Valkyrie Riders Cruiser Club
March 29, 2026, 07:35:19 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Ultimate Seats Link VRCC Store
Homepage : Photostash : JustPics : Shoptalk : Old Tech Archive : Classifieds : Contact Staff
News: If you're new to this message board, read THIS!
 
VRCC Calendar Ad
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Contraception  (Read 3581 times)
doubletee
Member
*****
Posts: 1166


VRCC # 22269

Fort Wayne, IN


« Reply #40 on: March 04, 2012, 05:40:00 AM »

I kinda disagree with the church saying no to the 'pill'. The pill is not used solely for birth control. Alot of women take it due to gyno problems. The pill helps fix and prevent alot of them problems. But there is no talk of that.  crazy2

 My insurance at work doesn't cover a lot of things I wish they did, but it doesn't. And I can't think of anything they cover for FREE. I have a choice, get over it, or quit.
They have the same choice.

That's where I am on this, too, Jeff. It's about the government sticking its nose into the private sector once again. If we want a free market, capitalistic society in the US, then the government needs to stay out of it. If the insurance provided by my employer doesn't cover things I wish it would, I have 3 choices:  1. Deal with it, 2. Get a job with an employer whose insurance covers the things I want covered, 3. Buy my own policy that includes coverage for my choices.

This isn't about birth control. It's about the government placing mandates on the private sector. I don't like the slippery slope.
Logged

  
Bob E.
Member
*****
Posts: 1487


Canonsburg, PA


« Reply #41 on: March 04, 2012, 11:28:48 AM »

Actually, this whole thing started with the govt protecting individuals from the rampant abuses of insurance companies by placing minimum standards on the levels of insurance that they offer.  What they are saying is that if you are an insurance company and collect premiums from customers, then you have to provide a product (insurance) that is actually worth something.  One of those minimum standards is that basic preventative health care (which actually saves insurance companies money, by the way) must be provided in all policies without copay.  And there are a whole host of medical services that are lumped into this category.  The controversy started when prescription oral contraception was placed in the category of preventative health care...and the republicans saw something they thought they could make an issue of.
Logged


3fan4life
Member
*****
Posts: 7028


Any day that you ride is a good day!

Moneta, VA


« Reply #42 on: March 04, 2012, 11:32:31 AM »

Fortunately, the woman hater days are numbered.  

HUH ?

Oh well.................

If you say so... I have no idea what you are talking about.  But, thanks for posting.
Logged

1 Corinthians 1:18

Jeff K
Member
*****
Posts: 3071


« Reply #43 on: March 04, 2012, 12:40:07 PM »

Actually, this whole thing started with the govt protecting individuals from the rampant abuses of insurance companies by placing minimum standards on the levels of insurance that they offer.  What they are saying is that if you are an insurance company and collect premiums from customers, then you have to provide a product (insurance) that is actually worth something.  One of those minimum standards is that basic preventative health care (which actually saves insurance companies money, by the way) must be provided in all policies without copay.  And there are a whole host of medical services that are lumped into this category.  The controversy started when prescription oral contraception was placed in the category of preventative health care...and the republicans saw something they thought they could make an issue of.

You say that like it's a good thing. Forcing companies to provide a product based on government mandates not public demand.

And the bottom line is if the church is forced to violate their beliefs they will drop coverage entirely. And you will feel like you have won?

If the goal is to get religions to stop providing services out of their faith, this will help a lot.
Logged
Bob E.
Member
*****
Posts: 1487


Canonsburg, PA


« Reply #44 on: March 04, 2012, 02:21:21 PM »

Actually, this whole thing started with the govt protecting individuals from the rampant abuses of insurance companies by placing minimum standards on the levels of insurance that they offer.  What they are saying is that if you are an insurance company and collect premiums from customers, then you have to provide a product (insurance) that is actually worth something.  One of those minimum standards is that basic preventative health care (which actually saves insurance companies money, by the way) must be provided in all policies without copay.  And there are a whole host of medical services that are lumped into this category.  The controversy started when prescription oral contraception was placed in the category of preventative health care...and the republicans saw something they thought they could make an issue of.

You say that like it's a good thing. Forcing companies to provide a product based on government mandates not public demand.

And the bottom line is if the church is forced to violate their beliefs they will drop coverage entirely. And you will feel like you have won?

If the goal is to get religions to stop providing services out of their faith, this will help a lot.

Having minimum standards to keep American Citizens from being ripped off, harmed, injured, etc. by corporations is a good thing.  Its like the whole loud pipes arguement.  Bikers with loud pipes result in municipalities passing noise ordinances.  Well, rampant abuse by insurance companies has resulted in minimum insurance standards.  And there has been public demand for doing something about our broken health care sytem since Nixon and before. 

You are acting like this is a new thing.  We have govt mandated minimum standards for nearly every product sold in this country from safetey standards for kids toys and furniture, fuel mileage and crash standards for cars, lead paint standards for homes and toys, construction standards, education standards, etc.  You might not agree with the standard, but every regulation, policy, law, department, whatever was created to address a real problem usually created by the industry selling the goods.

As far as the Catholic Church goes, I guess maybe I'd have a little more sympathy for them if they weren't so full of hypocrisy on the issue.  More than 70% of Catholic Universities, charities, and hospitals already provide this coverage.  28 states already have the mandate including 7 or 8 that don't even provide an exception for actual churches...many (if not most) of which were enacted under Republican governors including Romney and even Huckabee...and until now, there hasn't been a peep of objection.  If they had such a moral objection to this mandate, why have they acted as they have up until now?  They are objecting to something they already do.  Gimme a break! Roll Eyes
Logged


The Anvil
Member
*****
Posts: 5291


Derry, NH


« Reply #45 on: March 04, 2012, 03:01:11 PM »

You have to remember that the Catholic church was (and still is in many places) the church of the lower rungs of society; the working (as in paycheck to paycheck) class. Once upon a time the ruling class needed the lower class in as many numbers as possible. Coincidence that the CC went so hardcore against any form of birth control? I have mine own doubts.
Logged

Boxer rebellion, the Holy Child. They all pay their rent.
But none together can testify to the rhythm of a road well bent.
Saddles and zip codes, passports and gates, the Jones' keep.
In August the water is trickling, in April it's furious deep.

1997 Valk Standard, Red and White.
Jeff K
Member
*****
Posts: 3071


« Reply #46 on: March 04, 2012, 03:21:39 PM »

And when the government mandate comes down that makes riding motorcycles illegal because it IS a health hazard... y'all are going to be fine with it because it is for the benefit of all? 
Logged
Bob E.
Member
*****
Posts: 1487


Canonsburg, PA


« Reply #47 on: March 04, 2012, 04:25:24 PM »

And when the government mandate comes down that makes riding motorcycles illegal because it IS a health hazard... y'all are going to be fine with it because it is for the benefit of all?  

Apples and oranges.  The difference is that motorcycles are a case of an individual deciding to assume some personal risk...same as helmet or seat belt laws, both of which I disagree with.  Your analogy would only be valid if the govt were requiring women to take oral contraceptives, which isn't the case.  A better analogy would have been if my employer were requiring me to ride a motorcycle to work to save him on parking fees in the city....then the govt would require my employer to allow employees to drive cars.

Actually, I just thought of an even better analogy...and it is exactly the opposite of your arguement. A better analogy related to motorcycles would be the insurance company refusing to cover medical costs related to motorcycle accidents or other behaviors they decided were too "risky" and the govt stepping in to say they must cover these costs.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2012, 06:12:08 PM by Bob E. » Logged


Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
Print
Jump to: