« POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: Topic: The Blunt-Rubio bill is a disaster for women

By: clo in POPE | Recommend this post (0)
Mon, 12 Mar 12 12:10 AM | 41 view(s)
Boardmark this board | (The) Pope's for real stock market report
Msg. 53250 of 65535
(This msg. is a reply to 53248 by Zimbler0)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

What is NOT fine . . . is for one person to say
"YOU MUST pay for someone elses contraception".

No 'one person' is saying that.

Many people are strongly suggesting insurance companies cover contraception.




Avatar

DO SOMETHING!


- - - - -
View Replies (3) »



» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: Topic: The Blunt-Rubio bill is a disaster for women
By: Zimbler0
in POPE
Mon, 12 Mar 12 12:03 AM
Msg. 53248 of 65535

Clo> Why should insurance cover your high cholesterol meds or someone else's high blood pressure meds?

Because it is cheaper & more practical.
>>>


Cheaper for who, Clo?
Me? Or the other ratepayers paying for it?

I think what you just do not get . . .

In an open marketplace one can buy anything one wants.

If one wants an insurance policy that provides for
birth control - one can buy one.

If an employer wants to provide a drug perscription
benefit that's fine. No problem.

If an employer wants to provide contraception as
part of the benefits package that's fine too. As
you like to point out, it is cheaper to provide
contraception than it is to bring another baby into
the world.

What is NOT fine . . . is for one person to say
"YOU MUST pay for someone elses contraception".

Zim.


« POPE Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next