Dem Booed Over Birth Control at Town Hall

[Greenbeard]

No, the church is telling its employees they can have what ever they want as long as the employee pays for it. You are telling the church they have to pay for it for the employees.

Are you not up to date on this? This was resolved weeks ago. Religious employers are off the hook.

 

[saveliberty]

I see...no figures
Blowing it out of your arse, again?

I'm sorry, are you asking me to provide figures to prove that the health insurance cost of contraception is not greater than the health insurance cost of having children??

Children that will then be beneficiaries of said health insurance?

Really? You need proof of that?

Since those having sex will have the children, maybe they should buy some contraception then huh?

 

[Vast LWC]

We know the constitution is of little use to the left and more
of a nuisance to their Utopian socialist dreams

Birth control is not a right
The First Amendment is clearly defined in the Constitution
So the gov't overstepping this one, is the real factor here

Granted the Left wants to make it about condoms
but real issues are at stake here

Really, Papa Obama failing at trying to create a "wedge issue" and distract the masses
from his economic failures only highlights his faults and gives the right even more
help

He should really fire whoever advised him on this one

I never said it was a right. I said it was a free service. A service that is being provided because doing so saves insurers money.

The Catholic Church is attempting to force people into not having the ability to get a free service. And that is abridging those people's consumer rights.

The government is not restricting the right of the church to teach people not to use contraception. They can keep on doing that all they want.

And the congregation is free to NOT take said contraception to their heart's content. No-one is forcing it upon them.

Therefore, the only people that are in the wrong here is the Catholic Church, and people like you who are supporting it as if it's a religious freedom issue. It's not.

Look at it this way: Let's say it was a Muslim organization, and they said that everyone who worked for their organization had to pay a fine any time one of them drank or ate ham, on their own time.

How would you feel about that?

 

[Immanuel]

No, the church is telling its employees they can have what ever they want as long as the employee pays for it. You are telling the church they have to pay for it for the employees.

Are you not up to date on this? This was resolved weeks ago. Religious employers are off the hook.

No they are not.

Obama took a hell of a lot of heat over this. Then he came back and announced that he would change his stance and only insist that the insurance companies pay for it, including the insurance companies of the religious organizations. If you are going to force those institutions to pay for the insurance policies that provide contraceptives whether or not it is "for free", you are forcing religious institutions to pay for a product they do not want to purchase.

Nice of your prophet to be so frigging willing to "compromise".

Immie

 

[saveliberty]

Oh bull Vast. You'd accuse the church of hypocracy if they said one thing in doctrine and practiced another. Give them credit for a consistent message. One which I doubt any employee was not aware of prior to excepting a job.

 

[saveliberty]

No, the church is telling its employees they can have what ever they want as long as the employee pays for it. You are telling the church they have to pay for it for the employees.

Are you not up to date on this? This was resolved weeks ago. Religious employers are off the hook.

Now you are going to make an argument for how government can demand a business provide a free service? You go from one fail to another.

 

[Vast LWC]

Wow, did you get that wrong. Are you really that stupid, or do you have to fake it?

Yet in a survey of 15 large health plans this week, Reuters found that "40 percent of the participants said they expect the requirement will increase costs through higher pharmacy expenses" within a year or two.
Another "20 percent said costs would even out because they already budget for contraception in the premium, 6.7 percent said it would drive up pharmacy costs but decrease medical costs, while 33.3 percent weren't sure," Reuters found. "None said it would lead to net savings."
It's not clear how those costs would be passed on. The regulation bars the health insurance plans from raising the religiously-affiliated employers' premiums, so it's possible workers at companies that directly offer contraceptive coverage would get stuck with higher premiums to make up the lost revenue.

Insurance industry could take hit from birth control mandate - The Hill's Healthwatch

Those are short term costs. It is utterly obvious that in terms of long-term costs, they would encounter a net savings.

Birth Control pills cost $400.00 a year. I know, because my wife used to buy them, as they weren't covered on her health plan.

Condoms cost even less, on average.

Child Birth costs $30,000.00. And that's just the initial cost for the birth.

Then those children will be put on that person's plan, costing an additional amount that is far greater than $400.00, per year, every year, until they reach the age of 26.

 

[Greenbeard]

No they are not.

Yes, they are. They don't have to pay for contraception coverage.

Granted, they're still pissed because the compromise preserves access to contraception for their employees. It's a victory on the religious freedom argument, but a loss in the war on contraception.

But they bravely soldier on, looking for new ways to go after contraception.

 

[Vast LWC]

No, the church is telling its employees they can have what ever they want as long as the employee pays for it. You are telling the church they have to pay for it for the employees. You are telling the employer that they must provide something they don't want to provide.

If you are stupid enough to believe that the insurance companines are not profiting from adding contraceptives to their policies, then don't blame me. They are doing nothing for free.

