Judge: Employers Don't Have To Cover HIV Meds If They Oppose 'Homosexual Behavior'

Its their business. If the people dont like it they can leave.
I think employers have an obligation to treat all of their employees equally. Or do you think Justice in equality under the law doesn't mean anything anymore, you really want to replace it with hatred and bigotry.
 
In other words it’s 100% preventable.
As are most heart and lung conditions ( by far the largest share of medical expenditures ) 100% preventable. People are only human. Shit happens. You don't see anyone attacking them.
 

This is outragious! Not everyone who contracts HIV is a homosexual. It can be the result of heterosexual sex as well, or a blood transfusion, or maybe from being attacked by someone with HIV. So if they are going to refuse coverage to gay people with HIV, they had better damned well refuse coverage to all workers with HIV or it's discrimination and in conflict with Obergefell

As far as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act goes, discrimination is not a free excercise of religion. It is DISCRININATION
If I don't want HIV meds, I shouldn't have to pay for HIV med coverage.

This bullshit about me paying higher premiums so someone can get free meds has to stop.
 
I think employers have an obligation to treat all of their employees equally. Or do you think Justice in equality under the law doesn't mean anything anymore, you really want to replace it with hatred and bigotry.
I agree and if an employee wants a certain coverage, they should be required to pay for it.
 
If I don't want HIV meds, I shouldn't have to pay for HIV med coverage.

This bullshit about me paying higher premiums so someone can get free meds has to stop.
That's the way insurance works. Others are paying for whatever it might be that is wrong with you, even jf they are no so afflicted

Good drivers pay for what bad drivers do. and so on andso on.
 
Hmmm, if the private industry doesn't have to cover such things, then should there be a government plan that would give the supplemental coverage that might be needed for those who can't truly afford such a thing ? Otherwise yes people do crazy thing's in life, and then you have the innocent other's that might happen to get caught up in the traps of it all too, but it is by no fault of their own when they do get caught up, so suffer them also or lump them into the frey ??

Are people to be suffered or given death sentences if they weren't breaking any law's or rules when coming into contact with something like a virus somehow ? No dog in this fight, but was just trying to make sense of it all after following along.

HIV doesn't discriminate on who gets the disease right(?), and this whether it be by needle, by promiscuous activities or by other more indirect means if be it the case right ?........ No one should be given a death sentence if they weren't intentionally breaking any serious law's or rules by their being irresponsible in life....

Now it is that moral values and rules should be uplifted again in this so called civilized society we supposedly live within and/or in this country again, otherwise it should be done as a stark reminder that sin is a dangerous thing to toy with or get caught up in. It has been seen so many times over and over in people's lives throughout history or time now, and stark warnings and education is man and woman's only hope to do better in life while in the midst of it all. The Bible tells about it all.

Hopefully people will turn from their sinfulness if given another chance in life, otherwise after the killer arrow was fired at them by the evil one therefore wounding them forever upon the earth, but somehow they are given a second chance in order to hopefully get their lives back within the chaos, and yet this is spoken only as if they hopefully choose to do so.

Even if the one's doing wrong in life has lead them into despair, and their second chance is them having to live on a drug that is sustaining their live's after the messing up of their live's had since come to pass, then they should see it all as a lesson in life of what not to do anymore after being directly exposed to something that now needs a maintenance drug or cocktail mix of drug's in order to sustain their live's with, otherwise after them being wounded in their situations.

The drug should quietly be accessible and affordable for anyone while they hopefully heal in all ways needed be it physically and mentally in their live's, and for the ones that engage in things that bring about such a thing in which they were warned about in the stats, otherwise that directly told everyone with an ounce of common sense about what NOT to do in life, then hopefully they'll have a better understanding about what got them there in the first place, and what not to do in the future while having to live on a drug in order to sustain their lives with.... Once they've been ensnared by the poison arrow received, hopefully they learn a much needed lesson in life in which is to tell other's to turn away from sin before they are mortally wounded by it (otherwise to think of other's instead of themselves), and if mortally wounded then it's all the more reason to turn away from it before other's follow their lead in becoming wounded also.

A lot of re-education, education, and rehabilitation is needed in this COUNTRY big time, and the devil's lie's convincing anyone otherwise needs to be stopped.

It's like slowing down a train that is about to leave it's tracks, it hopefully can still be done.

It's not normal to have to be sustained in life by a "drug", otherwise that is used to stop one from dying from something in which they(?) hopefully do finally realize what the drug is being used for, and how it is being used for that reason...

As a result of coming into direct contact when contact is made, then at the same time it should also give people great pause in their live's about how they ended up in such a situation to begin with.

THINK PEOPLE.

Praying for everyone in life to somehow heal their mind's and bodies if they have been harpooned by the evil one, otherwise who sent a his poison arrows with very deceptive guidance in order to destroy the mind, body, and soul in these constant relentless attacks upon the creation. It is the evil ones goal to destroy as much as he can before his time is finished here.

