Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: WOW Ariz: Employers can require reason for BCPs, deny if contraception
You keep trying to make this argument, as if it matters at all when discussing how BSC the policy is.
Yes, because that's totally apples and apples.
I know it doesn't matter to those of you who think Obama's mandate is the best thing since sliced bread. To think otherwise, MUST be because we hate women. Like I said, I guess the rest of us should just follow along.
Same concept. A business gets to declare a religious or moral preference and then avoid following the law under the name of said religion.
Birth control is a civil right now?
Poster: Policy x is stupid.
2V: Nevermind the policy, it's happening because of Obama.
Me: It's just not a logical argument.
Perhaps you need to re-read my post. I was trying to explain why it's happening (in response to soontobe) not whether it's a good policy or not. It's not like these bills surfaced out of the blue. Like I said, I am not necessarily agreeing with it. I do think exemptions should be made for religious organizations, not just any organization.
ETA: And you'll have to excuse me...I need to call my mother.
A random boss or coworker is not the same as an org that is the extension of a church....where the religious org actually founding and running it as part of their mission of the church. VEy different. I think religious freedom is the issue here and prevents it from happening.
But from what I understand, there is no distinction between a random business owner and an org that is an extension of the church in these bills. The bills cover any employer, not just a religiously affiliated and recongized one.
Oh I k ow that. I disagree with this bill. I was just responding to sibil.
Birth control falls under the right to privacy, which is grounded in the 9th Amendment and kind-of sort-of in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th. Legislating that an employer has the right to know about someone's birth control medications conflicts with the employee's right to privacy.
It seems we have 2 guaranteed rights being pitted against each other.
2Ver, it doesn't have to be that politicians/people inherently hate women. When they are willing to let laws supercede women's rights to protect a business's rights, however, they are in effect practicing discrimination.
Yes - and also, I imagine that a whole lot of companies will suddenly have nagging consciences about paying for a host of treatments, just in order to save themselves some money. Although if the insurer has to pick up the cost anyway, I don't know how companies fool themselves into thinking they're not paying for it.
Yes - and also, I imagine that a whole lot of companies will suddenly have nagging consciences about paying for a host of treatments, just in order to save themselves some money. Although if the insurer has to pick up the cost anyway, I don't know how companies fool themselves into thinking they're not paying for it.
I understand what you meant. I am just saying that your doctor knew that your school would want to see "medically necessary" in terms of non contraceptive use, and she could not say that. I don't think that means that doctors always feel that contraceptive use is not medically necessary, however.
Anyway, I just didn't like the "gotcha" tone in that reply and responded. Sorry.
my read shelf:
Dupe
my read shelf:
Then I guess the way to avoid pitting both against each other would be not to include birth control at all regardless of reason. Then there wouldn't be a need to ask the private questions.
I agree with this! Yes, I totally see other organizations taking advantage of this to save money .....not to oppress women.
So there were inklings, but they were not widespread...which is the claim now right...the outright, blatant, hateful war on women.
Actually, according to many birth control is always medically necessary because it prevents a medical condition called pregnancy (I beleive this is the basis for it being included as a "preventative medicine"). So, yes some people think contraceptive use is medically necessary. My point was that her doctor did not call contraceptive use "medically necessary" and found it unethical to do so. I find that fascinating.
I am talking about what others think (general). I remember a thread not too long ago where we talked about birth control use for contraceptive purposes and why that use can also be medically necessary because pregnancy can be a serious, dangerous medical condition worthy of prevention. Although many lay people will consider it medically necessary, doctors do not.
Does that mean a business can use Biblical justification for making me stay home one week out of the month when I'm on my period? If that's paid leave, I'm all about it.
It would have been unethical for him to say so because the doctor already knew it was not for acne, endometriosis, etc. The doctor (I infer) already knew that the patient wanted BCP for contraception.
As for your other comment about how then contraceptives shouldn't be covered at all-- please. Because it offends you as a Catholic, no one should have free access to it? That is what you said. Please do not argue back that it's not-- it is. You specifically said that contraceptives should not be included.
Companies do not have morals. They have profits. They especially do not have morals for everyone.
Do you seriously not care about infringing on other people at all as long as the religious folks are happy?