[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Satans Mark/Cashless Title: Use Birth Control? You're Fired! First, a bill that gives immunity to doctors who lie to couples about the results of their prenatal tests in order to prevent them from getting an abortion. Now, a bill that would give your boss the green light to fire you for using birth control. You think I am kidding? I wish. For a decade now, Arizona insurance companies have been required to provide coverage for contraception just like other prescriptions. But, because they saw an opening to score some political points, some politicians there are suddenly moving to take that coverage away from women and their families. And we aren’t talking here just about exemptions for religiously affiliated employers like Catholic hospitals and universities. We are talking about authorizing secular, for-profit employers to deny a woman coverage for birth control if the employer doesn’t believe that she and her partner should be allowed to have sex without getting pregnant. Yup, that’s right. If the owner of the Taco Bell where you work opposes birth control, Arizona legislators want to give him a legal right to deny you insurance coverage for your pills. Sadly, that isn’t even the half of it. You may want to sit down for this one. Arizona legislators know that whether or not her insurance covers it, a woman may get the prescription she needs to prevent an unintended pregnancy. They want to give her boss the right to control that too. The bill they are pushing would not only allow employers to take the insurance coverage away, but it would also make it easier for an employer who finds out that his employee uses birth control to fire her. You heard me right . . . to fire her. And I thought Rush Limbaugh’s comments were as low as you could go on this one. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 32. #1. To: A K A Stone, Anti-ping to CE, Fred Mertz, Godwinson, go65, war, no gnu taxes, Skip Intro, ferret mike, jwpegler, brian s, mininggold, mcgowanjm (#0) The bill they are pushing would not only allow employers to take the insurance coverage away, but it would also make it easier for an employer who finds out that his employee uses birth control to fire her. This is the right-wing nuts version of liberty?
#4. To: lucysmom (#1) The bill they are pushing would not only allow employers to take the insurance coverage away, but it would also make it easier for an employer who finds out that his employee uses birth control to fire her. Of course polls never seems to get around to askin about how birth control makes it easier for men to just fuck and fuck and fuck...;} And that just about 100% of women use birth control now. Getting to chaos levels of discrepancy(approaching 100%) on Anything should give one pause. But not the humans pushing this MEme from K street....;}
#9. To: mcgowanjm (#4) Of course polls never seems to get around to askin about how birth control makes it easier for men to just fuck and fuck and fuck...;} Too be fair, an employer should be able to fire a man if his wife or girl friend use birth control. And that just about 100% of women use birth control now.
As compensation for making it over the hill, some of us no longer need to worry about that.
#11. To: lucysmom (#9) Note the source of your article - Consider the bias - the inaccuracies of the blog report --- This little article is garbage.
#13. To: mel (#11) Note the source of your article - Consider the bias - the inaccuracies of the blog report --- This little article is garbage. I like the ACLU. I may not always agree with them, however I am grateful they exist.
#18. To: lucysmom (#13) In Arizona, employers have the right to fire you without cause. I am curious about this purported bill though so if you have a bill number, please provide it so I can look into it some more. I'm sure the contents of the bill are being twisted just like the contents of the other bill are. This has a liberal twist to it that stinks to high heaven and back.
#19. To: All (#18)
#20. To: All (#19) 1. If the contract provides coverage for prescription drugs, the contract shall provide coverage for any prescribed drug or device that is approved by the United States food and drug administration for use as a contraceptive. A corporation may use a drug formulary, multitiered drug formulary or list but that formulary or list shall include oral, implant and injectable contraceptive drugs, intrauterine devices and prescription barrier methods if the corporation does not impose deductibles, coinsurance, copayments or other cost containment measures for contraceptive drugs that are greater than the deductibles, coinsurance, copayments or other cost containment measures for other drugs on the same level of the formulary or list. This is directly from the bill.
#21. To: All (#20) It's very long. It appears to extend the same type of exemptions as are extended to religious organizations, but I'd have to read further into it.
#24. To: mel (#21) (Edited) It appears to extend the same type of exemptions as are extended to religious organizations, but I'd have to read further into it. According to the Arizona Republic, HB 2625 makes it okay for both religious and secular employers to deny health coverage for contraception if said employers object to birth control for moral reasons.
(Click HERE for full text of the bill)
Worse, the bill eliminates this crucial anti-discrimination provision of current law:
“A religious employer shall not discriminate against an employee who independently chooses to obtain insurance coverage or prescriptions for contraceptives from another source.”
That means that, if passed, Arizona employers could fire women who are using contraception for birth control, not other medical reasons.
“I personally don’t have a moral objection to contraceptives but I respect the people that do,” Rep. Debbie Lesko, the Republican who introduced the measure, told KTVK 3. “House Bill 2625 allows Arizona employers to opt out of the contraceptive mandate if they have a religious or moral objection”
But Arizona already has a law that permits religious employers to deny workers contraception coverage for religious reasons. HB 2625 would expand that prerogative to all employers, and that has got many people alarmed. morallowground.com/2012/0...ntrol-advances-in-senate/
#29. To: lucysmom (#24) They either need to remove the exemption from the religious employers or extend it to all employers. I vote for the former. They should not be mandated to provide any certain type of health insurance nor should the be mandated to deny any type. Whatever the employer offers is generally what you have to go with or turn down and get your own outside of work. Personally, I think the employee should be able to add contraceptive coverage into the health plan and pay the extra costs in including it regardless of the employer's moral beliefs.
#30. To: mel (#29) They either need to remove the exemption from the religious employers or extend it to all employers. I vote for the former. I agree. Single payer is the only way to go.
#32. To: mininggold (#30) I agree. Single payer is the only way to go. You beat me to it.
Replies to Comment # 32. You beat me to it. At this point in my life I figure if it's good enough for the military, then us second class citizens should be able have a go at it too.
#35. To: lucysmom (#32) Only if the only people covered are the people that pay would I even think about considering that, and even then, I don't want the feds in charge of my health care.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 32. Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|