• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Arizona Legislature "Employers can fire you for using birth control"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you not understand the distinction between being anti-'forcing employers to cover contraception if they offer health care' and anti-contraception?

I'm sorry you missed the fucking memo on contraception being a health issue. I hope the next time you get a medication you have to explain to your boss the fucking reasons why.
 
Is it some kind of running gag or what ? Is every US representative wakes up every morning and sign up for the most ridiculous act they can come up with ?
 
When your state requires you to go into your boss' office and explain why your dick doesn't work, you may sing a different tune.

If my insurance covers dick medicine for medical reasons and I have a medical reason to need dick medicine paid for, I'd have to communicate such with my insurance company. If my employer provided that insurance, then that would be my employer, sure. Is this some sort of problem?
 
So wait, not forcing employers to cover the cost of contraception if they provide health insurance is tantamount to a war on women or a war on contraception now? Hyperbole much? 'WAR ON WOMEN' is so mouth-foamingly over the top it makes me question lefties sanity. It's surreal.

huffington post said:
Moreover, according to the American Civil Liberties Union, the law would give Arizona employers the green light to fire a woman upon finding out that she took birth control for the purpose of preventing pregnancy.

"The bill goes beyond guaranteeing a person's rights to express and practice their faith," Anjali Abraham, a lobbyist for the ACLU, told the Senate panel, "and instead lets employers prioritize their beliefs over the beliefs, the interests, the needs of their employees, in this case, particularly, female employees."

Seems pretty black and white to me. The Civil Rights Act happened for a reason, people used to have "moral objections" to race mixing.

Civil Rights Act of 1964 said:
Title VII
Title VII of the Act, codified as Subchapter VI of Chapter 21 of title 42 of the United States Code, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e [2] et seq., prohibits discrimination by covered employers on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin (see 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2[32]). Title VII also prohibits discrimination against an individual because of his or her association with another individual of a particular race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

So I'd actually call this recent crusade a war against the CRA of '64 (and the Voting Rights act, as seen in South Carolina), trying to paint the Civil Rights Movement as a 'communist aggression' against American values.
 
If my insurance covers dick medicine for medical reasons and I have a medical reason to need dick medicine paid for, I'd have to communicate such with my insurance company. If my employer provided that insurance, then that would be my employer, sure. Is this some sort of problem?

You must be a 7-year old Chinese girl, because those are some amazing gymnastics.
 
If my insurance covers dick medicine for medical reasons and I have a medical reason to need dick medicine paid for, I'd have to communicate such with my insurance company. If my employer provided that insurance, then that would be my employer, sure. Is this some sort of problem?

Do you fucking not get it? Birth control is pretty much a part of many working class women's lives. So you're saying that employers have the right to pry into her fucking sex life and health matters if they have a moral objection to her private use of fucking birth control.
 
Seems like I missed the memo where some people think employers have full rights to do whatever the fuck they want with people's lives
 
9bbtde.gif
 
Social conservatives are digging their own graves with this kind of shit, I fully expect a massive defeat for them later this year.

Social conservatism has always been digging themselves deeper. When has social conservative policies ever found itself on the right side of history?
 
Poor logic due to the fact that contraception is a part of health care.

Toothpaste and soap is part of health care, can I force my employer to pay for my toothpaste too because they provide insurance? The point of insurance is to pool risk to reduce individual exposure to risk. Eg. you buy health insurance in case you someday have a heart attack because the pooled premiums pay for the unlucky subset of the insured who do have heart attacks. You don't have sudden unpredictable needs for contraceptives that you need to reduce your risk exposure to via insurance. Forcing it on insurance plans legislatively just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Forcing it on employers insurance offerings makes even less sense. One of the reasons US healthcare is so derp is because health insurance is so heavily welded to employers by tax legislation; this means losing one's job also means one loses one's health insurance at the same time, which is fucked up. Pushing even more health care related costs (contraception) onto employers is the opposite of sense. So you lose your job and your health insurance and your contraception along with it? Sounds great.
 
Big business and big government alive and well in the Republican party. What a fucking joke. Big government for those ideologically opposed to us, small government for us. Fuck. Off.
 
I haven't followed this movement by social conservatives too closely since the initial feud between Obama and the Catholic Church started. Just out of curiosity, are they at least keeping it as a morality issues. Specifically, none of this outrage concerns fiscal concerns about employers getting dinged financially as a result of having to pay for birth control, right?
 
Toothpaste and soap is part of health care, can I force my employer to pay for my toothpaste too because they provide insurance? The point of insurance is to pool risk to reduce individual exposure to risk. Eg. you buy health insurance in case you someday have a heart attack because the pooled premiums pay for the unlucky subset of the insured who do have heart attacks. You don't have sudden unpredictable needs for contraceptives that you need to reduce your risk exposure to via insurance. Forcing it on insurance plans legislatively just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Forcing it on employers insurance offerings makes even less sense. One of the reasons US healthcare is so derp is because health insurance is so heavily welded to employers by tax legislation; this means losing one's job also means one loses one's health insurance at the same time, which is fucked up. Pushing even more health care related costs (contraception) onto employers is the opposite of sense. So you lose your job and your health insurance and your contraception along with it? Sounds great.
So your solution to the problem of employment and health insurance being too tied together is to allow employers to make health care decisions and hire/fire using them?
 
Toothpaste and soap is part of health care, can I force my employer to pay for my toothpaste too because they provide insurance? The point of insurance is to pool risk to reduce individual exposure to risk. Eg. you buy health insurance in case you someday have a heart attack because the pooled premiums pay for the unlucky subset of the insured who do have heart attacks. You don't have sudden unpredictable needs for contraceptives that you need to reduce your risk exposure to via insurance. Forcing it on insurance plans legislatively just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Forcing it on employers insurance offerings makes even less sense. One of the reasons US healthcare is so derp is because health insurance is so heavily welded to employers by tax legislation; this means losing one's job also means one loses one's health insurance at the same time, which is fucked up. Pushing even more health care related costs (contraception) onto employers is the opposite of sense. So you lose your job and your health insurance and your contraception along with it? Sounds great.

So...you're suggesting that every woman in the country nut up and pay for their own birth control, so if they get fired the birth control train keeps riding along smoothly? If I'm mistaken, please clarify.
 
Do you fucking not get it? Birth control is pretty much a part of many working class women's lives. So you're saying that employers have the right to pry into her fucking sex life and health matters if they have a moral objection to her private use of fucking birth control.
this is also conservatives giving businesses different ways of having absolute control over employees. many employers might not really give a damn but if any woman acts up they can then use this to fire them. how many women will complain about work conditions if they have this hanging over their heads?
 
Toothpaste and soap is part of health care, can I force my employer to pay for my toothpaste too because they provide insurance? The point of insurance is to pool risk to reduce individual exposure to risk. Eg. you buy health insurance in case you someday have a heart attack because the pooled premiums pay for the unlucky subset of the insured who do have heart attacks. You don't have sudden unpredictable needs for contraceptives that you need to reduce your risk exposure to via insurance. Forcing it on insurance plans legislatively just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Forcing it on employers insurance offerings makes even less sense. One of the reasons US healthcare is so derp is because health insurance is so heavily welded to employers by tax legislation; this means losing one's job also means one loses one's health insurance at the same time, which is fucked up. Pushing even more health care related costs (contraception) onto employers is the opposite of sense. So you lose your job and your health insurance and your contraception along with it? Sounds great.
Well, you understand that insurance should be decoupled from employment at least. But I'm sure you will shut your brain off once the obvious, empirically tested solution to this problem is presented: single payer health insurance.

Also, do a tiny bit of googling: providing contraception saves insurers money.
 
So wait, not forcing employers to cover the cost of contraception if they provide health insurance is tantamount to a war on women or a war on contraception now? Hyperbole much? 'WAR ON WOMEN' is so mouth-foamingly over the top it makes me question lefties sanity. It's surreal.

Hey, remember the outrage from Republicans over health insurance coverage of Viagra? Oh.....
 
Toothpaste and soap is part of health care, can I force my employer to pay for my toothpaste too because they provide insurance?

These are not prescribed medication, unlike the contraceptives being discussed. Care to come up with a relevant example?

The point of insurance is to pool risk to reduce individual exposure to risk. Eg. you buy health insurance in case you someday have a heart attack because the pooled premiums pay for the unlucky subset of the insured who do have heart attacks. You don't have sudden unpredictable needs for contraceptives that you need to reduce your risk exposure to via insurance.

This is false, contraceptives can be required for many unexpected medical reasons. For example, 2 forms of birth control are required for a woman to be put on accutane.
 
Do you fucking not get it? Birth control is pretty much a part of many working class women's lives. So you're saying that employers have the right to pry into her fucking sex life and health matters if they have a moral objection to her private use of fucking birth control.

