• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Angry lawmakers challenge lineup at hearing: 'Where are the women?'

Boo Radley said:
On a bit of a tangent, Stewart also questioned the Catholic Church's support of health insurance plans that cover Viagra: "How is it that women can't get their pill and men can get their pill?" In footage from a 2000 interview, a spokesperson for the National Conference of Catholic Bishops explained that “Viagra actually answers a medical problem. ... Contraception is a choice that somebody will make, but it doesn't answer a particular healthcare need.”

Stewart was not convinced by the distinction. "So the Catholic Church says a[n erection] is a need, but not getting pregnant is more of a want?"
Click to expand...

Do you think Stewart realizes that's not really what they said, or is he as clueless as the audience that hes trying to fool?
 
j-mac said:
Yes, and thank you for the list...Let's take a look at what you listed...

Ok, After looking up some of the less common reasons you listed here, in every case the pill is not the first line treatment of ANY of these, nor is ANY of these life threatening to the point of requiring the pill to be mandated for free.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Endometriosis: (These are not serious?) complications of endometriosis include:

Long-term (chronic) pelvic pain that interferes with social and work activities

Large cysts in the pelvis (called endometriomas) that may break open (rupture)

In a few cases, endometriosis implants may cause blockages of the gastrointestinal or urinary tracts. This is rare.

Very rarely, cancer may develop in the areas of endometriosis after menopause.

Endometriosis - PubMed Health

Polycyctis Ovary Syndrome: (These are not serious?) Increased risk of endometrial cancer

Infertility (early treatment of polycystic ovary disease can help prevent infertility or increase the chance of having a healthy pregnancy)

Obesity-related (BMI over 30 and waist circumferance greater than 35) conditions, such as high blood pressure, heart problems, and diabetes

Possible increased risk of breast cancer
Polycystic ovary syndrome - PubMed Health

Amenorrhea: (These are not serious?) Infertility. If you don't ovulate and have menstrual periods, you can't become pregnant.
Osteoporosis. If your amenorrhea is caused by low estrogen levels, you may also be at risk of osteoporosis — a weakening of your bones
Amenorrhea: Complications - MayoClinic.com
 
taxigirl said:
Endometriosis: (These are not serious?) complications of endometriosis include:

Long-term (chronic) pelvic pain that interferes with social and work activities

Large cysts in the pelvis (called endometriomas) that may break open (rupture)

In a few cases, endometriosis implants may cause blockages of the gastrointestinal or urinary tracts. This is rare.

Very rarely, cancer may develop in the areas of endometriosis after menopause.

Endometriosis - PubMed Health

Polycyctis Ovary Syndrome: (These are not serious?) Increased risk of endometrial cancer

Infertility (early treatment of polycystic ovary disease can help prevent infertility or increase the chance of having a healthy pregnancy)

Obesity-related (BMI over 30 and waist circumferance greater than 35) conditions, such as high blood pressure, heart problems, and diabetes

Possible increased risk of breast cancer
Polycystic ovary syndrome - PubMed Health

Amenorrhea: (These are not serious?) Infertility. If you don't ovulate and have menstrual periods, you can't become pregnant.
Osteoporosis. If your amenorrhea is caused by low estrogen levels, you may also be at risk of osteoporosis — a weakening of your bones
Amenorrhea: Complications - MayoClinic.com
Click to expand...


Can you show what the primary treatments for these problems are? Also, I don't see any of what you listed that would require BC pills as a life saving measure.

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Can you show what the primary treatments for these problems are? Also, I don't see any of what you listed that would require BC pills as a life saving measure.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Every person responds differently to different treatments. BC pills can control blood pressure and other chronic conditions. They help prevent cancer. I think these are lifesaving measures.
 
buck said:
Do you think Stewart realizes that's not really what they said, or is he as clueless as the audience that hes trying to fool?
Click to expand...

Not what who said?
 
ludahai said:
The problem is that the government will be telling religious people that they MUST pay for something that is abhorrant to their beliefs.
Click to expand...

No, they pay for insurance. Insurance for people who may or may not share their beliefs. It's really a silly issue. They pay for a lot of things that abhorrent to them, and pay people who do things that are abhorent to them. Their logic is sadly lacking.
 
ludahai said:
Aren't they typically not-for-profits?
Click to expand...

Typically, but not entirely. And not for profits, oddly enough, often make a lot of money.

But that doesn't change that the are business, employing people who are not Catholic.
 
j-mac said:
This matters not to liberals, it is about the force of their ideals.


j-mac
Click to expand...

We,re not deciding for individuals, rather selectively I might add, what they can have and can't. ;)
 
Boo Radley said:
Not what who said?
Click to expand...

Stewart was not convinced by the distinction. "So the Catholic Church says a[n erection] is a need, but not getting pregnant is more of a want?"
Click to expand...

Do you think he really doesn't know what the panel was saying, or do you think he was trying to fool his audience? I tend to think the later, but who knows.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, they pay for insurance. Insurance for people who may or may not share their beliefs. It's really a silly issue. They pay for a lot of things that abhorrent to them, and pay people who do things that are abhorent to them. Their logic is sadly lacking.
Click to expand...

Currently they do not pay for insurance for contraception/morning after pill and this is not infringing on anyones rights. It's really not a silly issue at all. It's a shame that some people are so willing to give up constituionally guaranteed rights in order to "feel good".
 
If we can't this right, what kind of troubles are we going to see when it comes to end of life care and other touchy subjects.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, they pay for insurance. Insurance for people who may or may not share their beliefs. It's really a silly issue. They pay for a lot of things that abhorrent to them, and pay people who do things that are abhorent to them. Their logic is sadly lacking.
Click to expand...

When you pay for insurance, you pay for various services that the insurance policy provides, which are spelt out in the policy. If the policy includes birth control, then you are indeed paying for it. You don't think that influences the premium that is paid? Of course it is. So, yes, whoever is paying for the insurance is paying for the service of the provision of birth control, something that is abhorrant to many people of Faith, Catholic and otherwise.
 
ludahai said:
When you pay for insurance, you pay for various services that the insurance policy provides, which are spelt out in the policy. If the policy includes birth control, then you are indeed paying for it. You don't think that influences the premium that is paid? Of course it is. So, yes, whoever is paying for the insurance is paying for the service of the provision of birth control, something that is abhorrant to many people of Faith, Catholic and otherwise.
Click to expand...

Just as you are paying for all kinds of things the church objects to. Mindless to pick one, especially one they are so wrong about.

Let me ask you, when they pay the salary to their employees, and they go buy drugs, or prostitutes, or use the money on affiras or getting drunk, should the church have a say? After all, insurance is part of the salary packet, and if the problem is the money being spent on what the Church objects to, what is the line and hwo do you justify it?
 
buck said:
Currently they do not pay for insurance for contraception/morning after pill and this is not infringing on anyones rights. It's really not a silly issue at all. It's a shame that some people are so willing to give up constituionally guaranteed rights in order to "feel good".
Click to expand...

Really? Don't workers have the right to disagree with the Church? Especially the non-Catholics?

You can answer the same question I ask above.
 
buck said:
Do you think he really doesn't know what the panel was saying, or do you think he was trying to fool his audience? I tend to think the later, but who knows.
Click to expand...

You didn't really answer the question. You seem to me to be confused. Are you talking about what was said years agoe, or the panel now? And if now, exactly what did he get wrong?
 
Boo Radley said:
Just as you are paying for all kinds of things the church objects to. Mindless to pick one, especially one they are so wrong about.

Let me ask you, when they pay the salary to their employees, and they go buy drugs, or prostitutes, or use the money on affiras or getting drunk, should the church have a say? After all, insurance is part of the salary packet, and if the problem is the money being spent on what the Church objects to, what is the line and hwo do you justify it?
Click to expand...

You are once again comparing apples and oranges. When I pay taxes, it is the decision of public officials as to how to spend it. It is no longer my money. Similarly, salary for services rendered is to be spent as the employees see fit. It is their money.

However, NOW you are forcing employers to spend THEIR OWN money on something that is abhorrent to them. How you can't see how that is fundamentally different is beyond me.
 
Boo Radley said:
Really? Don't workers have the right to disagree with the Church? Especially the non-Catholics?

You can answer the same question I ask above.
Click to expand...

My first question is do you realize it is more then just catholics that are opposed to Obama's mandate? For examples, protestants have just come out and sad they will no longer be providing insurance to individuals at their schools because they do not believe in funding abortion pills and contraceptives.

Anyway,of course the employees have the ability to disagree. They can take the money they earn from working and spend it on whatever the heck they want, including contraceptives. However, I really ma not sure what that has to do with forcing religious organizations to provide coverage to their employees for things specifically against their beliefs.

You seem to think those two actions are the same. They aren't.
 
Boo Radley said:
Really? Don't workers have the right to disagree with the Church? Especially the non-Catholics?

You can answer the same question I ask above.
Click to expand...

Of course they have the right to disagree. They do NOT have the right to expect the Church to pay for something that is abhorrant to the Church. Just as I never expected my former employer to pay for or even allow me to have meat/garlic/onion on campus.
 
ludahai said:
Of course they have the right to disagree. They do NOT have the right to expect the Church to pay for something that is abhorrant to the Church. Just as I never expected my former employer to pay for or even allow me to have meat/garlic/onion on campus.
Click to expand...

Really, so when they pay you, they decide what you can buy. After all, it is their money they are giving to you. Salary is really no different than insurance. Both are you pay, your conmpesation for the work or service provided.
 
ludahai said:
You are once again comparing apples and oranges. When I pay taxes, it is the decision of public officials as to how to spend it. It is no longer my money. Similarly, salary for services rendered is to be spent as the employees see fit. It is their money.

However, NOW you are forcing employers to spend THEIR OWN money on something that is abhorrent to them. How you can't see how that is fundamentally different is beyond me.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. Your benefit package is as much compensation for your labor as you salary. Both are equal.
 
buck said:
My first question is do you realize it is more then just catholics that are opposed to Obama's mandate? For examples, protestants have just come out and sad they will no longer be providing insurance to individuals at their schools because they do not believe in funding abortion pills and contraceptives.

Anyway,of course the employees have the ability to disagree. They can take the money they earn from working and spend it on whatever the heck they want, including contraceptives. However, I really ma not sure what that has to do with forcing religious organizations to provide coverage to their employees for things specifically against their beliefs.

You seem to think those two actions are the same. They aren't.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if it is or isn't only Catholics.

And what it has to with it is that insurance is compensation. Insurance is part of the salary package. Both is the employers money being given to the employee for services rendered. There is no difference between the two. Don't believe me? Go negotiate your pay some time.
 
Boo Radley said:
You didn't really answer the question. You seem to me to be confused. Are you talking about what was said years agoe, or the panel now? And if now, exactly what did he get wrong?
Click to expand...

Oy. Stewart is claiming that the Catholic Church says a[n erection] is a need, but not getting pregnant is more of a want. That's not at all what the catholic church is saying.

Do you think he realizes they aren't saying that and is just trying to fool his viewers, or do you think he really believes that is what they are saying and he is just clueless?

Since you seem so confused either Jon purposely fooled you or Jon really doesn't have any idea and accidentally fooled you. I'm still not certain.

They are simply stating that viagra is to correct something that is medically wrong with an individual. Pregnancy is not a medical problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom