RE: Religious Liberty?
February 14, 2016 at 2:43 pm
(This post was last modified: February 14, 2016 at 2:51 pm by ohreally.)
(February 12, 2016 at 9:46 pm)bennyboy Wrote: If the person is not preventing pregnancy, then whatever the pill or device involved, it's not birth control by definition.-Excellent then an employer doesn't have the ability to restrict those prescriptions in the face of doctor/patient confidentiality, both sides win, case closed.
(February 12, 2016 at 9:46 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Given the proper definition of "birth control" I gave above, then being pregnant is not part of health care, either. Pregnancy is not an illness. As I stated previously, health care is not limited strictly to illness or sick so given a modern and conventional definition of health care yourConsidering that all major insurance companies and hospitals consider BC to be part of health care I would say that that your interpretation is incorrect. As i stated initially, health care is not only about illness.
Also what is the doctrine of validating ones religious beliefs that their employees must adhere to?
If water rots the soles of your boots, what does it do to your intestines?
