Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures.

Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

farglebargle -> Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 4:50:43 AM)
If it's LEGAL, as the Supreme Court said, why isn't it covered by insurance? Seriously? A bunch of unhinged religious nuts want to impose their version of Sharia Law on y'all and you accept that shit?

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 5:11:51 AM)
not all abortions are medically necessary. It is an elective procedure in most cases. That would be my opinion.

farglebargle -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 6:09:59 AM)
quote: not all abortions are medically necessary. It is an elective procedure in most cases. That would be my opinion. Why do you believe INSURANCE POLICIES are limited to 'medically necessary' procedures? It's a contract, and the contract terms are regulated by various state, federal, and local Authorities Having Jurisdiction. So, as long as the contract terms are legal, and abortion, regardless of 'medical necessity' IS LEGAL, I do not see any foundation for your apparent concern.

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:00:21 AM)
Do they cover Lasik or breast augmentation? no, they are legal, so why not? How many health plans cover sex changes for people with body dysmorphia? Ask those people if they don't feel that it is medically necessary to make them comfortable in their own body? In theory you could have health plan to cover an elective abortion but why mandate it? Covering birth control is cheaper and prevents the abortion. that is the more logical thing to cover. You are being hyperbolic and absurd.

searching4mysir -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:10:23 AM)
quote: A bunch of unhinged religious nuts want to impose their version of Sharia Law on y'all and you accept that shit? Abortion is not strictly a religious issue. There are groups called Atheists for Life, for example. If there is no God and this is the only life we have, why should anyone have the right to take that life away from another human being? Slavery was once legal also, but that didn't make it moral or right.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:23:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: not all abortions are medically necessary. It is an elective procedure in most cases. That would be my opinion. Why do you believe INSURANCE POLICIES are limited to 'medically necessary' procedures? It's a contract, and the contract terms are regulated by various state, federal, and local Authorities Having Jurisdiction. So, as long as the contract terms are legal, and abortion, regardless of 'medical necessity' IS LEGAL, I do not see any foundation for your apparent concern. An insurance company can include abortive services on the list of covered services. That would be in the contract between the insurer and the insured. Are you also going to support 100% coverage for liposuction, tummy tucks, boob jobs, and other purely cosmetic and elective surgeries? Why aren't posting against the "Cadillac Tax" that will be levied on plans that provide more/better benefits for the covered? The contracts between the business and the insurer is fully legal, is it not? Then, why tax it?

farglebargle -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:24:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FunCouple5280 Do they cover Lasik or breast augmentation? no, I would like to see your basis for making this blanket statement. Especially considering I've just falsified your assertion with this evidence from Rice University's AETNA healthcare benefit overview materials. http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~chbegsa/Aetna%20Vision%20Discount.pdf

farglebargle -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:26:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: searching4mysir quote: A bunch of unhinged religious nuts want to impose their version of Sharia Law on y'all and you accept that shit? Abortion is not strictly a religious issue. There are groups called Atheists for Life, for example. If there is no God and this is the only life we have, why should anyone have the right to take that life away from another human being? Slavery was once legal also, but that didn't make it moral or right. So, you're going to enslave a woman to bear children on behalf of the State because of your BELIEF about only getting one life, or that a soul exists independently of divine provenance or some shit. WHY DOES YOUR OPINION MATTER TO ANYONE ELSE???? And why should anyone's belief trump science? We "KNOW" there is no indivisible soul implanted at conception. Period. Otherwise twinning after conception would result in one of the twins not having a soul. That's what "pro-lifers' need to explain if they don't want ridicule and derision as nuts.

