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.

(Talking Points Memo)   HHS: Here is the new contraception rule proposal. Catholic group: THIS IS AN OUT...wait, no, this is actually a fair deal   (livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 100
    More: Spiffy, Health and Human Services, health law, individual mandate, contraceptives, faith-based, cost sharing, Obama administration  
•       •       •

4532 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Feb 2013 at 4:51 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



100 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-01 01:11:38 PM
So, the exception list got bigger, and the employers are taken completely out of the loop via direct dealings between patients and insurers.  This is probably where they should have started to begin with, but hey, at least it kills their talking point.

From a more cynical view though:  This allows religious organizations to continue their mental delusion that their employees can't possibly be sinning, because they aren't paying for it directly.  Whatever helps you sleep at night, guys.
 
2013-02-01 02:34:13 PM
Instead of being an ass about it, I'll just say I'm glad that it all got worked out.
 
2013-02-01 03:17:22 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: So, the exception list got bigger, and the employers are taken completely out of the loop via direct dealings between patients and insurers.


I thought they did that when the initial pushback from religious groups started.  Is that the case, and it just became official now or something?  My understanding is the insurers said they'd cover the cost if their religious members didn't want to.

Hazy on details is me.
 
2013-02-01 03:53:11 PM
So, if I'm reading this correctly, before this compromise it was religious organizations said "I don't want to pay for my employees to have contraceptive coverage" and the insurance companies said "it's totally fine, it's comped, you're not paying any extra for it" but that was bad. So now under the new compromise it is now if you are a religious organization you can say "I don't want to pay for my employees to have contraceptive coverage" and he insurance company will say "fine, it's not coming from the coverage you're paying for, it's coming from this TOTALLY DIFFERENT PLAN which is free, but IT IS NOT IN ANY WAY YOUR PLAN."

Just seems like more paperwork for no gain to me.
 
2013-02-01 04:05:00 PM

nmrsnr: So, if I'm reading this correctly, before this compromise it was religious organizations said "I don't want to pay for my employees to have contraceptive coverage" and the insurance companies said "it's totally fine, it's comped, you're not paying any extra for it" but that was bad. So now under the new compromise it is now if you are a religious organization you can say "I don't want to pay for my employees to have contraceptive coverage" and he insurance company will say "fine, it's not coming from the coverage you're paying for, it's coming from this TOTALLY DIFFERENT PLAN which is free, but IT IS NOT IN ANY WAY YOUR PLAN."

Just seems like more paperwork for no gain to me.


Well, if you're the type of person who thinks birth control will INCREASE your the amount of taxes you pay, you're already not the brightest bulb out there.
 
2013-02-01 04:11:35 PM
Legalist Jesus smiles on this development.
 
2013-02-01 04:13:45 PM

what_now: Well, if you're the type of person who thinks birth control will INCREASE your the amount of taxes you pay, you're already not the brightest bulb out there.


But if it's free, there's nothing stopping those sluts from having sex. Can you imagine how expensive it is to just keep on giving them pills for every time they want to have sex? How can it not cost me money?
 
2013-02-01 04:14:57 PM
Good luck in 2014, GOP
 
2013-02-01 04:37:41 PM

nmrsnr: So, if I'm reading this correctly, before this compromise it was religious organizations said "I don't want to pay for my employees to have contraceptive coverage" and the insurance companies said "it's totally fine, it's comped, you're not paying any extra for it" but that was bad.


Nah, I believe the issue was self-insured religious institutions.  So the insurance company itself was refusing to pay for it.  This contraception coverage is coming from elsewhere (probably some HHS plan), I think.
 
2013-02-01 04:39:03 PM
Why is birth control bad? For one thing, consistent widespread use would lower the number of abortions every year.

/at least until the next Adam Sandler movie comes out
 
2013-02-01 04:52:49 PM
What's preventing any religious institution from making a fuss about any coverage they don't want to foot the bill for in the future? "It greatly offends my freedom of religion that I have to pay for obesity-related diseases, ruckus, ruckus, ruckus." This is why you don't negotiate with terrorists.
 
2013-02-01 04:55:58 PM
How about we respect the 1st amendment and remove employers from health care
 
2013-02-01 04:56:34 PM
I just heard a giant WHEW from Jeezus, God, and the Holy Ghost.  Crisis averted, guys!
 
2013-02-01 04:57:42 PM
Hobby Lobby will object anyway.
 
2013-02-01 04:57:43 PM
So if someone is a Jehovah Witness can then opt out of covering operations?

Where does this end. The idea that businesses and colleges have a religion is stupid. People have religions. If you don't want a business that has to follow the law don't start a business.
 
2013-02-01 04:57:58 PM

SurfaceTension: Why is birth control bad? For one thing, consistent widespread use would lower the number of abortions every year.


It's not about abortion, it's about control.
 
2013-02-01 04:58:02 PM

SurfaceTension: Why is birth control bad?


Because Jeebus.
 
2013-02-01 04:58:16 PM
Tell them to suck it up because the law is the law. Something about a one of their 1st century all stars and obeying a government.
 
2013-02-01 04:59:16 PM
Catholics United are considered by many to be "liberals in Catholic clothing".  wait to see what the UCCB says, then you'll see the real reaction.
 
2013-02-01 05:00:03 PM

moothemagiccow: How about we respect the 1st amendment and remove employers from health care


Uhh the first amendment has nothing to do with it. First amendment doesn't say you can ignore laws based on religious grounds at all. In fact it says the opposite. That everyone has to be treated the same and not given favoritism because of their beliefs.
 
2013-02-01 05:08:02 PM
So we're conceding, in a round-about, paperwork way, to the religious terrorists on this issue?

What's next? Jehovah's Witness business owners who won't cover employee's blood transfusions after a car accident? Muslim business owners who won't cover by-pass surgery for their employees who ate too much bacon? Hindu business owners who won't cover similar surgery because of a burger-based diet? Amish employers who won't cover hospitalization for an employee electrocuted on the job, because they shouldn't have been messing with that devil's juice in the first place?

All I can hope for now is that this gets so convoluted that single-payer will become the only choice - backed by business owners large and small as they finally realize it's in their best interests.
 
2013-02-01 05:09:21 PM

fearthebunnyman: Catholics United are considered by many to be "liberals in Catholic clothing".  wait to see what the UCCB says, then you'll see the real reaction.


You mean, like John Fitzgerald Kennedy?

/nope, no liberal Catholics, nothing to see here
 
2013-02-01 05:10:55 PM

nmrsnr: Just seems like more paperwork for no gain to me.


Having worked in Islamic finance where they've found a way around the no interest commandment, I can tell you that religions often are quite fine with ignoring the spirit of the law as long as the letter of the law is followed.

/Same goes for Sabbath mode elevators
 
2013-02-01 05:14:14 PM

fearthebunnyman: Catholics United are considered by many to be "liberals in Catholic clothing".  wait to see what the UCCB says, then you'll see the real reaction.


This. I'll wait until Bill Donohue releases his statement. I'm sure he'll still find something to be poutraged about.
 
2013-02-01 05:14:25 PM
It would be hilarious if the contraception plan ends up being offered for less money do to a long term decrease in costs over all.
 
2013-02-01 05:14:41 PM

fearthebunnyman: Catholics United are considered by many to be "liberals in Catholic clothing".


It's that kind of bullcrap that's kept me distant from the Catholic Church lately.
 
2013-02-01 05:17:52 PM
Please let it involve mini flags... oh please oh please.   DRAT.
 
2013-02-01 05:19:34 PM

nmrsnr: So, if I'm reading this correctly, before this compromise it was religious organizations said "I don't want to pay for my employees to have contraceptive coverage" and the insurance companies said "it's totally fine, it's comped, you're not paying any extra for it" but that was bad. So now under the new compromise it is now if you are a religious organization you can say "I don't want to pay for my employees to have contraceptive coverage" and he insurance company will say "fine, it's not coming from the coverage you're paying for, it's coming from this TOTALLY DIFFERENT PLAN which is free, but IT IS NOT IN ANY WAY YOUR PLAN."

Just seems like more paperwork for no gain to me.


Pointless symbolic gestures and needless rigmarole?  In my Catholic Church?
 
