CA wants to insure gays against infertility

[mal]

I suppose it would be best if insurance companies only insured those they approved of....

Please explain how infertility would be an issue for same sex couples.

You've never heard of gay women giving birth or gay men getting someone pregnant?

You don't get out much, do you.

Same Sex Couples are Infertile with each other 100% of the time.

Fact not Fiction.



peace...

 

[Beachboy]

I read the OP again. Here is the jest of it. They are saying that group insurance coverage must cover all equally. Last time I checked that was part of the U. S. Constitution. Perhaps we can let this ridiculousness end.

 

[hazlnut]

It is biologically impossible for gays to naturally conceive a child, but CA wants to insure them against exactly that. Is there no limit to liberal hypocrisy.

Read all about it here: Calif. bill would require insurance to cover infertility treatments for gay, lesbian couples - Washington Times

Well, the Washington Times must be stupid, stupid, stupid...

Infertile, generally refers to women, so this has little to do with gays, as they would need a surrogate mother to have a baby. However lesbians are perfectly capable of conceiving a child in the natural manner, via sperm banks, donor etc. And if you think it's biologically impossible for a lesbian to naturally conceive a child, then your high school health teacher totally screwed with you.

Single women have been having babies for decades, via sperm banks.

This is obviously an attempt by group policies to get out of full coverage for gays and lesbians. Since prop 8 hasn't been overturned yet, legislature has to step in and require the group plans cover everyone fairly.

Lastly, you need to buy a dictionary and look up the word Hypocrisy. You have no clue what it means.

 

[OKTexas]

I read the OP again. Here is the jest of it. They are saying that group insurance coverage must cover all equally. Last time I checked that was part of the U. S. Constitution. Perhaps we can let this ridiculousness end.

No the OP is saying the CA government is requiring insurance companies to cover a situation that can not naturally occur. There is no biological way a gay couple can conceive therefore there in no way to claim infertility.

 

[Beachboy]

I read the OP again. Here is the jest of it. They are saying that group insurance coverage must cover all equally. Last time I checked that was part of the U. S. Constitution. Perhaps we can let this ridiculousness end.

No the OP is saying the CA government is requiring insurance companies to cover a situation that can not naturally occur. There is no biological way a gay couple can conceive therefore there in no way to claim infertility.

I was able to read the OP myself. Read your U. S. Constitution again before you post in this thread again. Thank you.

 

[AmyNation]

Homosexuals can be infertile, and if the state law says those treatments are covered by insurance, then being gay shouldn't exclude you.

 

[Euroconservativ]

If its one thing that I've learned from being in Europe is that American gays are faggots and European gays are normal homosexuals and that's because homosexuality in America is highly politicised, glamorised, and force fed via the media in an effort to force acceptance of it, so you see gays all over the media and the whole gay issue keeps being brought up. In Europe in contrast, you don't see this, gays here, while still living am abominable, sinful lifestyle in the eyes of God, are not glamorised and politicised in the media and there is no force feeding acceptance of homosexuality, they just live their lives and do their thing. Militant homosexual activism is nonexistent here, the only time you'll hear about is if some kind of crime is committed against a homosexual.

Homosexuality in Europe is politicised and glamorised too but in english-speaking countries there is an additional push to shove it down people's throats. I mean, in England they are fining football players for gay jokes in twitter. In America i think we will see people/organizations completely undermined, and regarded as undesirable both socially and politically, because of being "homophobic". "Anti-gay" will be the new "racist". Maybe it has something to do with the "moral purity" thing. Now there is a kind of new puritan tolerance, and anyone who opposes will fall under the category of bigot.

In America things are changing fast. In Germany there is a chancellor who opposes equal tax benefits for same-sex couples... but her approval rating is 65%. In America, i think, we will not see another "anti-gay" president (whatever anti-gay means).

 

[Katzndogz]

Europe has probably had a gut full of gay activism and seen how destructive it is.