FunCouple5280 -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:26:12 AM)
Wrong! That is a discount not a covered procedure.....There is a vast difference

TricklessMagic -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:29:34 AM)
I'm all for free Baby-Murder (aka Abortion) it helps prevent undesirables in our society and prisons. Medicaid needs to provide it for free. Private insurance companies should have the right to contract as they choose.

farglebargle -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:32:33 AM)
Isn't "CHOOSING TO BEAR A CHILD TO TERM" an elective medical procedure, in that case too? I mean, no-one HAS TO, do they, and it's not MEDICALLY NECESSARY is it?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:34:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: ORIGINAL: searching4mysir quote: A bunch of unhinged religious nuts want to impose their version of Sharia Law on y'all and you accept that shit? Abortion is not strictly a religious issue. There are groups called Atheists for Life, for example. If there is no God and this is the only life we have, why should anyone have the right to take that life away from another human being? Slavery was once legal also, but that didn't make it moral or right. So, you're going to enslave a woman to bear children on behalf of the State because of your BELIEF about only getting one life, or that a soul exists independently of divine provenance or some shit. WHY DOES YOUR OPINION MATTER TO ANYONE ELSE???? And why should anyone's belief trump science? We "KNOW" there is no indivisible soul implanted at conception. Period. Otherwise twinning after conception would result in one of the twins not having a soul. That's what "pro-lifers' need to explain if they don't want ridicule and derision as nuts. Why does your opinion on abortion matter to anyone else? What makes your opinion better than mine? This is the problem with making blanket statements. If I don't want to support abortions, why should I be forced into a contract where my money is helping to support abortions? (Edited to fix a formatting error)

mnottertail -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:35:52 AM)
For the same reason that you are forced to pay for the national azealea collection, and bloated military hardware contracts.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:38:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Isn't "CHOOSING TO BEAR A CHILD TO TERM" an elective medical procedure, in that case too? I mean, no-one HAS TO, do they, and it's not MEDICALLY NECESSARY is it? It's contracted in, though, isn't it? TricklessMagic stated that private insurance should be able to contract it in as they choose.

mnottertail -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:40:41 AM)
And we need to remove private insurance from the equation as the way of doing business, it is a drag on the country and the economy.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:45:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail For the same reason that you are forced to pay for the national azealea collection, and bloated military hardware contracts. Actually, there is a difference. While I don't think I'll notice the dying off of the National Azalea collection (or tree toad or what-the-fuck-ever it was in Pelosi's District), at least it's a National thing, like the military. Covering Jane Doe's abortion in Poughkeepsie isn't going to help me at all. Covering Jane Doe's abortion in Columbus, Ohio isn't going to help me, either. And herein lies a problem with welfare programs. To limit the cost of program X, we need to covered procedure Y, or we have to have a new program Z. To cut the cost of medical care (by reducing the number of procedures required), we have to ban certain things. It simply accumulates until there it becomes necessary and proper to have damn near full autonomy taken over by the Federal Government. Fit people cost less, so everyone is mandated to take part in a physical fitness program and there will be a limit on the number of calories (and what types of calories) consumed.

TricklessMagic -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 7:55:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail And we need to remove private insurance from the equation as the way of doing business, it is a drag on the country and the economy. Why can't we have hospitals for the publicly insured and hospitals for the privately insured? Oh wait because there might be a huge quality of treatment difference if that happened. You know kind of like folks coming to the U.S. for medical treatment and procedures that are from overseas. A cousin of mine is a neurosurgeon (yes he's a Jew go figure) in New York City and many of his patients are from overseas. Let's put together public healthcare and allow private healthcare to flourish. Now granted I have a cousin in Louisiana who is a renal doctor (kidney doctor) and he found that eliminating Medicaid patients from his practice actually helped him cut his overhead dramatically and his profits went up noticeably. Granted he was forced to fire his bloated medicaid related staff to achieve this profit realization but such is reality. So let's create a system of public healthcare for those who can't qualify for private healthcare. It would help the pubic and we could pass another one percent tax blanket tax on the public. Since the poor would be using it they could afford that additional one percent tax, and if more sick people went to public healthcare from private healthcare, private healthcare costs could possibly go down. I mean if you want treatment from a public grade employee, good luck, I'll take my uber-expensive highly skilled private doctor. Quality comes at a premium. Oh and public healthcare would have to provide abortions (aka Baby Murder) for free and private health insurance would have the freedom of contract to include it in its contract or not. Mind you everyone would have to contribute one percent of their income regardless of use, to pay for the public healthcare.

