HHS mandate on Catholic and other religious institutions

• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  sleeper;1078260 wrote:Peace of mind is a mental health benefit. Lighter periods. Reduced menstrual cramps, clearer skin, less mood swings etc.
  
  Obviously there are some downsides to taken BC, but you there are also plenty of benefits to BC as well. You said far outweigh, I'm interested if you still feel this way and if so, can you provide some backup?

  Ok.. if you don't take birth control you don't rsk the side affects of these.. http://birthcontrolsideeffects.biz/
  some of which contradict your mental health benefit.
• sleeper

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1078430 wrote:Ok.. if you don't take birth control you don't rsk the side affects of these.. http://birthcontrolsideeffects.biz/
  some of which contradict your mental health benefit.

  Interesting. I'd be curious if you do this type of risk analysis for everything that you do. Like when you get in your car, do you weigh the chance that you might get into a car accident vs. taking the bus instead? I'm just trying to gain insight into how your mind works.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  sleeper;1078440 wrote:Interesting. I'd be curious if you do this type of risk analysis for everything that you do. Like when you get in your car, do you weigh the chance that you might get into a car accident vs. taking the bus instead? I'm just trying to gain insight into how your mind works.

  Only when the decision isn't apparent.
• pmoney25

  

  This thread has gone way off base. The issue here is not birth control, gay sex, or if you believe in God. The question is do you believe in Govt telling you what to do. Would you mind if the govt said every woman under 25 take birth control because you are too young to have kids? Or every guy get a vasectomy after 35? Or how about 1 child per family?
  
  Again I support birth control if you want to use it. My question is when will the govt mandating our lives ever end?
• queencitybuckeye

  pmoney25;1078450 wrote:This thread has gone way off base. The issue here is not birth control, gay sex, or if you believe in God. The question is do you believe in Govt telling you what to do.

  That, and if your decision involves money you don't have, should I be forced to pay for your decision with which I don't agree.
• Devils Advocate

  

  pmoney25;1078450 wrote:Again I support birth control if you want to use it. My question is when will the govt mandating our lives ever end?

  The govt isn't mandating anything in anyones live. the govt is saying that birth control coverage should be available. No one is forcing anyone to TAKE birth control.
  
  
  And ZWIK, A rubber has no side effects ( unless you have a latex alergy ) (( in which case I would advice a natural lamb skin)) ((( Watt... is that beastiality?? )))
• Devils Advocate

  

  queencitybuckeye;1078455 wrote:That, and if your decision involves money you don't have, should I be forced to pay for your decision with which I don't agree.

  You mean like raising a child that someone else procreated and can't afford?
• sleeper

  

  pmoney25;1078450 wrote:This thread has gone way off base. The issue here is not birth control, gay sex, or if you believe in God. The question is do you believe in Govt telling you what to do. Would you mind if the govt said every woman under 25 take birth control because you are too young to have kids? Or every guy get a vasectomy after 35? Or how about 1 child per family?
  
  Again I support birth control if you want to use it. My question is when will the govt mandating our lives ever end?

  This isn't about mandating people take BC, this is mandating that health insurance companies cover BC for free. If people don't want to take BC, then they don't have to.
• jmog

  I Wear Pants;1077420 wrote:Honestly anything that isn't specifically a charitable organization shouldn't be non-profit.

  Churches are charitable organizations. Not only in reality but also by law. My deduction on my taxes goes under "charitable donations".
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Devils Advocate;1078459 wrote: And ZWIK, A rubber has no side effects ( unless you have a latex alergy ) (( in which case I would advice a natural lamb skin)) ((( Watt... is that beastiality?? )))

  But not as effective.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1078463 wrote:Churches are charitable organizations. Not only in reality but also by law. My deduction on my taxes goes under "charitable donations".

  Abortions are also legal, by law. Does this invalidate your opinion that abortion should be illegal? IWP is saying he doesn't think churches should be considered charities, and I agree with him.
• queencitybuckeye

  Devils Advocate;1078461 wrote:You mean like raising a child that someone else procreated and can't afford?

  If those were the only two options, you'd have a point. They aren't. You don't.
• sleeper

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1078449 wrote:Only when the decision isn't apparent.

  And in the case of BC vs. no BC, it isn't. Thanks.
• Devils Advocate

  

  queencitybuckeye;1078466 wrote:If those were the only two options, you'd have a point. They aren't. You don't.

  Oh... So we're back to the birth control argument are we....????
• HitsRus

  

  Agreed(with pmoney). First we start with Obamacare which mandates that you have to buy insurance...now the government is telling you what benefits are permissible and/or must be included in the insurance (using arbitrary determinations), and making you pay the premium for a 'benefit' even if it is not a benefit that you would use .
  This kind of stuff has to stop.
• QuakerOats

  obama has made a(nother) huge mistake; his radical policies have caused him to pick a dumb fight against a large group that he can ill afford to alienate. Once he assesses the damage he is doing to his re-election bid, my guess is he will reverse the decision (hoping to then sneak it back in elsewhere after the election). The tiger cannot change his stripes ....only hide them long enough to pull another sham on The People.
• HitsRus

  

  this is mandating that health insurance companies cover BC for free

  Might be one of the most naive statements I have ever heard.... Reproductive coverage is one of the most expensive services in a health insurance policy. The cost of such is reflected in the premium paid by consumers. If the government mandates this, the cost will be in your premium.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  sleeper;1078470 wrote:And in the case of BC vs. no BC, it isn't. Thanks.

  Sure it is. It's as effective, if not more so, and without the side effects.
• sleeper

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1078491 wrote:Sure it is. It's as effective, if not more so, and without the side effects.

  No it isn't. It sounds like voodoo magic to me, aka not based on any science.
• sleeper

  

  HitsRus;1078487 wrote:Might be one of the most naive statements I have ever heard.... Reproductive coverage is one of the most expensive services in a health insurance policy. The cost of such is reflected in the premium paid by consumers. If the government mandates this, the cost will be in your premium.

  Reproductive coverage? I'd love to see the cost analysis between providing BC for free for life for a woman vs. her having x amount of kids. I think you'll find BC is much cheaper. Do you agree or disagree?
• jmog

  sleeper;1078465 wrote:Abortions are also legal, by law. Does this invalidate your opinion that abortion should be illegal? IWP is saying he doesn't think churches should be considered charities, and I agree with him.

  
  
  Can you explain why your opinion is that churches aren't charitable organizations?
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1078498 wrote:Can you explain why your opinion is that churches aren't charitable organizations?

  It operates just like any other business. They provide a service and people pay to utilize that service. They don't deserve any special treatment because they do so for "god". Should Exxon restructure itself and become worship the "Oil God"? No different, yet one gets off scott free with regards to taxes.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  sleeper;1078495 wrote:No it isn't. It sounds like voodoo magic to me, aka not based on any science.

  Just b/c you can't understand it, doesn't make it any less valid.
• sleeper

  

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1078509 wrote:Just b/c you can't understand it, doesn't make it any less valid.

  Have any peer reviewed research to back up your claims?
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  sleeper;1078510 wrote:Have any peer reviewed research to back up your claims?

  No, you're the first to question the claims
  /sarcasm
  
  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070221065200.htm