Supreme Court Rules Some Employers Don't Have to Cover Birth Control

[JohnR! 5,495]

[UncleBeer 244]

In the real world, however, we all know that neither the government nor the insurance companies are forcing anyone to take contraceptivesugh the ages.

But the preznit & minions expected Hobby Lobby & the Catholic church to pay for them. If they have an ideological problem with that, they shouldn't have to pay for them. Hence the Supreme's decision. Get over it.

[unsmiley 111]

People are paying for the insurance, more than the cost of BC would be a month. Why do you support insurance companies getting all the premium money and not giving any benefit to the people?

I do not support insurance companies getting all that money. What I want is for our premiums to be lower when the insurance companies are no longer required to pay for all this fluff.

Insurance should be for catastrophic expenses. So people do not get bankrupted when confronted with serious expenses/illness etc. That was its original intention. Not to pay for stupid incidental expenses, to the point that everyone thinks everything should be covered, and now we bemoan the costs of healthcare. Every special interest group adds their own pet requirements to these bills, and look what results. An out of control monster.

[JohnR! 5,495]

I do not support insurance companies getting all that money. What I want is for our premiums to be lower when the insurance companies are no longer required to pay for all this fluff.

Insurance should be for catastrophic expenses. So people do not get bankrupted when confronted with serious expenses/illness etc. That was its original intention. Not to pay for stupid incidental expenses, to the point that everyone thinks everything should be covered, and now we bemoan the costs of healthcare. Every special interest group adds their own pet requirements to these bills, and look what results. An out of control monster.

Ergo, if a doctor were to prescribe contraceptives, it should be covered, unless of course the church now presume to be the holder of the truth in all things medical.

[unsmiley 111]

Ergo, if a doctor were to prescribe contraceptives, it should be covered, unless of course the church now presume to be the holder of the truth in all things medical.

I would rather the church be the "holder of truth in all things medical" than the government.

[JohnR! 5,495]

I would rather the church be the "holder of truth in all things medical" than the government.

I would rather neither. I would rather decide with my doctor.

[unsmiley 111]

I would rather neither. I would rather decide with my doctor.

Absolutely no argument there.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

I do not support insurance companies getting all that money. What I want is for our premiums to be lower when the insurance companies are no longer required to pay for all this fluff.

Insurance should be for catastrophic expenses. So people do not get bankrupted when confronted with serious expenses/illness etc. That was its original intention. Not to pay for stupid incidental expenses, to the point that everyone thinks everything should be covered, and now we bemoan the costs of healthcare. Every special interest group adds their own pet requirements to these bills, and look what results. An out of control monster.

All right, but you know that's not going to happen, right? Insurance companies are all like "poor wittle us, we make so much money off of sick people but we need more!" and some actors in Washington do what they can to get them more money.

There will be no decrease in premiums from this decision and the insurance companies will just take the money.

[Teddy B 17,252]

You obviously do not understand Obama's takeover of the healthcare system. First of all, no one is being "denied access." That is a misleading, inflammatory term. What may be denied in some circumstances is taxpayer funding for contraceptives, which is vastly different from access. Additionally, "universal" does not mean everything is covered 100% -- there are many things that are not covered under this atrocious "act."

If an employee of Hobby Lobby is to pay into the ACA just like everyone else, yet denied access to birth control options because their employer refuses to allow them to have that option, what is that called other than being denied access to a viable option of their health plan that is available to everyone else?

Actually the term "universal" does mean that everything is supposed to be covered for everyone.

¹uni·ver·sal adjective \ˌyü-nə-ˈvər-səl\

: done or experienced by everyone : existing or available for everyone

: existing or true at all times or in all places

Full Definition of UNIVERSAL

1

: including or covering all or a whole collectively or distributively without limit or exception; especially : available equitably to all members of a society <universal health coverage>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/universal

All right, but you know that's not going to happen, right? Insurance companies are all like "poor wittle us, we make so much money off of sick people but we need more!" and some actors in Washington do what they can to get them more money.

There will be no decrease in premiums from this decision and the insurance companies will just take the money.

Bingo!

Edited June 30, 2014 by Teddy B

[casualsurfer 25]

I do not support insurance companies getting all that money. What I want is for our premiums to be lower when the insurance companies are no longer required to pay for all this fluff.

Insurance should be for catastrophic expenses. So people do not get bankrupted when confronted with serious expenses/illness etc. That was its original intention. Not to pay for stupid incidental expenses, to the point that everyone thinks everything should be covered, and now we bemoan the costs of healthcare. Every special interest group adds their own pet requirements to these bills, and look what results. An out of control monster.

Hehe, you mean like they do it in China?

I headed a company in China where I saw my assistant's mom get thrown out on the street from the hospital because she didn't have enough money to pay for surgery. Every person for themselves is how medical care works in China, I think that's what folks like you want.

If we don't want insurance to cost so much, we should not mandate hospitals to take patients who can't prove they can pay first. Because all those people not buying insurance and going to the emergency room is costing everyone a few thousand bucks each time that happens, multiply by tens of thousands of cases each year and you've got real money that we are all on the hook to pay.

What's next? I don't want to pay for the neighbor's kids education so I shouldn't pay property taxes?

[Teddy B 17,252]

Hehe, you mean like they do it in China?

I headed a company in China where I saw my assistant's mom get thrown out on the street from the hospital because she didn't have enough money to pay for surgery. Every person for themselves is how medical care works in China, I think that's what folks like you want.

If we don't want insurance to cost so much, we should not mandate hospitals to take patients who can't prove they can pay first. Because all those people not buying insurance and going to the emergency room is costing everyone a few thousand bucks each time that happens, multiply by tens of thousands of cases each year and you've got real money that we are all on the hook to pay.

What's next? I don't want to pay for the neighbor's kids education so I shouldn't pay property taxes?

Makes just as much sense as not wanting people to be healthy. Let's have a bunch of dumb sick people running around spreading disease, that'll show em! Not on my dime man!

I never had any kids and have paid property taxes for about 30 years, I want a refund dammit!

[unsmiley 111]

All right, but you know that's not going to happen, right? Insurance companies are all like "poor wittle us, we make so much money off of sick people but we need more!" and some actors in Washington do what they can to get them more money.

There will be no decrease in premiums from this decision and the insurance companies will just take the money.

That definitely would happen if the government got out of regulating the insurance industry (and actual competition took over) and those bankrupting mandates to cover everything but the kitchen sink were repealed.

Actually the term "universal" does mean that everything is supposed to be covered for everyone.

I do not need a lesson in the definition, thank you very much. You have misused this word in the context regarding the intention of Obama's healthcare takeover.

Hehe, you mean like they do it in China?

I headed a company in China where I saw my assistant's mom get thrown out on the street from the hospital because she didn't have enough money to pay for surgery. Every person for themselves is how medical care works in China, I think that's what folks like you want.

If we don't want insurance to cost so much, we should not mandate hospitals to take patients who can't prove they can pay first. Because all those people not buying insurance and going to the emergency room is costing everyone a few thousand bucks each time that happens, multiply by tens of thousands of cases each year and you've got real money that we are all on the hook to pay.

What's next? I don't want to pay for the neighbor's kids education so I shouldn't pay property taxes?

I think even you would agree there is a huge difference in paying for emergency, life-saving care than supplying some 32 year old "law student" her contraceptives, or some horny 65 year old his Viagra. Sorry, but others should not be on the hook for paying for your sex change operation.

Like it or no,t property tax exemptions are already here, at least in NY. If you are over a certain age, you get exemptions up to a point. It seems everyone has exceptions to all the rules/laws they don't like. but have no problem sticking it to someone else. That is why there is such a backlash to these programs. They are simply different excuses/methods of redistributing hard earned wealth.

Edited June 30, 2014 by unsmiley

[Sousuke 1,214]

Where does this leave businesses run by Christian Scientists?

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

[Peikko 1,575]

Where does this leave businesses run by Christian Scientists?

Free from having to worry about health insurance period, presumably. Let the good times roll.