So you're saying it's prying when health insurance providers require that the people they provide insurance to provide information about the consumables they are claiming on their health insurance? Really? The fact that that happens to be your employer is providing the health insurance and therefore there are privacy issues is an argument against forcing your employer to cover contraception health costs not for it.
 
Where is the part about employers firing you if you use birth control?
I read the bill quickly but don't see that part. Is that if you tell the employer you are using contraceptives for medical reasons but are really using it for birth control reasons?
 
Toothpaste and soap is part of health care, can I force my employer to pay for my toothpaste too because they provide insurance? The point of insurance is to pool risk to reduce individual exposure to risk. Eg. you buy health insurance in case you someday have a heart attack because the pooled premiums pay for the unlucky subset of the insured who do have heart attacks. You don't have sudden unpredictable needs for contraceptives that you need to reduce your risk exposure to via insurance. Forcing it on insurance plans legislatively just doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Forcing it on employers insurance offerings makes even less sense. One of the reasons US healthcare is so derp is because health insurance is so heavily welded to employers by tax legislation; this means losing one's job also means one loses one's health insurance at the same time, which is fucked up. Pushing even more health care related costs (contraception) onto employers is the opposite of sense. So you lose your job and your health insurance and your contraception along with it? Sounds great.

Whats next? Only Jesus can save you from depression? Cancer can be cured through prayer? Employers have no right to deny you healthcare due to religious reasons


Also contraception saves employers and insurers a lot of money
 
Where is the part about employers firing you if you use birth control?
I read the bill quickly but don't see that part. Is that if you tell the employer you are using contraceptives for medical reasons but are really using it for birth control reasons?
How is birth control not a medical issue?
 
These are not prescribed medication, unlike the contraceptives being discussed. Care to come up with a relevant example?



This is false, contraceptives can be required for many unexpected medical reasons. For example, 2 forms of birth control are required for a woman to be put on accutane.

Right. And the legislation distinguishes between contraceptives prescribed for medical reasons (which your employer must cover if they offer health insurance as long as you prove the prescription is for a medical reason) and contraceptives for general contraception which your employer may or may not to decide to cover with their insurance plan.
 
Social conservatives are digging their own graves with this kind of shit, I fully expect a massive defeat for them later this year.

In the long term, maybe (hopefully), but in the short term, there is plenty of scaremongering about how Islam/immigrants/liberals/etc are destroying the American (read: white) way of life. How to save that endangered breed? By going back to the "good old days" of the 50s (1950s or 1850s, take your pick).
 
Where is the part about employers firing you if you use birth control?
I read the bill quickly but don't see that part. Is that if you tell the employer you are using contraceptives for medical reasons but are really using it for birth control reasons?

Tell them you don't want a baby. For a lot of people it's the same as saying you don't want cancer.
 
Right. And the legislation distinguishes between contraceptives prescribed for medical reasons (which your employer must cover if they offer health insurance as long as you prove the prescription is for a medical reason) and contraceptives for general contraception which your employer may or may not to decide to cover with their insurance plan.
Why would the insurer NOT want to cover contraception?
 
Go do some reading on the civil rights act.

You people are hilarious.

Libertarians don't like the Civil Rights Act as well.

Social conservatives are digging their own graves with this kind of shit, I fully expect a massive defeat for them later this year.

Yeah, but as long as young people and minorities don't turn out to vote during midterm elections, they'll keep regaining that power.

edit: Though, heh, these specific legislatures in Arizona will just get rewarded for shit like this.
 
So let me get this straight:

In Arizona, contraceptives can be covered by medical insurance, but only if you're using them for reasons other than the most obvious and common one? And employers are now capable of firing someone for using contraceptives?

Please tell me I'm misunderstanding something, because this sounds unbelievably stupid.
 
Well, you understand that insurance should be decoupled from employment at least. But I'm sure you will shut your brain off once the obvious, empirically tested solution to this problem is presented: single payer health insurance.

Also, do a tiny bit of googling: providing contraception saves insurers money.

I'm an Australian. I am very happy with our publicly funded universal health care, thank you very much. If the US did something similar I would regard it as a marked improvement, so please save your strawmen attacks on me for views I don't actually hold.
 
Libertarians don't like the Civil Rights Act as well.
I have no hope of convincing the ridiculous person in question; such comments are more for the edification of the thread.

I'm an Australian. I am very happy with our publicly funded universal health care, thank you very much. If the US did something similar I would regard it as a marked improvement, so please save your strawmen attacks on me for views I don't actually hold.
Doublethink is an incredible thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom