Obama: Worst President Ever? Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Would everyone be happy if HL chose another insurance company that refuses to pay for prescriptions of these types?    As you know, health insurance companies do that now. 
7/3/2014 2:03 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by toddcommish on 7/3/2014 2:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 1:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 1:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 1:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 1:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/3/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
OK, that didn't take long.

The two IUD that HL are objecting to providing prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg.   So, yeah, they do work differently.   The rest, evidently, work in preventing the fetilization of said egg.   There you go.
No one is forcing HL to use an IUD. Why do they get to pick which ones their employees can have?
They're not being forced to use an IUD, but they are being forced to subsidize a health plan that pays for abortions and plan B pills.

Why should the government be allowed to force them to subsidize something that goes against the religious beliefs?
I don't see the difference between:

HL pays employee. Employee buys IUD for employee.

and

HL pays health insurance company. Health insurance company buys IUD for employee.
Of course you don't see the difference.

Here's the funny thing about you.  You're all about "rights", provided that they're rights that you agree with or subscribe to.  All other "rights" that you don't personally care about are off the board.

You're the biggest hypocrite in these forums.
What's the difference?
The "difference" is that if HL pays employee, employee then has the right to spend that money any way they see fit.

If HL pays health insurance company, they (HL) have the right to discontinue using health insurance company and the right to dictate some terms of the policy as the purchaser.
Why should HL have the right to dictate what medicine its employees get covered under the insurance?

EDIT: HL has the right to switch to whatever health insurance company they want. It's just that all health insurance companies cover all FDA approved forms of birth control. This isn't a term that is negotiable.

And again, we're ignoring the fact that a corporation is a fictional entity. It's legally separate from the shareholders and the shareholders's religion. The shareholders are free to not take birth control they disagree with.
7/3/2014 2:08 PM
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/3/2014 2:03:00 PM (view original):
Would everyone be happy if HL chose another insurance company that refuses to pay for prescriptions of these types?    As you know, health insurance companies do that now. 
All health care covers FDA approved birth control.
7/3/2014 2:09 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 164 32 129
Prospect
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 2:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/3/2014 2:03:00 PM (view original):
Would everyone be happy if HL chose another insurance company that refuses to pay for prescriptions of these types?    As you know, health insurance companies do that now. 
All health care covers FDA approved birth control.
And therein lies the problem.

Not all people approve of various methods of "birth control" on religious grounds.
7/3/2014 2:32 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 164 32 129
Prospect
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 1:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 1:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 1:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 1:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/3/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
OK, that didn't take long.

The two IUD that HL are objecting to providing prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg.   So, yeah, they do work differently.   The rest, evidently, work in preventing the fetilization of said egg.   There you go.
No one is forcing HL to use an IUD. Why do they get to pick which ones their employees can have?
They're not being forced to use an IUD, but they are being forced to subsidize a health plan that pays for abortions and plan B pills.

Why should the government be allowed to force them to subsidize something that goes against the religious beliefs?
I don't see the difference between:

HL pays employee. Employee buys IUD for employee.

and

HL pays health insurance company. Health insurance company buys IUD for employee.
Of course you don't see the difference.

Here's the funny thing about you.  You're all about "rights", provided that they're rights that you agree with or subscribe to.  All other "rights" that you don't personally care about are off the board.

You're the biggest hypocrite in these forums.
What's the difference?
Are employee wages/salary the same thing as health care benefits?

The government doesn't seem to think so.
7/3/2014 2:33 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 2:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 2:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/3/2014 2:03:00 PM (view original):
Would everyone be happy if HL chose another insurance company that refuses to pay for prescriptions of these types?    As you know, health insurance companies do that now. 
All health care covers FDA approved birth control.
And therein lies the problem.

Not all people approve of various methods of "birth control" on religious grounds.

Religious Right Health Insurance Company.    Our motto is "We don't cover prescriptions that violate our religious beliefs."


They'd get PLENTY of business.  Probably be the biggest insurance company in the US in a matter of months.

7/3/2014 2:35 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I'm not sure there are "experts" who can tell me what I think constitutes abortion.
7/3/2014 2:40 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 2:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 2:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/3/2014 2:03:00 PM (view original):
Would everyone be happy if HL chose another insurance company that refuses to pay for prescriptions of these types?    As you know, health insurance companies do that now. 
All health care covers FDA approved birth control.
And therein lies the problem.

Not all people approve of various methods of "birth control" on religious grounds.
Those people are free to not take birth control. 
7/3/2014 2:45 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by The Taint on 7/3/2014 2:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/3/2014 2:40:00 PM (view original):
I'm not sure there are "experts" who can tell me what I think constitutes abortion.
You can believe whatever you like, my niece believes in the tooth fairy, but it doesn't make it right or real.

So you're the expert on when life begins?    If I believe it begins when an egg is fertilized, I'm on par with your retarded niece who believes in the tooth fairy?

7/3/2014 2:46 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 164 32 129
Prospect
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 2:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 2:09:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/3/2014 2:03:00 PM (view original):
Would everyone be happy if HL chose another insurance company that refuses to pay for prescriptions of these types?    As you know, health insurance companies do that now. 
All health care covers FDA approved birth control.
And therein lies the problem.

Not all people approve of various methods of "birth control" on religious grounds.
Those people are free to not take birth control. 
But it's OK for the government to force them to subsidize it for others?
7/3/2014 2:47 PM
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
bad_luck
Posts: 21761 (0)
Hall of Famer
48 1 10
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 2:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 1:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 1:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 1:50:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 7/3/2014 1:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 7/3/2014 1:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/3/2014 1:28:00 PM (view original):
OK, that didn't take long.

The two IUD that HL are objecting to providing prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg.   So, yeah, they do work differently.   The rest, evidently, work in preventing the fetilization of said egg.   There you go.
No one is forcing HL to use an IUD. Why do they get to pick which ones their employees can have?
They're not being forced to use an IUD, but they are being forced to subsidize a health plan that pays for abortions and plan B pills.

Why should the government be allowed to force them to subsidize something that goes against the religious beliefs?
I don't see the difference between:

HL pays employee. Employee buys IUD for employee.

and

HL pays health insurance company. Health insurance company buys IUD for employee.
Of course you don't see the difference.

Here's the funny thing about you.  You're all about "rights", provided that they're rights that you agree with or subscribe to.  All other "rights" that you don't personally care about are off the board.

You're the biggest hypocrite in these forums.
What's the difference?
Are employee wages/salary the same thing as health care benefits?

The government doesn't seem to think so.
I'm not seeing a material difference in this case.

Party A pays Party B. Party B pays for birth control.

or

Party A pays Party C. Party C pays for birth control.

Which one violates Party A's religious rights?
7/3/2014 2:47 PM
◂ Prev 1...220|221|222|223|224...462 Next ▸
Obama: Worst President Ever? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2025 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.