Challenging Affordable Care Act--religious freedom?

[*Deidre*]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/2...1W20140325

I haven't been following this story 'too' intently, but ran across this article. I have mixed feelings about all of this. I'm no longer religious and while I classify myself as an atheist, is it right to bestow MY views onto religious people? Should all corporations, regardless of their religious affiliations, be required to pay for contraception under their insurance plans?

Your thoughts/opinions?

If employers can pick and choose which bits to follow who knows what else they can object to.

Remember there are some religious sects that do not agree with any level of medical intervention, so contraception could be the thin edge of a very wide wedge.

This!! Yes. I remember recently the story of a teenage girl diagnosed with cancer, whose parents denied her chemotherapy, I believe that was the story, because of their religious beliefs. Horrifying. How can this not be classified as child abuse?

[Crossless2.0]

I smell a stalking horse and agree with those who suggest this is a wedge issue with wide ramifications. All too often, claims of 1st Amendment free exercise infringements amount to little more than some group whining that they don't get to shove their views down others' throats. Fuck 'em. That said, I suspect the Court will side with the corporations.

It will be interesting to see what criteria the courts adopt to determine the legitimacy of corporations' free exercise claims once this genie is let out of the bottle.

[*Deidre*]

I smell a stalking horse and agree with those who suggest this is a wedge issue with wide ramifications. All too often, claims of 1st Amendment free exercise infringements amount to little more than some group whining that they don't get to shove their views down others' throats. Fuck 'em. That said, I suspect the Court will side with the corporations.

It will be interesting to see what criteria the courts adopt to determine the legitimacy of corporations' free exercise claims once this genie is let out of the bottle.

Yes, great points. The thing is though, this is still all very new. Nowhere near coming to a conclusion. Suppose the religious groups win? And the thing is, where does this end in terms of corporations? Could someone who is the CEO of a large company, and happens to be religious, decide not to allow the health coverage for employees to fund certain procredures and medications because it violates their personal religious beliefs?

It could get ugly in a hurry.

[Minimalist]

People - even business owners - are perfectly free to believe whatever the fuck they wish. The issue is can they inflict those beliefs on third-parties?

Suppose they advocated sacrificing virgins to a volcano god? Must society accept such barbarism because some silly douchebag claims it is "religion?"

[truthBtold]

How come everyone here is smarter than me?

I think you ALL make outstanding points. Totally agree. I was on the fence, seriously, with this issue, and it bothered me so much. I was viewing it from a religious freedom view...and while I think all religions are unnecessary and nonsensical, would a situation like this be my right to choose for someone else?

But, what you are all saying is that a person's health supercedes that of any religious conviction, and where might this slippery slope end?

Catholics for example teach that a variety of reproductive processes and surgeries are ''mortally sinful,'' and so I could see if religious people win on this front, they can opt out of all procedures that 'go against' their beliefs.

Ugh, what a crazy can of worms that would open up!

Thank you everyone for helping me make sense of all this.

Nobodys smarter than u... I need to see u in my office. Cough cough!!

[*Deidre*]

How come everyone here is smarter than me?

I think you ALL make outstanding points. Totally agree. I was on the fence, seriously, with this issue, and it bothered me so much. I was viewing it from a religious freedom view...and while I think all religions are unnecessary and nonsensical, would a situation like this be my right to choose for someone else?

But, what you are all saying is that a person's health supercedes that of any religious conviction, and where might this slippery slope end?

Catholics for example teach that a variety of reproductive processes and surgeries are ''mortally sinful,'' and so I could see if religious people win on this front, they can opt out of all procedures that 'go against' their beliefs.

Ugh, what a crazy can of worms that would open up!

Thank you everyone for helping me make sense of all this.

Nobodys smarter than u... I need to see u in my office. Cough cough!!

I'm not falling for that.

:p

[John V]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/2...1W20140325

I haven't been following this story 'too' intently, but ran across this article. I have mixed feelings about all of this. I'm no longer religious and while I classify myself as an atheist, is it right to bestow MY views onto religious people? Should all corporations, regardless of their religious affiliations, be required to pay for contraception under their insurance plans?

Your thoughts/opinions?

I don't think insurance should cover contraceptives, but my reasoning isn't religious. Insurance is supposed to be a pooling of resources to guard against catastrophic events. Contraception is routine. My car insurance doesn't pay for oil changes. My homeowners insurance doesn't pay for a fresh coat of paint. IMO the US is in trouble with health care largely because we've gotten away from the basic insurance principle.

[Angrboda]

I don't think insurance should cover contraceptives, but my reasoning isn't religious. Insurance is supposed to be a pooling of resources to guard against catastrophic events. Contraception is routine. My car insurance doesn't pay for oil changes. My homeowners insurance doesn't pay for a fresh coat of paint. IMO the US is in trouble with health care largely because we've gotten away from the basic insurance principle.

That's one way of looking at it. Another is that insurance is a structured redistribution of wealth so that a small amount of input can be transformed into greater output when needed.

In line with that principle, it makes sense to redistribute a small amount in the form of prevention and maintenance, to preserve the fund's ability to manage major outputs when needed. (And yes, I'm aware that, dollar-wise, preventive care is more expensive than catastrophic coverage for the insurer; however that doesn't factor in the human cost of catastrophic failure, which is of interest to any calculation of equity.)

[Minimalist]

Insurance is supposed to be a pooling of resources to guard against catastrophic events.

If a woman gets knocked up and can't afford a kid its a catastrophe for her. Which is why the government should fully fund abortions. Cheaper than welfare.

[*Deidre*]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/2...1W20140325

I haven't been following this story 'too' intently, but ran across this article. I have mixed feelings about all of this. I'm no longer religious and while I classify myself as an atheist, is it right to bestow MY views onto religious people? Should all corporations, regardless of their religious affiliations, be required to pay for contraception under their insurance plans?

Your thoughts/opinions?

I don't think insurance should cover contraceptives, but my reasoning isn't religious. Insurance is supposed to be a pooling of resources to guard against catastrophic events. Contraception is routine. My car insurance doesn't pay for oil changes. My homeowners insurance doesn't pay for a fresh coat of paint. IMO the US is in trouble with health care largely because we've gotten away from the basic insurance principle.

The main difference however being, if you choose to not take care of your car for example, never getting regular check ups and oil changes, etc... and you get into an accident because of engine failure due to your negligence, in the middle of the highway--your car insurance won't cover your damages, because you were at fault. (let's say your engine's failure caused you to get into an accident that would be deemed at fault)

On the flip side...You can choose to ignore your health your entire life, not exercising, eating poorly, and you end up eventually having a heart attack, yet your health insurance will cover the charges for the heart surgery. (less copays, and other applicable out of pocket expenses associated with your plan) And barring genetics, your poor health choices led you into the hospital for surgery.

Personal lines insurance and health insurance operate differently.

That said, if insurance companies operated similiarly to personal lines insurers, we might see more people exercising, eating cleaner, quitting smoking, etc...

Not to say all illnesses and health issues are self induced, as genetics plays a role, bu in many cases, how we take care of our bodies reflects how they will function.

Not to go off topic too much, but you do bring up some great points.

---

Insurance is supposed to be a pooling of resources to guard against catastrophic events.

If a woman gets knocked up and can't afford a kid its a catastrophe for her. Which is why the government should fully fund abortions. Cheaper than welfare.

Contraception does fail on occasion, but if contraception is available, and affordable, we should see less abortions. I'm not for making abortions illegal, but it changes women's lives, not for the better, who have had them. There's a huge psychological component to them, I've seen friends of mine undergo. So, in a nutshell, I think it's imperative to provide good education and affordable contraception for all women, so an abortion isn't their only option.

The other caveat to the contraception thing is not all women take contraception solely for birth control usage. Some take it to regulate periods and to prevent painful ones. Some take it for other medicinal purposes. So, if this is off the table because of the religious component, then where does this leave women who need it for other reasons? So, health first, religion...well, nevermind. lol