SCOTUS

[OC_An Khe]

Okay, SCOTUS has ruled on Hobby Lobby and contraception and also on the IL. healthcare workers and agency fee, any thoughts?

To me the ruling on Hobby Lobby reverse previous SCOTUS ruling which always put individual rights (freedoms) over business entities. Business entities are not people.

[Kaley1]

The Supreme Court upheld the mandate last year, this was about exemptions based on religion. While i think hobby lobby should be able to cover what they want as you do, the religious exemption was dangerous and wrong. I don't agree with a bad court decision to remedy the situation because it opens the door to more nonsense and abuse. Hobby Lobby is not consistent with their religious objections. When it means higher profits, their objections to supporting abortion or those birth control methods are suddenly out the window. If you have religious objections honored by a court, you should not be able to pick and choose when you object and when you don't. You should have to prove like a conscientious objector that you truly mean what you say before it is even considered. There needs to be a standard that you are consistent with, otherwise, I don't buy your objections or offense.

[Kaley1]

Should corporations have more rights as defined in the Bill of Rights then human beings.

In a way, they already have more rights, our government works for them, not for the people.

[Robert.CFRN]

Kaley, unfortunately I have to agree. I'm a strong believer in free market capitalism. In this system, those who work hard and provide a good service or product succeed. Those who don't will fail. The competition creates superior products and services. What we have with government, and it's both Reps and Dems, is crony capitalism, where large businesses lobby and have competition legislated out of existence.

And that's where we find government incompetence as well. Government doesn't have to provide excellence because they don't have to compete with anyone. You buy their product, or you're fined and/or jailed. The government can be wasteful and inefficient without consequence. If they don't have enough money, they just tax more or borrow more. Don't agree with them? The NSA and IRS will target you again without consequence.

We live in very dangerous times.

[Robert.CFRN]

Another question. How is it than many businesses and unions were able to opt out of the ACA? Shouldn't the law apply to all equally?

[MunoRN, RN]

Another question. How is it than many businesses and unions were able to opt out of the ACA? Shouldn't the law apply to all equally?

They aren't actually able to opt out of the ACA. The lifetime limit rule was delayed until an adequate alternative kicked in (until 2014).

The 'unions exempted from the ACA' claim actually earned "pants on fire" status:

Unions don't have to comply with Obamacare, says Crossroads GPS | PolitiFact

[MunoRN, RN]

This is a very good discussion. I agree with the Hobby Lobby decision. I don't see anywhere in the Constitution, which enumerates the powers of the government, where the government has the power to force a person to buy something for another person. People say that a corporation can't have a religious view, but many have correctly pointed out that it's not a corporation's view, but the OWNER'S view. Also correctly pointed out is that women's choice isn't limited. They'll simply have to purchase the 4 of 20 birth control methods not covered out of their own pockets.

It's the power of the free market in a free nation. Don't like an employers benefits or the owners views? Don't work for them. An employer that has crappy benefits won't draw the best employees, and thus won't do well. HL pays their employees well, has good benefits, and is a good place to work based on what I've read from their employees.

I worry at the growth in power of the federal government and all of the bureaucracies that create regulations without legislation. One, our individual freedoms are in grave danger, and two our children are already bankrupt before they're born. It's not sustainable.

Based on the rest of your post I sort of doubt you really agree with the court's decision. What they ruled is that Hobby Lobby and other businesses shouldn't be required to cover contraception (not just the 4 that HL opposed) because we can instead just have the costs absorbed the public. So instead of HL covering their labor costs, now you are.

[Kaley1]

Kaley, unfortunately I have to agree. I'm a strong believer in free market capitalism. In this system, those who work hard and provide a good service or product succeed. Those who don't will fail. The competition creates superior products and services. What we have with government, and it's both Reps and Dems, is crony capitalism, where large businesses lobby and have competition legislated out of existence.

And that's where we find government incompetence as well. Government doesn't have to provide excellence because they don't have to compete with anyone. You buy their product, or you're fined and/or jailed. The government can be wasteful and inefficient without consequence. If they don't have enough money, they just tax more or borrow more. Don't agree with them? The NSA and IRS will target you again without consequence.

We live in very dangerous times.

I completely agree. Many of the solutions are very simple too, but neither side has the courage or will to begin.

[MunoRN, RN]

Good day:

Food for thought....

.

Thank you.

Actually, the target $9 birth control isn't always the proper medical choice for many women. Sandra Fluke wasn't demanding free birth control for herself, her testimony hinged on accounts such as this:

Despite verification of her illness from her doctor, her claim was denied repeatedly on the assumption that she really wanted birth control to prevent pregnancy. She's gay -- so clearly, polycystic ovarian syndrome was a much more urgent concern than accidental pregnancy for her.After months of paying over $100 out of pocket, she just couldn't afford her medication anymore, and she had to stop taking it. I learned about all of this when I walked out of a test and got a message from her that, in the middle of the night in her final-exam period, she'd been in the emergency room. She'd been there all night in just terrible, excruciating pain. She wrote to me: "It was so painful I woke up thinking I'd been shot." Without her taking the birth control, a massive cyst the size of a tennis ball had grown on her ovary. She had to have surgery to remove her entire ovary as a result. On the morning I was originally scheduled to give this testimony, she was sitting in a doctor's office trying to cope with the consequences of this medical catastrophe.

Since last year's surgery, she's been experiencing night sweats and awaking and other symptoms of early menopause as a result of the removal of her ovary. She's 32 years old. As she put it: If my body indeed does enter early menopause, no fertility specialist in the world will be able to help me have my own children. I will have no choice at giving my mother her desperately desired grandbabies, simply because the insurance policy -- that I paid for, totally unsubsidized by my school -- wouldn't cover my prescription for birth control when I needed it. Now, in addition to potentially facing the health complications that come with having menopause at such an early age -- increased risk of cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis -- she may never be able to conceive a child.

[Kaley1]

Good day:

This issue is about who pays for what; it has never been an access issue. Those who DO NOT believe in personal responsibility want to FORCE others to pay for their wants, desires, and needs. Those who believe in personal responsibility are grateful when others pick up the tab, would never force others to pick up the tab, and will pay for it themselves (or do without). Simple.

Thank you.

i suppose if you had kids, you paid for their birth in full? Didn't take maternity leave? Paid for their entire education? It was your desire to have a kid and it costs a lot more than birth control. If you don't have kids, disregard that, but take the message for what it is. Everyone makes decisions, what makes one person's decision to have a kid one that should be funded by everyone else, and someone else's decision not to have a kid one that shouldn't be funded? Birth control certainly costs less for everyone.

[Rose_Queen, BSN, MSN, RN]

If you want personal responsibility, then personally pay for it rather than trying to force others to pay for your choices and your responsibility.

How is paying for a portion of my health insurance plan not paying? It is no different than health care dollars going for any other preventive care or health care. There are many reasons women need birth control that don't include preventing pregnancy. I am one of them. As a lesbian, there is no chance that I can become pregnant. However, I do take birth control pills in order not to need a monthly blood transfusion as a result of extremely low lab values caused by excessive bleeding. However, the reason I take those pills is absolutely none of my employer's business and should remain between my health care provider and myself. This whole debate is another reason to get employers out of the insurance business.

Oh, and might I suggest that instead of posting inflammatory memes from the internet as "evidence", you broaden your horizons and explore some non-partisan, non-biased sources with substance?

[wooh, BSN, RN]

We get it pmabraham. You think Sandra Fluke is a **** because she has sex. Tell me, how much do YOU spend each month to have recreational sex and not get pregnant?

[Kaley1]

Oh, and might I suggest that instead of posting inflammatory memes from the internet as "evidence", you broaden your horizons and explore some non-partisan, non-biased sources with substance?

I was thinking the exact same thing. I posed a simple question, and instead of an answer or opinion, there is half a page worth of partisan nonsense disrupting everyone else's civil discussion. Wish there was a way to selectively tune out posts like that.