Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, January 02, 2018

Los Angeles Times editorial board: In the tortured history of birth control coverage under the ACA, the government has made change after change to placate employers who objected on religious grounds to covering birth control. Now, the Trump administration has essentially neutered the mandate entirely, allowing any employer with any religious or moral objection to refuse to offer birth control coverage -- without any requirement that they allow their insurance company to make an accommodation. ... The issue here should not be an employer's religious or moral beliefs but the needs, beliefs, health and safety of the employee. Why should our employers make the moral or religious decisions about our healthcare? Besides, it is already clear that there are plenty of ways for employers to register their objections and then allow insurance companies to step in and provide the insurance. That's accommodation enough.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"allowing any employer with any religious or moral objection to refuse to offer birth control coverage -- without any requirement that they allow their insurance company to make an accommodation"

yeah! screw people with type 1 diabetes. they either abstain or force them to get an abortion if they get pregnant.

#1 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-01-02 08:34 AM | Reply

FTA:"The Trump administration should not impose its wrongheaded moral principles on the rest of us by denying birth control coverage to women."
The title of the article calls the last line of the article a lie.
"Allowing employers a 'moral exemption' from offering birth control coverage"
Allowing employers to determine what coverages they offer in exchange for the work their employees perform is in no way the same as The Trump administration denying birth control.
I am all for access to birth-control for all. I'm just against the article lying to folks.

either abstain or force them to get an abortion if they get pregnant. - #1 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-01-02 08:34 AM

You have prepared a weak
false-dichotomy. Prior to the 2014 roll-out of the ACA, were abstinence or abortion the only options as well?

#2 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-01-02 01:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#2 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-01-02 01:40 PMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive

Deciding when you're ready to have or not have a child is part of healthcare. Birth control shouldn't be an issue but the religious hacks love to parade this around like a dog and pony show.

#3 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-01-02 04:33 PM | Reply

There are too many people in the world.
There is no soul or afterlife.
Worry about pregnancy can interfere with joyful aex.
The Constitution, through the Bill of Rights, sought to protect the interests of the individual, not the Corporation. Conservatives seek to destroy individual constitutional rights while replacing them with Corporate constitutional rights and are already halfway through the process. The current campaign to load Federal Courts with Christian Corporatists, in direct violation of Christian principals, is disgusting and moving rapidly.

#4 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-02 06:19 PM | Reply

- There is no soul or afterlife.

Thanks for clearing that up for us. My guess is there were no black holes until humans discovered them, right?

www.huffingtonpost.com

Reversing Bubba's well-known formulation, abortions should be rare, safe, and legal. And employers should have no say in the medical decision.

#5 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-02 06:35 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

There is no soul or afterlife.

Posted by bayviking

Science trends against you.

#6 | Posted by Zed at 2018-01-02 07:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

And employers should have no say in the medical decision. - #5 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-02 06:35 PM
Sounds like you agree that it was a mistake for the government to mandate that employers become a part of the medical insurance process in a country where those employers have freedom of religion.

#7 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-01-02 07:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

BAY

"There is no soul or afterlife."

I guess somebody would have to go there and come back to tell about it to settle that argument.

Personally, I believe.

#8 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-01-02 07:52 PM | Reply

Houdini certainly tried, and failed to reach an afterlife. We should agree no evidence exists for believing in these things, but you are free to believe what you want. We do know that the brain provides a complete explanation for our memories and psychologies. Surgeries and experiments demonstrate these are all parked in our grey matter, which disintegrates when you die. You can posit a parallel memory in a soul if you want to but it is unnecessary to explain what we observe.

Anyway, as far as we are concerned Corky's point that Corporations, which includes employers and insurance companies, should have no say in ANY medical decision between patient an doctor, but that's not the way it works in this country. Doctors only work if they are paid and insurance and Conservative liars who pretend to love "freedom" are in the middle of it all. They use similar arguments to defend deregulated gun ownership. Its all BS and its bad for us.

#9 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-02 08:31 PM | Reply

A few comments on Corky's link and exercise in wishful thinking:

"nothing could exist without consciousness." This statement is absurd on its face, unless you believe every rock and virus possesses consciousness. If you believe that please explain to me where Lake Michigan's consciousness and every rock and atom in it ends and Lake Superior's begins.

"the uncertainty principle... only makes sense from a biocentric perspective." More rubbish...this uncertainty applies to elementary particles, which have nothing to do with biology. It introduces randomness into events, consistent with Bell's Theorem, complicates interpretation of experiments... our understanding of the universe is based on mathematical models smaller than the universe and therefore incomplete.

"reality is a process that requires our consciousness", more nonsense, our senses limit our ability to perceive reality which exists independently of our presence or observation. The process of observation can alter the observation, for some extremely small scales.

" the "me'' feeling is just a 20-watt cloud of energy in your head. But this energy doesn't go away at death." Boy, that's a unproven conjecture if there ever was one. Sure, energy and mass cannot be destroyed, but change forms constantly. SO WHAT. Probing the brain can trigger a memory, which are stored in poorly understood biochemical structures which disintegrate on death.

As for the "Schrodinger's cat puzzle", quantum laws are being incorrectly applied on our scale of existence, which do not follow quantum physics, even though everything in the universe, including ourselves, consists of particles and waves which follow these laws. These are mathematical models which do not apply at the scale in which we live.

#10 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-02 09:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

BAY

You left out the psychological benefit to people who are coming to terms with their own mortality. It gave my mother great comfort in her waning weeks that she was finally going to be united with the sister she missed so much.

So it doesn't really matter if it's true or not as long as the belief in an afterlife serves the purpose of comforting the dying. Dying would be more difficult than necessary without that belief.

I wouldn't dream of dissuading them otherwise, mathematicals be damned.

#11 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-01-02 09:45 PM | Reply

I certainly do not disagree with the contention that every man needs to bring meaning to their life and they should be free to find that in any way they choose. But our country should not be run by a bunch of delusional religious fanatics, or worse, con-men, which is where its at now.

#12 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-02 10:42 PM | Reply

#10

Perhaps you need an atheist to help you out....

www.youtube.com


Or maybe Robert Lanza...

www.robertlanzabiocentrism.com

Can Quantum Physics Explain Consciousness?

www.theatlantic.com

A scientific hypothesis for a 'quantum soul'.

www.bibliotecapleyades.net

Discovery of quantum vibrations in 'microtubules' corroborates theory of consciousness...

phys.org

btw, making an absolutist claim like, "There is no soul or afterlife." just makes you look like the other side of the obnoxious, know it all coin that also claims it "knows" the facts, the rwing religionists.

Try to keep an open mind rather than a closed one like theirs. And bone up on your physics, they suck.

#13 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-02 11:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Stoicism and buddhism will help you with your delusion and attachment.

You live, you die and become dust, this is the cycle of life.

#14 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2018-01-03 12:38 AM | Reply

Science trends against you.

#6 | POSTED BY ZED

Oh? Do tell.

#15 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-03 01:19 AM | Reply

in a country where those employers have freedom of religion.

"Freedom of religion" is just cover for -------- to act like --------.

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-03 01:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Try to keep an open mind rather than a closed one like theirs. And bone up on your physics, they suck.
#13 | POSTED BY CORKY

Maybe you should show that you actually grasp what you link to before being a condescending ass.

#17 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-03 01:22 AM | Reply

BAY

" But our country should not be run by a bunch of delusional religious fanatics, or worse, con-men, which is where its at now."

Nobody is going to disagree with that. But have some faith. A mortal savior is on the way. It takes time to build a coffin big enough to bury the lot of them. Everybody knows you have to clean out the muck before you start a new foundation.

Worry instead that Trump is using North Korea as a distraction. He has all our eyes pointed that direction when his own eyes are pointed at Iran. I believe that's where the real danger of war lies. The hints are neither subtle nor mistakable. He's ginning up for a war with Iran. The worst of it, he's racing the clock with Mueller.

Trump is a sick puppy to be sure. He's sick with determination to destroy Obama's legacy ~ namely the Nuclear Accords. Human life means nothing to a sociopath. He has no conscience, no empathy, no rational thinking. He's self-serving at any cost, and has an insatiable need to be right about absolutely everything, especially about Obama whom he hates with a burning passion.

Keep your eye on Iran.

#18 | Posted by Twinpac at 2018-01-03 06:20 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

so is the rest of the Moral Crusade, drug wars, etc.
what's new. ...their renewed insensity isn't even new anymore.

#19 | Posted by ichiro at 2018-01-03 06:24 AM | Reply

Birth control? That is like 15 bucks a month. Who needs coverage for a expense that small?

#20 | Posted by docnjo at 2018-01-03 07:26 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I have provided reasons for why we have our memories and psychologies, devoid of a parallel universe full of souls with identical memories and psychologies, which Corky would prefer. We can trigger memories and reactions by probing different parts of the brain with conscious surgical patients. Clearly our brain cells store our memories and trigger our various behaviors. There is no reason to harbor beliefs that there is a separate, identical repository of these memories and opinions, but Corky is certainly free to do so, for no other reason than it makes him happy. As usual, Corky is loathe to address any specific supposition of mine and instead uses third party nonsensical statements as if they are factual and credible when they are clearly exercises in wishful thinking at best and con artist justification for wealth transfer so typical of religious promoters, at worst. Corky is posting silly physics. He thinks we all need a physics lecture from a former truck driver. The shallowness of Corky's thinking is consistently revealed in his blind allegiance to party and religion within deeply flawed institutions. But, his lesser of two evils argument is valid on occasion. The impact Trump is having on our Courts will haunt this country for thirty or forty years and we may never recover.

#21 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-03 07:48 AM | Reply

"Freedom of religion" is just cover for -------- to act like --------. - #16 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-03 01:20 AM

No less so than freedom of speech. Hell, I can't think of any of rights that don't protect the ------- as well as the innocent. That's why they are universal rights. If you think that Freedom of religion preventing Trump from blocking muslims from arriving in our country is to provide cover for those ------- muslims, well...you've got the freedom of speech to admit it, I suppose.

#22 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-01-03 08:15 AM | Reply

There is no constitutional basis for providing human rights to Corporations, but our Courts have been moving in that direction for a long time. The fundamental reason for reason for inadequate gun laws, a police State and perpetual war is profits for the arms industry. These industries all have DC lobbyists, children don't. There must be exclusive public funding of all political campaigns to fix this problem.

#23 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-03 08:27 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

And employers should have no say in the medical decision. - #5 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-02 06:35 PM
Sounds like you agree that it was a mistake for the government to mandate that employers become a part of the medical insurance process in a country where those employers have freedom of religion.

#7 | Posted by Avigdore

Couldn't let that one slip by. I will agree - I am for single provider/payer. Time to get insurers and employers out of the mix and make it a basic American right - or as some like to call it "entitlement". 20 years ago I would have laughed at the thought but my depth of experience has changed. I see so much of what makes this system non-functional, unfair and a corporate money grab.

#24 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2018-01-03 08:29 AM | Reply

#22 | Posted by Avigdore

Going to disagree on this. Look if you are an employer but a corporation in particular - I am sorry but you cannot have religion. A non-being having religion? Please. Don't get me wrong - stock holders have their choice of Religion but it is not possible for the corporation to do so.

#25 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2018-01-03 08:32 AM | Reply

--A scientific hypothesis for a 'quantum soul'.

Where did that bit of new age woo come from? Crackpot Quarterly?

#26 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-01-03 08:38 AM | Reply

---- it, man.

#27 | Posted by madscientist at 2018-01-03 09:53 AM | Reply

Should women's insurance costs reflect the added costs for 'free' birth control? I believe that other rates can vary based on risk, young pay less than old or smokers more than non.

#28 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-01-03 10:25 AM | Reply

"Should women's insurance costs reflect the added costs for 'free' birth control?"

They do. Age, gender, etc..are all ratable factors. Group plans composite the rates but those factors are included in the rates.

#29 | Posted by eberly at 2018-01-03 10:28 AM | Reply

Just to add more the argument, my girlfriend and I figured out that we would spend more on condoms than on birth control per month. So now she uses birth control instead of me using condoms. Yet, I don't see any arguments about condoms needing to be covered under insurance and all companies must cover it. I thought we lived in the time of equal rights for everyone. Of course, I know white males are exempt from that but what about all other races, even though they are lowly males who should not have any rights according to bleeding hearts.

#30 | Posted by humtake at 2018-01-03 12:24 PM | Reply

You should ask your girlfriend about how birth control pills are often used for more than just birth control.

Did you go to your doctor to discuss condom use? Did your doctor write you a prescription?

#31 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar at 2018-01-03 12:38 PM | Reply

If I can get my doctor to write me a prescription for scotch, do you think I could get my insurance company to pay it?

#32 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-01-03 12:49 PM | Reply

No less so than freedom of speech.

With one major difference-freedom of religion is used by the "Christian" ------ in order to control others' lives. Who they can marry, what coverage their insurance provides, what they do in their own bedrooms ect ect.

#33 | Posted by jpw at 2018-01-03 02:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You should ask your girlfriend about how birth control pills are often used for more than just birth control.

Did you go to your doctor to discuss condom use? Did your doctor write you a prescription?

#31 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar at 2018-01-03 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

That would require brain cell use. Way too many for him sadly.

#34 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-01-03 02:23 PM | Reply

- Crackpot Quarterly?

#26 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Says the Editor of TrumpHumpers Review.

But no, the basics are from Stephen Hawkings' more theoretically sound BBT partner, Sir Roger Penrose. Not that you would be able to follow anything he theorizes.

#21

Wow.... a non-responsive word salad from MoneyBore.... I'm shocked I tells ya! Shocked!

btw, making an absolutist claim like, "There is no soul or afterlife." just makes you look like the other side of the obnoxious, know it all coin that also claims it "knows" the facts, the rwing religionists.

You are Jim Bakker with a ponytail cap.

