Fired for Being on the Pill

[Ravi]

I wonder what the insurance companies think about this stupid law....and if they will raise the rates on companies that don't allow birth control for birth control purposes. Because all those pregnant women are going to cost the insurance companies a bundle.

If it was so cost effective, then wouldn't insurance companies already be providing the pill in their coverage and this whole fiasco would have never existed?

Most do.

 

[Valox]

I wonder what the insurance companies think about this stupid law....and if they will raise the rates on companies that don't allow birth control for birth control purposes. Because all those pregnant women are going to cost the insurance companies a bundle.

If it was so cost effective, then wouldn't insurance companies already be providing the pill in their coverage and this whole fiasco would have never existed?

Most do.

Then this is much ado about nothing.

 

[Ravi]

If it was so cost effective, then wouldn't insurance companies already be providing the pill in their coverage and this whole fiasco would have never existed?

Most do.

Then this is much ado about nothing.

No. It is much ado about a law being potentially passed that gives employers the right to dictate the sex lives of their employees. Not even for religious reasons. For any reason.

 

[Valox]

Most do.

Then this is much ado about nothing.

No. It is much ado about a law being potentially passed that gives employers the right to dictate the sex lives of their employees. Not even for religious reasons. For any reason.

Then perhaps employers should stop paying the bill for insurance.

 

[Immanuel]

Then this is much ado about nothing.

No. It is much ado about a law being potentially passed that gives employers the right to dictate the sex lives of their employees. Not even for religious reasons. For any reason.

Then perhaps employers should stop paying the bill for insurance.

That is always a possibility.

Then again come 2014 Obamacare forces many corporations to either pay a portion (a large portion) of their employee's healthcare or be fined... heavily.

The Employer Mandate

ObamaCare’s employer mandate is among the new laws most anti-growth provisions. When implemented, it will force most American business firms to offer government-approved health insurance to their employees or else pay new federal taxes for not doing so. This costly new requirement will make it more expensive for firms to hire workers in the future. Consequently, it will destroy jobs, and many firms are likely to slow down on hiring in anticipation of its implementation.

“Free-Rider” Provision

ObamaCare does not impose a straight-forward requirement that employers offer health insurance to workers. Proponents of the new law wanted to avoid the charge that the new law was directly imposing new costs on American business. So, instead, they created a back-door mandate, what they call the “free-rider” provision.

If a firms with at least 50 workers has a full-time employee who is getting federally-subsided insurance through an ”exchange,” then that employer must pay a penalty for failing to offer that worker acceptable insurance on the job. (Workers that are offered qualified coverage by an employer are ineligible for the new insurance subsidies provided in the exchanges.)

The tax is scheduled to begin in 2014 and the Congressional Budget Office estimates it will bring in approximately $10 billion in annual revenue once it’s fully implemented.

The Employer Mandate | ObamaCare Watch

Immie

 

[Ravi]

Then this is much ado about nothing.

No. It is much ado about a law being potentially passed that gives employers the right to dictate the sex lives of their employees. Not even for religious reasons. For any reason.

Then perhaps employers should stop paying the bill for insurance.

That's fine, too, but it doesn't change the facts of this bill.

 

[Valox]

No. It is much ado about a law being potentially passed that gives employers the right to dictate the sex lives of their employees. Not even for religious reasons. For any reason.

Then perhaps employers should stop paying the bill for insurance.

That's fine, too, but it doesn't change the facts of this bill.

So employers do not have to offer insurance under Obamacare?

Are you serious?

 

[Uncensored2008]

No. It is much ado about a law being potentially passed that gives employers the right to dictate the sex lives of their employees. Not even for religious reasons. For any reason.

It's simply your war against the First Amendment. That the Catholic Church defied an order from our Supreme Ruler, will not stand, if you Brown Shirts have any say.

Nice use of the Big Lie, BTW - of course no one is dictating the sex lives of employees, but you need to tell your lie often, and make it outrageous, for the technique to work.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So employers do not have to offer insurance under Obamacare?

Are you serious?

Rati?

She's not "serious," she's lying.

The whole Big Lie thing is predicated upon lying.

 

[Mr.Nick]

A proposed new law in Arizona would give employers the power to request that women being prescribed birth control pills provide proof that they're using it for non-sexual reasons. And because Arizona's an at-will employment state, that means that bosses critical of their female employees' sex lives could fire them as a result.

Yesterday, a Senate Judiciary Committee endorsed Republican Debbie Lesko's HB2625 by a vote of 6-2, which would allow an employer to request proof that a woman using insurance to buy birth control was being prescribed the birth control for reasons other than not wanting to get pregnant. It's all about freedom, she said

Law Will Allow Employers to Fire Women for Using Whore Pills

The freedom comment was really the icing on the cake.

And ... cue the "conservatives" saying there is not a war on women.

What's wrong with that???

It's not a war on woman - it's a moral standard...

I'm sure if men could bare children you would get the same standard out of conservatives.

You think most conservative woman would oppose this policy???

 

[Valerie]

A proposed new law in Arizona would give employers the power to request that women being prescribed birth control pills provide proof that they're using it for non-sexual reasons. And because Arizona's an at-will employment state, that means that bosses critical of their female employees' sex lives could fire them as a result.

Yesterday, a Senate Judiciary Committee endorsed Republican Debbie Lesko's HB2625 by a vote of 6-2, which would allow an employer to request proof that a woman using insurance to buy birth control was being prescribed the birth control for reasons other than not wanting to get pregnant. It's all about freedom, she said

Law Will Allow Employers to Fire Women for Using Whore Pills

The freedom comment was really the icing on the cake.

And ... cue the "conservatives" saying there is not a war on women.

What's wrong with that???

It's not a war on woman - it's a moral standard...

I'm sure if men could bare children you would get the same standard out of conservatives.

You think most conservative woman would oppose this policy???

Don't tell Unwound2008 that, he thinks it's all about Ravi...

 

[Uncensored2008]

Don't tell Unwound2008 that, he thinks it's all about Ravi...

No Mani, I think it's about the First Amendment.

Because it is, despite the Big Lie campaign.

 

[JoeB131]

No. It is much ado about a law being potentially passed that gives employers the right to dictate the sex lives of their employees. Not even for religious reasons. For any reason.

It's simply your war against the First Amendment. That the Catholic Church defied an order from our Supreme Ruler, will not stand, if you Brown Shirts have any say.

Nice use of the Big Lie, BTW - of course no one is dictating the sex lives of employees, but you need to tell your lie often, and make it outrageous, for the technique to work.

This isn't about Freedom of religion.

It's about compensation.

If you jokers are going to insist that we have to earn our health care (instead of just garunteeing it to every citizen like any civilized country does) then you need defined parameters of what constitutes a valid health care program.

That's when you leave the sky pixies and imaginary friends and hocus pocus off to the side and determine what is solid health care. You can still get together and do that on Sunday, but the only people who should be determining what is valid health care are 1) Patients and 2) Doctors.

 

[JoeB131]

I wonder what the insurance companies think about this stupid law....and if they will raise the rates on companies that don't allow birth control for birth control purposes. Because all those pregnant women are going to cost the insurance companies a bundle.

If it was so cost effective, then wouldn't insurance companies already be providing the pill in their coverage and this whole fiasco would have never existed?

Most insurance companies do. Oh, if they think they can sneak in a co-pay or otherwise rip someone off, they will.

The reason why this "fiasco" exists is because in states where they haven't already be mandated to, the Roman Church is trying to impose its views on its employees.

 

[Ravi]

I wonder what the insurance companies think about this stupid law....and if they will raise the rates on companies that don't allow birth control for birth control purposes. Because all those pregnant women are going to cost the insurance companies a bundle.

If it was so cost effective, then wouldn't insurance companies already be providing the pill in their coverage and this whole fiasco would have never existed?

Most insurance companies do. Oh, if they think they can sneak in a co-pay or otherwise rip someone off, they will.

The reason why this "fiasco" exists is because in states where they haven't already be mandated to, the Roman Church is trying to impose its views on its employees.

And worse, they are trying to get the government to impose Catholic views on its employees.

 

[Valerie]

Don't tell Unwound2008 that, he thinks it's all about Ravi...

No Mani, I think it's about the First Amendment.

Because it is, despite the Big Lie campaign.

okee dokee mani...

 

[Papageorgio]

who go fired?

Hi, you have received -969 reputation points from WillowTree.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
Who got fired?

Regards,
WillowTree

I never said anyone did get fired.

Read your title Stupid.

He doesn't know what he posts. He just does as he is told. Otherwise he'd have to think and you know that won't happen.

 

[Papageorgio]

Dumb law, it is the businesses decision, the state needs to but out.

 

[Uncensored2008]

This isn't about Freedom of religion.

This is about Obama revoking freedom of religion.

It's about compensation.

Nope, it's about the right of employers to not buy things that are opposed by their religion.

Obama says that all should worship him as god, so there is no conflict....

If you jokers are going to insist that we have to earn our health care (instead of just garunteeing it to every citizen like any civilized country does) then you need defined parameters of what constitutes a valid health care program.

Just like we need defined parameters of what a cable TV package is - Obama will decide what channels I pay for - he is our GLORIOUS RULER....

That's when you leave the sky pixies and imaginary friends and hocus pocus off to the side and determine what is solid health care. You can still get together and do that on Sunday, but the only people who should be determining what is valid health care are 1) Patients and 2) Doctors.

I don't care about your irrational bigotry. I do care that Obama is attempting to dictate what individuals and employers will buy, and what religious traditions will be allowed.

 

[Uncensored2008]

okee dokee mani...

If I were a Mani sock, I would be you, and I think we would both know it.....