If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Ladies, today marks the day that many women's preventive health services are required to be free under the Affordable Health Care Act. Take a moment to learn your options   (theobamacrat.com) divider line 91
    More: PSA, Health Care Act, preventive medicines, obamacare, gestational diabetes, The Woman-Identified Woman, Health Insurance in the United States, health cares, celebration  
•       •       •

10740 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Aug 2012 at 6:51 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-08-01 01:11:48 AM
10 votes:
Awesome, congrats.

Repealing Obamacare now officially includes wanting to repeal free mammograms, colonoscopies, women's health screenings, breastfeeding support, contraception, and other women's services. Good luck with, GOP!
2012-08-01 01:40:33 AM
6 votes:

Ambivalence: I think men should get mamograms.


Well technically over 2000 men get diagnosed with breast cancer every year in the US, and about a quarter of them die from it.
2012-08-01 07:38:08 AM
5 votes:
When available, taxpayer funded health programs are a complete waste of money...unless you or your loved ones are the one that needs the healthcare, in which case they are cheap at ten times the price and should been brought in years ago.

I had no idea that desire to make sure everyone was kept healthy and happy was not really a laudable human trait at all, but is a dangerous left-wing plan, until well-off healthy ring-wingers decided the best way to keep their money was to try to scare everyone silly. Thanks, now we're all smarter.

Some things never change, because most people who know the price of everything as know the value of nothing.

As an ex-pat who has contributed to and enjoyed the many benefits of the British NHS for 25 years, I read people's attempts to brand it as socialism (who don't even know what socialism is to start with) and I cringe with shame at my fellow Americans. My late mother had many health problems, so much so that insurance companies won't accept her, she suffered for years because they couldn't afford treatment until it was life-threatening and my parents ended up declaring bankruptcy afterwards. In the UK, she would have had the treatment she needed when she needed it, and lived a long and happy life as a result.

This is a great day for the ladies of the country, and a good start - keep it going.
2012-08-01 03:17:57 AM
5 votes:

DeltaPunch: Awesome, congrats.

Repealing Obamacare now officially includes wanting to repeal free mammograms, colonoscopies, women's health screenings, breastfeeding support, contraception, and other women's services. Good luck with, GOP!


I know plenty of women who'll vote against all of that, as long as the candidate mentions Jesus while standing in front of a flag. While it's true that a good number of indie-minded women have wised up to the GOP, you can't really fix Stupid. If you could, people in trailer parks and living on food stamps wouldn't be cheering for people in cowboy hats who want to cut their food stamps.
2012-08-01 02:16:37 AM
4 votes:

MisterTweak: RobertBruce: Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.

Covered services include colonoscopy, which is gender-neutral. May I suggest you get one?


His head is in the way.

I'm sure he has been a stalwart activist at the unfair pricing practices of women's healthcare all these years, as well as the disparity in pay wages.
2012-08-01 07:30:22 AM
3 votes:

intelligent comment below: RobertBruce: Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.


And let me guess, affirmative action is reverse racism, right? You idiot conservatives are too easy


No, it's just regular racism. There is no such thing as 'reverse' racism. If blacks are discriminated agaisnt, that's racism. If whites are discriminated against...still racism.

Definition:
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine discrimination.

So a policy set by the government, requiring an employer to hire a person, not base on skill or qualifications, but by the color of their skin isn't racism? If you were to deny a job to someone based on skin color, that is racism. So if you were to not hire someone, because someone else was a 'correct' skin color, that is also racism.

Companies should give everyone an *equal* chance at a job. To pass over someone who has a better skillset simply because you already have 'too much' of that race is just stupid.

But what do I know? I'm just an idiot conservative.
2012-08-01 07:05:43 AM
3 votes:

bmihura: Free? No tax dollars spent? Awesome!


Like I said, it cost me $1000 for a colonoscopy WITH insurance. I am THRILLED to pay more in taxes if I can get decent preventative health care without breaking my bank account.

I'm not scared of taxes like some dimwit Republican. I understand they are inevitable, like death, and sometimes, they do good work.
2012-08-01 04:03:40 AM
3 votes:
I mean, my real question is, couldn't we just make health care free for everyone...?
2012-08-01 03:20:47 AM
3 votes:

DeltaPunch: Ambivalence: I think men should get mamograms.

Well technically over 2000 men get diagnosed with breast cancer every year in the US, and about a quarter of them die from it.


I'm a guy and had to get a mammogram earlier this year for a suspicious lump which thankfulky turned out to be nothing to worry but if it grows anymore I'll have to get another one and ultrasound. I was also the third guy who got one that day. While I'm am a biatchubby I don't have huge moobs, anyone can get it. It's a mixed bag with guys because while bumps are easier to detect because there's usually less overall tissue, guys tend to wait way longer to get such bumps checked out because of the obvious uncomfortableness of the situation. Hell, I'm as pinko liberal commie as they come and even I waited over a year.

Long story short: check your moobs guys.
2012-08-01 03:14:40 AM
3 votes:

MadSkillz: Does it cover prostate screenings for men? I see all those pink ribbons to raise breast cancer awareness, but no brown ribbons for prostate cancer awareness, despite the fact it kills as many people as breast cancer does.

/its not as dramatic a loss when removed however.


It's a blue ribbon and they do a big push (heh) every Father's day.

Michael Milken does a thing during baseball games and money is donated for every home run hit on Father's day. Usually players and coaches wear blue ribbons and other gear. Similar to the pink bats and ribbons on Mother's Day.
2012-08-01 01:35:59 AM
3 votes:

RobertBruce: Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.


You know, for a conservative you sure sound like a whiny liberal when it comes to gender equality.
2012-08-01 01:22:55 AM
3 votes:

RobertBruce: Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.


Fine, you can get all the pap smears you want. Happy?
2012-08-01 10:54:40 AM
2 votes:

seadoo2006: This text is now purple: WhyteRaven74: Nabb1: For example, most insurers will not cover "experimental procedures," e.g. those that have not received FDA approval.

They shouldn't be allowed to not cover it.

Until it's FDA approved, it's not medicine.

So, the government now decides what is and what isn't medicine?


Yeah, that's sort of what the FDA does, in simple terms.
2012-08-01 10:46:39 AM
2 votes:
"Free" contraception is a lot cheaper than paying for prenatal care, food, education, housing, healthcare, dental care, foster care, therapy and prison for unwanted children. It also creates more options for men and women, means less government interference in families' lives, and ensures that more children will be wanted and loved, which means they'll be more likely to grow up healthy, happy, successful and independent.

Small government conservatives, fiscal conservatives, social liberals and libertarians should all be able to get together on contraception.

/same goes for "well care" and preventive care
2012-08-01 10:04:57 AM
2 votes:

rufus-t-firefly: I love how people with health insurance coverage are now biatching that their insurance covers too much stuff.

Seriously? That passes for victimhood now?

"OMG THE GOVERNMENT SAYS MY INSURANCE CAN'T CHARGE FOR A PAP SMEAR. I'M BEING OPPRESSED."


It's more "Government isn't doing what FOX News & the RNC say it should be doing, we're being oppressed!"

I haven't heard one sound, rational, derp-free argument against the ACA. I've heard a lot of "OMG SOSHULISM!" and "Death Panels!1!1!I!" and "Gubmint takeover!" "Robbing Medicare to pay for socialized medisin" and "It's immoral to make the me pay for other people's healthcare!" crap.

People want to think they are oppressed, they want to be angry at somebody, fear and anger sells more than happiness (sad to say). The Fear industry makes a lot of people rich by making them afraid of government. People who are afraid are easier to manipulate.

Thus, it's easier to pit Republicans against Democrats using wedge issues and sit back and make money (and gain political power) from it. Healthcare is just one of the bigger wedges of the day. If it wasn't this, they'd be using abortion rights, or teaching evolution in school, or prayer in school, or Ten Amendments in courtrooms, or some other "Religious/Plutocratic Conservative" vs "Secular/Socialist Liberal" argument.
2012-08-01 09:37:05 AM
2 votes:
Could libertarians please drop the tired-ass complaint about the government being a thug with a gun who forces liberty-loving citizens to do stuff? There's always a gun; in a democracy you get some choice as to who that is. Without an elected government being in charge of the guns, there will always be other, nastier people with the guns. See Somalia. If the Feds couldn't force corporations at gunpoint to compete on a relatively level playing field, do you think you'd really have any choice about where to spend your money? Imagine Microsoft with the guns.

The choice is not between tyranny and freedom. It's between regulation and chaos.

/Put me down, however, as being against some of the democratic choices we've made over the past 40 years; people have widely supported the erosion of liberties in response to terrorism. The Patriot Act isn't the government's fault; it was the fault of the majority of Americans with brown stains in their undies who support it. Same goes for bloated defense budgets, privatizing prisons, etc.
2012-08-01 08:46:14 AM
2 votes:

Mr. Right: Rights are always accompanied by responsibilities. You have the right to have sex but with that comes the responsibility to pay for the consequences. In a normal world, that would mean that if a woman wants to have sex, she is free to do so but she would be responsible for her own birth control. As of today, women can demand the right to have sex but demand that society, through insurance premiums, assume the responsibility for her birth control.

Here's the part nobody wants to think about. Whoever assumes the responsibility of paying for your actions will, ultimately, assume the rights that go along with those responsibilities. When insurance companies are forced to pay for your birth control, at some point they will decide what kind of birth control you will receive. It may not be this year but it will come. If the government assumes the responsibility of paying for your birth control, sooner or later it will decide what kind of birth control you will practice.

There
Ain't
No
Such
Thing
As
A
Free
Lunch.


Newsflash, dumbass, we already do pay for healthcare for people who don't have insurance. Adding preventative care and making it co-pay free is just a cost-saving measure. Nobody's telling you you have to take birth control.
2012-08-01 08:25:27 AM
2 votes:

Thunderpipes: Just another blow to self responsibility and a means to get more Democrat votes. Free stuff taken from working people = votes from idiot Democrats.


Yeah, blow it out your ass...

I'm self-employed and have two part-time jobs and without MA Health I still wouldn't have been able to afford insurance for my family.

Now, we have affordable insurance and I can actually invest money back into my business to grow it.

So, spare me the "working people paying for the lazy" crap.

...and you're damn right about one thing. It will be a cold day in hell before I ever vote for another Republican after their behavior over the last four years.
2012-08-01 08:07:55 AM
2 votes:
Where by "free", subby is of course referring only to the money price. ACA cheerleaders have consistently ignored that health care also has a time price. The time price is how long a person has to wait to obtain services. Now that these services are "free" in terms of dollars, we can expect more people to attempt to access the scarce resources of health care. This includes people who can certainly afford to pay some of their own way and were, up to this point, evaluating some of their health care expenditures in terms of its price (however distorted) and their perceptions of risk or quality of life. See, for example, the commenter above who claims that she currently pays extra for more expensive hormonal birth control because it's more convenient. As a result of more people seeking to take advantage of "free" health care, its time price will rise. Rather than hormonal birth control being rationed on the basis of a higher co-pay, it will be rationed according to how inconvenient it is to obtain. We can expect the poor, whose schedules are often not that flexible, to be disproportionately affected.

But, by all means, continue patting yourselves on the back for making something "free."
2012-08-01 07:33:48 AM
2 votes:

Confabulat: Look, your interstate isn't "free". But we understand the difference between a "free" interstate and a toll road.

Do you really think you need to explain this to people? Do you think you've figured something out that no one else has? Really?


They just need their point of outrage.

I agree, though, that all preventative care should be co-payless for all genders (yearly physicals, yearly sexual health screenings). But that doesn't mean I blast them for giving this to women. Be upset for the fact that no one lobbied for men's prostrate screenings to be included in this act and work to change that.
2012-08-01 07:31:06 AM
2 votes:
Look, your interstate isn't "free". But we understand the difference between a "free" interstate and a toll road.

Do you really think you need to explain this to people? Do you think you've figured something out that no one else has? Really?
2012-08-01 07:23:21 AM
2 votes:

czei: Roukzeptea23:
Anyhow, I just paid my $70 a few days ago. Maybe I should have waited until today to refill. :/

Sure, go a few days without birth control. What could possibly go wrong?


Like a well prepared person, I have more than a months supply extra so I can wait a couple of days to refill without having to go without (in case of emergency or some other reason that prevents me from refilling).
2012-08-01 07:06:56 AM
2 votes:
Nothing is "free." It just means someone else is paying for it.
2012-08-01 07:03:53 AM
2 votes:
"free."
2012-08-01 03:50:19 AM
2 votes:

skinnycatullus: RobertBruce: Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.

Fine, you can get all the pap smears you want. Happy?


lol!

Funny thing is, that is the same derp that conservatives use against gay marriage.

"Gay's are still free to marry a member of the opposite sex, therefore DOMA is not discriminatory."
2012-08-01 01:19:42 AM
2 votes:
Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.
2012-08-01 08:34:05 PM
1 votes:
Christ, there's a lot of farking retards in this thread arguing over the definition of "free," when they all know damn well and good that the definition in use in this case is "without additional end-consumer cost."

STFU already, you neo-con morons. It's nay-sayers like you that argued againt going to the moon, building bridges, and trying to fly.

Just shut the fark up, already. Jesus, you make yourselves look stupid.
2012-08-01 02:56:35 PM
1 votes:

Purdue_Pete: Therefore, in an effort to "save the poor", Democrats will drive the biggest wedge in class warfare yet... living and dying.


You realize the status quo involves a large portion of the population with no insurance at all, today, and they routinely die in busy hospitals with no coverage every single day?

Yet you think insuring everyone is going to drive a wedge? Ha, you've always had insurance, haven't you.
2012-08-01 12:49:08 PM
1 votes:

Nezorf: Nice story. I remember using the stamps as a child at the grocery store. I remember going to the food shelf and picking out the least freezer burnt food. I'm glad I got to eat a child.

\Isn't this where I say "you didn't build that [ladder]!"


An old friend of mine (friend's no longer) grew up dirt poor in the middle of New Mexico. She used to talk about how she pulled herself up from the dirt to being a successful woman today, and if she could do it, anyone could (so all those poor people mooching off welfare should just buck up). How did she get to where she was? She joined the military out of high school, then married a career military guy. Divorced him 10 years later. Worked at a factory for a few years, married another career military guy. Now she works for the local sheriff's dept. Yup, no government support for her; totally did that all on her own.
2012-08-01 11:50:23 AM
1 votes:

RobertBruce: Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.


The day men give birth is the day this whining makes sense.
2012-08-01 10:55:39 AM
1 votes:
Cover preventative medicine at 100%. You're on the hook for the first 5k or 10% of your annual income (whichever comes first) of your medical expenses. Medical insurance should cover catastrophic medical expenses. No one whines that their car insurance should cover an oil change.
2012-08-01 10:54:59 AM
1 votes:

This text is now purple: WhyteRaven74: Nabb1: For example, most insurers will not cover "experimental procedures," e.g. those that have not received FDA approval.

They shouldn't be allowed to not cover it.

Until it's FDA approved, it's not medicine.


I just wish the FDA would grow some balls and start cracking down on homeopathic pseudoscience. England is finally starting to get it and push back against the chiropractic organizations and their wackadoodle claims, and starting to state that if they can't get good science to back up their treatments, they can't get money from the Nhs anymore.
2012-08-01 10:53:30 AM
1 votes:

foo monkey: "free."


q4t. Drives me crazy when people call this "free healthcare". There is no such thing.
2012-08-01 10:49:55 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: Nabb1: For example, most insurers will not cover "experimental procedures," e.g. those that have not received FDA approval.

They shouldn't be allowed to not cover it.


Until it's FDA approved, it's not medicine.
2012-08-01 10:49:45 AM
1 votes:

DeltaPunch: Awesome, congrats.

Repealing Obamacare now officially includes wanting to repeal free mammograms, colonoscopies, women's health screenings, breastfeeding support, contraception, and other women's services. Good luck with, GOP!


And by "free" you mean somebody else othe than you pays for them right?

"The politician who robs Peter to pay Paulette can always count on the vote of Paulette."

Of course under Obamacare it means that there will be new restrictions on being able to get these things. For example:

A U.S. government group recommends that women delay getting regular mammograms until age 50, instead of 40, the age at which the American Cancer Society (ACS) has long advised women to begin screening for breast cancer.

\
2012-08-01 10:46:15 AM
1 votes:

hutchkc: rufus-t-firefly: BostonEMT: BUT the Gov't allows people to buy cigarettes and alcohol with MY tax money on their EBT cards (or cards of the like). So, now i pay for their cancer sticks, then I get to pay for their "preventative" treatment, and eventually their cancer treatment.

So, you want the government regulating people's lives? Giving them assistance, then dictating what they do every day? I keep hearing that assistance is enslaving people, but then people like you apparently WANT them to live their lives within government guidelines.

I understand your concern about the terrible burden being forced upon you, and I'm sure the $0.0005 you are contributing to a particular person's treatment could be better spent. Maybe you could get an extra sesame seed on your next burger.


Not counting the fact that he is completely wrong. My family survived on food stamps when I was younger and I know people now whom are on it currently. You can't buy anything that isn't approved food, which alcohol and tobacco are definitely not. You can't even buy paper towels or aspirin and have to use cash for those. If you spend any amount of time in a grocery store you will see people with those items have 2 distinct checkouts. Some of the additional programs for kids don't even allow for certain types of food. I know the one in my area doesn't allow for soda, candy, sugary cereals, etc as it is not deemed healthy.


I hated those days. WIC is the one that has strict guidelines for what can be purchased. I remember having 4-5 distinct checkouts. One for each WIC coupon, one for the food stamps, and one for the things that were not covered by either. Eventually, the store managed to get their computers to use food stamps for the food items, and then pay the remainder with something else, so it cut the number of check outs down by one. We'd time our shopping for the least busiest days so people wouldn't be stuck waiting for us.

I am so glad those days are gone, but I remember calling the state and saying I didn't need food stamps or the state health plan anymore as I had a full time job and full benefits for my family. The wouldn't let me drop the health plan, just said don't reapply next year and I ended up with a total of $13/month food stamps.

Being on government assistance was motivation to keep looking for better work, and I found that a while ago. But I wouldn't have had that chance with out the assistance I received in Federal Student Loans, as there was no way for me to afford college without federal help.

And I probably wouldn't have been able to study as well as a child in elementary school if I had been hungry all the time, and my parents were on food stamps during the downturn in the mid-80s and we had a huge garden.

I've jumped a rung on the socio-economic ladder with help from family, friends, and the government. That ascent is something that is sadly far to uncommon these days.
2012-08-01 10:37:20 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: BTW several states have required all insurance plans to cover for years what the new federal law requires. Insurance in those states didn't become more expensive when those laws took effect.


citationplease.jpg
2012-08-01 10:33:30 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: Nabb1: That's a financial issue. An unfortunate one, but it happens.

No, it's a medical care issue.


You may think it is, but that's not how it works or how these disputes are resolved.
2012-08-01 10:31:43 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: Nabb1: I don't think that they should be required to go beyond those terms in all circumstances, either

Well currently they fark over a lot of people and there's no recourse and they're allowed to do it. Basically they're allowed to skip out on their end of the bargain.


Health insurers get sued all the time. They are answerable to the department of insurance from state to state. It's not a perfect system - there really are no perfect systems - but this notion that insurers operate above the law is nonsense.
2012-08-01 10:31:37 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: Well when you oppose anything that would help people, people are going to call a spade a spade.


Because those who think government can help people forget that government can only do something for someone when they first take it from someone else.

For the rest of us who are going to see our rates rise to compensate for all the "free" stuff being offered, this isn't helping. Not all of us are evil, rich 1%ers either who can absorb it either.
2012-08-01 10:30:29 AM
1 votes:

Mr. Right: I said that IF a woman CHARGES we call her a hooker.


Oh bull farking shiat. You said if she charges for birth control she's a hooker. Charging for birth control is not equal to charging for sex. Why do you think birth control should only be paid for by women?
2012-08-01 10:29:44 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: Nabb1: They are not prohibiting a person from getting treatment.

When something costs, say, $50,000 and a person can't afford that, then they are in effect prohibiting the person from getting the treatment.


That's a financial issue. An unfortunate one, but it happens. Not to mention that if it falls under EMTALA, the patient will still get care. The bill will still have to be resolved after the fact.
2012-08-01 10:29:42 AM
1 votes:

mbillips: We could completely fix this by ditching private insurance altogether and putting everyone on Medicare


I'll get in line for that as soon as the politicians, judges and executives do as well.
2012-08-01 10:27:30 AM
1 votes:

DeltaPunch: Awesome, congrats.

Repealing Obamacare now officially includes wanting to repeal free mammograms, colonoscopies, women's health screenings, breastfeeding support, contraception, and other women's services. Good luck with, GOP!


It's not free.
/don't think they should repeal.
2012-08-01 10:25:10 AM
1 votes:

ComicBookGuy: Having a penis, this doesn't affect me.

Yawn.


Do you not have any women in your life? That is so sad.
2012-08-01 10:15:49 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: fracto: I don't think he is saying that it should be a rubber stamp, just that there should be consequences if the insurer wants to have a say on treatment.

This.

wildcat2011: Then you have no idea what socialism is.

Oh I do. But providing health coverage for everyone, isn't it.


What this will eventually do is take all profit out of healthcare, which by definition is socialism. It can be argued since healthcare is a need for everyone that it is justified. Of course, so are food and shelter, so those may not be too far behind. The question is how far do we take it.
2012-08-01 10:14:28 AM
1 votes:

Confabulat: Look, your interstate isn't "free". But we understand the difference between a "free" interstate and a toll road.

Do you really think you need to explain this to people? Do you think you've figured something out that no one else has? Really?


Bingo.

Not to me.tion that sometimes bc is prescribed for medical reason.s having nothing to do w/preventing pregnancy. And IIRC correctly this stuff lowers the cost of healthcare because its cheaper for insurance companies to pay for bc then to pay for a baby. In fact I think insuran ce companies welcomed this rule.

So nobodies insurance premiums are going to go up
2012-08-01 10:02:31 AM
1 votes:

A Day Older than Yesterday: Nothing is "free." It just means someone else is paying for it.


You know what? I have spent over a week trying to get my wife an Rx filled. with a medication that her doctor has prescribed before. She needs this on a daily basis. The Insurance company has been pushing back by requesting more paperwork, then requiring us to work with a 'subcontracting entity' and then requiring my Doctor (on Friday afternoon) to make a personal phone call to them to explain why she's on this medication.

Why?

Because we're paying them over 30k in annual benefits (through her employer) to cover our doctor visits and medications.

... and of course the fact that I can buy the medicine out-of-pocket means that they insurance company can claim we're not being 'denied care'

... what?

It's not like we can take the money out of the Insurance premium and spend the damn money ourselves.

We can't 'go across the street' to a supplier who WILL honor the fact that my Doctor wants my Wife to have certain meds.

The situation is that We've given them the money to spend, and they've gotten a 'better deal' out of the drug company. We'd probably be happy to pay whatever they're paying(~2$ per pill) instead of the 20$ per pill the 'retail' price of the drug is (making a month's Rx 600$). (yes, this is the generic version of the drug)

We're already under rationed care. The Problem is that we're paying people to NOT give us medical treatment.
2012-08-01 09:59:01 AM
1 votes:

BostonEMT: and people shouldn't be allowed to live / leech off the hard work of others*


So you support getting rid of all corporate subsidies, mandating all defense contracts be fixed price, making it illegal to only offer stock options to certain employees, and oh I could think of a ton more.

Nabb1: Yes, well, if it's medically necessary, then insurers are bound to cover it under insurance law (generally speaking)


I have a friend that's spent the last three months trying to get an MRI on his heart approved by his insurance, so that he can go get his heart taken care of. The MRI is quite medically necessary but the insurance balked for three months to pay for it. I have a friend with rather bad back pain and some issues related to her back and the only thing that will fix it is back surgery, her insurance told her they won't pay for the surgery. Even though it is medically necessary as it is the only thing that will fix what ails her.
2012-08-01 09:55:06 AM
1 votes:

wildcat2011: I wouldn't have near as much of a problem with this if all the proponents of it would at least come out and call it socialism, which is exactly what it is. They dance around it like it was a live grenade. If you're gonna support something at least admit what it is and own it. I would have much more respect for their position.


"Socialism" is not a bad word and it's something we need a hell of a lot more of in the USA.

It's just that the dimwit Republican block of America that freaks out when they hear that word "socialism" so intelligent people try to avoid it because it makes them hyperventilate and make misspelled signs to carry around.
2012-08-01 09:54:13 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: Nabb1: If you can't realize why that would be a bad idea, then I don't know what to tell you.

The entire populations of France, Germany, Italy etc would like to know what you're on. Cause in them if it's medically necessary, there are no issues about things being paid for. If a doctor says you need a heart procedure, it's done. Back surgery? Done. The physical therapy after said surgery? Covered.


Yes, well, if it's medically necessary, then insurers are bound to cover it under insurance law (generally speaking). But that's an issue of insurance law, not practicing medicine.
2012-08-01 09:53:48 AM
1 votes:

office_despot: Mr. Right: office_despot: EXACTLY. My problem with you is that you think "single woman" = "prostitute" !!!

That is a bold-faced lie. I never said that a single woman is a prostitute. I said if she charges for her services she's a prostitute. It must be hard work to be so totally stupid.

My point is that whoever pays for the contraception will, sooner or later, decide what kind of contraception you will receive. I wasn't making a moral judgement about contraception, about sex outside of marriage, or about any other damned thing. It's the Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rule.

I don't care if it's an insurance company or the government, when we force someone to pay for something, they will decide what it is they will pay for. You like your expensive hormonal birth control because it fits your lifestyle and doesn't give you a muffin top on your jeans? Too damned bad. You'll get the cheap stuff and learn to deal with your muffin top.

I'm not making this up to try to demonize the ACA. I'm just reporting on what has happened every time we demand insurance companies cover something and every time we demand the government covers something.

When companies demanded that insurance companies cover industrial accidents, the insurance companies started telling companies what kinds of safety equipment they needed to have, what kind of employee training they needed to do, etc. Insurance companies did far more to improve worker safety than OSHA and unions combined. Because they will not pay for bad practices.

When farmers demanded that the government cover their crop losses and support prices, the USDA took over. Literally. If you participate in a farm program, the government tells you how to farm.

When you sign up for welfare, the social worker gets to tell you, in very large part, how you must live.

This isn't some kind of radical extremism. It's a fact.

Don't deny what you said. You said, "If the woman is single and tries to charge her partner a fee to cover t ...


I pay for my girlfriend's Depo shot ... I guess that makes her a hooker? Bull farking shiat ... it's called being a good boyfriend ...
2012-08-01 09:53:00 AM
1 votes:

wildcat2011: which is exactly what it is


Not by any accepted definition of socialism.
2012-08-01 09:49:39 AM
1 votes:

Mr. Right: office_despot: EXACTLY. My problem with you is that you think "single woman" = "prostitute" !!!

That is a bold-faced lie. I never said that a single woman is a prostitute. I said if she charges for her services she's a prostitute. It must be hard work to be so totally stupid.

My point is that whoever pays for the contraception will, sooner or later, decide what kind of contraception you will receive. I wasn't making a moral judgement about contraception, about sex outside of marriage, or about any other damned thing. It's the Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rule.

I don't care if it's an insurance company or the government, when we force someone to pay for something, they will decide what it is they will pay for. You like your expensive hormonal birth control because it fits your lifestyle and doesn't give you a muffin top on your jeans? Too damned bad. You'll get the cheap stuff and learn to deal with your muffin top.

I'm not making this up to try to demonize the ACA. I'm just reporting on what has happened every time we demand insurance companies cover something and every time we demand the government covers something.

When companies demanded that insurance companies cover industrial accidents, the insurance companies started telling companies what kinds of safety equipment they needed to have, what kind of employee training they needed to do, etc. Insurance companies did far more to improve worker safety than OSHA and unions combined. Because they will not pay for bad practices.

When farmers demanded that the government cover their crop losses and support prices, the USDA took over. Literally. If you participate in a farm program, the government tells you how to farm.

When you sign up for welfare, the social worker gets to tell you, in very large part, how you must live.

This isn't some kind of radical extremism. It's a fact.


Don't deny what you said. You said, "If the woman is single and tries to charge her partner a fee to cover the cost of birth control, we call her a prostitute and she's arrested." And that was your attempt to explain yourself after your initial misogyny-cloaked-as-morality.

Normal people can think of a lot of situations in which an unmarried woman and her unmarried partner share both the pleasures of sex and the expenses of birth control. And you know, I think if she has to tell her partner, "Hey, this IUD is costing $300, could you chip in too?" that doesn't make anyone a prostitute.
2012-08-01 09:47:27 AM
1 votes:

WhyteRaven74: Nabb1: Denying or approving payment is not the same as practicing medicine. T

When refusing to cover something means a person can't get the care, it is practicing medicine.


No, it isn't. Not even remotely. Medical coverage, be it a state benefit or private insurance, is not a rubber stamp on a blank check. If you can't realize why that would be a bad idea, then I don't know what to tell you. If it were, then quacks like the doctor who helped Octomom produce a litter would have a blank check to do all sorts of frivolous nonsense to people. Reimbursement for a number of areas have been getting slashed as it is.
2012-08-01 09:27:55 AM
1 votes:

Liz Lemon: What I think is much scarier than any other this, is the fact that this whole issue of mandatory insurance is unconstitutional. Sure they found a technicality, and now it's a "tax" (wink, wink). But seriously, even if the concept was we all get chocolate sundaes for life but we MUST (or else) join the hot sundae club - I'd still be incensed. It's not the content of the Act, it's how I perceive it to be completely unconstitutional, and how this just paves the way for other freedoms to continue to be eroded. I think not having medical insurance is retarded - but hey, to each his own. If you want to live without a safety net - go for it. Oh...but not anymore.

I think all this discussion about the meaning of the word free really distracts from the main issue here of the government literally taking liberties.


I'll just leave this here.
2012-08-01 09:26:49 AM
1 votes:

BostonEMT: rufus-t-firefly: This is about people with insurance. Insurance that these people are already paying for. Therefore, you aren't being "forced" to pay for their preventative care any more than you're "forced" to pay for them getting a flu shot.

If you don't want to be "forced" to pay for this care, you can always cancel your insurance coverage.

oh, so then my taxes will go down? YAY Obamacare!!! free health care for EVERYONE!!!


This is about healthcare reform. If you want to biatch about the terrible burden of your taxes, you can surely find a thread about that subject.

/If I'm not paying for it, who is? Where is the money coming from? please answer that ONE question.

Since this is about insurance coverage, it comes from GODDAMN INSURANCE PREMIUMS, LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S COVERED BY INSURANCE.

You can't just walk into a doctor's office without insurance and demand a free checkup.

