RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election?

RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Hillwilliam -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 7:07:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Churches themselves obtained an exemption from the BC mandate. Ok, I can see that. Who works for an actual church who doesnt follow their teachings? You would be surprised how many work for a church and don't follow the teachings. If the church owns a school, teachers and other employees frequently aren't required to be of that faith. I taught at a Catholic HS owned by the church. Heck, my assistant coach was Jewish. My paychecks came from the Archdiocese. My medical plan covered BC believe it or not. Even with non school related employment, churches have custodians and groundskeepers. Larger ones will have an accountant, secretarial staff, etc. many of these people will be from ourside.

RacerJim -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 7:18:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Churches themselves obtained an exemption from the BC mandate. Ok, I can see that. Who works for an actual church who doesnt follow their teachings? You would be surprised how many work for a church and don't follow the teachings. If the church owns a school, teachers and other employees frequently aren't required to be of that faith. I taught at a Catholic HS owned by the church. Heck, my assistant coach was Jewish. My paychecks came from the Archdiocese. My medical plan covered BC believe it or not. Even with non school related employment, churches have custodians and groundskeepers. Larger ones will have an accountant, secretarial staff, etc. many of these people will be from ourside. I would be surprised how many churches force non-believers to work there. The ages old adage "If you don't like the rules don't play the game." applies here. BTW: Since Congress exempted itself from "Obaamacare" in toto why shouldn't "We the people", whom Congress is supposed to represent and be subserviant to, be able to exempt themselves from it also, if not in toto then in specific(s)?

tazzygirl -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 7:23:28 AM)
Pre-PhD requirements is typically 1 semester of A&P. http://www.llu.edu/allied-health/sahp/pt/dptentry.page I cant seem to find a school that requires A&P as part of its doctoral program. Got a link?

tazzygirl -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 7:28:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Churches themselves obtained an exemption from the BC mandate. Ok, I can see that. Who works for an actual church who doesnt follow their teachings? You would be surprised how many work for a church and don't follow the teachings. If the church owns a school, teachers and other employees frequently aren't required to be of that faith. I taught at a Catholic HS owned by the church. Heck, my assistant coach was Jewish. My paychecks came from the Archdiocese. My medical plan covered BC believe it or not. Even with non school related employment, churches have custodians and groundskeepers. Larger ones will have an accountant, secretarial staff, etc. many of these people will be from ourside. Under the clarified rule, the government chose to use the Internal Revenue Code's definition of "religious employer," which means churches and other houses of worship are exempt from providing contraceptive coverage to their employees. The government also introduced an accommodation for religious non-profits so that eligible organizations would not have to contract, arrange or pay for contraception coverage. Instead, their insurance companies would have to allow plan participants to opt for separate individual health insurance policies that include free birth control coverage, with the insurers picking up the tab. For religious non-profits that are self-insured, the third party that administers claims would have to coordinate free birth control coverage. http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2013/02_-_February/Exemptions_to_birth_control_mandate_unlikely_to_defuse_lawsuits/ Accountants can be contracted employees working for themselves. Secretarial staff, at least from what I remember of the church, was someone from the church.

Owner59 -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 7:28:19 AM)
Ummmm....congress already has healthcare insurance.....Dahh... No is being forced to accept healthcare.....Duhhh... If you or congress or anyone don`t want it......fine. If someone does......it`s none of your damm business..... The ACA was one of the major election issues and (we won) is now the law of the land ......

JeffBC -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 7:28:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl ...yet dont see the hidden costs in not having birth control? "Hidden costs" as in "children"? I don't find it funny. I find it rather horrific actually. The idea that I would sacrifice children on the alter of my ideology is rather incomprehensible to me. Then again, the very definition of an ideologue implies someone who is detached from actual reality no matter which direction their ideology goes.

tazzygirl -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 7:36:00 AM)
quote: "Hidden costs" as in "children"? No, not as in children. As in all the costs I just listed that no one thinks about when they complain about the costs of birth control under the mandate.

JeffBC -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 7:49:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl No, not as in children. As in all the costs I just listed that no one thinks about when they complain about the costs of birth control under the mandate. Fair enough. I had to go back and look. Those are what I'd call secondary costs but their worth thinking about in case the "children" argument hits a brick wall.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:06:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim BTW: Since Congress exempted itself from "Obaamacare" in toto why shouldn't "We the people", whom Congress is supposed to represent and be subserviant to, be able to exempt themselves from it also, if not in toto then in specific(s)? EXACTLY the point I have been making for a long time! We live in a society where (unfortunately) businesses no longer have to compete for the best and brightest by offering what used to be called "fringe benefits" (healthcare, company car, corner office, secretary, etc.) We also live in a society where, thanks to free trade agreements, businesses are finding it harder and harder to compete with foreign (cheaper) producers of products. Instead of cutting the jobs (immediately), they chose to start lessening those "fringe benefits" and now, what used to be fairly accessible to anyone with a decent job (one other than a McDonald's) is now way too out of reach. Yet, the government's answer is not to improve things, here. Their answer is to make it an even more hostile environment in which to do bussiness, to spin down the value of our money, and to fail to protect the American worker. Don't worry, though, bussinesses will just farm out more jobs to overseas countries and we'll be fucked, even deeper. BTW, I never meant to exclude the greedy fucks in the medical professions (partially excused by the greedy fucks in the insurance industry, which charges them ridiculous amounts of money for malpractice insurance) and the greedy, worthless fucks that think that suing people who are trying to help them is tantamount to "hitting the lottery". It's a huge shit sandwich and we are all being forced to take a bite. Peace and comfort, Michael

Lucylastic -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:08:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl No, not as in children. As in all the costs I just listed that no one thinks about when they complain about the costs of birth control under the mandate. Fair enough. I had to go back and look. Those are what I'd call secondary costs but their worth thinking about in case the "children" argument hits a brick wall. Texas will see nearly 24,000 unplanned births between 2014 and 2015 thanks to these cuts, raising state and federal taxpayer's Medicaid costs by up to $273 million. Nearly half of the women said they couldn't access birth control in the three months before they got pregnant. In a state where half of all pregnancies were unplanned in 2011, and one in three women of childbearing age lacks health insurance, this is only going to get worse. The Planned Parenthood clinics that anti-choice legislators booted from the state's Women's Health Program serviced nearly 50 percent of the program's patients. Along with contraceptive counseling, the clinics provided basic screenings for cancer, hypertension, and other key problems. There's no shortage of need: women in Texas suffer high rates of STIs and unintended pregnancies compared to national figures, and the state ranks 50th for diabetes prevalence in women. Nonetheless, Republican lawmakers went after the clinics in 2011, thanks to their long-standing beef with the organization, and forfeited tens of millions in Medicaid reimbursements to the Women's Health Program so they could defund Planned Parenthood clinics without breaking any federal rules governing how states have to spend Medicaid money. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/03/what-happens-when-you-defund-planned-parenthood

RacerJim -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:09:29 AM)
"The ACA was one of the major election issues and (we won) is now the law of the land ......" The ACA was one of the major lies of the election and (thanks to you) "We the people..." (and the country) are worse off for it. FYI: The law of land can be changed.

Lucylastic -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:13:21 AM)
they have tried, 31 times... how many more are they going to do so?? yet there is no complaint abou the money being used to fund these attempts to get rid of it....or the lack of time spent on doing something actually responsible about stopping the big businesses and insrance, banking, oil companiesand facebook onto an even playing field regarding tax breaks and corporate welfare... nope it has to be to fuck up the poor and sick... and you think things are fucked up because of healthcare for everyone? Amaing how countries that HAVE healthcare for their citizens actually manage to do any business ANYWHERE [8\|]

searching4mysir -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:13:24 AM)
quote: Texas will see nearly 24,000 unplanned births between 2014 and 2015 thanks to these cuts, raising state and federal taxpayer's Medicaid costs by up to $273 million. And how many of those unplanned births were conceived while using a form of birth control? quote: Nearly half of the women said they couldn't access birth control in the three months before they got pregnant. In a state where half of all pregnancies were unplanned in 2011, and one in three women of childbearing age lacks health insurance, this is only going to get worse. I call bullshit. You don't need prescriptions (or a doctor) for a condom. I find it hard to believe condoms were not available to these women in the three months prior to getting pregnant.

Lucylastic -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:15:11 AM)
having been pregnant seven times using birth control... I would say more than a few

searching4mysir -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:16:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic having been pregnant seven times using birth control... I would say more than a few So, is it really ACCESS to birth control that is the problem? I don't think so.

Lucylastic -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:20:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: searching4mysir quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic having been pregnant seven times using birth control... I would say more than a few So, is it really ACCESS to birth control that is the problem? I don't think so. I dunno, Why dont you ask the people who did the survey... I had access to it, I had to pay nothing except thru my taxes, I dont live in texas, I dont know how many used a rubber/ Pill/ Depo, or didnt... why dont YOU do some research to find out answers to YOUR questions??? isnt access or lack of it an issue??

JeffBC -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:45:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: searching4mysir I call bullshit. You don't need prescriptions (or a doctor) for a condom. I find it hard to believe condoms were not available to these women in the three months prior to getting pregnant. OK, I sincerely doubt you're looking for a fact based rebuttal here but I'll go ahead anyway. The failure rate of "the pill" as opposed to "male latex common" is 8% versus 15% (in actual usage rather than theoretically perfect usage). That's in the first year of use. So presumably these numbers are worse across a 10 year period than a 1 year period. So that means providing access to "the pill" (in quotes because the numbers I'm looking at are generic) will reduce unwanted pregnancies by 7% annually across whatever sample size you're looking at. So yes, if our goal is to prevent unwanted children then "the pill" does a substantially better job at it... a fact we all should know. I hadn't thought this argument was really a fact based one though. I thought we were debating morality. Is the goal to reduce unwanted children or to save the potential life inherent in a fetus?

tazzygirl -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 8:55:15 AM)
quote: I call bullshit. You don't need prescriptions (or a doctor) for a condom. I find it hard to believe condoms were not available to these women in the three months prior to getting pregnant. In 2011 Texas reported roughly 400,000 births. http://soupfin.tdh.state.tx.us/birth05.htm 400,000 x 8% (failure rate for the pill) = 32000 births. 400,000 x 15% (fail rate for condoms) = 60000 births. And you want to call bullshit on 24000?

Lucylastic -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 9:04:56 AM)
SFMS Oh I missed the bullshit part of the post, ..nice edit..LMAO I dont give a rats ass WHAT you call bullshit on dear, take it up with them........ You are entitled to your opinions, but please back it up with some form of intelligent argument to support it. Have you some form of ..different statistics, or just using your "splendiferous uninformed mind"?

JeffBC -> RE: Did the GOP really understand the last election? (3/15/2013 9:17:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl In 2011 Texas reported roughly 400,000 births. I call bullshit (LOL, I couldn't resist) But seriously, maybe I'm missing something but I think you're math is wrong. You're looking at births and then applying the percentages to them. Wouldn't you need to look at "people on birth control" THEN apply the 8 and 15% numbers to them?

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875