Post Reply
Page 5 of 10  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Sandra Fluke's Testimony...and the Bureacrats who Second-Guess Our Doctors
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 11:15AM #41
Find1Answer
Posts: 7,292

Mar 5, 2012 -- 9:14PM, arielg wrote:


The woman has become a poster person for the right to women's health care.  This is a clever argument  invented by some smart   person in the administration or the Democratic party.


To treat the sexual activities of a woman as a heathcare issue is totally absurd. Clever as a political ploy, but absurd. 


 There can be possible  health complications with anticonceptives like  could be with anything else, but to use that as a reason for providing anticonceptives is a stretch. If there are health problems, they should be treated as a health problem, regardless of  the origin. 


If some insurance company wants to make it part of their plan, fine.  To require it is ridiculous.


I am personally for  universal healthcare as a safety net, which could probably include anticonceptives. But other than basic care, it should be apt to the individual and insurance companies.


 


To treat the sexual activities of a woman as a heathcare issue is totally absurd. Clever as a political ploy, but absurd. 




Treating sexual activities of a woman is a anti position of the anti.   The dems have not brought up the sexual activities,  that is all on you and your ideological camp.   The consevative camp is the one that is so interested in sexual activities.    Let's discuss Santorum's sexual activity or Newt Gingrich and Limbaugh's sexual activities.     


This is between a woman and her doctor and the patient's sexual mores are none of your business and unneccesary to the discussion.


Be honest?  is it the Mandate that gets in your craw or is it someone else's sexual activity.

Bush's "de-Bathification program" eliminated all vestiges of Sunni power in Iraqi society and set the stage for the Sunni insurrection against American occupation and the new Shiite-led government. Bush disbanded the entire Sunni-dominated Iraqi Army and bureaucracy. He didn't change it. He didn't make it more inclusive of Shiites and Kurds. He just disbanded it. It is no accident that two of the top commanders of today's ISIL are former commanders in the Saddam-era Iraqi military.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 11:18AM #42
Ed.W
Posts: 9,442

Should start at 2:05  unless you like Maher, you can stop at 2:40



If Maher was funny, his show wouldn't use a laff track.  So him basing what he says on the laughter he adds in post production is ..... funny.


www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_det...

‘Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength, while loving someone deeply gives you courage.’ --Lao Tzu
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 11:23AM #43
Find1Answer
Posts: 7,292

Mar 5, 2012 -- 10:56PM, TENAC wrote:

Mar 5, 2012 -- 9:40PM, aarroottoonn wrote:


Mar 5, 2012 -- 3:38PM, Kwinters wrote:


Just curious how many other services righties here will object to:



Under the Affordable Care Act, women’s preventive health care – such as mammograms, screenings for cervical cancer, prenatal care, and other services – is covered with no cost sharing for new health plans. However, the law recognizes and HHS understands the need to take into account the unique health needs of women throughout their lifespan. 


The HRSA-supported health plan coverage guidelines, developed by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), will help ensure that women receive a comprehensive set of preventive services without having to pay a co-payment, co-insurance or a deductible.  HHS commissioned an IOM study to review what preventive services are necessary for women’s health and well-being and should be considered in the development of comprehensive guidelines for preventive services for women.  HRSA is supporting the IOM’s recommendations on preventive services that address health needs specific to women and fill gaps in existing guidelines.




Do you also oppose mammograms? Cervical cancer screenings?  Should women have to pay out of pocket for those too?





I don't oppose any of those things, but I do oppose them being free. Medical care is medical care, and should at least have a co-pay or deductable. All this does is make insurance companies pass along those costs to everyone in other forms. There is no free lunch, no matter what the left thinks.




Guess who's much heralded affordable health care act began with cutting out mammograms?  Until he flip flopped......



A Breast Cancer Preview


The mammogram decision is a sign of cost control to come.



And dont think this idiot wont flip again.


Breast cancer statistics over the last 30 years had told us a great deal.     Breast cancer in women over 75 has shown that it is a very slow rate.   My mother insisted on yearly mammograms because she had been told they were necessary.   Finally the doctor convinced her that in her age group the cure was much worse than the actual slow rate of the disease.      This panel was not trying to save costs.   This panel came up with some interesting findings about prostrate cancer as well and has recommended less surgeries as well as a fresh look at medications to treat the condition.     


It is not about a cost but a better way to treat these conditions.

Bush's "de-Bathification program" eliminated all vestiges of Sunni power in Iraqi society and set the stage for the Sunni insurrection against American occupation and the new Shiite-led government. Bush disbanded the entire Sunni-dominated Iraqi Army and bureaucracy. He didn't change it. He didn't make it more inclusive of Shiites and Kurds. He just disbanded it. It is no accident that two of the top commanders of today's ISIL are former commanders in the Saddam-era Iraqi military.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 1:20PM #44
arielg
Posts: 9,116

To treat the sexual activities of a woman as a heathcare issue is totally absurd. Clever as a political ploy, but absurd.


Treating sexual activities of a woman is a anti position of the anti.   The dems have not brought up the sexual activities,  that is all on you and your ideological camp.   The consevative camp is the one that is so interested in sexual activities.    Let's discuss Santorum's sexual activity or Newt Gingrich and Limbaugh's sexual activities.    


