Thread: Is Free Birth Control like 9/11 and Pearl Harbor?

Originally Posted by GloriaInTX

Who pays for the insurance? The employer. So if the Catholic church is the employer and they have to pay for someone to get a morning after pill (which is included as contraception) that they believe is an abortion, you are infringing on their reglious freedom not to pay for an abortion.

I don't know how many employers completely pay for the employee's insurance. I pay $300 a month for my insurance; if my employer objects to any of my medications, they can tell themselves that the objectionable medication comes out of my share.

Also, perhaps working in corporate America has made me cynical, but I would be truly surprised if there are many employers out there that don't factor the cost of their portion of insurance into the total compensation package they offer their employees. What I mean is, I'm pretty sure they follow models that go something like this:

"I would pay employee A $2000 a month. However, I need to factor in that I will most likely be paying $500 a month for his insurance, so I will offer him $1500 a month plus benefits."

What I'm saying is, I'm pretty sure they take your money and (partially) pay for your insurance with it. Pretty sure most employers don't just give it as a gift and allow themselves to be out that money each month.

Also, are you a fan of allowing people to refuse to pay into a common pool for other things that they disagree with? For example, I disagree with the war and would prefer not to pay for it. Should I be able to opt out of my taxes, or do you think that sometimes paying for things you disagree with is the cost of living in a diverse society?

I dont believe employers should have the right to dictate what meds a woman takes, but they should have a right to dictate what they will pay for. I have paid the $35 a month for my BCP, our insurance does not pay for it until now.

ETA: I do not believe Republicans are waging a "War on woman" I believe they are waging a war on making others pay for woman's meds, BIG DIFFERENCE.

Originally Posted by Alissa_Sal

I don't know how many employers completely pay for the employee's insurance. I pay $300 a month for my insurance; if my employer objects to any of my medications, they can tell themselves that the objectionable medication comes out of my share.

It doesn't really work that way. So if an abortion cost $200 and I only give $10 towards it, then I didn't pay for the abortion?

Originally Posted by Alissa_Sal

Also, are you a fan of allowing people to refuse to pay into a common pool for other things that they disagree with? For example, I disagree with the war and would prefer not to pay for it. Should I be able to opt out of my taxes, or do you think that sometimes paying for things you disagree with is the cost of living in a diverse society?

This isn't a common pool. It is a church. They should absolutely be able to not pay for things they disagree with on religious grounds.

Originally Posted by mom3girls

I dont believe employers should have the right to dictate what meds a woman takes, but they should have a right to dictate what they will pay for. I have paid the $35 a month for my BCP, our insurance does not pay for it until now.

The problem with our insurance models is that when we are all paying into the same pool (all meaning employers and employees) as is the most typical, how do you separate out what I am paying for vs what my employer is paying for? If I pay $300 a month for my premium (and I do) it's hard to say that I shouldn't be able to have a portion of my $300 that I pay put towards my birth control just because my employer also pays for part of it (sort of, like I said above, I'm pretty sure the typical model is that employers factor in cost of benefits when they decide how much to pay an employee...) Maybe I don't think my boss should manage his diabetes through medication and think that he should focus on diet and exercise. Is he infringing on my rights just because we both pay into the same pool? Is that really the direction we want to go in, where we are all looking at each other's medical benefits and arguing about what we personally agree with? Or should we just leave it up to personal choice?

Originally Posted by GloriaInTX

It doesn't really work that way. So if an abortion cost $200 and I only give $10 towards it, then I didn't pay for the abortion?



This isn't a common pool. It is a church. They should absolutely be able to not pay for things they disagree with on religious grounds.

Insurance is a common pool of money. Everyone who pays for insurance (including the employees) pays into the common pool. If you want to not spend money on things you disagree with, the only thing I can think of is removing yourself from the common pool.

Originally Posted by Alissa_Sal

The problem with our insurance models is that when we are all paying into the same pool (all meaning employers and employees) as is the most typical, how do you separate out what I am paying for vs what my employer is paying for? If I pay $300 a month for my premium (and I do) it's hard to say that I shouldn't be able to have a portion of my $300 that I pay put towards my birth control just because my employer also pays for part of it (sort of, like I said above, I'm pretty sure the typical model is that employers factor in cost of benefits when they decide how much to pay an employee...) Maybe I don't think my boss should manage his diabetes through medication and think that he should focus on diet and exercise. Is he infringing on my rights just because we both pay into the same pool? Is that really the direction we want to go in, where we are all looking at each other's medical benefits and arguing about what we personally agree with? Or should we just leave it up to personal choice?

The insurance companies manage to do it. Everyone's insurance will go up to cover the cost of BCP that are now "free". Nothing is free in the world now everyone else will just pay it in a different way.

Originally Posted by GloriaInTX

The insurance companies manage to do it. Everyone's insurance will go up to cover the cost of BCP that are now "free". Nothing is free in the world now everyone else will just pay it in a different way.

Insurance companies manage to do what? Like, earmark funds? I don't think that's how it works. I do agree with you that BCP is not free. Nothing is free. Absolutely true.

Originally Posted by Alissa_Sal

Insurance companies manage to do what? Like, earmark funds? I don't think that's how it works. I do agree with you that BCP is not free. Nothing is free. Absolutely true.

Insurance companies have a list of things they include in coverage. If BCP are added to the list, the cost goes up for everyone. It's not like they have no idea how to seperate these things out. They are doing it now.

Originally Posted by GloriaInTX

Who pays for the insurance? The employer. So if the Catholic church is the employer and they have to pay for someone to get a morning after pill (which is included as contraception) that they believe is an abortion, you are infringing on their reglious freedom not to pay for an abortion.

I am still in the fact gathering stage. Do we know that the morning after pill is included?

I do think it is over the top to compare free BC to 9/11 or Pearl Harbor. BC prevents abortions. I would be willing to compair the day Row vs Wade happened to those tragedies though.

Originally Posted by GloriaInTX

Insurance companies have a list of things they include in coverage. If BCP are added to the list, the cost goes up for everyone. It's not like they have no idea how to seperate these things out. They are doing it now.

I don't disagree with any of that. What I'm saying is that if I pay $300 for my coverage and my employer pays $300 for my coverage, and I believe in and want bc but my employer doesn't, how will they sort out my money from my employers to decide what pays for what? And if I'm paying too, why shouldn't I have a say over my own coverage?