If that were true you might have a point.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
|
If that were true you might have a point.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again, Steve:
Look. Let's continue on with your "scarred for life" metaphor. First off, I'm sorry your daughter had to endure an abortion... But, IT didn't scar her for life. How she DEALT with it could have done that. Having a family that thinks she committed MURDER might do that. But, the surgical procedure itself doesn't scar anybody...Quote:
If that were true you might have a point.
That's not to say it's like getting cyst removed. It's a MOMENTOUS decision... But, with family support people get past it and live a normal life. Even WITHOUT family support, women get past it.
What they AREN'T, is scarred for life.
excon
You really don't get it do you?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
>Deleted because poster must think I'm STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...ia-743581.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Hello again, Steve:
Sure I do. Do YOU think you're the ONLY one who's been touched by abortion?? Listening to you rant, you'd think you're the only person in the world who's had to deal with it.Quote:
You really don't get it do you?
I've dealt with it. To this day, I wonder who that person would be. It's still PAINFUL. I would NOT do it today. Does it make you feel good to know that this liberal wouldn't have an abortion today? Did you think we just screwed and aborted for fun??? Listening to you, I think you do believe that. It was a DIFFICULT decision. But, I'm glad I had the RIGHT to make that decision.
There are NO winners in the abortion debate.
excon
Never said I was, in fact I've explicitly told you I know others with the same story. I've witnessed and shared in their pain and their shame - none of it induced by "Having a family that thinks she committed MURDER" as you so harshly put it.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Then you DO get it, she may have overcome the shame but like too many others will never overcome the pain of having aborted their child.Quote:
I've dealt with it. To this day, I wonder who that person would be. It's still PAINFUL.
I never expected it to be an easy decision, and I have already said I don't believe the right will ever be lost. Just spare me the argument that PP is interested in protecting and serving the best interests of women or that they, and people like Wendy Davis want to make abortion "safe and rare."Quote:
I would NOT do it today. Does it make you feel good to know that this liberal wouldn't have an abortion today? Did you think we just screwed and aborted for fun??? Listening to you, I think you do believe that. It was a DIFFICULT decision. But, I'm glad I had the RIGHT to make that decision.
There can be fewer losers.Quote:
There are NO winners in the abortion debate.
Hello again,
People form corporations to AVOID some of the responsibilities of BEING a person. That's the ONLY reason they do it.
Having done so, is it fair to say that you really ARE a PERSON, with ALL the Constitutional rights that come with BEING a person??
Do rights come with responsibilities?? Having shed one, are you entitled to the other??
excon
The ACLU is suing NSA over 1st and 4th Amendment violations . How could they do that if they weren't people who's rights had been violated ? Where is thier standing if the ACLU is not people ?
Hello tom:
The ACLU is a law firm that represents individual PEOPLE. And, it doesn't address my argument anyway.
If you GIVE up something to GET something, should you BE entitled to HAVE all the stuff that came with what you GAVE up???
excon
What other rights should they give up ? You already want to deny them speech ,religious freedom ... how about their 6th amendment right to trial ,or any of the other due process clauses ? How about search and seizure rights ,or 7th amendment right to trial by jury for lawsuits ?
The ACLU is a corporation . The law suit I'm speaking of is called 'ACLU v Clapper'. That tells me they are representing themselves .
SCOTUS will hear the case of a boss, or religious corporation having the right to deny benefits for its employees because of what they believe.
In an added unexpected tidbit, Walmart will pay its employees who work on this holiday time and a half, and spring for a turkey lunch. WOW! Progress?
Why do workers give up their rights so bosses, and church corporations can exercise theirs?Quote:
What other rights should they give up ?
???? I already know your position ... like people ,you want corporations to be wards of the state .
Hello again, tom:
Let's say the Supreme's agree that corporations HAVE all the religious rights that come with being a person... Would that mean a company run by Christian Scientists wouldn't have to provide health care to its employees AT ALL? Would it mean that Jehovah's Witness's don't have to cover blood transfusions??
Who's religious rights WOULD be recognized?? Could a Jewish run company FORCE its employees to be circumcised? Would my religion that sanctifies pot allow me to FORCE my employees to get high? What if the Westboro Baptist Church formed a corporation??? Could they force their employees to carry signs at funerals?? What if the Aryan Nation church formed a company.. Could they deny employment to black people?
excon
Do you want to force Christian Scientists to buy insurance and Jehovah's Witnesses to cover blood transfusions? Is anyone wanting to force their employees to be circumcised? And I'm betting Westboro is incorporated.
Hello again, Steve:
If they run a company with 50 or more employees, then the law says they DO have to cover their employees. So, YEAH, Christian Science and Jehovah lead companies DO have to obey the law.Quote:
Do you want to force Christian Scientists to buy insurance and Jehovah's Witnesses to cover blood transfusions? Is anyone wanting to force their employees to be circumcised? And I'm betting Westboro is incorporated.
Nobody wants to force their employees to be circumcised, because Jews like me who run companies NEVER, in a million jillion years, thought that OUR religious beliefs could be FORCED on our employees... But, if the Supreme Court tells me I have that right, I'm SURE I will. More than that, I certainly wouldn't hire gentiles. We don't believe in mixing the races. At least MY sect of Judaism believes that.
excon
I will stipulate that when SCOTUS decided that a corporation is a person that they distinguished between LEGAL person and NATURAL person. You wouldn't want it any other way . Because if BP was not a legal person under the law then there would be no standing for the lawsuits they have to address. Tal wouldn't want it because their employee contracts would not be binding . If a customer slips and falls at Hobby Lobby ,you want Hobby Lobby to be sued.
You just want it all one way . They are legal persons when it comes to responsibility ,but you refuse to recognize that as a legal person/people they also have rights.
What I like about the case is that Hobby Lobby isn't suing about contraceptives . They don't want to provide insurance that covers abortion pills . The question that matters is not whether a corporation is a person, but whether people must relinquish their First Amendment rights if they own a business.
btw I am not convinced that the same court that decided Citizen's United will also say that Congress intended the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to apply to corporations. Such is my uncertaintly with the Robert's court . But they should be clear that a business owner like David Green and his family should not be compelled to leave relgious convicitions and their morals behind when they walk into their place of business.
The abortion pill is in fact not an abortion, it stops fertilizing and egg. Abortions are after they are fertilized. Thus inaccurate. Are they against condoms to? Does it apply to older females with endometriosis who are treated with BC pills?
Endometriosis Symptoms, Causes, Treatment - How is endometriosis treated? - MedicineNet
Bottom line letting any untrained and uniformed person, boss, or religious corporation getting between a person, and their doctor is a death panel. Agreed?Quote:
Since endometriosis occurs during the reproductive years, many of the available medical treatments for endometriosis rely on interruption of the normal cyclical hormone production by the ovaries. These medications include GnRH analogs, oral contraceptive pills, and progestins.
Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs (GnRH analogs)
Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs (GnRH analogs) have been effectively used to relieve pain and reduce the size of endometriosis implants. These drugs suppress estrogen production by the ovaries by inhibiting the secretion of regulatory hormones from the pituitary gland. As a result, menstrual periods stop, mimicking menopause. Nasal and injection forms of GnRH agonists are available.
The side effects are a result of the lack of estrogen, and include:
hot flashes,
vaginal dryness,
irregular vaginal bleeding,
mood changes,
fatigue, and
loss of bone density (osteoporosis).
Fortunately, by adding back small amounts of estrogen and progesterone in pill form (similar to treatments sometimes used for symptom relief in menopause) many of the annoying side effects due to estrogen deficiency can be avoided. "Add back therapy" is the term that refers to this modern way of administering GnRH agonists along with estrogen and progesterone in a way to keep the treatment successful, but avoid most of the unwanted side effects.
Oral contraceptive pills
Oral contraceptive pills (estrogen and progesterone in combination) are also sometimes used to treat endometriosis. The most common combination used is in the form of the oral contraceptive pill (OCP). Sometimes women who have severe menstrual pain are asked to take the OCP continuously, meaning skipping the placebo (sugar pill) portion of the cycle. Continuous use in this manner will free a woman of having any menstrual periods at all. Occasionally, weight gain, breast tenderness, nausea, and irregular bleeding are mild side effects. Oral contraceptive pills are usually well-tolerated in women with endometriosis.
Another reason to cut out the middle man.
Maybe it is time to better define who has what rights and when the rights are limited to personal preference, and cannot be trumped by more powerful entities. That's the bottom line.
That's as much a false premise today as it was the first time you tried. No one is forcing their religious beliefs on others by not buying them contraceptives. Those employees can have all the contraceptives they want, no one is telling them they can't.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
You aren't buying them contraceptives, the insurance carrier does. The law says he must provide every consumer with a minimum insurance package that included what females need too.
I can respect you conducting yourself according to what you believe, but why should women and companies suffer for your beliefs? If we have to buy extra stuff because you don't believe in it then that's a burden. What about blood tranfusions being eliminated by JW's? What about the boss being a scientologist, and he doesn't believe in doctors?
Where do your rights stop, and everybody else's starts? If you are saying the boss can tell me what rights I have you are surely LOONY.
You might think discriminating against the rights of women using religion as an excuse, but I do NOT!
I of course would take the arguement further and ask why a person should be forced to buy coverage they don't want and need ? I think all our rights are violated in this law ,and the idiot Chief Justice's twisting of the wording of the law doesn't change that .
You keep believing those greedy insurance companies are paying for them and we'll see. Thus far the courts have come decidedly in favor of religious freedom.Quote:
You aren't buying them contraceptives, the insurance carrier does. The law says he must provide every consumer with a minimum insurance package that included what females need too.
If you don't need it, you won't use it, and won't pay for it. And hospitals won't pass the cost of treating the uninsured onto its other clients, though I imagine they will jack up the costs of surgical gowns, or aspirin any way. Wonder how many of your private market insurance companies would flat out go out of business if you could buy across state lines?Quote:
I of course would take the arguement further and ask why a person should be forced to buy coverage they don't want and need ? I think all our rights are violated in this law ,and the idiot Chief Justice's twisting of the wording of the law doesn't change that .
So you think workers have NO rights, huh? Or not as much as YOUR church?Quote:
You keep believing those greedy insurance companies are paying for them and we'll see. Thus far the courts have come decidedly in favor of religious freedom.
What is it with you libs thinking it's all or nothing? Is there no such thing as balance? Yes workers have rights and yes the church has rights, but there is no right to free contraceptives especially at the expense of specifically enumerated constitutional rights. You can't and won't force me to violate my religious freedom to provide an imagined right to free contraceptives any more than I can or would force my employees to be circumcised.
FREE contraceptives don't exist. You have to pay a premium for insurance to get them since its prescriptions only. That means a licensed doctor, and you have to actually visit them. Even with a script without insurance you pay the full amount. Ask your pharmacist how that works.
You have been severely misinformed.
Yes they think that everything is free, the universal provider syndrome otherwise known as the ACA. Has anyone told them there is a cost to participate which must be borne by someone; individual, employer or governmentQuote:
You have been severely misinformed.
Clete I wish there was an easier way to get everybody on the same page, but we haven't found it. None of us have. Damn!! Just have to keep working at it.
Tal it all has to do with how reasonable you are and how much you are beholden to lobbists, and vested interests, and, of course, those inevitable eighteenth century ideas.
Change is important as we wrestle with changed circumstance and holding the status quo does allow us to deal effectively with change. What you have is people who don't want change, either because they are stuck in a time warp, or because it might mean they actually have to admit the system isn't perfect
Nah, I dont think so. Maybe your the one that is misinformed. Check this out.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
And while lack of awareness about the so-called "contraception mandate" might reflect overall, widespread confusion about Obamacare's details, an expert who has been following the issue said it also reflects the fact that pharmaceutical companies aren't advertising the fact that their contraceptives could be effectively obtained free by many women.
Three separate surveys by Phoenix earlier this year found that less than 50 percent of women ages 18 to 45 knew that the Affordable Care Act requires health insurance plans to provide contraceptives without out-of-pocket payments to women for birth control methods approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
Maybe Im misinformed but to me no out of pocket expenses means it is free.
Low awareness of Obamacare birth control mandate
your serfdom predates my 18th century ideas .
para- what is missing from this debate most of the time is one side refuses to open thier eyes and see the truth and when they do come accross it they would rather "pretend" it doesnt exist and just spout the party lines they have been given. Change can only take place when you have transparency. So far there is no transparancy from the Obamacare plan. There is only emperor granted loopholes and lies being pushed as truths to fool the sheeple into believing.
When you say free, cdad, you meant without a co pay, so the amount is paid for by your insurance carrier through your premiums as your article points out repeatedly you only get benefits if you have insurance. No copay for certain things is a part of your benefits when you purchase your plan, much like my free high speed internet service, or free HD cable. Without a subscription I would get neither... for free.
If indeed it was free why are church corporations so adamant about NOT paying for it?
My mind would be more open if you quit denying facts from your own links. Okay many don't know the benefits yet, but transparency isn't the problem.
Talk about the party line!! Word for word.Quote:
Change can only take place when you have transparency. So far there is no transparancy from the Obamacare plan. There is only emporor granted loopholes and lies being pushed as truths to fool the sheeple into believing.
whose serfdom Tom? I don't live in a place where I have to buy health insurance.
Tal, it should be obvious. They (the church coporations) are either A) Paying for that premium or B) They are self insured and the money for it comes directly out of thier own pocket.
So yes they are paying for something that is against thier beliefs.
If Obamacare is so transparent then why use words like "pretend" to defend it? It all started with the perfectly transparent passage of the bill. You have to pass it to find out whats in it. So lets pretend from the start they actually read it somewhere along the line before voting on it. Yeah right !!!! lol
You mean there is no employee contribution for church workers for health insurance? Interesting.
My dad was a Lutheran pastor for over 30 years and paid into a Lutheran health insurance plan. When I taught Lutheran school, I paid into the same plan.
Thank you for finally coming around to my side. So the insurance company doesn't pay for them after all, the policyholder does.Quote:
FREE contraceptives don't exist. You have to pay a premium for insurance to get them since its prescriptions only.
thus the church objectionQuote:
So the insurance company doesn't pay for them after all, the policyholder does.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:08 PM. |