General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe rule about employer provided insurance that covers contraception
The Supreme Court ruled on this some years back, when the Hobby Lobby asked them. What is the difference? From the point of law, that is.
ProudMNDemocrat
(16,783 posts)If women cannot be covered from getting knocked up, nor should men be covered for being able to get it up.
Sorry for the crude analogy. This is about CONTROL of women's bodies and decisions made for medical reasons as well.
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)ED meds fix something that's wrong with the body, while contraception interferes with how the body is supposed to work.
Don't shoot me-- I'm just proposing that for the sake of discussion. Why is, or isn't, it a valid argument? It will come up at some point, if it hasn't already.
ProudMNDemocrat
(16,783 posts)Based on medical fact that using Contraception....
1) Regulates hormal balances so that the body CAN work as it should...
2) Helps with women who suffers from Migranes.
3) Deals with Endometriosis and Uterine cysts.
4) Stymie Ovarian disfunction.
Using ED meds for men is opening blood vessels important for achieving erections.
brewens
(13,562 posts)conceive?
blueinredohio
(6,797 posts)Also Wouldn't covering birth control be a lot cheaper than paying a delivery bill and insuring a child for eighteen years?
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)into the politics of contraception, abortions, etc.
unc70
(6,110 posts)Even when required as follow up treatment for prostate cancer. Generic prescriptions run $800/year or more. I strongly support full coverage of birth control and of ED.
WhiskeyGrinder
(22,315 posts)an acceptable level for an exemption. This decision holds that the religious or moral values of the employing organization are enough for an exemption. Hobby Lobby, the owner didn't like birth control. In Little Sisters, the Little Sisters of the Poor don't like birth control.
moose65
(3,166 posts)They don't think that married women should have access to contraceptives?? Don't they know that women take contraceptives for other reasons besides birth control?
It is just SO weird to me that these people who usually preach about personal responsibility don't think that the womenfolk have the good sense to decide what is right for their own bodies. Boggles the mind.
Also, they would NEVER deny a man any kind of treatment for anything.
ProudMNDemocrat
(16,783 posts)From 2014 after the ruling came down..
[link:https://money.cnn.com/2014/07/01/investing/hobby-lobby-401k-contraception|
[link:https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers/|
[link:https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-401k-discovered-to-be-investor-in-numerous-abortion-and-contraception-products-while-claiming-religious-objection/#396fc5011b38|
Whether Hobby Lobby still does, I have seen no further information on the internet.
unblock
(52,181 posts)This latest case holds for public companies as well, afaik
question everything
(47,462 posts)unblock
(52,181 posts)i haven't read the opinion, but the media coverage suggests it applies more generally.
dsc
(52,155 posts)Under the first rule, a business could refuse but had to let the government know they refused so other arrangements could be made and the employee would still get the BC. Trump's rule ditches the need to notify and thus the employee doesn't get the BC. Also Trump expanded who gets to object so that one only had to have a moral objection not a religious one.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,109 posts)are caused by your interaction with the devil so my 2000 employees now have NO coverage for either.
Lowers my premiums a bunch, as you can imagine...and being a rightwing pretend xtian, I cant WAIT for them to start dying.
THAT is what this is about.
ABSURD they would make this ruling...