Jesus, Inc.

[gerryh]

The pill is most certainly medical care. I've been on the pill plenty, never as a contraceptive method. I've also had IUD's (hormone infused) offered in an attempt to treat my medical condition, and finally had a hysterectomy.

That isn't contraception. That is hormone therapy used to treat a medical condition. As far as I am concerned that should be covered regardless. It is NOT being used as a contraceptive.

It is exclusionary when the medical care of one gender is being used as an excuse to claim that your corporation's religious rights are being trampled. "Stop giving women contraceptive care, or we pull everyone's coverage."

No, they are saying they are not willing to provide that which goes against their religious beliefs. At this time, they are being forced to participate in something that they find morally wrong.

If men are allowed contraceptive care from their doctors, then so are women, end of story. No cherry picking, no making up rules according to the particular way you're practicing your religion that day. If medical care is an employment rule, it's a rule. If that tramples your corporation's religious rights, then get out of the business.

Sorry, I consider vasectomies to be in the same realm as tubal ligation's and I don't believe anyone has requested that they be excluded.

 

[karrie]

That isn't contraception. That is hormone therapy used to treat a medical condition. As far as I am concerned that should be covered regardless. It is NOT being used as a contraceptive.



No, they are saying they are not willing to provide that which goes against their religious beliefs. At this time, they are being forced to participate in something that they find morally wrong.




Sorry, I consider vasectomies to be in the same realm as tubal ligation's and I don't believe anyone has requested that they be excluded.

No matter how it is being used, the end result is the same... it can result in failed implantations.


I'm sorry but employers have no more right to dictate how employees use their medical care, than they do to dictate how they use their money.

 

[petros]

I'd pay money to see a Corporate bris.

I wonder which Corporations go to a Church, Synagogue, Mosques or Temple and how the hell do you baptize a Corporation?

.

 

[gerryh]

I'm sorry but employers have no more right to dictate how employees use their medical care, than they do to dictate how they use their money.

They aren't. They are stating that they don't feel they should HAVE TO supply insurance coverage that goes against their moral standards. They feel that they should not be FORCED to live by someone elses mores.


and again, the employee has the option of getting their own insurance coverage.

 

[karrie]

They aren't. They are stating that they don't feel they should HAVE TO supply insurance coverage that goes against their moral standards. They feel that they should not be FORCED to live by someone elses mores.


and again, the employee has the option of getting their own insurance coverage.

The employer has the option of not owning a corporation and subjecting their corporation to employment law.


The employee is being paid (medical coverage or cash in hand, it's pay), and they are using that pay to get medical care. At that point, it is none of the corporation's business. This will not hold up in court.

 

[gerryh]

The employer has the option of not owning a corporation and subjecting their corporation to employment law.


The employee is being paid (medical coverage or cash in hand, it's pay), and they are using that pay to get medical care. At that point, it is none of the corporation's business. This will not hold up in court.

The employer USED to have the right to decide whether or not they supplied basic medical insurance to their employees or not. Now they don't have a choice, and now with the government mandated coverages, they also don't have the choice to follow their religious beliefs.

 

[karrie]

The employer USED to have the right to decide whether or not they supplied basic medical insurance to their employees or not. Now they don't have a choice, and now with the government mandated coverages, they also don't have the choice to follow their religious beliefs.

They are not being forced away from following their beliefs at all. Money leaves their hands, and goes to their employees. What their employees do with it, is on the employee. It has zero, zilch, nada, to do with their religious beliefs. It is strictly, and solely, an issue of trying to control others and/or save a buck.

 

[petros]

It is never going to happen. The opinions are those of the Green family not their corporation. Corporations are dead entities. corpse and corporation have the same word origin for a reason.

 

[gerryh]

They are not being forced away from following their beliefs at all. Money leaves their hands, and goes to their employees. What their employees do with it, is on the employee. It has zero, zilch, nada, to do with their religious beliefs. It is strictly, and solely, an issue of trying to control others and/or save a buck.

The employer has NO CHOICE in the insurance plan it offers. Non, zilch, nada. They are not stating they won't supply an insurance plan, just not one that covers contraception.

How about this. How about the damn americans bite the bullet and offer a true universal health plan for all americans like we have. Then there is non of this crap with employers wanting to choose what plans they offer. The government is the insurer, they set the rates paid, and they decide what is and isn't covered. Then the employers aren't having to offer anything aside from an extended plan, and THEY get to choose what or if, same as we have it here.

 

[karrie]

The employer has NO CHOICE in the insurance plan it offers. Non, zilch, nada. They are not stating they won't supply an insurance plan, just not one that covers contraception.

How about this. How about the damn americans bite the bullet and offer a true universal health plan for all americans like we have. Then there is non of this crap with employers wanting to choose what plans they offer. The government is the insurer, they set the rates paid, and they decide what is and isn't covered. Then the employers aren't having to offer anything aside from an extended plan, and THEY get to choose what or if, same as we have it here.

I know they don't have a choice... because that's the system. Do I think it's a smart system? No. I think universal coverage is better. But do I think THIS is why the system is wrong? Hell no. Do I think these people will be happy paying into a universal health care system that provides women the health care they and their doctor decide on? No. I doubt that would sit with their religious freedom either.

 

[petros]

All of this is hypothetical and will never happen.

 

[MHz]

No I don't, and no you didn't...and like then, I am done with you.

You call me a liar and when I prove I'm not you don't acknowledge that, that pretty much says it all.
Goes with your rude sign, have to give you credit on being honest on that part of it. The rest of that sign is more than a little debatable.
Except for the one post cheap shots that you like to deliver, that's is what you are, time you looked in the mirror.
I admit my mistakes to people, that's why I don't say things I can't back up.
Now when a little pissant troll like yourself wants to take a shot at me why would that intimidate me, it actually lets me skip through the middle and go from (relative) calm to being angry when I end up having to listen to somebody who is being intentionally stupid.

 

[gerryh]

I know they don't have a choice... because that's the system. Do I think it's a smart system? No. I think universal coverage is better. But do I think THIS is why the system is wrong? Hell no. Do I think these people will be happy paying into a universal health care system that provides women the health care they and their doctor decide on? No. I doubt that would sit with their religious freedom either.

I would bet they don't bitch like they are now.

 

[karrie]

I would bet they don't bitch like they are now.

the sort of people who are heading to the supreme court over the religious rights of their corporation? You think they won't bitch at any possible chance? Sorry, but I have to disagree there. lol.

 

[MHz]

Come out, come out wherever you are Walter. Time for us to have a little chat about you hiding in the background . You must have some words filtering through your mind that puts your finger on the red so many times. Drone kills are alright even though it is innocents how get tapped most of the time. Is that why the red is there walter, or was it the reference to the term Christian, technically it would be False Christians but why bother with that minor detail in the post.

 

[captain morgan]

Contraception is contraception. Cherry picking which medical care your employees are allowed, and aren't, is not okay.

Since when is contraception 'medically necessary'?

I'm sorry but employers have no more right to dictate how employees use their medical care, than they do to dictate how they use their money.

Great - then buy your own plan and do as you like.

The employer has the option of not owning a corporation and subjecting their corporation to employment law.

That's like saying that an employee has the option of not being an employee

 

[karrie]

Since when is contraception 'medically necessary'?

If it's whether it's medically necessary or not that's the issue, then they'd be arguing about men getting vasectomies, not women's contraception. Vasectomies are covered, and NEVER medically necessary. Whereas the pill, hormonal IUD's, abortions, ablations, and other medical interventions for women that serve also as contraception, can also be medical necessities. So why make women the scape goat if it's necessity that's the issue?

Great - then buy your own plan and do as you like.

Why should they do that? It's part of their rights as employees.

That's like saying that an employee has the option of not being an employee

They do have that option. They also have the right to push labour laws and fight for equality. Whereas, a corporation does not have a right to religion.

 

[captain morgan]

Why should they do that? It's part of their rights as employees.

I suppose that the Green family is also exerting their rights

They do have that option. They also have the right to push labour laws and fight for equality.

... And the corps also have the right to challenge labour laws as well.

.. Mind you, stating that this issue is about 'equality' is a massive stretch

Whereas, a corporation does not have a right to religion.

Who knows, maybe this event will change that.

 

[karrie]

.. Mind you, stating that this issue is about 'equality' is a massive stretch

I suppose if your gender's right to make medical choices with your doc isn't challenged, you'd be blind to how unequal it is.


But, of course, everyone can afford to just go get a different plan to pay for medical decisions that their employer won't allow.


Right.

 

[captain morgan]

I suppose if your gender's right to make medical choices with your doc isn't challenged, you'd be blind to how unequal it is.

But, of course, everyone can afford to just go get a different plan to pay for medical decisions that their employer won't allow.

Right.

Your 'right' to make medical choices?... Sure, but if that medical system uses money to transact, then it is dependent on the capacity to pay, which goes to a corps right to conduct business in any manner they see fit... On this note, I always thought that it was the decision of a medical professional to make the decisions on the course(s) of action to take - not the patient.

Regardless, if an individual wants to start playing Dr. then ante-up.

The corporations also have the right to change the employment status of all their employees from F/T to P/T and eliminate this issue all together (in the US that is)... Is this a solution? Obviously not although some companies have taken that step as their economic situation does not allow for the ACA and to remain in business.

In the end, the law sees a corp as a unique entity that has rights and like it or not, they will be explored and defended no differently than an individual