The Supreme Court's 5 to 4 Ruling, on birth control.

No the wages are not, but when you are talking about 4 specific medications that are not used that often then you are not talking about a great amount of money.

 

This post is vague, I can't understand what you mean here. Please try again.

 

Sorry, you had made a comment that wages do not make up for lack of coverage and overall I would agree but we are talking about 4 specific medications that are not used a lot. So paying out of pocket for them is not a make or break.

 

Actually no, you aren't talking about medicine alone. The Ruling, applied to any medical procedure that a privately held company felt met the criteria of violating their religious beliefs on abortion.

I assume you aren't a female, and don't have female friends who have confided in you that some cannot take the birth control pill because of an adverse reaction. Instead they're only option statistically safe birth control methods are condoms or IUD's. In the case of condoms, some have a latex allergy so they are now off the lists of options.


Sure you could counter with, "but there are other materials other than latex for condoms", but I rebut that with that their availability is very small. And if you are poor, or already tight-budget as a family, you can't expect them to have internet service that costs $79-$1000+ a month.

I have walked into a lot of major pharmacy type stores and they do not have non-latex condoms most of the time.

---

Also a Dr.'s visit to get an IUD, is easily $1000, a procedure out of pocket, without insurance.


Now run the numbers on a minimum wage anywhere from $9-$16 an hour, and tell me how an average family of 4, can afford out of pocket expenses for an IUD procedure or other type of sexual health procedure.


Factors:

1. Taxes: Federal, State, Local.

2. Expenses for gas and car or bus fairs. (so gas, new tires, the occasional ticket from a cop every 7 years)

3. Rent/Mortgage.

4. Food expenses (moderately health food expenses) If you tell me to eat cheap Ramen, and get by, then you need to factor in costs due to the probability of health concerns because of the unhealthy diet, from too much salt and genetically modified food consumption.

5. Utility Bills (Water/Electric).

6. Student Debt (from one's own days in college).

optional (because these don't apply to everyone but might):

7. Diapers for possible young kids.

8. Children's education supplies expenses (growing up all my teachers and professors required typed essays otherwise it's an F paper)

9. College tuition projections for your children or spouse/partner.

10. Cell phone bills (let's face it on all the job applications now, employers ask for cell phone #'s to have you on-call available)

11. Serious medical bills from stays at the hospital from some freak car crash or something.



-----

Given a 60 hour workweek, at anywhere from $9-$16, you tell me how a family get's by, not just day-to-day, but to actually save money for retirement.

 

This ruling would allow an employer to deny benefits for cancer treatment, HIV treatment or any damn other medical care. Again five old white men making decisions for the rest of us.

 

That's a bit of a slippery slope but I guess it's possible... in that the precedent is set and if "someone" (an employer) can show something violates their religious beliefs I can see it. But still I don't know if that would work. How would you show cancer treatment for example violates a religious belief?

Also, and more importantly.... the more I get to thinking about this whole entire topic. I don't get it and I'll explain why. Employers often give people health insurance-or should I say help pay for it... partial employer, partial employee.... and then the insurance is given through an insurance company, right? But typically the employer has nothing at all to do with what the insurance company covers... my husband's employer (who I have my insurance through), has nothing to do with if my insurance company covers say, vision care or gym membership or whatever. So, how in the world does a company now say the INSURANCE COMPANY has to change what it's plan covers? Yea I know it's all based on the ACA regs- but still.. does not compute.

 

A small fraction, to the insurance company, of the cost of a normal pregnancy. Viewed rom that perspective, birth control costs an insurance company less than nothing.

Christian Scientists and a few other nonmainstream denominations reject nearly all modern medical treatments.

 

Cancer treatment and HIV treatment would have no way to be show it is against religious beliefs, it would be struck down by the court.

Nurse Steve it's nice to know that you think Clarence Thomas is white. And the Chief Justice is old.

monkjr can not use a "strawman" because it just does not apply, you want to apply the worst case but what is the chance 1-1000000?? But hey for the sake of the discussion vasectomy is covered by INS so that is a guarantee form of birth control.

Karen can you find me any Dr that is considered a "christian" that rejects modern medicine? There is not one, because that is how they become Dr's.

 

No, I was making reference to a specific church. They have been in legal hot water before, over such issues as insisting that their seriously ill children be "treated" only by prayer.

 

Ok, because no church I know of would restrict medical treatment. Yes some out there will use other means but not limited just to "Christian".

 

It's because legally, a corporation is legally a "person", and so that "person" shops for a healthcare plan that would then cover their employees.

(Trust me if you have healthcare questions and how the system worked pre-obamacare and post-obamacare, i'm the person to ask)

@Mods, see this is why I think this thread is also valid in the Politics thread, I get why you merged it, but is there a way to get this thread linked to Politics forum as well?

 

Oh yeah I need to add this to this post.


Richard Mourdock, of Indiana's 8th Congresssional District also had a scandal similar to Todd Akin's, in the sense that he went on TV and said that essentially if you were raped, that it was God's will.

Did I mention he was a Tea-partier?

Anyway he too, lost the election in 2012.

But this is why the Republican brand on politics, and the Tea party, even though it's trying to be it's own 3rd party now, are both unhealthy for national politics.


I think people who are joining the Tea-party movement aren't looking at the bigger picture, they see 3rd party good, and then don't closely examine the Tea Party's platform on a realistic consequence basis.

 

Vance 2335, Clarence Thomas is the "whitest" black man I have ever read. It is more than the color of a persons skin that determines his character and by any reasonable standard Clarence Thomas is "white". With men like him on the court the Civil Right act of 1964 is in danger of being ruled unconstitutional.

 

#uncletom

 

So Karen you can't have a difference of opinion with someone and still be friends with them?

 

Nursesteve and darksuger you both are sick people. Because Thomas is not a Jesse Jackson he is some how less of a black man? He is not "white" he is a black man deal with it. And to say the Civil Rights act is in danger is just stupid.

darksuger you might be the uncletom for not thinking for yourself and following what is expect of you.

 

Sometimes.

 

But not with me? Something I said was so bad/offensive?

 

Whether it's online or in real life, I don't think I could ever be friends with anybody who is deep into the GOP / Fox News point of view. It's just too different from my views on subjects that are very important to me. The arguments would be never-ending. I politely disagree with my friends all the time, but not about core values.

 

I am a conservative and I do not watch Fox News as I get my news from more unbiased sources then Fox, CNN and MSNBC. I have a liberal friend who is an atheist and while we disagree over politics and religion we have been friends for about 20 years now. But if you don't think you can be friends with someone who has a different point of view then that is kind of sad and shows why there is a big divide in this country.
I believe in the constitution, gun rights but gun control, not being a sheep, working hard to get ahead, that all men are created equal and get sicked by race baiters and those on the left who like to call black conservatives uncletoms, i am against the death penality, against abortion but having it legal is better than illegal, and believe in God.
Now you don't have to agree with what I believe in and all for disagreement but if you can't respect the right for someone to have a different opinion and still be able to have a civil conversation then again just sad and shows something about why America is the way it is today.