A question about HHS mandate


#1

I realize the mandate is an attack on all religons and freedom, but what if and I know it not very possible but what if an athiest owned a business and of course mandated to comply with the mandate, and this business owner objected to it for the same reasons we do, because it is after all an attack not just religous freedom, I would say it is an attack on freedom over all or am I missing something. :rolleyes:


#2

[quote="ricks1948, post:1, topic:275013"]
I realize the mandate is an attack on all religons and freedom, but what if and I know it not very possible but what if an athiest owned a business and of course mandated to comply with the mandate, and this business owner objected to it for the same reasons we do, because it is after all an attack not just religous freedom, I would say it is an attack on freedom over all or am I missing something. :rolleyes:

[/quote]

Your not missing anything, ricks. The underlying problem with the HHS mandate is the extension of government power by the statute itself. Anytime government takes on more power over our lives, it comes at the expense of individual liberty. That's because government power is granted to the government out of the rights of the people, which come from God.
Think about how the administration "solved" to controversy. They decided that the Churches didn't have to pay for the contraceptives, the insurance companies did! In other words, the new regulation dictates that the insurance companies must turn over their property to others without expectation of compensation.

The HHS mandate is just a small part of the violation of individual rights by the Obamacare statute, rights that are protected by the constitution.

Jon


#3

This mandate is very strange, even if you look at it from a purely non-religious perspective. A lot of businesses offer health insurance that doesn't cover dental health and vision/optics, so how in the world does it make any sense to force them now to offer free birth control pills? Are birth control pills more important than dental health? Why mandate free birth control pills? Why not mandate employers instead to provide their employees with two beers and a marijuana cigarette, of course free of charge, every day?

A lot of us professionals do not regard birth control pills as "healthcare". Birth control pills mess up a perfectly healthy body. Women's bodies are supposed to be fertile, thus rendering them sick and infertile through chemicals fails the very definition of "healthcare". Same thing with surgical sterilization - that's not "healthcare" but rather a form of "self-mutilation" - that's how I see it and I'm not alone. Don't even get me started on drugs like Plan B and Ella - those can kill a human being, they cause an early abortion. Killing a human being with a drug is not that different of someone drinking bleach to kill himself, or someone trying to slip rat poison into another person's food - this is not "healthcare" but "murder". I'm a professional with a master's degree in pharmacy and a PhD in medicinal chemistry and neuroscience, with formal studies in bioethics, spent almost 30 years in the fields of "life science" and "healthcare", I have all the professional credentials to back up my opinions, and I adamantly refuse to regard contraception, sterilization, and abortion as "healthcare".


#4

Thank you Jon for your reply:thumbsup:And Lpiper yes this is not "health care" the drug industry has women (and men) brainwashed into thinking it is. Its the almighty buck is why its being mandated I can't imagine the amount of money they will reap if this goes forward.:shrug:


#5

Ricks, you make a great point about the money issue - the pharmaceutical companies will reap BIG $$$ profits on this HHS mandate.

Today, many women use less expensive "generic" contraceptives, since usually they have to pay less on those. Generics are cheaper if the woman pays 100% (i.e. if she doesn't have health insurance), and even if the woman does have health insurance, she will have to pay less in co-payments for generic contraceptives.

However, the new health insurance mandate says that the woman should get the whole range of FDA-approved contraceptives, including the most expensive ones, without paying a single cent in co-payments. Thus, doctors will suddenly start prescribing the newest and most expensive contraceptives, and women will request those expensive drugs - why not, after all?

The drug companies will reward the doctors in many ways (paying their trips to expensive conferences, treating them to fancy dinners, etc) for prescribing more of the expensive drugs and thus increasing the bottom line profits for the drug companies.

The women will also like getting the latest and most expensive drugs, since they (the women) will not have to pay anything for those drugs. This HHS mandate will surely lead to many women transitioning from $10-a month contraceptives to fancy stuff that costs $50 and even $100 a month, and contraceptive costs will spiral out of control, because Uncle Sam made a promise to make everything available "for free", including the fancy stuff.

In the end, contraceptive costs will sky-rocket, and drug companies will push more and more extravagantly expensive new contraceptive drug formulations - and guess who will pay in the end for those expensive contraceptives? We, Americans, all of us, will see our health insurance costs increasing substantially, because health insurance companies will pass on those increased costs to all of us, increasing our health insurance premiums.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.