Keep telling yourself that lie and maybe it'll become true someday.
I'm sorry you fail to understand the point being made.
It's not a lie, it is completely and totally immaterial to the discussion.
Burning your own house down, may not actually be illegal.
I'm sure there is a permitting process for it.
A legal demolition, you can call it.
And if your aunt had balls she'd be your uncle.
Setting your house on fire on purpose isn't an "elective" condition. It's a crime. It's a crime for a reason. That reason is the same one that prevents it from being covered under home insurance.
If you accidentally set your house on fire, however, it will be covered by your home owners insurance. Accident = not insurance fraud.
Setting your house on fire, on purpose, is a purposeful action, choosing to get pregnant, is another purposeful action.
You have chosen to do these things, they are done by you electing to do so.
I'm sorry you can't see this.
That'd be insurance fraud. People don't get pregnant in order to get money from their health insurance company.
You're forgetting another big detail in your disingenuous comparison: who receives the money. Nobody commits health insurance fraud by virtue of getting pregnant. Arson, however, is one of the most common ways people attempt to commit home insurance fraud. Suicide is a way that people commit life insurance fraud.
I'm not talking about fraud, I'm talking about purposefully destroying an insured piece of property, then with all the facts in the open, attempting to make a claim on your policy.
They will summarily deny it, because insurance does not exist to cover purposeful losses.
It's not disingenuous, you just don't seem to understand the purpose of insurance.
On the "who receives the money" issue, it is the insured.
With pregnancy, you don't have to pay the full cost.
You save money by this action.
Regardless, you are benefiting from it.
Find one definition of "elective" that puts arson or suicide in the realm of "elective events". And pregnancy isn't an elective condition, it's a preventable one. Big difference. Especially when you're whinging about having insurance cover that which makes said condition preventable.
Elective is you exercising a choice, in this situation, a choice to incur a loss.
You seriously mean to tell me that people don't choose to get pregnant.
You have the nerve to say I'm lying. :lol:
Whining?
I'm pointing out the erroneous belief that people who can afford medical insurance, can not afford birth control.
The logic behind that position is dumb.
And so are certain forms of cancer. Are they elective events now too?
Do people purposefully choose to get cancer?
Only when you are desperately attempting to pretend that a totally dishonest comparison is valid. It's entirely relevant if one values honest comparisons, though.
There is no desperation to be honest, this isn't even hard to debate with you (which is odd, because 99% of the time, you skills make it challenging).
It's incredibly apparent that you don't know what insurance is meant to do.
False. There is no loss to an individual incurred by pregnancy. Using fallacious language doesn't make your argument any less dishonest.
In the event of the pregnancy, the pregnant person will incur a financial loss, by paying for medical services to deliver and care for the mother or child.
But this loss, is on purpose, because the woman has chosen to become pregnant.