Immie

The church would only be "paying for it" if there was an additional charge by the insurance companies to cover some imagined cost.

Since there is not, they are not "paying for" anything.

They are receiving the exact same service they were previously receiving.

Contraception is just a bonus, given away to the end-user for free.

 

[saveliberty]

Pretty deep denial from the lefties here. Things are free. Separation of church and state is not in play here. r

 

[Vast LWC]

Since those having sex will have the children, maybe they should buy some contraception then huh?

Why would they do that, when the health insurance companies are perfectly happy to pay for it?

Maybe if the leaders of the catholic church weren't so busy having sex with boys, they would have a better understanding of how contraception works...

 

[saveliberty]

Since those having sex will have the children, maybe they should buy some contraception then huh?

Why would they do that, when the health insurance companies are perfectly happy to pay for it?

Maybe if the leaders of the catholic church weren't so busy having sex with boys, they would have a better understanding of how contraception works...

Maybe if you were in church more, you'd understand the subject better.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, the church is telling its employees they can have what ever they want as long as the employee pays for it. You are telling the church they have to pay for it for the employees.

Are you not up to date on this? This was resolved weeks ago. Religious employers are off the hook.

Are you not up to date on this? There is no compromise, all there is a vague promise of one from Obama.

 

[Vast LWC]

Maybe if you were in church more, you'd understand the subject better.

Why, would they have raped me too?

 

[Neotrotsky]

Our country is facing serious issues
and the Left wants to talk about condoms

Is the Left obsessed with sex or is it they know they can not run on Papa Obama's economic failures?

tough call

That's the best propaganda so far I think.

Make a big stink over an issue, and then claiming the other side is making the stink.

As mentioned before, Orwell would truly be impressed.

No that would be the Left's attempts - they are akin to blaming the victim of rape
for what she wore

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We know the constitution is of little use to the left and more
of a nuisance to their Utopian socialist dreams

Birth control is not a right
The First Amendment is clearly defined in the Constitution
So the gov't overstepping this one, is the real factor here

Granted the Left wants to make it about condoms
but real issues are at stake here

Really, Papa Obama failing at trying to create a "wedge issue" and distract the masses
from his economic failures only highlights his faults and gives the right even more
help

He should really fire whoever advised him on this one

I never said it was a right. I said it was a free service. A service that is being provided because doing so saves insurers money.

The Catholic Church is attempting to force people into not having the ability to get a free service. And that is abridging those people's consumer rights.

The government is not restricting the right of the church to teach people not to use contraception. They can keep on doing that all they want.

And the congregation is free to NOT take said contraception to their heart's content. No-one is forcing it upon them.

Therefore, the only people that are in the wrong here is the Catholic Church, and people like you who are supporting it as if it's a religious freedom issue. It's not.

Look at it this way: Let's say it was a Muslim organization, and they said that everyone who worked for their organization had to pay a fine any time one of them drank or ate ham, on their own time.

How would you feel about that?

There ain't no such thing as free. If it actually did save money every insurance company would already offer it as part of their service and we wouldn't be having this discussion. The fact that we are actually having this discussion speaks louder than anything you can possibly say.

 

[Neotrotsky]

There are no "increased costs", there are specifically "Decreased Costs" when birth control is provided.

Heart disease fact sheet | womenshealth.gov

Oh really? None at all? This is just a quick look. I'm sure I can find more.

As a matter of fact that was quick:
Warning over using contraceptive pill with higher clot risk | Life and style | The Guardian

It's like leftists never heard of cancer and blood clots.

Yes indeed
they are overly concerned with condoms and sex

Hey

this must be Papa Obama's version of

"Cash for Condoms"
program

 

[Vast LWC]

There ain't no such thing as free. If it actually did save money every insurance company would already offer it as part of their service and we wouldn't be having this discussion. The fact that we are actually having this discussion speaks louder than anything you can possibly say.

Almost all of them already do.

It was only an issue for these particular ones because of the church's requirements.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No they are not.

Yes, they are. They don't have to pay for contraception coverage.

Granted, they're still pissed because the compromise preserves access to contraception for their employees. It's a victory on the religious freedom argument, but a loss in the war on contraception.

But they bravely soldier on, looking for new ways to go after contraception.

Still waiting for some kind of link to something that actually says that. Usually you post stuff like that up front, why didn't you do that this time? Is it because nothing actually exists?

 

[Neotrotsky]

What kind of hogwash is that? Where is the church saying their employees can't go buy contraceptives on their own? Where the hell do people like you get off telling other people what they have to pay for?

Immie

The church is telling people they cannot have a service for free, that would otherwise be provided, for free.

They are making people pay for a free service.

The government is not forcing anyone to pay for anything they don't want. There is no additional cost. There are significant savings.

Since a lot of Democrats don't pay taxes
it is easy to see why they do not understand
there is no "free lunch"

Savings
where are those figures again?