History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid. - Ike
Tea is better for you than Kool-Aid.
2001-2008: Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.
2009-2016: Dissent is the highest form of racism.
2017-? (Probably): Dissent is the highest form of misogyny.
Health insurance purchased by middle and higher income level women is also used to cover those women's children, perhaps teenage daughters who may not have access to BC otherwise and who might end up pregnant and receiving public assistance.
The only argument I see against this is that it is a relatively cheap drug.
Look, things are better now than ever on the birth control scene. Women don't have to risk their future health to take birth control today and the price, quality and variety is astounding. More people are using effective birth control than ever before and more are educated in it's use and efficacy. And there isn't a store that won't sell them to teens (unlike my day).
If the individual cannot afford either birth control or a birth - then they should abstain from vaginal intercourse with fertile males - period. Just as if you have a car but cannot afford insurance or an accident, you should not drive it. It sucks, but that's life. You don't always get to do what you really, really want to do exactly when you want to do it. The Devil Made Me Do it is not an excuse.
Where birth control has gotten better, personal responsibility has not.
Perhaps the government is trying to avoid Idiocracy from being a predictive movie.
No one is saying that insurers should be barred from offering birth control but rather it is bad mandate. Insurers who do offer birth control have already weighted their risk tables to cover the cost, but when I have to have BC coverage as a male it screws the whole thing up. For instance I have zero possibility of becomming pregnant, none, and have no interest in taking BC and since I am not married there is no dependent who would qualify, but under Obamacare I must now insure myself, you, and everyone else to provide birth control, it is of no benefit to me. As well Viagra, non-medical breast reductions, and cosmetic surgery should not be covered.
Check the different price ratings in mandate heavy states versus mandate light states and you will see sometimes a thousand or more dollars a year difference in premium, and lower deductibles. It can be astronomical.
EDIT - Lower ded. should be higher deductibles. Sorry, kind of makes a difference.
Last edited by LaMidRighter; 09-04-12 at 06:12 PM.
Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.
"The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without."
~Dwight D. Eisenhower
That is the otherside of the 'conservative' dodge. The Gawd n Mutha 'conservatives' would see the advantage to keeping women in good health to spawn good children.
Now to be precise, the ONLY business being forced to provide BC, Breast Exams, PAP smears are the insurance companies.
To be fair, many women already have BC coverage as they live in states that require some sort of BC coverage, so the 'why should businesses be required' has already been asked and answered for roughly 50% of the US Women.
Depending on the method of birth control and with no negotiated discounts for it the cost for a month of BC is 30 bucks. If there is a 50% on it then it costs the company two hours wages at minimum wage rates.
Two hours a month for a much happier and productive female worker. My wife had bad cramps, irregular cycles, tough mood swings. Birth control REALLY helped with cramps, time and duration of period and a bit on mood swings.
Two hours a month to have women shedding the period problems of the past and not having that OOPS-OH moment that pulls them out of the workforce,(with maternity leave), just after you get them trained.
Seems a very low cost benefit.