scooterbug44
SoWal Expert
You're supposed to get married in a church according to some churches. 
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
abortion down, contraception up
- Thread starter Bob
- Start date
Alicia Leonard
SoWal Insider
You're supposed to get married in a church according to some churches.
scooterbug44
SoWal Expert
There is a whole theological argument about it that has its basis in many good things - strong families, respect for women, sexual responsibility, etc. but like many religious ideas it has gotten perverted and turned into a sound bite.
In more quantifiable terms, it has major economic and health benefits - best way to improve an economy is to educate the women and have them do something besides pop out kids and die early.......not to mention halting the spread of diseases (not just STDs, but infections from botched or amateur medical procedures or treatments).
30ashopper
SoWal Insider
I am talking about PREVENTATIVE and HEALTH measures like the pill, IUDs etc. not abortion.
And I'll let people legislate MY MEDICAL CARE based on THEIR "morality" when they follow all of their Church's teachings as strictly as they want me to, instead of picking and choosing.
So to spell that out, that rules out anything beyond 2nd base before marriage, premarital sex, BJs, divorce, co-habitation before marriage, outdoor weddings..................... and results in a huge family that the husbands will have to raise after their wife exhausts or kills herself producing a litter.
This is about legislating everybody's healthcare, not just yours scooter. The question was, should government mandate that 1) birth control be covered by all plans available in the states (I think that's an ok idea), and 2) should government mandate that abortion coverage should be available in all plans (I don't feel so), and I added a third - should government subsidies pay for birth control (sure) and abortion (not in all cases).
scooterbug44
SoWal Expert
I guess I don't understand why it can't be covered and if you are morally opposed to a medical procedure ...................... you don't have it!
It's a very slippery slope to pick and choose EVERYONE'S medical care based on SOME religious beliefs. There are many procedures that certain groups have a problem with ................ but are completely okay with other groups.
Should I be unable to get a porcine valve or graft, or get medicine with a pork or beef ingredient because of Jewish or Muslim or Hindu beliefs? (Over 1000 medicines use pork or beef derived gelatin or stearic acid as inert ingredients.)
Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in blood transfusions. Should those not be covered by insurance?
What about stem cell research?
Should we get rid of organ transplants because some religions forbid cutting onto the body after death or burying only part of the corpse?
Masturbation is forbidden by Islam - should all sperm testing, invitro fertilization etc. not be covered?
Should we stop burning medical waste because some religions don't believe in cremation?
It's a very slippery slope to pick and choose EVERYONE'S medical care based on SOME religious beliefs. There are many procedures that certain groups have a problem with ................ but are completely okay with other groups.
Should I be unable to get a porcine valve or graft, or get medicine with a pork or beef ingredient because of Jewish or Muslim or Hindu beliefs? (Over 1000 medicines use pork or beef derived gelatin or stearic acid as inert ingredients.)
Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in blood transfusions. Should those not be covered by insurance?
What about stem cell research?
Should we get rid of organ transplants because some religions forbid cutting onto the body after death or burying only part of the corpse?
Masturbation is forbidden by Islam - should all sperm testing, invitro fertilization etc. not be covered?
Should we stop burning medical waste because some religions don't believe in cremation?
30ashopper
SoWal Insider
Well, I have to wonder if some insurance providers are religious based, or in the case of self insured organizations, you might run into conflict in forcing these institutions to cover certain procedures or drug treatments they disagree with. I think all your points are valid, does government have the right to force private industry to provide these services?
I also think another risk here is that we are dealing with government regulation, and government's reach is bound by the Consitution. Step over those bounds (and step on state's toes) and you risk the entire thing being undone by the Supreme Court. It's not cut and dried.
Here's a Time article regarding the flip side -
Health-Care Reform: A Fight over Abortion Coverage? - TIME
Subsidized plans in the exchange may have to exclude abortion coverage, which creates a disincentive to join the exchange and reap the rewards of free taxpayer funding. (Which is fine with me.
I don't like the idea of people getting subsidied care at all except under extreme circumstances.)
30ashopper
SoWal Insider
A better solution, IMHO, would be to define the coverage of those plans available in the exchanges, and leave all the other plans out there alone. Democrats don't want to do that though, which presents us with these problems.