mnottertail -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 8:36:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail For the same reason that you are forced to pay for the national azealea collection, and bloated military hardware contracts. Actually, there is a difference. While I don't think I'll notice the dying off of the National Azalea collection (or tree toad or what-the-fuck-ever it was in Pelosi's District), at least it's a National thing, like the military. Covering Jane Doe's abortion in Poughkeepsie isn't going to help me at all. Covering Jane Doe's abortion in Columbus, Ohio isn't going to help me, either. And herein lies a problem with welfare programs. To limit the cost of program X, we need to covered procedure Y, or we have to have a new program Z. To cut the cost of medical care (by reducing the number of procedures required), we have to ban certain things. It simply accumulates until there it becomes necessary and proper to have damn near full autonomy taken over by the Federal Government. Fit people cost less, so everyone is mandated to take part in a physical fitness program and there will be a limit on the number of calories (and what types of calories) consumed. Poughkeepsee, NY and Columbus, OH and put a couple more together then its NATIONAL. So. Based on the stuff that others have to pay for that they don't want to, nobody gives a fuck if you want or don't want to pay, goto fuckin jail...we ain't mad at ya. Oh, yeah, and lookin at the debt, we ain't payin anyway, so I wouldn't get too wroth up about it.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 8:46:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail For the same reason that you are forced to pay for the national azealea collection, and bloated military hardware contracts. Actually, there is a difference. While I don't think I'll notice the dying off of the National Azalea collection (or tree toad or what-the-fuck-ever it was in Pelosi's District), at least it's a National thing, like the military. Covering Jane Doe's abortion in Poughkeepsie isn't going to help me at all. Covering Jane Doe's abortion in Columbus, Ohio isn't going to help me, either. And herein lies a problem with welfare programs. To limit the cost of program X, we need to covered procedure Y, or we have to have a new program Z. To cut the cost of medical care (by reducing the number of procedures required), we have to ban certain things. It simply accumulates until there it becomes necessary and proper to have damn near full autonomy taken over by the Federal Government. Fit people cost less, so everyone is mandated to take part in a physical fitness program and there will be a limit on the number of calories (and what types of calories) consumed. Poughkeepsee, NY and Columbus, OH and put a couple more together then its NATIONAL. So. Based on the stuff that others have to pay for that they don't want to, nobody gives a fuck if you want or don't want to pay, goto fuckin jail...we ain't mad at ya. Oh, yeah, and lookin at the debt, we ain't payin anyway, so I wouldn't get too wroth up about it. But, it isn't National. And, now we're talking about the Federal Government taking it all and the States being out of it. Makes it all the less worthwhile, IMO. And, I'm not taking Fuckitol®, so I will get wroth up about our debt levels, our spending levels and what-the-fuck.

farglebargle -> RE: Time for ALL Healthcare to 100% cover all abortion procedures. (4/4/2013 9:11:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail For the same reason that you are forced to pay for the national azealea collection, and bloated military hardware contracts. Actually, there is a difference. While I don't think I'll notice the dying off of the National Azalea collection (or tree toad or what-the-fuck-ever it was in Pelosi's District), at least it's a National thing, like the military. Covering Jane Doe's abortion in Poughkeepsie isn't going to help me at all. Covering Jane Doe's abortion in Columbus, Ohio isn't going to help me, either. And herein lies a problem with welfare programs. To limit the cost of program X, we need to covered procedure Y, or we have to have a new program Z. To cut the cost of medical care (by reducing the number of procedures required), we have to ban certain things. It simply accumulates until there it becomes necessary and proper to have damn near full autonomy taken over by the Federal Government. Fit people cost less, so everyone is mandated to take part in a physical fitness program and there will be a limit on the number of calories (and what types of calories) consumed. Given that abortion is safer than pregnancy, I would suggest that you're doing everyone a favor reducing overall risk and expense across the board. ICC > "States Rights"... And if you disagree, take it to the USSC, because complaining to me ain't gonna help.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125