• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Contraception and Viagra, why one but not the other?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TxGoat
  • Start date Start date
mpw said:
It's easy to say, but if the world ran with a dog eat dog attitude, and I can't delude myself that isn't what would happen any more than a full communism could never work, it's the people who are least able that would be left with nothing.
Don't like being disabled? Change it... and no, that's not easy is it; never impossible?
Living within a plural society peacefully and caring for those that you may not totally agree with, or even like, IS had, but I don't think I'd change it for what some people, often those able-bodied, wealthy and educated, see as 'fair' because they 'earned' what they have

Not sure why you feel the need to bring it up, as I see nowhere that I'm contravening the rules, but feel free to point it out.
Click to expand...

Never accused anyone of breaking the rules :)

That PSA was for everyone, I've seen this topic get VERY VERY heated other places.
 
ylexot said:
I think you're missing the point. The Catholic church isn't trying to impose restrictions on people. They just don't want to provide those services to people. If you work for them and want an abortion or contraceptives, you are still free to go get them. The church just doesn't want to pay for it because it is against their religion.
Click to expand...

Once the Catholic church enters the public market, i.e. hospital, schools, etc., takes government grants, i.e. taxpayers money, they must obey the rules just like everybody else.
 
OutofDate1980 said:
Once the Catholic church enters the public market, i.e. hospital, schools, etc., takes government grants, i.e. taxpayers money, they must obey the rules just like everybody else.
Click to expand...
Can you show me where they get government grants and that a stipulation of the grant is that they have to abide by Obamacare?

Also, I really don't care about the Catholic/religious birth control issue. I don't think ANY company should be forced to provide ANY health insurance whatsoever. In fact, I would prefer it if no company provided health insurance to employees. That would make the health insurance industry act more like a free market...which would be good.
 
The thread title presupposes a premise im not really clear about...im wondering though, txgoat, if posting in this section will boost my post count... fingers crossed.:D
 
ylexot said:
Can you show me where they get government grants and that a stipulation of the grant is that they have to abide by Obamacare? ...
Click to expand...

I assume you are referring to Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.. The was passed by Congress. Yes religious organizations must obey laws.
 
ylexot said:
Even if it violates the Constitution?
Click to expand...

His point is that if an entity accepts federal government money (for anything) then that entity is subject to government rules (from there on out.) There is precedent for this (most notably in colleges/universities). The degree to which those rules are prescribed/..postscribed is what is at issue. Also note that one can voluntarily give up their constitutional rights (in the eyes of those who espouse this argument.)
 
atljatl said:
His point is that if an entity accepts federal government money (for anything) then that entity is subject to government rules (from there on out.) There is precedent for this (most notably in colleges/universities). The degree to which those rules are prescribed is what is at issue. Also note that one can voluntarily give up their constitutional rights (in the eyes of those who espouse this argument.)
Click to expand...
I asked what grants were given that specified that they had to follow Obamacare. His point was that Obamacare is the law. His point had nothing to do with government money.
 
mpw said:
does violating the constitution really matter though surely people should be allowed to opt out on religious(or other) grounds?
Click to expand...

Well...that is the point and it really really matters. The constitution is what is supposed to protect the right of citizens to opt out/not buy something. There wouldnt be a discussion about this in, say, China because you have no choice. And, really, there shouldn't be a discussion here because we DO have a choice. So, yes, people surely should be able to opt out (as you say) ...but that right is only valid in the context of a constitution that validates it, as I believe the US constitution does.
 
ylexot said:
I asked what grants were given that specified that they had to follow Obamacare. His point was that Obamacare is the law. His point had nothing to do with government money.
Click to expand...

Religious tax exemption is just one means that religions are supported by government money.

Churches and Taxes - ProCon.org

"A tax break for churches forces all American taxpayers to support religion, even if they oppose some or all religious doctrines. As Mark Twain argued: "no church property is taxed and so the infidel and the atheist and the man without religion are taxed to make up the deficit in the public income thus caused."
 
atljatl said:
Im confused then
Click to expand...

Once you or any entity engage in public commerce you have to obey the laws applicable to this activity.

Religious organizations that engage in the commerce of operating schools, hospitals, insurance, banking, etc., must obey the laws pertaining to this commerce.

Some religious organizations do not approve of birth control per religious beliefs, therefore do not want their employees or customers engaged in this commercial activity to be provided this service.

Birth control is part of reproductive health and government has mandated that heath insurance companies must provide for reproductive health care to engage in this public commerce.

If one doesn't want to obey the laws applicable to a commercial activity, then there is no law that forces one to engage in this commercial activity.
 
atljatl said:
....There wouldnt be a discussion about this in, say, China because you have no choice...
Click to expand...
You don't have a choice to opt out of healthcare insurance? you sure about that?

Anyway the point I was making was that for those that believe that it's every man for himself, what's the point of a constitution? If the law said you can't bear arms, but you're of a religious bent that wants to, then just go ahead; you don't need any constitution/law/government.
 
ylexot said:
Can you show me where they get government grants and that a stipulation of the grant is that they have to abide by Obamacare?

Also, I really don't care about the Catholic/religious birth control issue. I don't think ANY company should be forced to provide ANY health insurance whatsoever. In fact, I would prefer it if no company provided health insurance to employees. That would make the health insurance industry act more like a free market...which would be good.
Click to expand...

Its silly IMO that small and medium companies have to pay for health insurance for their staff. Seems like an awful burden. And heh, free market health insurance... thats only done in the US, and you have half the efficiency of the rest of the developed world in healthcare.
 
ElasticNinja said:
and you have half the efficiency of the rest of the developed world in healthcare.
Click to expand...

I almost lost control of bodily functions I was laughing so hard at this one........ then I realized..... hey youre right

it is very effecient when you refuse to treat anyone..... just put everyone on a waiting list to receive the most basic of care until they die....... truely the most efficient systems imagineable
 
copestag said:
I almost lost control of bodily functions I was laughing so hard at this one........ then I realized..... hey youre right

it is very effecient when you refuse to treat anyone..... just put everyone on a waiting list to receive the most ic of care until they die....... truely the most efficient systems imagineable
Click to expand...

That is quite efficient. Not nazi-like efficiency, but efficient nontheless
 
copestag said:
it is very efficient when you refuse to treat anyone..... just put everyone on a waiting list to receive the most basic of care until they die....... truly the most efficient systems imaginable
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

A few years back I was talking to a few people, one of whom had just visited Canada. He got injured on a camping trip and was transported to a hospital, was treated right away and that was that. No fuss, and no cost.

Now, maybe that was an outlier example, but I don't think so. I think that if everyone was on a waiting list dying, they would flip out and change their system.
 
copestag said:
...just put everyone on a waiting list to receive the most basic of care until they die...
Click to expand...
I understand your scepticism, I was on a waiting list for a whole week when I need treatment, free to me at that point.

Of course I could have gone private and seen the same surgeon, in the same hospital, for the same treatment, possibly sooner: but at what cost?!

And to bring it back on topic, a friend had 'the pill' prescribed at 16years old, and another had Viagra prescribed FREE.

Because they paid? No, because those were the drugs that the medical professional prescribed; with no consideration for religion, just health.
 
copestag said:
I almost lost control of bodily functions I was laughing so hard at this one........ then I realized..... hey youre right

it is very effecient when you refuse to treat anyone..... just put everyone on a waiting list to receive the most basic of care until they die....... truely the most efficient systems imagineable
Click to expand...

I have had several family members treated for cancer in the public system.. once a diagnosis was done, there was very little waiting.

I think you'll find those who can't afford treatment in the US, they have very long and painful waits - hope that doesn't happen to you.

Also, could you imagine the results we'd get if we brought our spending up to 2/3rds of the US?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom