Think of this ...Clinton did one little interview on web tv and said that Obama
ought to KEEP HIS PROMISE and allow folks to keep their insurance as long as
they want. Now if this is obvious to Clinton (who is still the king of party)
then it is also obvious to Barack. Barack reacted almost immediately after
Clinton spoke like a puppet on a string and gave his phony "keep it for a
year" speech which really amounts to a fraudulent and weak attempt to shift
the blame to the insurance companies...vintage Obama not taking responsibility.
If this president could be any more pathetic I really don't know how. His
credibility is now in the 30% range and his likeability is tanking too (people
don't like arrogant liars).
I'm going to make my own religion that says I'm not allowed to pay
taxes and don't have to obey speed limits. After all, "what good are
religious beliefs if you can't act on them?"
J Thompson,So if my daughter needs contraception for other
conditions (many do), should that be covered?If a mother needs
contraception because getting pregnant again would be dangerous and she and her
husband have counseled together and feel this is the right thing, should that be
covered?If there is no contraception and there is a baby, should the baby
be covered (even if it is the result of poor choices)?Alternatively,If I smoke and get lung cancer, should that be covered?If I drink and get into a bad accident and have significant injuries, should
those be covered?If I go to work in a mine (full well knowing the risks)
and get black lung or injured, should I be covered?My point is
simply that many choices have negative (and avoidable) health consequences.
Also, that not all usage of something controversial is really negative.I certainly understand the point that we do not want to encourage bad choices.
And that agency should have consequences. But every insurance plan I have had
for about 30 years (at least that I can think of) covered all of the above.
It is more cost effective to pay for a contraceptive implant than it is to pay
for the birth of a child. Period. Nobody's religious worship is affected
by my wife's decision to get an implant. The very idea is nonsense. Canada's single payer system of health care recently garnered a 97%
approval rating. When was the last time ANYTHING in the U.S. had a 97% approval
rating? You don't see these countries that have gone single payer changing
their minds, do you? Somebody is going to jump on and talk about how it
was fifteen years ago when the single payer system was working out its bumps.
Those bumps are gone. Canada worked it out. Europe worked it out. Are they
smarter than us? Perhaps so...
The President has announced an extension of Personal Plans that were canceling
people.I would encourage all that have a personal plan (not group,
Medicare or Medicaid) to study their plan carefully. If they were going to
cancel you, you need to find out why (likely that they were not offering the
protections of the ACA). The ACA is requiring that these plans send you
information of how their plan does not stack up to the protections that the ACA
has designed in theirs. During this time a person can make an informed decision
as to what plan they would like for the coming year. As for me, since I've
had none, I will be happy to get a plan that stacks up to the ACA's
requirements that are fair and good.
@ HutteriteThank you for distilling such a gem as:"Religion doesn't need health care. People do. Let them have
access."Well said. Why do so many people take it
upon themselves to pronounce the will of God? Those people aren't God, but
they want God's power over their fellow men and women. That's
blasphemy, pure and simple. People who speak for God should tremble, but they
are too proud, and maybe don't even believe in God, if they think God
can't speak for himself.
hefre is the thing Obama shares an equal part of the blame, An equal part with
the congress that passed the ACA then walked away knowing there were changes
that needed to be made, so get back in there and make the changes. Any
congressman or senator that points a finger at Obama need to take a long look in
the mirror then roll up their sleeves and go back to work. Yes Obama needs to do
ObamaCare is the transfer of wealth and of responsibility from the person to
other citizens. Those who equate having sex with getting cancer are insane.
Yes, some of us will get cancer. Some of us will intentionally contribute to
getting cancer, but how many of us would do anything that could cause cancer if
the odds were 1 in 10 EVERY MONTH? Pregnancy is caused by having sex. When a
person has the choice of having sex, that person is responsible for the
consequences of that act. No one, except the two people involved, should be
required to finance the consequences of that act, or for contraceptives to
prevent that act from resulting in pregnancy. The irresponsible
will tell us that some "rich guy" should pay for all contraceptives.
That same person would also tell us that some "rich guy" should house
them and clothe them and feed them. God told us differently. He gave us
agency. That agency is not separate from the consequences of our choices. When
we choose to act, we are responsible for the consequences of those actions.
Of course former president is correct. If the government promises people can
keep their insurance plan and that turns out to be not correct, then the
government should make it right. They should pass supplemental legislation
allowing people to keep their plans. This should be obvious.
Re: ". . . [Health care] provided by the U.S. Military was the BEST
Healthcare my family and I have EVER had . . . ."And you know,
of course, that one feature of Obamacare is to reduce, charge for, even deny
aspects of that care to military families, making them compete for rationed or
unavailable health care, along with the rest of America?Welcome to
the brave, new Obamacare world.Recruiters promised me "free
medical and dental care, for me and my family, for life" if I enlisted and
stayed for life. So, I enlisted. Spent 30+ years in the military. It has taken
awhile, and politicians of both parties were involved, of course, but Obamacare
will soon kill off the last of my "free" medical and dental care for
life.Not sure, but it seems you're suggesting Obamacare is a
good replacement for military health care. It's not.And
Obamacare can NEVER get America to a military health care standard. Even if, as
Obama plans, it collapses American health care.Once the genie's
out, it's out. No going back.
I was in both eastern and western europe.The 100% subsidy from the feds is
for 3 years.If I remember right the cost to expand medicaid in Utah is 4.8
billion per year ( I don;t know for sure though)so the state would have to
come up with 480 million dollars a year every year after 3 years.The 2012
budget had Utah at 3.6 billion dollars.So that is an automatic increase of
13% that the state has to pay out.With revenue projected to increase
slightly where does this money come from.More taxes.Austria one
nation I have been to is a great model in healthcare, but they are taxed heavily
and if people are able to buy a two bedroom apartment they are lucky.I
agree that healthcare needs reformed.Like a cap on malpractice suits. That
would be a great way to lower premiums.There are two chooses pay an
obscene amount of tax (most socialized nations in Europe)Or have a little
freedom to choose.
@patriot"The same people who oversaw the web application also oversaw
the writing of the law itself and both are an impossible mess. "Web design contractors didn't write the bill nor did beareaucrats make
the site. Though I agree with you on overhauling the site. Just use the
contractors Kentucky, Oregon, or one of the other successful states used, unlike
Vermont which made its own site but used the contractors the federal gov't
used..."If it's not broken don't try to fix
it."The website is broken, not the bill. It's working just
fine in other states that had their own website design.@BeSmart"I lived in Europe for a long while and the health care is terrible.
"Which nation(s), if you don't mind me asking? There's
a big difference between the Soviet bloc nations and western Europe. "The reason many states did not expand medicaid is the cost."There's 0 cost to the states the first few years of it (the 90%
subsidization comes later though I forget which year). A state could always
expand it for those couple years and then decide if they want to keep it later.
Irony of the day, part IIThe same people who cried, "the
Government needs to START making people take personal responsibility for their
own healthcare", are now the very same people crying -- "the Government needs to STOP making people take personal responsibility
for their own healthcare".
@LDS Liberal 12:09Your logic is flawed related to religious liberty
and the contraceptive funding debate. Although a veteran (USAF pilot including
Vietnam), I oppose our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. On religious
principles, I am generally opposed to all war. Yet, taxes I pay go toward our
offensive wars (I'm not opposed to basic self-defense).Do you
think I should not be taxed for costs of offensive wars?Common sense
requires that our tax dollars go to all sorts of programs and purposes, some of
which we oppose on ethical or religious grounds. Such is life in a free society:
we subsidize many things for everyone else.
My "Socialist" -- No-premium, No-Denial, no-deductible, no-copay, no 80/20% split [now down to 50/50% for
United Healthcare], No medical bankruptcy, nothing out of pocket,
no pre-existing condition, NO Questions asked, Government
provided by the U.S. Military was the BEST Healthcare my family and I have
EVER had in the outside. BTW -- It cost the U.S. tax payers 1/4 the
cost of anything in the private sector.
@atl134 I lived in Europe for a long while and the health care is
terrible. If they had to pay anything for surgeries they probably went to
the better doctors.The run of the mill low end doctors paid by the
government are terrible.One example I went with a man to the hospital
complaining of chest pain, we went in and saw the doctor he hit his hand with a
hammer to test something and said you need this and booted us out. All of 4
minutes in there after a couple hours wait for an emergency.The German
system is amazing and the world class system. The majority of socialized (or
subsidized) medical systems in the world are sub-par . When the ACA first
passed they said it would only help a smaller percentage. Don't use the
media as a source. The reason many states did not expand medicaid is the
cost.The leftist controlled U.S. government said they would pay for 90% of
the expansion so 10% must come from the states.Truth is most states
don't have that money.How many people right now have an extra chunk
of change to throw out.
As a software engineer this whole Obamacare law reminds me of so many horribly
written pieces of software I have seen over the years from small applications to
large complex enterprise applications. With few exceptions - the best policy is
always to just scrap the old app and architect a new one built on the latest
technology and also rethinking the entire work flow of the app during the
process. The effort to fix a poorly written complex app is rarely worth the time
spent.Obamacare is a mess - pure and simple. The same people who
oversaw the web application also oversaw the writing of the law itself and both
are an impossible mess. If you try to allow people to keep their insurance
...and most people elect to do just that...then why in the world did we even
adopt this law in the first place? If it's not broken don't try to fix
it. Concentrate on a small law that provides bare bones coverage for those
citizens who have no health care instead of tying to re-invent the wheel for
Sending the ACA back to Congress for overhaul would not be wise. Our govenment
is divided, fractured by partisan and ideological groups that refuse to
compromise. The ACA has flaws, but overall it is essential to solving our
skyrocketing cost of health care.Unfortunately it is looking like
immigration reform, realistic budgeting and necessary cuts in defense and
entitlement spending are all beyond the congressional freeze. Congress cannot
be relied on to provide any significant legislation, maybe for years to come.The ACA bugs will be worked out, just like all bugs in new programs are
solved. Let it be. It will serve us well.
@BeSmart"Europes healthcare is also sub-par. Try living there for a
while."My dad and stepmom have been living there for the past
four years, both have needed surgeries, and both of those surgeries were much
cheaper for them than mine was while they got to see specialists faster than I
did (6 weeks for me, 2 for my stepmom, 1 for my dad). A week long hospital stay
for my stepmom's knee replacement surgery had roughly the same charge as my
four hour outpatient surgery expense. The nightly rates were comparable to a
Holiday Inn in this nation... mine was more than a month's rent for the
afternoon. The German healthcare system is fantastic."Healthcare
should be available to all, but obamacare will only insure 33% of the currently
uninsured."It'd be higher if some Republican governors
didn't oppose the Medicaid expansion (who's throwing people off of
@atl134Europes healthcare is also sub-par. Try living there for a while.
Another is look at the french tax rate.I disagree with Obamacare because
of how it is structured. I also disagree with the Ryan Budget on Medicare
matters.A big difference with seniors is they paid taxes and social
security for many years so they deserve what they were paying into all these
years.Healthcare should be available to all, but obamacare will only
insure 33% of the currently uninsured. The subsidies are paid through taxes and
penalties on both citizens and healthcare providers.If a hospital has to
pay an extra 100,000 in taxes where will they make up the costs?They will
increase their rates which will in turn increase the premiums. The people who
are subsidized for insurance get a plan for free great, but these low income
people are getting a high deductible plan (usually around 3,500 from what I have
read) and they can not even afford the deductible so it is the same boat. People with good insurance will face in increased premium cost and pay for
@RGBuena Vista, VATo Wilf55: "Strange that a Mormon oriented
newspaper would back an issue that is relevant for the Catholic Church. The
Catholic Church condemns contraceptives, not the Mormon Church."No, it is not strange at all. The issue is one of religious liberty. One of
the things LDS most believe in is religious liberty. We're all in this
together. When anyone's religious liberty is trampled on, all of our
religious liberty is trampled on.12:09 p.m. Nov. 13, 2013============ Somehow -- I have a sneaky suspicion you did
not support Muslims building an Islamic Cultural Center in New York.I know the LDS Church did, but I also know many of their AM radio
listening Tea-party members did not.BTW - The LDS Church allows
abortions (in some instances for it's members), but I also know many
of their AM radio listening Tea-Party Republican members who do not for any
reason for anyone (members or not).
When a religion is operating purely as a religion, then it should be afforded
all sorts of protections. But when a religion is operating as a business and
employing in non-ecclesiastical roles then it should not be able to dictate the
healthcare choices of its employees.All of this howling over freedom
of religion is a misdirection, and should be called out as such.
RedShirtCalTech,Is that for all types and for all the reasons it is
prescribed? As others have well said, simple birth control is not the only
reason such that I assume there are many types both on and off patent (with the
resulting variance in cost).Is it your contention that all such
drugs are this cheap?
Does anybody realize how much birth control costs? You realize that according
to Target, you can get a month's supply of birth control for $10 without
insurance. Now, let look at the cost with insurance. With insurance most plans
have a $400 deductible for prescriptions that must be met before the plan covers
any of the costs. So, even with the mandate for birth control, you still will
pay for it entirely out of your pocket. Since you will still pay for it out of
pocket, what is the point in keeping it in the plan?
One thing conservatives, but not liberals, know how to do is to learn from
history. The "war on poverty" did not cure poverty. It only encouraged
women to have babies out of wedlock, which lead to more poverty and crime.
Conservatives also know that the bigger the government or the government
program, the more subject it is to fraud, abuse and waste, and always,
unintended bad consequences. This has been true for many decades, but the
liberals have yet to figure it out. Obamacare is no exception. It is causing job
loss, insurance and dr. loss, and look at the incompetent way it was rolled out.
It is only going to get worse, but let's see if the liberals learn
anything. (BTW, I read yesterday how the govt.-promoted corn ethanol project is
anti-green - has caused way more CO2 emmisions and other pollution than before
the project. Total backfire. Great example of unintended consequences. And we
can blame Bush for starting it, but Obama is still an enthusiastic supporter.)
Clinton is right about honoring a promise made but that is easier said than
done. First of all Obamacare is built on the scam that insurance companies will
be forced to dump their members and then those members will be forced into the
exchanges. This entire premise is a disgusting scam in and of itself - something
Barack knew back in 2010 but decided to lie and tell people they could keep
their insurance and doctor so he could sugar up his 2012 re-election chances.
Now he tidal wave of cancellations is occurring nationwide dumping people into
the exchanges where they find - for the most part - much higher premiums waiting
with new doctors as well - which adds to the lie. Had people known the truth
back in 2010 Barack and Obamacare would have been finished so the decision was
made to lie and then assume the Obama friendly media would cover up the mess and
...somehow the number of cancellations would be concealed. so how to
NOW honor the promise?? If people are allowed to keep their insurance Obamacare
dries up and dies due to lack of funding. This mess just get's uglier by
To Wilf55: "Strange that a Mormon oriented newspaper would back an issue
that is relevant for the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church condemns
contraceptives, not the Mormon Church."No, it is not strange at
all. The issue is one of religious liberty. One of the things LDS most believe
in is religious liberty. We're all in this together. When anyone's
religious liberty is trampled on, all of our religious liberty is trampled on.
@Pete1215Germany has a universal healthcare system that is a mix of
public and private contributions. They seem to be doing pretty well at the
moment, I would say.
Strange that a Mormon oriented newspaper would back an issue that is relevant
for the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church condemns contraceptives, not the
When you form a for-profit business, you must abide by the law of the land.It is not a violation of freedom of religion to require that a business
selling wedding dresses must be willing to sell them to black brides who are
marrying white grooms, even if the idea of interracial marriage is against the
religion of the sales clerk.It is not a violation of freedom of
religion to require that a business selling wedding dresses must be willing to
sell them to Jewish brides who are marrying Catholic grooms, even if the idea of
inter-faith marriage is against the religion of the sales clerk.It
is not a violation of freedom of religion to require that a business selling
insurance policies must cover the cost of a blood transfusion, even if the sales
clerk (or business owner) is a Jehovah's witness who disapproves of blood
transfusions.If for-profit businesses are to be regulated at all,
the idea of giving exemptions on the basis of religious faith of the the owners
(or clerks) must be rejected. Otherwise, all regulation can be defeated by
claiming religious freedom.
@Pete1215France and other Euro nations spend around 7-12% of GDP on
healthcare. The US spends over 17% of GDP on healthcare. Regardless of the Euro
nations budget situations... their healthcare system is way less of a cost
burden than the US healthcare system.
To LDS Lib: the WORST thing we could ever do for healthcare in America is to go
to a single payer system. All of our healthcare cost problems began when the
govt got involved in the 60's. The govt does nothing efficiently and
most things incredibly poorly, why let them fully ruin healthcare? Unless you
want to sove the SS problem by reducing life expectancy.
Are there any countries with national health care that are not running defecits?
Greece is doing OK because they have Germany to occasionally pay Greece's
bills. Who is going to bail us out?
It is hard to do everything for everyone, but that is the thrust of the
Democrats. Obamacare is designed to fail. Socialized medicine covering everyone
is the goal of Obama with all its faults. We will see all health workers
unionized. That will be fun to deal with. A huge bureaucracy will be needed to
manage this. People who know little or nothing about health care will make the
decisions. It is likely to be a disaster and research will take a tumble.
Socialized medicine means no health insurance companies. The last laugh will be
on them. They thought they would get 30-40 million new customers and instead
will be forced out of business. Sarah predicted death panels to shouts of
derision. They are coming. The economy will suffer too as one can tax a economy
just so much.
The only way to fix all the flaws of this monstrous crime against America is to
HutteriteAmerican Fork, UTReligion doesn't need health care.
People do. Let them have access.======== Wowzers!Hey, I never thoguht of it like that before.Let those with enough
faith go heal themselves, but by the same token, let those without
that level of faith see a Doctor.
The funny thing about the outrage against Obamacare is that most people upset
with it are people who supported the Ryan budget. The Ryan budget would turn
Medicare into a system where seniors would be provided a voucher (subsidy) to go
purchase insurance on a private marketplace. You know... just like Obamacare.
Except of course there'd be no protection for pre-existing conditions, no
end of lifetime caps, and no limits on the premiums companies can charge like
Obamacare does (the subsidy in Obamacare scales out-of-pocket premiums for
lower/middle income to be no more than a particular percentage of income,
Ryancare would have no limits like that).So apparently to
conservatives Obamacare is an atrocity... and should be the replacement to
Medicare. Heh, just goes to show that if Obama were a Republican, you'd all
love Obamacare. As for liberals not liking Ryancare? That answer you know, since
you all say it often enough calling it a socialist conspiracy; liberals like
single payer, Obama/Ryan/Romneycare is a downgrade compared to single payer
RE: GZE "Many, many women use birth control pills for issues other than
birth control. " This is absolutely true. My wife had a life threatening
problem with large ovarian cysts which her doctor countered with a birth control
prescription. Fortunately, my employer's health insurance covered this
expense. It was literally a life saver for us. This is why it is a dicey
affair to step between a woman and her physician.
Many, many women use birth control pills for issues other than birth control.
They stabalize hormones and help with irregular, painful, and heavy periods.
They are regularly perscribed by dermatologists as a treatement for severe
acne.If, however, you insist that birth control not be covered, they
must also defund all coverage of those little blue pills for men. Those of you
who advocate personal responsibility for women must also demand that men pay to
J ThompsonThe same reason I have to pay for you having kids. You get
a tax break on every child you have. Those lost taxes have to be made up
elsewhere - usually by people who have no kids themselves. The same reason I
have to pay taxes so poor people can eat. They don't pay taxes, they get
assistance. Why do I have to buy other people food? Why do I have to pay my
medical bills when others get it for free on somebody else?
The affordable care act will eventually become workable, one way or another. And
just like social security, medicare and medicaid have done since they were
enacted, continue to increase the financial burden of the federal government. At
some point discretionary spending will become a thing of the past as every tax
dollar will, by necessity of legislation, be consumed on these social
obligations enacted by congress. Now this may be all well and good, spending our
tax dollars on our selves, however I think we may be overlooking most of the
consequences of this. As we have seen from the result of the end of the cold war
and the decrease in military spending, piracy increased creating more hazards
for international trade. When the British navy collapsed from WWI financial
debt, by necessity the US had to step in to ensure uninterrupted international
trade. I just don't think putting all our tax dollars in one basket is a
good idea. There is more to a country and it's economy than retirement and
I have a better idea. Get rid of it. It was a bad law, poorly
conceived. And for all the talk (by the media, including DesNews), this
president has truly shown repeatedly his incompetence.Next time,
leave the job of president to someone with skills above usage of a teleprompter.
If a bill to amend the ACA were ever submitted to congress, it would never
emerge. Republicans will vote over and over again to eliminate it, they will
never vote to improve it. President Obama knows that letting congress amend his
program would mean letting congress kill his program.
Religion doesn't need health care. People do. Let them have access.
@Furry1993 - You suggest a good compromise of conscience. However, many
companies pay all of the employee's medical insurance, while the employee
pays for the premiums that are for the rest of the family. In such a case, if
the employee is a female then there would be no subdivision of premiums for the
employee. @LDSLiberal - You are quite correct that birth control
pills are prescribed for numerous female health reasons, not just pregnancy.
However, I've not heard of any other reason for using "morning
after" pills. I can see where this might plague the conscience of some
J Thompson:If YOU get cancer, why should I have to pay for YOUR
treatment? If YOU'RE in an accident, why should I have to pay for YOU to
get medical attention? Those things weren't my fault. Why aren't YOU
the one taking personal responsibility for YOURSELF?
Why should I have to pay for YOUR birth control? Where is YOUR personal
responsibility to handle YOUR personal welfare? If YOU don't want a baby,
then YOU are responsible to either not have sex or to provide your own means of
preventing conception.It is utter nonsense for you to demand that
other people pay for their contraceptives. It is utter nonsense for you to
think that someone in Utah or Nevada or Mississippi should be billed for your
personal welfare in any way, including birth control.If you're
old enough to have sex, you're old enough to face the consequences of
having sex. Your birth control is not my responsibility. It's time to grow
up and take responsibility for your own actions.
The Deseret News editorial board is correct. Interestng that they have a
reputation in some circles of being conservative and now they have written a
piece promoting religious freedom (the human rights issue of our time) and at
the same time they have reasserted that corporations have the responsibility and
even the right to be governed by morality as opposed to "Cut-throat
Capitalism".I think that universities should divest themselves
from stocks in Israel because Israel is oppressing the Palestinians. It is
socially responsible. But there seem to be a lot of people who would argue that
corporations should be governed by laws and the profit motive but nothing
else.So I guess that the Deseret News editorial board are just a
bunch of commie pinko bleeding heart liberals with their views about human
rights and social responsibility.
1. Contraceptives are used for a number of women's health issues - not just
birth control.2. While the ACA is good, We need changes to make it Better,
but a SinglePayer PublicOption is BEST.3. Why didn't the Deseret News
ever call for fixing GW Bush's flaws -- ALL of them?
There is zero chance that the ACA will change. The House of Representatives has
voted over 40+ times to defund ACA, why would anyone think they would be open to
make adjustments to ACA? Also waiting on the Republican alternative to ACA, any
eta on that Boehner?
@ MarxistHow about employers not furnish insurance period. Would
that be better. But that would fit into your leftist thinking where the
taxpayers furnish it.Typical leftist thinking You must give me something and it
must be what I want.
When you have an unworkable mess, what do you do? We've known the solution
since Alexander the Great sliced through the Gordian Knot. Just slice through
ObamaCare. Get rid of it. Let the Federal Government be content to do those
things that it is authorized to do instead of meddling with issues that are to
be left to the States or to the People.Obama has proven that just
because he wants to control a huge part of the private sector's money, that
he has no experience to "entitle" him to handle that responsibility.
ObamaCare is NOT about health care; it is simply the transfer of a great deal of
our money to the Federal Government for use in the general fund, just like
Social Security funds are transfered to the general fund.Slice
through ObamaCare. Destroy it before it destroys America.
I will agree that many things need to be changed with the PPACA.
You clearly put the interests of institutions ahead of the rights of the
individual under the Bill of Rights.This newspaper is definitely a
A good and smart move by Clinton. His political savvy has always been his strong
suit. He can read the polls and his gentle rebuke of the broken promises made by
Obama will endear him and Hillary of course in the hearts of those 70+ percent
of voters who want Obamacare repealed. It also gives cover to democrats in both
houses of Congress to change or repeal the law, which they and their party
forced through without a single republican vote.
Contraception is basic preventative heath care. If, as the DesNews suggests,
the contraception mandate should be re-visited then it should be strengthened to
remove the loopholes now in place that let employers deny their employees
insurance for this very needed medicine. If the owners don't want to think
they are paying for contraception then they should realize that employees pick
up a percentage of their heath are and just think that the employees are paying
for the portion of insurance that provides contraception. Issue resolved.
Moreover, your favoring employers who want to deny contraceptives to female
employees through their health plans, over the needs of their female employees
to have easy access to them, is another demonstration of your bias for employers
over their employees. This is no surprise.
Would the removal of contraceptives from the ACA mandate be an example of
freedom of religion, or the tyranny of religion? It may be the latter.
Moreover since so many women rely on inexpensive contraceptives, your suggestion
may also be viewed as anti-woman.