The devil is the author of all confusion, and soon his folly will end. Until then the earth and therefore man and woman who live upon it must seek shelter from the raging storm's, and Jesus is the only way and the light that leadeth one out of the darkness and back into the light, and this is regardless of the wounds received from the evil ones attacks.

Let's all help the Lord and not the evil one who keeps his evil arrows sharp in order to destroy that which is good in the world on the ready. Put on the Armour of God, and resist the Devil. AMEN.

If constant sinning has caused your grief in your life people, then you know what to do. Resist the Devil, and he shall flee from you. Utter these words daily if attacked "get thee behind me Satan for it is written". Say this everytime he comes a visiting.... AMEN
..
None of that had anything to do with whether an employer should be forced to provide a specific type of healthcare or not.

Getting HIV is a choice for 99% who get it. Likely a higher percentage at this point
 
If I don't want HIV meds, I shouldn't have to pay for HIV med coverage.

This bullshit about me paying higher premiums so someone can get free meds has to stop.
That's not how insurance works, you get what you need and other people get what they need. Unless you want to buy your own insurance and not be part of a group insurance
If I don't want HIV meds, I shouldn't have to pay for HIV med coverage.

This bullshit about me paying higher premiums so someone can get free meds has to stop.
You can choose exactly what you want if you are willing to pay for private insurance. However if you're in a group plan, an employee plan you get what you need and other people get what they need out of it and you all pay the same premium. No one gets it for free, everyone pays.
 
That's not how insurance works, you get what you need and other people get what they need. Unless you want to buy your own insurance and not be part of a group insurance

You can choose exactly what you want if you are willing to pay for private insurance. However if you're in a group plan, an employee plan you get what you need and other people get what they need out of it and you all pay the same premium. No one gets it for free, everyone pays.
In regards to this case, the argument was that people should receive free HIV meds. Under Obamacare, it's free because other insurance buyers are paying for it. This ruling says that's unconstitutional and the ruling is absolutely correct.
 
In regards to this case, the argument was that people should receive free HIV meds. Under Obamacare, it's free because other insurance buyers are paying for it. This ruling says that's unconstitutional and the ruling is absolutely correct.
How about Monkey Pox?
 
That's the way insurance works. Others are paying for whatever it might be that is wrong with you, even jf they are no so afflicted

Good drivers pay for what bad drivers do. and so on andso on.
That isn't how Obamacare works. They were right when they said they were depending on the stupidity of the people for Obamacare to work.
 
That isn't how Obamacare works. They were right when they said they were depending on the stupidity of the people for Obamacare to work.
Obamacare is a law that subsidizes people so that they can buy insurance and regulates the insurance industry insurance. The same insurers who were ripping usbefore Obamacare and it works the same way as I described above

The stupid ons are the ones who do not take advantage of it
 
In regards to this case, the argument was that people should receive free HIV meds. Under Obamacare, it's free because other insurance buyers are paying for it. This ruling says that's unconstitutional and the ruling is absolutely correct.
I don't recall anything about it being free. Employees contribute to the premium. They are subject to co-pays and deductables.
 
In regards to this case, the argument was that people should receive free HIV meds. Under Obamacare, it's free because other insurance buyers are paying for it. This ruling says that's unconstitutional and the ruling is absolutely correct.
Only the indigent get their medicines for free. I had a wealthy friend who got AIDS and he had to pay 40 or 50,000 a year in co-pays even with insurance because of his wealth. If you're going to get HIV AIDS you better hope you're poor already. I believe you're mistaken about this case religious groups didn't want to pay specifically for people who had HIV in their group insurance. That's an abomination, group insurance is supposed to take care of everyone in the group.
 
None of that had anything to do with whether an employer should be forced to provide a specific type of healthcare or not.

Getting HIV is a choice for 99% who get it. Likely a higher percentage at this point
No one chooses to get HIV. And even if that were true, what about the other 1% in your statement. Aren't they being treated unfairly by the group insurance. See the whole matter boils down to is you can't judge other people. It just makes you look bad. And once this garbage get started how do we stop it.
 
Only the indigent get their medicines for free. I had a wealthy friend who got AIDS and he had to pay 40 or 50,000 a year in co-pays even with insurance because of his wealth. If you're going to get HIV AIDS you better hope you're poor already. I believe you're mistaken about this case religious groups didn't want to pay specifically for people who had HIV in their group insurance. That's an abomination, group insurance is supposed to take care of everyone in the group.
Group plans don't include free meds. In group plans everyone pays the same rate for everything. This ruling says that mandatory free HIV meds are unconstitutional.

Stop saying "group plans" because this ain't what this about.
 
I don't recall anything about it being free. Employees contribute to the premium. They are subject to co-pays and deductables.
You should do more research on the topic, then.

A federal judge in Texas has ruled that a provision of the Affordable Care Act that mandates free coverage of certain drugs that prevent HIV infections violates the religious beliefs of a Christian-owned company.

 
Group plans don't include free meds. In group plans everyone pays the same rate for everything. This ruling says that mandatory free HIV meds are unconstitutional.

Stop saying "group plans" because this ain't what this about.
So when an employer provides coverage, for a group of employees, it's not a group plan?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top