You Dirty Sluts

[sexobon]

Originally Posted by lookout123

... I see nothing in there that causes me to feel differently about compelling private organizations to provide coverage for any specific medication or procedure. ...

Originally Posted by Ibram

Then, i assume, you believe that argument applies equally to ALL medical procedures

What pomposity it is to declare that you assume something about another, through vocabulary substitution, that they have already blatantly stated about themselves.

Originally Posted by Ibram

... Why, then, should you or anybody else single out contraception as an issue?

Because ALL Medicine is NOT Preventive Medicine which is a fact of life that is lost on you. It's ALWAYS a matter of degree whether discussing immunizations, contraception; or, limiting medical intervention to prayer.

Your continuing approach, like the sensationalized title you ascribed to this thread, reflects attention whoring at the expense of a valid issue. You are respectfully requested to cease and desist confrontational methods of engagement and pursue synergistic intellectual discussion.

[Ibby]

Originally Posted by sexobon

Because ALL Medicine is NOT Preventive Medicine which is a fact of life that is lost on you. It's ALWAYS a matter of degree whether discussing immunizations, contraception; or, limiting medical intervention to prayer.

Your continuing approach, like the sensationalized title you ascribed to this thread, reflects attention whoring at the expense of a valid issue.

But again - Obamacare is clear in that it takes the stand that preventative coverage is included in Obamacare - that is to say, health insurance plans meeting the minimum standard of coverage are required to cover preventative services, including birth control.
Why, then, is birth control being singled out as a problem? Why not checkups or immunizations or whatever?

Originally Posted by lookout123

Ooh, a prescription costs a lot. Some people can't afford to have it. Shit happens. I've been on the shitty end of things not being covered an awful lot in the last few years. That still doesn't make me believe anyone or any organization should be compelled to pay for my expenses.

The only organization being compelled is the insurance companies who now need to provide coverage with a minimum standard of care that has raised to cover preventative services including birth control... and the POINT of insurance as a principle is that when "ooh, a prescription costs a lot, some people can't afford to have it"... the insurance company steps in to help. It's the same principle by which "ooh, chemotherapy costs a lot, some people can't afford to have it" so instead of saying "only rich people can survive cancer", we say "insurance coverage should be expected to cover them".

So therefore, to attack birth control coverage as YOU or TAXPAYERS or THE GOVERNMENT paying to give women birth control - which, as a supporter of a single-payer system, i think the government SHOULD - is flat out false. And so, the issue becomes, why should birth control be considered differently than any other medicine or prescription, when it comes to the mandated minimum standard of care? And if not, why single out birth control as a problem unless it's specifically with the intent of slut-shaming and trying to treat women differently - worse - than men?

[Stormieweather]

I'm just really astounded at the objections to covering a prescription drug that is used to either a) treat a medical condition or b) prevent an expensive medical condition.

It's insurance. That is what it is for. Just like dental insurance pays for bi-annual cleanings and molar sealings and health insurance pays for physicals, pap smears, prostate and breast exams. It is to prevent a potentially expensive issue later on. OR, to cover treatment of an illness.

The cost of covering birth control doesn't even come close to prenatal care, delivery, and 18 years of insuring an additional dependent. Not to mention taxpayer funded education and other civic expenses associated with another citizen.

If I have to pay for your insulin injections and glucose testers because of your eating habits, your rehab due to your drinking habits, your surgeries due to your lousy driving habits, your diet pills due to your excessive eating habits and your effing Viagra so you can continue to go have sex on demand...then why shouldn't my birth control be covered so I do NOT have to have a baby that I am unprepared for??

Makes no sense to me.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by Stormieweather

The cost of covering birth control doesn't even come close to prenatal care, delivery, and 18 years of insuring an additional dependent. Not to mention taxpayer funded education and other civic expenses associated with another citizen.

Stormie Stormie Stormie

Don't bring the larger picture, you know...reality, into this argument. This is only for highly idealized calls for personal responsibility that has repeatably been shown to never work.