Holy shiat, you are determined to find a way to be a victim.
2012-08-01 09:25:27 AM
1 votes:

o5iiawah: Confabulat: over your greed and selfishness and hope that people unlike you die soon.

I reject the construct of your argument that the only 2 choices I get are mandatory insurance cost-sharing versus wanting others to die because I am greedy and selfish. Do I feel an obligation to help others? Yes. Do I help others? Yes. Should I have a gun in my face telling me which people to help and how much I should? No.

you libs should really get better arguments than: "So whaddaya want people to die?"


Here we see the tragedy of the commons. Everyone is slightly better off if they pool resources to cover catastrophic costs (MUCH better off in the event of personal catastrophe), but any individual is MUCH better off if they don't pay into the system and don't have a catastrophic cost. So the system breaks down as individuals exercise choice. Voluntary insurance doesn't work any better than voluntary taxes, unless you go to the libertarian extreme and let uninsured people die in the street. What we have now is higher costs, because uninsured people are covered in the most expensive way possible, in emergency rooms only when they're critically sick, through taxes.

We could completely fix this by ditching private insurance altogether and putting everyone on Medicare (like most of the rest of the world does), but that would cause a catastrophic collapse of the humorous spokesperson/animal segment of the economy.
2012-08-01 09:15:19 AM
1 votes:

Pantubo: fracto: Pantubo: "Free" == "Paid for by other people."

No. 'Free' means covered with your premium.

Your own premium does not "cover" the cost of ANYTHING you do. It allows you to participate in a program wherein you can use everyone else's money.

You complete, total, unrepentant idiot.


That sounds unfair.

Every freedom-loving person should immediately drop their insurance coverage. It's like a farking commune.

Huh...that sounds like COMMUN-ISM!
2012-08-01 09:08:25 AM
1 votes:

fracto: Pantubo: "Free" == "Paid for by other people."

No. 'Free' means covered with your premium.



Your own premium does not "cover" the cost of ANYTHING you do. It allows you to participate in a program wherein you can use everyone else's money.

You complete, total, unrepentant idiot.
2012-08-01 09:01:46 AM
1 votes:

BostonEMT: fracto: BostonEMT: Gov't is forcing me to pay for other people's preventative care

No they aren't.

good work on framing your comment on the context of my post. your argument is compelling. But I will have to insist.


This is about people with insurance. Insurance that these people are already paying for. Therefore, you aren't being "forced" to pay for their preventative care any more than you're "forced" to pay for them getting a flu shot.

If you don't want to be "forced" to pay for this care, you can always cancel your insurance coverage.
2012-08-01 08:59:44 AM
1 votes:
cameroncrazy1984:

Mr. Right: Rights are always accompanied by responsibilities. You have the right to have sex but with that comes the responsibility to pay for the consequences. In a normal world, that would mean that if a woman wants to have sex, she is free to do so but she would be responsible for her own birth control. As of today, women can demand the right to have sex but demand that society, through insurance premiums, assume the responsibility for her birth control.

Here's the part nobody wants to think about. Whoever assumes the responsibility of paying for your actions will, ultimately, assume the rights that go along with those responsibilities. When insurance companies are forced to pay for your birth control, at some point they will decide what kind of birth control you will receive. It may not be this year but it will come. If the government assumes the responsibility of paying for your birth control, sooner or later it will decide what kind of birth control you will practice.

There
Ain't
No
Such
Thing
As
A
Free
Lunch.

Newsflash, dumbass, we already do pay for healthcare for people who don't have insurance. Adding preventative care and making it co-pay free is just a cost-saving measure. Nobody's telling you you have to take birth control.


I'm gonna assume he believes that private insurers don't have entire departments dedicated to figuring out how they can deny claims in order to save money for the stockholders. In his magical world only the evil government does that.

Oh. Wait. Here in the real world, the government is trying to prevent insurers' most egregious abuses such as dropping people as soon as they have a claim or denying coverage for pre-existing conditions.

My mom was an appeals analyst for a major private insurer... She actually *was* on a "Death PanelTM" long before that particular bon mot entered the wharrgarbl lexicon.
2012-08-01 08:58:22 AM
1 votes:
BTW for those of you who don't like this, here's a challenge, cancel all your insurance and never use insurance to pay for anything ever again. After all you don't want to pay for other people's care, why should anyone pay for anything of yours?
2012-08-01 08:45:42 AM
1 votes:

o5iiawah: Confabulat: I am THRILLED to pay more in taxes if I can get decent preventative health care without breaking my bank account.

Of course you are thrilled - it just means someone else is paying for your colonoscopy. Its only cheap to you. For the rest of us who pay for our healthcare, it becomes more expensive.

Welcome To America, vote for the policies that will help you at the expense of your neighbor.

Silverstaff: They get hurt, they get sick, they pay. They can't just say "Obamacare covers it" and expect the government to magically pay for it.

No, but they can go to an insurance company with their liver failure diagnosis and demand insurance at the rate of a healthy 21 year old male and the insurance company has to give it to them. The insurance company is all to happy to cover them at the expense of raising the rates of everyone else. So they in a sense say 'obamacare' covers me, the private insurer raises rates and it is the rate payers who end up "magically" paying for it.

Holographic Shimmering Pork: I still felt a little physically ill when I heard about it. Anyone know how these new laws address health industry providers who currently opt-out of paying for/prescribing/distributing contraceptives on moral grounds?

Sounds to me like you should get another insurance provider.

Gothnet: Just because your cow-orker goes on maternity leave doesn't mean you should have to work harder,

He shouldn't. A woman makes a choice to have a child and this should be of no concern to an employer. The boss either has to train a temp, then fire the temp and still count on others to pick up the slack, or ride the rest of the employees into the ground to make up for the lost productivity. The employer should not be responsible for the decision of an individual to have a child. They can if they want but they shouldn't be forced by law


Demonstrate more about how you failed at being a decent human being and American countryman, over your greed and selfishness and hope that people unlike you die soon.

Go on.
2012-08-01 08:43:04 AM
1 votes:

Mayhem of the Black Underclass: DeltaPunch: Awesome, congrats.

Repealing Obamacare now officially includes wanting to repeal free mammograms, colonoscopies, women's health screenings, breastfeeding support, contraception, and other women's services. Good luck with, GOP!

Free? Sweet. It was awfully nice of all the doctors, radiologist, anesthesiologists, nurses, and other hospital staff to volunteer to do those things for women. Oh wait, they didn't. So, not free. Forced. The word you're looking for is "forced". Maybe even "forced labor". That or the Drs' offices will be shuffling around charges. Don't worry you'll wind up paying for this government interference.


Richard Blaine: Government cannot make anything "free". It just means they force someone else to pay for it. Anyone who thinks this is a net gain fails Econ 101.


NEWSFLASH: No one actually believes it's completely, 100% free. You're making yourselves sound uneducated by pointing out something that no one no one disputes.
2012-08-01 08:32:23 AM
1 votes:

Jegred2: Disparity of wages between sexes is a farce, the stats don't account for typical professions that women go into or the fact that women tend to have kids and take maternity leave. So don't go pulling stiupid shiat out your ass.


Yes, they do. It's no farce. Save for those who falsely claim it doesn't exist.
2012-08-01 08:29:41 AM
1 votes:

ladyfortuna: Not to mention people basically have to have health insurance nowish/near future, which means they're mostly already paying in, which means IT'S NOT FREE.


Exactly. And I don't know why people are quibbling over this term. Free means you don't pay a copay or deductible on it. It means more people are likely to go in for those regular checkups to catch diseases early. People are STILL paying into this system, but it is saving them, and the insurance companies money by preventing the very LARGE costs assosciated with disease treatment.
2012-08-01 08:24:13 AM
1 votes:

Richard Blaine: Government cannot make anything "free". It just means they force someone else to pay for it. Anyone who thinks this is a net gain fails Econ 101.


Define "net gain." I do think it's a net gain if everyone gets what they need. I have been on the bottom of the economic pile and now I am near the top. And I want my tax dollars to help make sure that other Americans remain healthy. I would pay more taxes to that end. It certainly is an economic gain if people who would otherwise be sick, or who would be parents before they are ready, stay in the work force.
2012-08-01 08:19:20 AM
1 votes:

BostonEMT: Thunderpipes: Just another blow to self responsibility and a means to get more Democrat votes. Free stuff taken from working people = votes from idiot Democrats.

THIS


You know, or you think of it like this: Preventative health care for more people at reduced cost means less money spent in hte long run as treating hte disease costs EVERYONE a lot more. But you know, I don't expect people looking to call names about one party or the other being that willing to look at the big picture.

You do realize that working women are also getting these benefits, and that many working people are getting other benefits from the AHA?
2012-08-01 08:15:56 AM
1 votes:

anwserman: So I know this thread is about women, but I do have a question regarding ACA. As a guy who gets coverage through his employer (open enrollment was last November), don't I get covered for STD checking with no copays as well?

I thought that was a provision that went into effect April or something of last year, and any plan written after that had to include it, or if it was through your employer, when open enrollment for that year finished.


Yes.

There is no separate "Obamacare", like there is Medicare and Medicaid. There is no separate healthcare plan, no magic catch-all.

For example, if you dear Derp about people saying they'll cancel their insurance and just pay the tax for not having insurance, since it's cheaper, they are DUMB. They won't have any insurance, and they'll be paying money for it. They get hurt, they get sick, they pay. They can't just say "Obamacare covers it" and expect the government to magically pay for it. No, you still pay for health insurance under the ACA.

The Affordable Care Act is about ensuring all Americans can get and keep healthcare insurance, and ensuring that this insurance actually covers healthcare. If you have insurance, it's benefits apply to you.
2012-08-01 08:10:55 AM
1 votes:

AdolfOliverPanties: MisterTweak: RobertBruce: Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.

Covered services include colonoscopy, which is gender-neutral. May I suggest you get one?

His head is in the way.

I'm sure he has been a stalwart activist at the unfair pricing practices of women's healthcare all these years, as well as the disparity in pay wages.


Disparity of wages between sexes is a farce, the stats don't account for typical professions that women go into or the fact that women tend to have kids and take maternity leave. So don't go pulling stiupid shiat out your ass.
2012-08-01 08:04:04 AM
1 votes:

DeltaPunch: Awesome, congrats.

Repealing Obamacare now officially includes wanting to repeal free mammograms, colonoscopies, women's health screenings, breastfeeding support, contraception, and other women's services. Good luck with, GOP!


Ya, would be a real shame if chicks paid for their own woman problems huh? Chicks should be forced to buy me beer and jerky too, don't see that happening.

Just another blow to self responsibility and a means to get more Democrat votes. Free stuff taken from working people = votes from idiot Democrats.
2012-08-01 08:03:20 AM
1 votes:
So I know this thread is about women, but I do have a question regarding ACA. As a guy who gets coverage through his employer (open enrollment was last November), don't I get covered for STD checking with no copays as well?

I thought that was a provision that went into effect April or something of last year, and any plan written after that had to include it, or if it was through your employer, when open enrollment for that year finished.
2012-08-01 08:01:44 AM
1 votes:

DeltaPunch: Awesome, congrats.

Repealing Obamacare now officially includes wanting to repeal free mammograms, colonoscopies, women's health screenings, breastfeeding support, contraception, and other women's services. Good luck with, GOP!


I'm all for women (and men damnit) being able to receive preventative screenings like this for free or near free but this stance of "Well now you can't even discuss my new law because I tacked this stuff on it so neener neener" troubles me.

Yes I know the right has done this before too but you know that whole two wrongs thing.

I like the idea of Obamacare and some of the things it brings, but something about forcing people to have healthcare puzzles me. I remember being just above the income line where I couldn't receive cheap insurance but was nowhere near being able to afford good insurance. Thinking of some poor working stiff being forced to pay that amount bothers me. Of course, if Obamacare works like they say it will and it lowers the cost of insurance then of course I'm all for that.

Also I'm tired of people on my Facebook screaming "ZOMG FREE HEALTHCARE FOR ALL" when that's not what happened at all.
2012-08-01 07:58:43 AM
1 votes:

MythDragon: Companies should give everyone an *equal* chance at a job. To pass over someone who has a better skillset simply because you already have 'too much' of that race is just stupid.


Yes, yes. We all know what should be done, and if the real world were that way we wouldn't be in this situation. The reality is that without affirmative action many times women and minority men cannot get a foot in the door or a shot at a promotion. Most times there is no perfect applicant for a job. Each applicant has a subset of the needed skills and experience, and an employer must select from imperfect candidates.