#35 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-03 06:22 PM | Reply

"Yet, I don't see any arguments about condoms needing to be covered under insurance and all companies must cover it."

Thats is because condoms are available without a prescription.

If condoms were only available with a prescription, you might have a point though.

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-03 06:30 PM | Reply

"If I can get my doctor to write me a prescription for scotch, do you think I could get my insurance company to pay it?"

Alcohol for alcoholic patients suffering withdrawlals is medically indicated; sometimes it's life-saving.

So, the answer to your question is "yes."

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-03 06:34 PM | Reply

"Sounds like you agree that it was a mistake for the government to mandate that employers become a part of the medical insurance process"

It was a mistake to place the onus of health insurance on employers.

But, we chose this path instead of having socialized medicine.

And you think socialized medicine is an even bigger mistake.

More to the point, you don't think anyone should be guaranteed health care. Not military, mot veterans, not seniors, not children.

Of course, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about that. Do you think there are some people who should simply get health insurance, just for being alive? Who, and why?

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-03 06:40 PM | Reply

re: #37
I meant that in more of a 'rubbing my hands while wanting some scotch' rather than 'unh-uh, insurance won't cover that'.

re: #38
I have no problem at all with healthcare for all if the country decides that is the best use of their funds. I'm against health insurance for all, though. If the country is going to provide the healthcare, no need to have a 3rd party in the way.

#39 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-01-03 06:54 PM | Reply

"I'm against health insurance for all"

How else do you envision funding it?

#40 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-03 07:01 PM | Reply

"I meant that in more of a 'rubbing my hands while wanting some scotch' rather than 'unh-uh, insurance won't cover that'"

You meant in a non-medical capacity?

Why would you ask such a question in a medical context?

Presumably because you're trying to pettifog the issue, but you're so ignorant of health care you didn't consider that alcohol withdrawal can be fatal. You thought you were being clever, but you were just dumb, and wrong. Is that correct?

#41 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-03 07:04 PM | Reply

"If the country is going to provide the healthcare, no need to have a 3rd party in the way."

In a single payer system, the country is the insurance company, so there is no third party.

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-03 07:07 PM | Reply

Pay for it yourselves

#43 | Posted by Will123 at 2018-01-04 12:06 PM | Reply

Talking about an afterlife is making stuff up with no basis in fact,like Baker or Corky. Claiming these things are made up is based on what we know,but what we know is always an incomplete model.

#44 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-01-04 12:06 PM | Reply

Lets just make it fair.

If an employer wants to opt out, they have to pay for the privilege of not being subject to the law.

Why should they get to be a special exception?

#45 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-01-04 02:05 PM | Reply

- making stuff up with no basis in fact

Fact is that science is only fun for some people when it supports their bias... not so much when it doesn't. Such as when mechanisms have been found on the quantum level that could contain consciousness, like microtubiles, or when consciousness has been found to continue after death; after mechanistic functions have ceased, as has been recently shown.


- but what we know is always an incomplete model.

Which is why making absolutist declarations is dumb.

#46 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-04 04:21 PM | Reply

--on the quantum level t

As soon as your hear the word "quantum" you know you are dealing with new age woo of Deepak Chopra proportions.

#47 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-01-04 04:25 PM | Reply

#47

As soon as you see a Nulli post, you know you are dealing with cheap theatrics rather than anything of substance.

"Anyone not shocked by quantum mechanics has not yet understood it."

Niels Bohr

"Observations not only disturb what is to be measured, they produce it."

Pascual Jordan

Einstein vs quantum mechanics, and why he'd be a convert today

phys.org

#48 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-04 04:34 PM | Reply

Niels Bohr and DimPack Chopra.

lol

"Soon there will be a blossoming of karma the likes of which the infinite has never seen.

The solar system is electrified with morphic resonance. The goal of ultrasonic energy is to plant the seeds of faith rather than ego. Nature is the driver of wonder.

Consciousness is the richness of potential, and of us. Awareness is a constant. This life is nothing short of a blossoming reimagining of technological self-actualization.

We must learn how to lead non-dual lives in the face of dogma. We are being called to explore the dreamscape itself as an interface between interconnectedness and gratitude. It is a sign of things to come."

#49 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-01-04 04:54 PM | Reply

God does not play dice!
--Einstein

No, I play spades. Trump Bitches!
--God

#50 | Posted by madscientist at 2018-01-04 05:03 PM | Reply

#49

You confusing philosophy with physics is a surprise to.... no one at all.

#51 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-04 06:41 PM | Reply

"Pay for it yourselves
#43 | POSTED BY WILL123"

That's what single payer is.
We as a nation would be paying for it ourselves.
Unlike what most people get for health care, where their employer foots most of the bill.

#52 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-04 10:03 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort