« FFFT Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Supreme Court Rules Family-Owned Corporations Are Not Required to Pay for Contraception Coverage 

By: oldCADuser in FFFT | Recommend this post (4)
Tue, 01 Jul 14 9:09 PM | 150 view(s)
Boardmark this board | Food For Further Thought
Msg. 65299 of 65535
(This msg. is a reply to 65294 by Zimbler0)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

OK then, what do you think of a corporation that has no problem paying for vasectomies and ED treatments of their MALE employees yet refuses to pay for contraceptives for their FEMALE employees? Since they claim that this behavior is based on their religious views, then it would appear that their position is that only the MAN in the family is allowed to make decisions when it comes to whether to have children or not. Thus reducing women to 2nd class status, which would seem to be in violation of equal treatment clause of the 14th Amendment.

BTW, the last case the Supreme Court ruled on a business applying religious principles in terms of how it treated it's employees was when they ruled against a company owner who refused to provide health insurance to his married female employees since he claimed that his religious beliefs required that married women must depend on their husbands for their support in all things. The wonder was why did he hire women at all, but the consensus was that perhaps he did so because he could pay them less than males, and besides, this also supported his belief that only men should be the breadwinners.




Avatar

OCU


- - - - -
View Replies (1) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Supreme Court Rules Family-Owned Corporations Are Not Required to Pay for Contraception Coverage
By: Zimbler0
in FFFT
Tue, 01 Jul 14 8:57 PM
Msg. 65294 of 65535

OCU> Do you think vasectomies should be covered by insurance? How about ED treatments?


I think,
it should be up to the individual corporation to
decide whether or not to offer such treatments
under their health care plans.

The federal government should not have the 'authority'
to order 'You Must Pay' (or 'you must buy').

Does America need to reduce the number of abortions?
Sure, by reducing unwanted pregnancies.

Contraceptives are readily available. And, the cost
is not prohibitive.

The core concept you fail to recognize :

*I* should not have to pay for some bimbo's contraceptive needs.

(Unless I am enjoying the pleasures of intercourse
with her . . in which case, unless I don't want to
have a child maybe I ought to.)

Zim.


« FFFT Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next