Affirmative action encourages employers to at least consider applicants with funny sounding names before throwing their resumes in the trash. Back in the days of paper resumes I saw them tossed into the trash simply because the name was female or foreign or black sounding. Nobody even bothered reading them.
2012-08-01 07:50:12 AM
1 votes:

Pick: God, you people are so stupid. FREE!!! HA HA HA HA! SOMEONE is going to have pay for all of this, NOTHING is free. You think the doctors are going to work for free? NOT! You think our government , with it's massive deficit and debt is going to pay for it? It might look like it, at first, but um, NO.

Hint: Get ready for $8 a gallon gas, expensive electricity, $30, for 12 packs of beer, $20 packs of cigs, and other TAXES to pay for your so called "FREE" Healthcare.

What a bunch of suckers.


Really, it's this sort of dimwit fear-mongering that embarrasses Republicans. The Canadian dollar is stronger against the USA dollar than in modern history.

Ask a Canadian if he wants to spend $1000 on a colonoscopy. Then ask him about his $30 12 pack of beer and he'll toss a Molson at you and probably will have laxer selling laws than any right-wing American state ever would dream of.
2012-08-01 07:48:34 AM
1 votes:

DeltaPunch: Awesome, congrats.

Repealing Obamacare now officially includes wanting to repeal free mammograms, colonoscopies, women's health screenings, breastfeeding support, contraception, and other women's services. Good luck with, GOP!


My understanding is that it was a very intentional poliitical move to write it into the Affordable Care Act that some tangible benefits would kick in during election season, but well before election day, so people could see some good from "Obamacare" before going to the ballots.

If you look, there are already other benefits in place, like people under 26 being able to still be on their parents insurance.

The idea is that people will realize it's not OMG TEH GUBMINT IS TAKING OVER HEALTHCARE, and it's instead making insurance companies have to act towards promoting the overall health of the nation, instead of maximizing profits while providing the minimum possible insurance to get away with it.
2012-08-01 07:47:34 AM
1 votes:

Pick: God, you people are so stupid. FREE!!! HA HA HA HA! SOMEONE is going to have pay for all of this, NOTHING is free. You think the doctors are going to work for free? NOT! You think our government , with it's massive deficit and debt is going to pay for it? It might look like it, at first, but um, NO.

Hint: Get ready for $8 a gallon gas, expensive electricity, $30, for 12 packs of beer, $20 packs of cigs, and other TAXES to pay for your so called "FREE" Healthcare.

What a bunch of suckers.


Just like Canada, huh?
2012-08-01 07:42:47 AM
1 votes:

coffee smells good: Confabulat: A Day Older than Yesterday: Nothing is "free." It just means someone else is paying for it.

Ooo look at your big brain! Did you just figure this out today?

So what? We're a country and a society. Big deal if your tax dollars help your fellow countrymen live longer, unless of course like your standard Republican, you hope they all die if they don't act and think like you anyway.


Wow! What an a$$hole you are early in the morning.


He's not wrong.
2012-08-01 07:36:35 AM
1 votes:
2012-08-01 07:22:31 AM
1 votes:

BgJonson79: puffy999: I mean, my real question is, couldn't we just make health care free for everyone...?

No such thing as free healthcare.


Sure there is. See, language, besides being organic and dynamic, is quite contextual and practical. Since nothing is free in the sense of having absolutely no cost, whether this is a monetary, human resources, natural resources, opportunity, or some other cost, what is meant when people say "free" in this context is no cost for the consumer at the point of consumption of medical care. However, saying all this is pointless because we all understand "free".
2012-08-01 07:20:27 AM
1 votes:

Confabulat: A Day Older than Yesterday: Nothing is "free." It just means someone else is paying for it.

Ooo look at your big brain! Did you just figure this out today?

So what? We're a country and a society. Big deal if your tax dollars help your fellow countrymen live longer, unless of course like your standard Republican, you hope they all die if they don't act and think like you anyway.


So where do you draw the line? This has nothing to do with live expectancy being increased, rather who pays for contraceptives.
2012-08-01 07:18:21 AM
1 votes:

DeltaPunch: RobertBruce: Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.

You know, for a conservative you sure sound like a whiny liberal when it comes to gender equality.


No, he's right. If women's preventative health services are free, then men's should be as well.

/abortion is not preventative, let's get that out of the way
//men's health is just as important as women's health
///today should be hailed as the day when EVERYONE'S Preventative Health Services are paid for by our tax dollars, instead of out of pocket
/libs are retarded
2012-08-01 07:16:21 AM
1 votes:

Confabulat: A Day Older than Yesterday: Nothing is "free." It just means someone else is paying for it.

Ooo look at your big brain! Did you just figure this out today?

So what? We're a country and a society. Big deal if your tax dollars help your fellow countrymen live longer, unless of course like your standard Republican, you hope they all die if they don't act and think like you anyway.



Wow! What an a$$hole you are early in the morning.
2012-08-01 07:13:58 AM
1 votes:

puffy999: I mean, my real question is, couldn't we just make health care free for everyone...?


No such thing as free healthcare.
2012-08-01 07:09:41 AM
1 votes:

A Day Older than Yesterday: Nothing is "free." It just means someone else is paying for it.


Ooo look at your big brain! Did you just figure this out today?

So what? We're a country and a society. Big deal if your tax dollars help your fellow countrymen live longer, unless of course like your standard Republican, you hope they all die if they don't act and think like you anyway.
2012-08-01 07:07:45 AM
1 votes:
If by 'free' they mean higher copays will now be required on the front end to pay for something that can no longer be charged for on the back end, sure.
2012-08-01 07:01:40 AM
1 votes:
Free? No tax dollars spent? Awesome!
2012-08-01 04:19:16 AM
1 votes:
Wait, can I get free colonoscopies too? My last one set me back $1000 and that was with insurance.
2012-08-01 03:06:27 AM
1 votes:
Does it cover prostate screenings for men? I see all those pink ribbons to raise breast cancer awareness, but no brown ribbons for prostate cancer awareness, despite the fact it kills as many people as breast cancer does.

/its not as dramatic a loss when removed however.
2012-08-01 01:43:32 AM
1 votes:

RobertBruce: Complete total blatant gender discrimination. Awesome.


Covered services include colonoscopy, which is gender-neutral. May I suggest you get one?
 
Displayed 91 of 91 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report