Well, that’s not an exact quote, but of all the drugs in the world to choose from, the Dept of Health and Human Services, backed by the Obama Administration chose contraception as the drug that employers MUST provide free of charge. Not heart medication, not diabetes medication, not aids medication, and not even cancer medication. All of which are deadly if they are not taken.
The talking heads all came out this week proclaiming that this was a “women’s” issue. That we must make it available to ALL women. How important women’s health is. If it is so important, wouldn’t life saving be more important than pregnancy avoidance. Barbara Boxer, Sen (D) – Ca, said that women’s health trumps religious freedom, a ridiculous comparison, but is she also saying that pregnancy trumps death?
Now, I can’t speak for everyone, but I would think, given the choice of death or pregnancy, most would choose pregnancy. If they can’t afford contraception drugs, how can they be expected to afford any other type of medication. especially those for life threatening illnesses which cost way more than contraception.
Once again, the Obama administration is making choices that they have no business making. Just like they choose which companies can get bail-outs and can survive, they are choosing which medications you can get if you cant afford them and who will survive.
But wait, what if you can afford them…you also get them for free. Well, it’s not really free, is it? It’s an expense, and how do companies pay for rising expenses…that’s right…they pass them on as higher prices. So once again, we the taxpayer and consumer pay the bill for things we don’t get to consume.
Hmmm, maybe I’m on the right track. If they can force companies to give free contraceptive drugs…maybe they can force them to give free heart medications and diabetic drugs, and cancer and aids drugs. I mean it’s only fair. But why stop at drugs…that’s only part of the health equation…why not no-deductible medical care, just in case some can’t afford it. Remember, these requirements would only be on those companies that PROVIDE health care benefits. If they could no longer afford to provide them, then what…
“I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its gross national product on health care, cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody.”…Barack Obama, 2003 speaking at the AFL-CIO Civil, Human and Women’s Rights Conference.
Bingo…there is a method to their madness, after all.
Rx FOR THOUGHT: So, the rich need to pay their fair share in taxes, but we all need to pay for their contraception.
Moe Lane
Dan McLaughlin
Dan Spencer
Jeff Emanuel
Neil Stevens
So true, gitliani.
Uma Richie (Diary) Friday, February 10th at 3:23PM EDT (link)This is the administration whose panel rolled back mammogram screening for breast cancer from age 40 to 50.
This was in 2009, and I’m sure most women have forgotten.
http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf09/breastcancer/brcanup.htm
If democrats cared a rats A about women
demsaresatanic Friday, February 10th at 10:18PM EDT (link)they wouldn’t be putting them in even more near-combat roles where they can be slaughtered by men. I am waiting for Obama to help women boxers by making them fight against the men as well.
Where would you put them, then?
weyland Friday, February 10th at 10:24PM EDT (link)And would you solicit their input on the issue — or is that a lesser matter?
I have been banned from RedState as tarnover and aardpig and I’m not very bright.
wey, I would put them where they wouldn't have to fight.
demsaresatanic Saturday, February 11th at 1:31AM EDT (link)And no, I wouldn’t solicit their opinion, women know as much about fighting as men know about what it feels like to give birth.
you should discuss your misogyny with my wife
Raven (Diary) Sunday, February 12th at 5:50PM EDT (link)Or my sister.
Anyone who wishes can learn anything about fighting and as for kmyself, i have no use for a woman who can’t watch my back in combat. That may come from the norse, gallic, gaelic, pict, cherokee, sioux portions of my ancestry, though. Women like that may be nice to look at or to have clean your house, but i am not a fan of charging to rescue the damsel in distress from a little bug or mouse and i am away from home for the army too often to save her from a person who wishes to do her harm.
“If you do not have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
Luke 22:36
what about Santorum on women
elizaliza Sunday, February 12th at 10:23AM EDT (link)So, what you all think of Santorums remarks then, that women in combat would invoke mission threatening chivalry in men? valid or not?
ARE women even in heavy combat situations?
(MSM unfairly mischaracterized him as saying women get emotional in combat, but oh well.)
2.
and, so you don’t buy into the health insurance companies assertion that more contraceptives will not only pay for itself but actually reduce costs because there would be less childbirths?
Some see this as some evil plot to reduce the number of Catholics … I get that, but don’t totally agree, I suppose that is a bit far fetched.
on santorum: show me examples of what he says being true
Raven (Diary) Sunday, February 12th at 5:55PM EDT (link)10 years of women seeing combat now. Where are the examples?
The insurance “claim” is bull. The costs would go down short term but skyrocket middle and long term as the populace ages with fewer and fewer healthy young people to keep the risk pool strong.
True, some insurance companies don’t plan more than ten years out, but you have only too look at the messes (yes, plural) companies like metlife got into with such things as disability, long term care, and universal life insurances to see the fallacy of the claim.
“If you do not have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”
Luke 22:36
Dead women don't need health care
renny (Diary) Sunday, February 12th at 6:40PM EDT (link)Which is why the pages in the 400s in the Patient Protection Act are all about how to decide when the powers that be will pull the plug.
And, if the o was really smart, this is a fight
renny (Diary) Sunday, February 12th at 6:46PM EDT (link)he never had to pick this row right now.
o could have waited until after his reelection and dictated whatever atrocities against Catholicism or any other religion or group he disdains.
If this is some effort to energize the “woman’s vote,” then he hasn’t been paying attention to the women voting for Reps.
Statistically, every year fewer women, young or old, agree with o’s total pro-abortion stance, so kicking up this mess at the moment seems to be very counter productive and has provoked voters and entire constituencies that were better off as sleeping dogs.
Dead women don't need healthcare
greyeagle Sunday, February 12th at 10:43PM EDT (link)Along with increasing the age for mammograms from 40-50. The FDA for removing Avastin for use in breast cancer because of costs issues. This is the first time in history that the FDA removed a drug because of costs issues. Avastin is effective for inflammatory breast cancer, which goes like wildfire. My sister would have been dead if she followed the age 50 guidelines. So would two friends. Again this was a cost issue rather than a treatment issue. You will see the deaths rise in breast cancer rise using these guidelines. There were NO cancer specialists on this panel that recommended these guidelines. Several were academics who had not been in private practice. There were also non-physicians on this panel. Obamacare will be a nightmare that has been shoved down our throats by the Democrats.