Would you be dismayed to find your wife this month had to skip her birth control pills to buy groceries?
If I were a man, no..because I'd pay for them myself. AND if I were a man, who couldn't work..I'd stop having sex with my wife until I could provide protection...its called 'self control'...some have it, some don't.
Does not matter to me, but people should not have to pay for plans that do things agianst their beliefs.
There is no such thing as "free" birth control. Some one is paying for it. It might as well be the one who uses it.
Birth control has to be paid for by someone so I think the gay banging your wife, Hilbert, even if he's the boss, should pay for the birth control. On the other hand, if she gets pregnant, I'm okay with you paying for the kid, too. You're a heck of a gay, Hilbert. We had an insurance policy that had a provision for both birth control and maternity benefits but it cost a bit extra. The Precious Liberals insisted that coverage be standard for everyone so we all had to pay for it. I thought the chances of a fifty-year old single male with a vasectomy needing the coverage was insiginificant but not for liberals.
nothing is free , if it is part of the work benefit package great but no one should be forced to provide it
Jesus, how much free stuff do you want? The government has no business doing this. It has no right to "tell us" what to do about anything other than to be law abiding citizens who pay their taxes.
I'm all for Free Abortion & BC in EVERY turd world country and every Tiny Hamlet & Village & City in the Middle East & Near East & Far East & East Asia, & South East Asia & Asia Pacific & Africa & South & Central America ...
Hey you phrased the question not me... How about this...if you OR your wife...or BOTH actually, since it takes two to tango.. had to make a choice between buying birth control for the month or buying groceries....there is only one 'smart' choice. Buy the groceries and restrain yourselves...you'll not go hungry, you won't die of starvation from either lack of food or sex, and you won't end up with another mouth you can't afford to feed. Simple.
I pay for my own birth control. I don't get this business of having your workplace pay for it all. Makes no sense at all.
Did someone actually try to equate the cost of groceries for a month with a month's prescription for birth control pills? How about couldn't send your children to college because you had to buy birth control pills?
Assuming this is part of the mandate for Catholics to provide contraceptives against their beliefs, I must stress that the main issue here is not a morality vs immorality debate. This is an issue regarding the assault on religious freedoms. Women who want birth control should get it elsewhere instead of forcing the Catholic church to go against their longstanding tenets.
Free birth control is cheaper than a child, so would it not make financial sense for an insurance company to provide it?
What assault on religious freedoms? Are you referring to the massive tax breaks that religious institutions are given? I know, how oppressive. http://www.politicalforum.com/religion/232712-drumming-up-phony-war-religion.html
I think you mean to say are you against taxpayer subsidized birth control, and on the Federal level absent a Constitutional Amendment, yes, I would be against it. If taxpayers on the state and local level wanted to subsidize birth control, then I wouldn't have any objection to that.
The birth of children into poverty ends up costing all of us greatly so it seems sensible to me to prevent it by making birth control free to some who cannot afford it
That's just crazy and totally unfair. How does that happen? http://tewksbury.patch.com/blog_posts/not-a-single-woman-at-the-house-oversight-committees-meeting-on-birth-control-how-can-that-be