2013-02-01 05:19:51 PM
I never knew so many employers had religious objections to contraception. And who knew so many religions forbid contraception. Amazing what you learn when health care gets reformed.
 
2013-02-01 05:20:29 PM

EngineerAU: /Same goes for Sabbath mode elevators


My refrigerator has a "sabbath mode" setting. The light doesn't come on when you open it. Sure, the compressor and the fan are both running, but that's not important.
 
2013-02-01 05:21:51 PM

EngineerAU: Sabbath mode elevators


I just looked that up.  Christ on a cracker, that's the dumbest thing I've seen all day, and that's counting a creationism thread and a Contracts class.
 
2013-02-01 05:22:08 PM

SurfaceTension: Why is birth control bad?



No money making venture voluntarily endorses proposals that shrinks their customer base.
 
2013-02-01 05:24:17 PM

dinch: EngineerAU: /Same goes for Sabbath mode elevators

My refrigerator has a "sabbath mode" setting. The light doesn't come on when you open it. Sure, the compressor and the fan are both running, but that's not important.


Sure must be a lot of work to switch all your devices into Sabbath mode for one day a week...
 
2013-02-01 05:26:52 PM

SurfaceTension: Why is birth control bad? For one thing, consistent widespread use would lower the number of abortions every year.


Religious nutcases want women, especially teenagers, to have unwanted pregnancies.  Why else do you think they hired Bristol Palin of all people to go on the road telling kids how well abstinence works?
 
2013-02-01 05:27:12 PM

SurfaceTension: Why is birth control bad? For one thing, consistent widespread use would lower the number of abortions every year.


Because the thought that I might (however indirectly) contribute to allowing some woman who is not me in some location where I am not to have guilt and consequence free sex is completely unacceptable.
 
2013-02-01 05:30:36 PM
So because of the church's objection, the taxpayer is on the hook to pay for it. Nice.
 
2013-02-01 05:40:54 PM

silvervial: What's next? Jehovah's Witness business owners who won't cover employee's blood transfusions after a car accident? Muslim business owners who won't cover by-pass surgery for their employees who ate too much bacon? Hindu business owners who won't cover similar surgery because of a burger-based diet? Amish employers who won't cover hospitalization for an employee electrocuted on the job, because they shouldn't have been messing with that devil's juice in the first place?


That last, at least, is covered by older laws that supersede Obamacare.  You get hurt while doing your job, the employer has to pay regardless of what they believe.
 
2013-02-01 05:41:06 PM
Why does everyone forget that for many years before Obama's first term in office, many of these exact same "religious" organizations that are howling about their faith being infringed upon had health care plans that covered contraceptives.  It was only when the ACA was passed that some of them even noticed.

Which circle of hell do hypocrites go to?  That's where these so-called religious leaders should go.
 
2013-02-01 05:42:21 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: So, the exception list got bigger, and the employers are taken completely out of the loop via direct dealings between patients and insurers.  This is probably where they should have started to begin with, but hey, at least it kills their talking point.

From a more cynical view though:  This allows religious organizations to continue their mental delusion that their employees can't possibly be sinning, because they aren't paying for it directly.  Whatever helps you sleep at night, guys.


If they had started here, we'd have completely abandoned the rule in the "compromise"
 
2013-02-01 05:43:06 PM

SurfaceTension: Why is birth control bad?

God expects you to know when to pull out.

 
2013-02-01 05:43:36 PM
Wait a second.

Is this basically "We're going to pretend the dollar we pay to the insurance company doesn't fund something we don't agree with"?
 
2013-02-01 05:48:38 PM
Now they need a new reason to be assholier than thou.
 
2013-02-01 05:49:12 PM
So a way for churches to put their fingers in their ears and say "I'm not really paying for birth control, LA  LA LA, I can't heeeaaar you"?
 
2013-02-01 05:58:09 PM

BSABSVR: SurfaceTension: Why is birth control bad? For one thing, consistent widespread use would lower the number of abortions every year.

Because the thought that I might (however indirectly) contribute to allowing some woman who is not me in some location where I am not to have guilt and consequence free sex is completely unacceptable.


I don't believe it's that.  During the Pre-Cana course my wife (then fiance) and I were told that any attempt, no matter what it was, to prevent conception was wrong and sinful.  That included the so-called rhythm-method, withdrawal  oral sex - although this focused on wasting the male seed - and any other attempt to prevent pro-creation.

Pre-Cana is a pre-marriage consultation or course given by the church to people planning marriage.
 
2013-02-01 06:03:12 PM

Glancing Blow: I don't believe it's that. During the Pre-Cana course my wife (then fiance) and I were told that any attempt, no matter what it was, to prevent conception was wrong and sinful. That included the so-called rhythm-method, withdrawal oral sex - although this focused on wasting the male seed - and any other attempt to prevent pro-creation.


I'm laughing so hard just imagining this conversation. I would not have been able to keep it together if I was actually a part of it.
 
2013-02-01 06:07:56 PM

meat0918: Wait a second.

Is this basically "We're going to pretend the dollar we pay to the insurance company doesn't fund something we don't agree with"?


No.  It's more like, "Since every insurer was hit with the same regulations, they can't legally sell insurance without it, so it's either don't get coverage or get coverage with contraception.  But, we can hide behind the fact that it's the insurer that's paying for the contraception and not us.  Our premiums just went up $5 per month per employee because of the market forces at work."
 
2013-02-01 06:11:43 PM

Glancing Blow: During the Pre-Cana course my wife (then fiance) and I were told that any attempt, no matter what it was, to prevent conception was wrong and sinful. That included the so-called rhythm-method, withdrawal oral sex - although this focused on wasting the male seed - and any other attempt to prevent pro-creation.

Pre-Cana is a pre-marriage consultation or course given by the church to people planning marriage.


... And you didn't tell these people to go fark themselves?
 
2013-02-01 06:12:12 PM

Glancing Blow: BSABSVR: SurfaceTension: Why is birth control bad? For one thing, consistent widespread use would lower the number of abortions every year.

Because the thought that I might (however indirectly) contribute to allowing some woman who is not me in some location where I am not to have guilt and consequence free sex is completely unacceptable.

I don't believe it's that.  During the Pre-Cana course my wife (then fiance) and I were told that any attempt, no matter what it was, to prevent conception was wrong and sinful.  That included the so-called rhythm-method, withdrawal  oral sex - although this focused on wasting the male seed - and any other attempt to prevent pro-creation.

Pre-Cana is a pre-marriage consultation or course given by the church to people planning marriage.


I remember something similar when I was engaged to my first fiancee (we broke up before we got married and I dodged a major bullet).  I also remember telling the deacon that was running this consultation that I was not Catholic, nor was I going to be Catholic, nor was I going to follow the tenets of his church, as I had no plans of converting.  We ultimately decided we were going to get married elsewhere.

My current wife is also Catholic, but had no desire to get married in the Catholic church, so I had one of my good friends who also was a former associate pastor of mine perform the ceremony (this was before I became Buddhist).  I haven't set foot in a Catholic church since then and refuse to do so, because they are so holier than thou it is unbelievable.  I think they're still pissed that the Pope doesn't have any control over the various nation's governments anymore.
 
2013-02-01 06:14:58 PM

Glancing Blow: BSABSVR: SurfaceTension: Why is birth control bad? For one thing, consistent widespread use would lower the number of abortions every year.

Because the thought that I might (however indirectly) contribute to allowing some woman who is not me in some location where I am not to have guilt and consequence free sex is completely unacceptable.

I don't believe it's that.  During the Pre-Cana course my wife (then fiance) and I were told that any attempt, no matter what it was, to prevent conception was wrong and sinful.  That included the so-called rhythm-method, withdrawal  oral sex - although this focused on wasting the male seed - and any other attempt to prevent pro-creation.

Pre-Cana is a pre-marriage consultation or course given by the church to people planning marriage.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk
 
2013-02-01 06:33:26 PM
This is a brilliant political compromise that does absolutely nothing different behind the scenes, but makes everyone happy.  The church doesn't "pay" for contraceptions, but sort of is anyway since the costs are just built in to all the plans, with one version deleting the description from the tiny type.

Libby libs--why all the anger and name calling a few months ago?  Throw people who don't think like you do a bone now and then.
 
Displayed 50 of 100 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report