NATION

PASSWORD

Biggest US Supreme Court ruling of the year

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:07 am

The American Natives wrote:I'm sorry, I can't help you if you think the development of human life is exactly the same thing as an infectious disease that takes life.

You do realize that pregnancies have caused deaths before, right?
The American Natives wrote:Such completely moronic comparisons are why the far-right groups in America think liberals are crazy. You can make a better comparison.

No, not really.

If you can't tell us why they're different enough to make an absolute distinction, I'll just accept your concession then.
Last edited by Mavorpen on Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Doitsu-san
Diplomat
 
Posts: 581
Founded: May 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Doitsu-san » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:07 am

Gauthier wrote:
Doitsu-san wrote:If you wish to have sex, you should fund it yourself. It isn't the employer's responsibility to pay for an employee's sexual activities when the activities are a risk taken with consent and not necessary to everyday life or the health of a human being.


Obviously the part about contraceptives preventing actual diseases and not just being for baby prevention flew over your head.

Contraception prevents diseases during sex, and sex is completely optional. It isn't an employer's responsibility to pay for an employee doing something that they could live without and isn't necessary to their health.

It's like asking employers to pay for protective football gear, when their employees could just not play football in the first place or buy the gear themselves.
Volk! Reich! Doitsu-san!
Economic Left/Right: -3.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.26

Поддержка Крым
وأناأؤيدالأسد ויוה ישראל
该中国共和国是中国!

-Rhenish Model
-Limited Democracy
-Liberal Social Policy
-Foreign Interventionism

User avatar
Estrain (Ancient)
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1050
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Estrain (Ancient) » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:08 am

The American Natives wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:No, really, why ARE they different things?

I'm sorry, I can't help you if you think the development of human life is exactly the same thing as an infectious disease that takes life. You need to take that up with your psychiatrist.

Such completely moronic comparisons are why the far-right groups in America think liberals are crazy. You can make a better comparison.

But contraception is NOT just about preventing pregnancy nor is it just for things relating to sexual activity. And if a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she has every right to obtain contraception. And if that woman is poor, or even lower-middle class she may not be able to afford that contraception by herself.
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.00
Queer, feminist, leftist, humanist. A person who sees value in emotions and compassion. Advice to live by: don't take people who think Breitbart is a credible source seriously.

User avatar
Ashmoria
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46718
Founded: Mar 19, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Ashmoria » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:08 am

Trollzilla wrote:
Ashmoria wrote:no

its more "if corporations are people too, can they have a religious conscience that overrules some details of federal law?"

or "if you own a corporation yourself can your religious beliefs count as the beliefs of the corporation?"

My gut feeling though, was that there was more to it than that under the surface. My reason is that these corporations never before demanded religious exemption to allowing employees to have contraceptions or abortions but now that they have to help the employees pay for the stuff, now they are claiming religious exemptions.

not to mention that (I have read) hobby lobby used to offer insurance that paid for contraceptives that they now find horribly offensive to their religious sensibilities.
whatever

User avatar
Neo Rome Republic
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5363
Founded: Dec 27, 2012
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Neo Rome Republic » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:08 am

The American Natives wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:No, really, why ARE they different things?

I'm sorry, I can't help you if you think the development of human life is exactly the same thing as an infectious disease that takes life. You need to take that up with your psychiatrist.

Such completely moronic comparisons are why the far-right groups in America think liberals are crazy. You can make a better comparison.

And we should care about the opinions of Far-Right groups, because?
Ethical and Metaphysical: (Pan) Humanist and Naturalist.
Political Views Sum: Centrist on social issues, Market Socialist on economic, and Radical Civic universalist on political governance.
This nation DOES(for most part) represent my OOC views.
''A rich man complaining about regulation and taxes, is like the drunkard at a party, complaining about not having enough to drink.'',

"An empty mind is a mind without a filter, the mind of a gullible fool. A closed mind is the mind unwilling to look at the reality outside its bubble. An open mind is one that is cautious, flexible yet balanced; looking at both the reality and the possibility."
OOC Info Page Pros And Cons Political Ideology

User avatar
Estrain (Ancient)
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1050
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Estrain (Ancient) » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:10 am

Doitsu-san wrote:
Gauthier wrote:
Obviously the part about contraceptives preventing actual diseases and not just being for baby prevention flew over your head.

Contraception prevents diseases during sex, and sex is completely optional. It isn't an employer's responsibility to pay for an employee doing something that they could live without and isn't necessary to their health.

It's like asking employers to pay for protective football gear, when their employees could just not play football in the first place or buy the gear themselves.

That's kind of a false comparison. One, contraception is used for other things not relating to sexual activity. Two, it IS under federal law corporations/employers responsibility to help pay for their employees health coverage. Contraception is an important part of health coverage.
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.00
Queer, feminist, leftist, humanist. A person who sees value in emotions and compassion. Advice to live by: don't take people who think Breitbart is a credible source seriously.

User avatar
Trollzilla
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 449
Founded: May 19, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Trollzilla » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:11 am

Wilgrove wrote:So my thoughts:

Honestly, the only good side of this ruling is that it only applies to companies that are owned by families. So if you have a family like the Greens who own Hobby Lobby, then this ruling applies to them. This is ironic considering that my brother and I are now running a dog kennel together, which means this ruling also applies to me.

With that being said though, I do think this ruling opened up a Pandora's Box because now religious freedom can, and most likely will be used in discriminatory practices in these type of businesses. I also feel like this court went against the spirit and purpose of the 1993 Freedom Restoration Act (FRA). FRA was created and passed by Congress, signed by President Clinton to protect Native Americans in Oregon from being denied employment benefits because they smoke something that I cannot spell for religious purpose. FRA was meant to protect the little guys from big government and big corporations when it comes to their religion, not the other way around.

This ruling could also destroy the Corporate Veil, which could be bad news for corporate owners and shareholders.


Considering I was on the battle ground for the FRA, peyote was only one of the reasons and a minor one. The main reason Congress passed it was because schools across the US were suspending students for reading bibles, having religious meetings during lunch time, or wearing clothes that had scripture on them. The peyote issue only brought the Democrats to support a bill that was already going to pass because of Republican dominance of Congress at the time.

EDIT: I want to add that when we lobbied for this law, we never intended it to be used as cover by secular corporations to escape their legal responsibilities.
Last edited by Trollzilla on Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 111665
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Farnhamia » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:11 am

The American Natives wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:No, really, why ARE they different things?

I'm sorry, I can't help you if you think the development of human life is exactly the same thing as an infectious disease that takes life. You need to take that up with your psychiatrist.

Such completely moronic comparisons are why the far-right groups in America think liberals are crazy. You can make a better comparison.

Do not start down the road of implying anything about anyone's mental health in this discussion. That goes for everybody.
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
Doitsu-san
Diplomat
 
Posts: 581
Founded: May 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Doitsu-san » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:11 am

Estrain wrote:
Doitsu-san wrote:If you wish to have sex, you should fund it yourself. It isn't the employer's responsibility to pay for an employee's sexual activities when the activities are a risk taken with consent and not necessary to everyday life or the health of a human being.

But according to the ACA it is the employer's responsibility to pay for their employees health coverage at least in some way. Contraception is a vital piece of health care and health coverage. But sex is an everyday life thing? (for a lot of people, barring asexual people and the like) Contraception stops unwanted pregnancy from happening, disease spreading, etc.
Also, again to quote Justice Ginsburg:
"It bears note in this regard that the cost of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month's full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage."
Contraception isn't cheap, and a lot of people cannot afford to pay for it on their own.

No, contraception is not a vital piece of health coverage. Contraception is covering an optional activity that has little benefit to human health.

With contraception being so pricey, employees can either choose not to have sex or buy a pack of condoms, which I recall cost about $10.
Volk! Reich! Doitsu-san!
Economic Left/Right: -3.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.26

Поддержка Крым
وأناأؤيدالأسد ויוה ישראל
该中国共和国是中国!

-Rhenish Model
-Limited Democracy
-Liberal Social Policy
-Foreign Interventionism

User avatar
The American Natives
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 103
Founded: Jun 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The American Natives » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:11 am

Mavorpen wrote:You do realize that pregnancies have caused deaths before, right?

So causing deaths is what makes something an infectious disease? We better ban pools, there's an epidemic of poolitis causing drownings.

No, not really.

If you can't tell us why they're different enough to make an absolute distinction, I'll just accept your concession then.

Yes, really. If you can't fine any reason why they're the same thing besides both can cause death (in completely disproportionate levels), you aren't making a case at all. I'll just accept you're shitposting.

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 111665
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Farnhamia » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:12 am

Doitsu-san wrote:
Gauthier wrote:
Obviously the part about contraceptives preventing actual diseases and not just being for baby prevention flew over your head.

Contraception prevents diseases during sex, and sex is completely optional. It isn't an employer's responsibility to pay for an employee doing something that they could live without and isn't necessary to their health.

It's like asking employers to pay for protective football gear, when their employees could just not play football in the first place or buy the gear themselves.

Only condoms can prevent the transmission of disease. The Pill, for instance, cannot.
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
The American Natives
Spokesperson
 
Posts: 103
Founded: Jun 20, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The American Natives » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:13 am

NEO Rome Republic wrote:And we should care about the opinions of Far-Right groups, because?

Healthy attitude there. Giving no fucks is certainly the best way to resolve conflict and find common ground.

Of course, why should they care either? Their side won.

User avatar
Ashmoria
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46718
Founded: Mar 19, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Ashmoria » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:14 am

Doitsu-san wrote:
Gauthier wrote:
Obviously the part about contraceptives preventing actual diseases and not just being for baby prevention flew over your head.

Contraception prevents diseases during sex, and sex is completely optional. It isn't an employer's responsibility to pay for an employee doing something that they could live without and isn't necessary to their health.

It's like asking employers to pay for protective football gear, when their employees could just not play football in the first place or buy the gear themselves.


except that the insurance company is paying for the contraceptives. the employer is paying for he insurance. the federal government has passed a (really great) law mandating what has to be covered in a standard insurance plan so that no one gets tricked into buying substandard insurance that will crap out when you get sick. preventing unintended pregnancies is one of the very best health-insuring, cost-cutting measures for insurance to cover.
whatever

User avatar
Estrain (Ancient)
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1050
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Estrain (Ancient) » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:14 am

Doitsu-san wrote:
Estrain wrote:But according to the ACA it is the employer's responsibility to pay for their employees health coverage at least in some way. Contraception is a vital piece of health care and health coverage. But sex is an everyday life thing? (for a lot of people, barring asexual people and the like) Contraception stops unwanted pregnancy from happening, disease spreading, etc.
Also, again to quote Justice Ginsburg:
"It bears note in this regard that the cost of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month's full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage."
Contraception isn't cheap, and a lot of people cannot afford to pay for it on their own.

No, contraception is not a vital piece of health coverage. Contraception is covering an optional activity that has little benefit to human health.

With contraception being so pricey, employees can either choose not to have sex or buy a pack of condoms, which I recall cost about $10.

But they shouldn't have to /choose/ not to have sex. Sex is a vital part of relationships (not including asexual relationships, etc). Ten dollars can be a lot to some people, sweetie. Also, condoms aren't 100% effective and aren't always available. An IUD is always available because it's inside of a woman's body. And yes, contraception is an important part of health coverage because women need it.
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.00
Queer, feminist, leftist, humanist. A person who sees value in emotions and compassion. Advice to live by: don't take people who think Breitbart is a credible source seriously.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:14 am

The American Natives wrote:So causing deaths is what makes something an infectious disease? We better ban pools, there's an epidemic of poolitis causing drownings.

Who said it's an infectious disease?
The American Natives wrote:Yes, really. If you can't fine any reason why they're the same thing besides both can cause death (in completely disproportionate levels), you aren't making a case at all.

Yeah, you might want to learn what the burden of proof is. Because you made the original claim that they are different enough to provide one but not the other. So far you've just made childish remarks about "HERP SHITPOSTING!" and mental health. You've put no effort in presenting ANYTHING resembling a coherent argument.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Northwest Slobovia
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12531
Founded: Sep 16, 2006
Anarchy

Postby Northwest Slobovia » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:14 am

Farnhamia wrote:
Doitsu-san wrote:Contraception prevents diseases during sex, and sex is completely optional. It isn't an employer's responsibility to pay for an employee doing something that they could live without and isn't necessary to their health.

It's like asking employers to pay for protective football gear, when their employees could just not play football in the first place or buy the gear themselves.

Only condoms can prevent the transmission of disease. The Pill, for instance, cannot.

I've never been clear on this: does the mandate cover condoms?
Gollum died for your sins.
Power is an equal-opportunity corrupter.

User avatar
Neo Rome Republic
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5363
Founded: Dec 27, 2012
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Neo Rome Republic » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:15 am

The American Natives wrote:
NEO Rome Republic wrote:And we should care about the opinions of Far-Right groups, because?

Healthy attitude there. Giving no fucks is certainly the best way to resolve conflict and find common ground.

Of course, why should they care either? Their side won.

Implying I even want to find common ground with them.
Yeah you're likely correct, they probably don't care either. Oh well. :meh:
Last edited by Neo Rome Republic on Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ethical and Metaphysical: (Pan) Humanist and Naturalist.
Political Views Sum: Centrist on social issues, Market Socialist on economic, and Radical Civic universalist on political governance.
This nation DOES(for most part) represent my OOC views.
''A rich man complaining about regulation and taxes, is like the drunkard at a party, complaining about not having enough to drink.'',

"An empty mind is a mind without a filter, the mind of a gullible fool. A closed mind is the mind unwilling to look at the reality outside its bubble. An open mind is one that is cautious, flexible yet balanced; looking at both the reality and the possibility."
OOC Info Page Pros And Cons Political Ideology

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:15 am

Doitsu-san wrote:Contraception is covering an optional activity that has little benefit to human health.

Cutting down risk of heart disease in HALF is of little benefit to human health?
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Doitsu-san
Diplomat
 
Posts: 581
Founded: May 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Doitsu-san » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:15 am

Estrain wrote:
Doitsu-san wrote:Contraception prevents diseases during sex, and sex is completely optional. It isn't an employer's responsibility to pay for an employee doing something that they could live without and isn't necessary to their health.

It's like asking employers to pay for protective football gear, when their employees could just not play football in the first place or buy the gear themselves.

That's kind of a false comparison. One, contraception is used for other things not relating to sexual activity. Two, it IS under federal law corporations/employers responsibility to help pay for their employees health coverage. Contraception is an important part of health coverage.

Contraception is hardly used outside of sexual activity, and when it is, it's uses have no/little affect on bodily health and can easily be replaced by other products which work far better. The key word is "health coverage", sex has nothing to do with health coverage, as sex is an option that carries risks, not an unknowingly contracted sickness or disease.
Volk! Reich! Doitsu-san!
Economic Left/Right: -3.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.26

Поддержка Крым
وأناأؤيدالأسد ויוה ישראל
该中国共和国是中国!

-Rhenish Model
-Limited Democracy
-Liberal Social Policy
-Foreign Interventionism

User avatar
Ashmoria
Post Czar
 
Posts: 46718
Founded: Mar 19, 2004
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Ashmoria » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:17 am

Doitsu-san wrote:
Estrain wrote:But according to the ACA it is the employer's responsibility to pay for their employees health coverage at least in some way. Contraception is a vital piece of health care and health coverage. But sex is an everyday life thing? (for a lot of people, barring asexual people and the like) Contraception stops unwanted pregnancy from happening, disease spreading, etc.
Also, again to quote Justice Ginsburg:
"It bears note in this regard that the cost of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month's full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage."
Contraception isn't cheap, and a lot of people cannot afford to pay for it on their own.

No, contraception is not a vital piece of health coverage. Contraception is covering an optional activity that has little benefit to human health.

With contraception being so pricey, employees can either choose not to have sex or buy a pack of condoms, which I recall cost about $10.

contraception is essential to women's health.
whatever

User avatar
Olivaero
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8012
Founded: Jun 17, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Olivaero » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:18 am

The American Natives wrote:
Olivaero wrote:Why is avoiding small pox and avoiding pregnancy different things?

I can't believe someone made this argument in a serious fashion. Relieve humanity by telling us you're being sarcastic.

I'm not and I would question why you believe they are different things.
British, Anglo Celtic, English, Northerner.

Transhumanist, Left Hegelian, Marxist, Communist.

Agnostic Theist, Culturally Christian.

User avatar
Doitsu-san
Diplomat
 
Posts: 581
Founded: May 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Doitsu-san » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:18 am

Mavorpen wrote:
Doitsu-san wrote:Contraception is covering an optional activity that has little benefit to human health.

Cutting down risk of heart disease in HALF is of little benefit to human health?

If you want to reduce your risk of heart disease, buy the pill yourself. I decrease my risk of heart disease buy buying vitamins, and I don't believe my employers cover that.
Volk! Reich! Doitsu-san!
Economic Left/Right: -3.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.26

Поддержка Крым
وأناأؤيدالأسد ויוה ישראל
该中国共和国是中国!

-Rhenish Model
-Limited Democracy
-Liberal Social Policy
-Foreign Interventionism

User avatar
Trollzilla
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 449
Founded: May 19, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Trollzilla » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:18 am

Wilgrove wrote:
Anthony Willman wrote:I side with the company. If your regligious beliefs are against it, you should not have to deal with it. Besides, they're paying for legalized murder.


1) Using the United States Laws, prove that abortion of legalized murder, keep in mind that a fetus does not have personhood under our current laws.




It'll be interesting to see if Hobby Lobby's current insurer will back out of the corporation. As far as I can tell, Insurance companies would rather pay for contraceptive than for children, because surprise surprise, contraceptive are cheaper.


As someone who is anti abortion and who has taken the time to actually research what these pills do, I am amazed that a lot of Americans still think the morning after pill causes abortions. I feel that the credibility of the pro life movement suffers somewhat as a result because people won't do their homework.

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 111665
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Farnhamia » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:19 am

Trollzilla wrote:
Wilgrove wrote:
1) Using the United States Laws, prove that abortion of legalized murder, keep in mind that a fetus does not have personhood under our current laws.




It'll be interesting to see if Hobby Lobby's current insurer will back out of the corporation. As far as I can tell, Insurance companies would rather pay for contraceptive than for children, because surprise surprise, contraceptive are cheaper.


As someone who is anti abortion and who has taken the time to actually research what these pills do, I am amazed that a lot of Americans still think the morning after pill causes abortions. I feel that the credibility of the pro life movement suffers somewhat as a result because people won't do their homework.

No true anti-abortion person would soil themselves with that kind of research.
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
Estrain (Ancient)
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1050
Founded: Jun 16, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Estrain (Ancient) » Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:20 am

Doitsu-san wrote:
Estrain wrote:That's kind of a false comparison. One, contraception is used for other things not relating to sexual activity. Two, it IS under federal law corporations/employers responsibility to help pay for their employees health coverage. Contraception is an important part of health coverage.

Contraception is hardly used outside of sexual activity, and when it is, it's uses have no/little affect on bodily health and can easily be replaced by other products which work far better. The key word is "health coverage", sex has nothing to do with health coverage, as sex is an option that carries risks, not an unknowingly contracted sickness or disease.

Sex has everything to do with health coverage. That's pretty clear, whether you disagree or not, that doesn't matter really.
Other uses of contraception:
1) Lowering cancer rates
2) Lighter, less painful periods
3) Clearer skin
4) PMS relief
5) Endometriosis relief
http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/ ... e-the-pill
Also, 1/3 of teens use contraception exclusively for other reasons, let alone the people who use them for both to prevent pregnancy and the aforementioned reasons:
http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2011/11/15/
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.00
Queer, feminist, leftist, humanist. A person who sees value in emotions and compassion. Advice to live by: don't take people who think Breitbart is a credible source seriously.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Achan, Ceilikkell, Fractalnavel, Pridelantic people, The Astral Mandate, Unoccupied New York

Advertisement

Remove ads