Well Trump has signed legislation giving an employer a choice. They can exercise their religious and moral beliefs or not. Amazing what an uproar that has caused. Imagine you can't demand you be given something just because you want it. Oh, I know, it is a medical necessity. I did a little reading on just what those medical conditions may be. Acne is one. Migraine headaches is another. Regulating your menstrual cycle to reduce the pain of cramps is another. So what I found is all of those things are controlled by a mixture of hormones. Birth control pills are designed to interrupt those hormones and cycles thus preventing pregnancy. So yes, there are situations were taking these pills could be a medical necessity.
The solution ? I suspect the drug manufacturers will develop pills for those very same symptoms/problems and just list infertility as a side effect. If it is not used primarily for birth control it will be covered as a medical condition. Just wanting to have unprotected sex and not bear the responsibility when you conceive is not a medical condition. It is that some take moral and religious objection too. I'm not an employer and so can't say what I might do. I'm expecting for most employers it will come down to cost. Even the most moral among us want to have a good bottom line. If I'm the drug manufacturer I see this as an opportunity. I can develop " new " medications. Shouldn't be a problem. In New York state it is a hero sandwich, in New Orleans it's a grinder. They do the same thing, just a different name.
The whole issue boils down to one thing. Your choice to have sex or not. If you do not engage in sexual activity you will not get pregnant. That is a medical fact, undisputable, unless of course you are artificially inseminated. Should I have to pay for you to engage in an activity I find morally wrong ? If I have to pay for your birth control that is exactly what I am being forced to do. That is the truth if you are saying I need these pills to have sex ! You are forcing me to become an enabler, a person or thing that makes something possible.
I'm not talking about a medical condition here, only about birth control. Yes, abstinence works ! I know, I know, you just can't control yourself. That is a mental condition, not a medical condition. I'm not saying it is abnormal, just that it is a choice dictated by your moral sensibilities. There are many that practice " situational " morality. That occurs when we modify our morals to fit the current situation. Are those that refuse to modify their moral character to accommodate others wrong ? I don't believe you can justify that one. I think you have to agree that everyone has the right to choose for themselves. I think you also would have to agree that everyone should pay for their own choices as well.
Amazing isn't it ? We are having a big discussion about an issue that was settled on December the fifteenth 1791. That is when the bill of rights were ratified. The first amendment expressly states I can freely practice my religion. It doesn't say I have to pay for your practices ! Should I wish to include " extras " I am free to do that.
" As of January 1, 2015, employers with 50 or more full time equivalent (FTE) employees are required to provide health coverage to full-time employees or else pay a tax penalty. This is commonly referred to as the employer mandate. "
So you see with less than fifty employees a employer is not required to offer you a thing. It is your choice to work for that employer or not. If there are more than fifty employees health coverage is mandated by law. In my view a moral decision on the part of the employer now being legislated. I don't believe the government has any business legislating my morality. Morals should not be situational !
The solution ? I suspect the drug manufacturers will develop pills for those very same symptoms/problems and just list infertility as a side effect. If it is not used primarily for birth control it will be covered as a medical condition. Just wanting to have unprotected sex and not bear the responsibility when you conceive is not a medical condition. It is that some take moral and religious objection too. I'm not an employer and so can't say what I might do. I'm expecting for most employers it will come down to cost. Even the most moral among us want to have a good bottom line. If I'm the drug manufacturer I see this as an opportunity. I can develop " new " medications. Shouldn't be a problem. In New York state it is a hero sandwich, in New Orleans it's a grinder. They do the same thing, just a different name.
The whole issue boils down to one thing. Your choice to have sex or not. If you do not engage in sexual activity you will not get pregnant. That is a medical fact, undisputable, unless of course you are artificially inseminated. Should I have to pay for you to engage in an activity I find morally wrong ? If I have to pay for your birth control that is exactly what I am being forced to do. That is the truth if you are saying I need these pills to have sex ! You are forcing me to become an enabler, a person or thing that makes something possible.
I'm not talking about a medical condition here, only about birth control. Yes, abstinence works ! I know, I know, you just can't control yourself. That is a mental condition, not a medical condition. I'm not saying it is abnormal, just that it is a choice dictated by your moral sensibilities. There are many that practice " situational " morality. That occurs when we modify our morals to fit the current situation. Are those that refuse to modify their moral character to accommodate others wrong ? I don't believe you can justify that one. I think you have to agree that everyone has the right to choose for themselves. I think you also would have to agree that everyone should pay for their own choices as well.
Amazing isn't it ? We are having a big discussion about an issue that was settled on December the fifteenth 1791. That is when the bill of rights were ratified. The first amendment expressly states I can freely practice my religion. It doesn't say I have to pay for your practices ! Should I wish to include " extras " I am free to do that.
" As of January 1, 2015, employers with 50 or more full time equivalent (FTE) employees are required to provide health coverage to full-time employees or else pay a tax penalty. This is commonly referred to as the employer mandate. "
So you see with less than fifty employees a employer is not required to offer you a thing. It is your choice to work for that employer or not. If there are more than fifty employees health coverage is mandated by law. In my view a moral decision on the part of the employer now being legislated. I don't believe the government has any business legislating my morality. Morals should not be situational !
No comments:
Post a Comment