This is between a woman and her doctor and the patient's sexual mores are none of your business and unneccesary to the discussion.


Be honest?  is it the Mandate that gets in your craw or is it someone else's sexual activity


 


First of all, if you want to discuss anything with me , you talk to me according to what I say, not  the "conservative camp", "ideological camp", Santorum, Ginrich or Lingbaugh. I do not speak for or represnt any of them.


We are not talking about sexual mores. No one is preventing anyone from having sex. But sexual activity is not an illness. It is a choice. Requiring taxpayer to pay forit   is a ridiculous  understanding of what rights are supposed to be.  What about paying for  porno magazines  for the masturbators?  They need release as much as some  people need sex for recreation.


 It is nobody's business as you say. Why do you want to make it the taxpayers business?

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 1:27PM #45
TENAC
Posts: 26,583
Yow!
Any man can count the seeds in an apple....
.......but only God can count the apples in the seeds.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 4:10PM #46
Jasr
Posts: 11,803

Mar 6, 2012 -- 1:20PM, arielg wrote:


We are not talking about sexual mores. No one is preventing anyone from having sex. But sexual activity is not an illness. It is a choice.




On this thread, we are not talking about sex at all. In committee, Sandra Fluke was not talking about sex either. She did not mention it. She also did not mention herself.


The OP is about the testimony that Sandra Fluke actually gave, which dealt with the special case of a woman (Not Sandra Fluke, but a student covered under the same plan) denied doctor-ordered treatment for ovarian cysts.

Mar 6, 2012 -- 1:20PM, arielg wrote:


Requiring taxpayer to pay forit   is a ridiculous  understanding of what rights are supposed to be.




And referring to taxpayers is a ridiculous understanding of the topic of this thread, which is the behavior of a private health insurance company denying coverage for a needed health care intervention, because of misguided or cynical over-interpretation of an employer's exclusion of birth control from covered services.


Mar 6, 2012 -- 1:20PM, arielg wrote:


What about paying for  porno magazines  for the masturbators?  They need release as much as some  people need sex for recreation.


 It is nobody's business as you say. Why do you want to make it the taxpayers business?





Nobody is making it the taxpayers business but you. Please re-read the OP.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 6:00PM #47
TENAC
Posts: 26,583

Mar 5, 2012 -- 10:07AM, Jasr wrote:



Here we see a perfect illustration of what progressives affirm has been rampant at least since health maintenance organizations were embraced in the 1970s: needed care being denied by "health insurance bureaucrats."



Jas, sit down.


Could this be a moment of agreement here?


Are you saying that Health Maintenance Organizations introduced by TedK in the 1970's were and are a bad idea?


Seeking a moment of clarity here.

Any man can count the seeds in an apple....
.......but only God can count the apples in the seeds.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 7:15PM #48
arielg
Posts: 9,116

Mar 6, 2012 -- 4:10PM, Jasr wrote:


Mar 6, 2012 -- 1:20PM, arielg wrote:


We are not talking about sexual mores. No one is preventing anyone from having sex. But sexual activity is not an illness. It is a choice.




On this thread, we are not talking about sex at all. In committee, Sandra Fluke was not talking about sex either. She did not mention it. She also did not mention herself.


Why don't you read the post I was responding to? She said, among other things,  that it could cost her   $3000 in anticonceptives.  That is about sex.


I don't care about her or her personal case at all.  She is a spokeperson for a policy. I am not interested in personal cases. Her whole testimony is directed  at defending certain policies.  You can make her the issue, if you like,  like Limbaugh did and others here are constantly doing.


The OP is about the testimony that Sandra Fluke actually gave, which dealt with the special case of a woman (Not Sandra Fluke, but a student covered under the same plan) denied doctor-ordered treatment for ovarian cysts.

Mar 6, 2012 -- 1:20PM, arielg wrote:


Requiring taxpayer to pay forit   is a ridiculous  understanding of what rights are supposed to be.




And referring to taxpayers is a ridiculous understanding of the topic of this thread, which is the behavior of a private health insurance company denying coverage for a needed health care intervention, because of misguided or cynical over-interpretation of an employer's exclusion of birth control from covered services.


Mar 6, 2012 -- 1:20PM, arielg wrote:


What about paying for  porno magazines  for the masturbators?  They need release as much as some  people need sex for recreation.


 It is nobody's business as you say. Why do you want to make it the taxpayers business?





Nobody is making it the taxpayers business but you. Please re-read the OP.


Read what I was  responding to.


 





Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 7:34PM #49
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,158

Sexual problems and Birth control are Health issues. If not why do Obstetricians and Gynecologists go to Medical School and why do we call them Doctor?  The process of reproduction affects every part of a woman’s body and mind.  The ability to plan for children enhances the health and welfare of children and the parents.   Sexual activity is an instinctual drive, driven my hormonal activity, social situations and Capitalism. ( advertisement , marketing etc.)  If your politics or religion  excludes contraception fine,  but do not force your politics and religion on others by hiding on “not health care issue “, It is logically and reasonably clear that it is a health issue.

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 8:31PM #50
REteach
Posts: 14,796

How are taxpayers paying premiums for private insurance?  


If we get to choose what our premiums go for, I don't want to pay for anything another policy holder who smokes has problems with. 

I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard was not what I meant...
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 5 of 10  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook