Author Topic: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage  (Read 9240 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #45 on: February 03, 2013, 07:48:55 PM »
Do individuals have rights or do Churches and businesses have rights?

Are corporations people?

Are Churches people?

I don't know how a person can have a right to practce his religion only while he is in church and must practice something elese as soon as he sits at his desk.

Does the government have the right to make Jews buy pork for their employees?

That might be a usefull ability for the government to have.

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8010
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #46 on: February 03, 2013, 09:26:09 PM »
Hmm

If this works and churches are require to cover birth control. Does this potentially means everybody gets full organ transplant coverage?.?

Isn't this also an issue what is the limits of insurance coverage?

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #47 on: February 03, 2013, 09:41:37 PM »
I fail to see what this has to do with organ transplants.

Corporations are NOT people.

Churches are NOT people.

The Constitution has no provision to regulate churches or corporations or to guarantee rights to them. This is as it should be.

Since eating pork is unrelated to any medical condition, I see no chance how pork would be any part of any medical coverage.

Allergy medicine is certainly a valid medical treatment. It prevents a more serious condition with potential health problems, as do contraceptives. No one is requesting that the government force anyone to get or take contraceptives. It is only proposed that people who REQUEST contraceptives get them through their medical insurance. People who do not believe in contraceptive medicine would not be required to receive or take them.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #48 on: February 03, 2013, 09:51:22 PM »


Corporations are NOT people.

Churches are NOT people.

The Constitution has no provision to regulate churches or corporations or to guarantee rights to them. This is as it should be.

.......................

Then there is no point in protecting a church from having to violate its conscience.

But individuals who feel hurt at financeing a procedure that they feel immoral should be protected.

Individuals that are hired are free to quit , free to fianance their own procedures , free to buy their own additional insurance.

The Taliban is all about compliance , so is the Federal government , we should expand the federal role in our lives with great caution , because they have the leven of the Pharisee as badly as the Taliban ever did.

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8010
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #49 on: February 03, 2013, 10:27:07 PM »
Actually i think corporations legally might be people. The issue has been brought up but don't recall if answered

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #50 on: February 03, 2013, 10:47:06 PM »
This is E N T I R E L Y about giving women who want contraceptives what they want, just like women who do nor work for the Holy Mother Church. The rights of the individual TRUMP those of the Church. We see this, because the citizen has the right to vote and the Church does not.

There is no violation of individual rights involved.

A majority of the Catholic women in most countries use contraceptives. This explains why after contraceptives were available the birth rates of Catholic women plummeted.

The Church has the right to advise women that it frowns on birth control.

The citizens have the right to ignore the Holy Mother Church. They have the legal right to tell the Holy Mother Church to piss off.

Corporations are NOT PEOPLE. If they were, they would be eligible to vote. The law makes distinctions between people and corporations.

Note that people are always mortal. People cannot legally be bought. People cannot legally be sold.
Corporations have the potential of being living forever. Corporations can be bought. Corporations can be sold. Corporations can issue stock and sell it. People cannot do this. You cannot buy 100 shares of Beyoncé. You cannot buy a controlling interest in Donald Trump. You cannot buy Robert DeNiro, seize his assets and reincorporate him under a different name. If you had the money, you could do this with most corporations.

Some company bought the rights to the products and name of Hostess Bakeries and will start making Twinkies and other products using those names. It will have no problem selling a different product under the names formerly used by Hostess.

No one can purchase Kenye West and force him to record Sinatra tunes or sing operatic arias.

The government can and does stipulate tax regulations and rates for corporations that are different from tax rates for citizens.

Corporations are NOT people.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #51 on: February 03, 2013, 10:50:49 PM »
Corporations have the same rights as citizens. At least that is what SCOTUS has said on numerous occasions.

I don't agree with that but that doesn't matter.

I also don't agree that money is speech, but apparently SCOTUS thinks it is, and my opinion does not matter.


BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #52 on: February 03, 2013, 10:54:32 PM »
Quote
XO says: This is E N T I R E L Y about giving women who want contraceptives what they want,

No it isn't. no one is stopping any woman from obtaining contraceptives so please don't delude yourself into thinking they are.

The issue is entirely first amendment based. Does the Federal government have the authority to force a religious organization to act contrary to their beliefs. The first says no.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #53 on: February 03, 2013, 10:55:35 PM »
I can buy a corporation and sell shares in it to others.

I cannot legally buy a person and sell shares in him to others.

There are clear distinctions in every state between the rights and obligations of corporations and those of citizens.

Corporations do NOT have the same rights.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #54 on: February 03, 2013, 11:10:37 PM »
Corporate personhood is the legal concept that a corporation may sue and be sued in court in the same way as natural persons or unincorporated associations of persons. This doctrine in turn forms the basis for legal recognition that corporations, as groups of people, may hold and exercise certain rights under the common law and the U.S. Constitution. The doctrine does not hold that corporations are "people" in the most common usage of the word, nor does it grant to corporations all of the rights of citizens.

Since at least Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward – 17 U.S. 518 (1819), the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized corporations as having the same rights as natural persons to contract and to enforce contracts. In Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad - 118 U.S. 394 (1886), the reporter noted in the headnote to the opinion that the Chief Justice began oral argument by stating, "The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does."[1] While the headnote is not part of the Court's opinion and thus not precedent, two years later, in Pembina Consolidated Silver Mining Co. v. Pennsylvania - 125 U.S. 181 (1888), the Court clearly affirmed the doctrine, holding, "Under the designation of 'person' there is no doubt that a private corporation is included [in the Fourteenth Amendment]. Such corporations are merely associations of individuals united for a special purpose and permitted to do business under a particular name and have a succession of members without dissolution." [2] This doctrine has been reaffirmed by the Court many times since.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood_debate

kimba1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8010
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #55 on: February 04, 2013, 12:05:45 AM »
Actually her rights are not been denied thier has been no mention of birth control being denied. Just no coverage which shouldn't be much of an issue since alot of medications are not covered. But are still availabe at full price to the patient.

But if the church wins this case would insurance companies be able restrict coverage even more?

BSB

  • Guest
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #56 on: February 04, 2013, 12:20:39 AM »
What goes on within the Church is one thing. When you go outside and hire private citizens to do a job, be they Catholic or not, then you lose any special consideration as a religious institution as far as those employees go. That's my take. And, eventually, I believe that will be the accepted view and practice.



BSB

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #57 on: February 04, 2013, 12:21:15 AM »
The insurance company is not the villain in this story. It is an overreaching federal government.

BSB

  • Guest
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #58 on: February 04, 2013, 12:26:10 AM »
"It is an overreaching federal government. "

That's just redneck speak for states rights, the Civil War, and all that crap. 

BSB

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Yea, opposing contraception is like opposing leukemia coverage
« Reply #59 on: February 04, 2013, 12:30:21 AM »
The Constitution has no provision to regulate churches or corporations or to guarantee rights to them. This is as it should be.

The 1st amendment doesn't guarantee rights to churches/religions??  Since when??


Allergy medicine is certainly a valid medical treatment. It prevents a more serious condition with potential health problems, as do contraceptives.

NO, NO, NO....This is spoken out of ignorance.....not a personal insult, but to someone who is wholly uninformed.  An allergy can be a serious, if not a deadly diagnosis.  THERE IS NO MEDICAL DIAGNOSIS TO A WOMAN WHO WANTS TO BUY BIRTH CONTROL.  If they want them, they can shell out the few bucks for something.  THEIR CHOICE
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle