Active Users:99 Time:25/06/2016 12:46:05 AM
"The employees can then buy the coverage directly from an insurer." Joel Send a noteboard - 11/02/2012 01:25:52 AM
That, according to the article I linked, is how HI (the model it says Obama is using for his surrender) deals with this. Insurance companies are not in the business of giving things away for free, and do not dispense drugs or healthcare anyway: They just pay for it, in part. If forced. Grudgingly. At great cost to policy holders. Those are the core the problems with US healthcare, and why Obamas "healthcare reform" is such an absurd misnomer.

This controversy just highlights that much deeper problem with Obamas healthcare law (or rather, the one the insurance lobby wrote and he signed.) Since the First Amendment prevents the US government forcing religious institutions to pay for things their doctrine opposes, their employees who can afford it are "free" to purchase coverage directly from insurers. "Purchasing coverage" is still a LONG way from "free medicine." It would not be free in any case, because nothing is, but a single payer plan would dramatically lower costs and increase access, as it has in every other country that adopted such a plan, without unconstitutionally forcing private entities to directly finance acts violating their religious beliefs.
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
Democrats bailing on Obama - War against the Catholic Church heats up - 09/02/2012 04:03:35 AM 885 Views
This is not a war on Catholics, it is Obama being an idiot again. - 09/02/2012 04:52:01 AM 227 Views
For someone who used to be a Con Law professor - 10/02/2012 08:23:34 PM 173 Views
Also, kudos for linking to a source, and a fairly non-partisan one as well. - 09/02/2012 01:33:07 PM 296 Views
I am a non-partisan guy, so I only use unbiased sources! *NM* - 09/02/2012 04:02:50 PM 159 Views
Is there really such a thing? *NM* - 09/02/2012 04:11:30 PM 130 Views
You lost all credibility in the first line of your post. - 09/02/2012 04:49:23 PM 267 Views
The subject line didn't help. *NM* - 09/02/2012 06:04:11 PM 134 Views
But it added some flair to the discussion! *NM* - 09/02/2012 07:46:47 PM 128 Views
You actually think any of us has 'credibility' anymore in regards to neutrality? *NM* - 09/02/2012 06:46:13 PM 125 Views
It's one thing to have a bias. - 09/02/2012 07:28:51 PM 230 Views
Some would say putting a spotlight on it is more honest. *NM* - 09/02/2012 09:34:17 PM 106 Views
Ah, the Rupert Murdoch School of Objectivity. - 09/02/2012 10:15:57 PM 183 Views
Wow, talk about making a supernova out of a couple hydrogen atoms. - 09/02/2012 08:41:44 PM 190 Views
I'm somewhat suprised that Obama blundered this badly. - 10/02/2012 01:40:14 AM 248 Views
Why? Have you not been paying attention? - 10/02/2012 02:03:43 AM 271 Views
If I am not satisfied with Romney then my Plan B is to not vote. - 10/02/2012 10:58:34 PM 240 Views
How does that help anything? Except Romneys election chances, of course. - 11/02/2012 01:08:22 AM 223 Views
Bullshit. - 11/02/2012 04:29:31 AM 265 Views
A vote for no one is a vote for more BS. - 11/02/2012 05:55:11 AM 283 Views
Obama doing this actually impresses me to no end. - 10/02/2012 02:21:10 AM 398 Views
He is already preparing to cave. - 10/02/2012 02:42:32 AM 298 Views
Why are you even replying to me? What you said has little meaning to what I said. - 10/02/2012 03:33:27 AM 243 Views
"And here I thought he was just another politician." - 10/02/2012 01:29:36 PM 233 Views
Aaaaand you can put your hat back on now: Obama has already caved. - 10/02/2012 04:04:30 PM 323 Views
No, you don't have to buy it from insurers. You get it for free, just like everyone else will. *NM* - 10/02/2012 09:55:53 PM 213 Views
"The employees can then buy the coverage directly from an insurer." - 11/02/2012 01:25:52 AM 348 Views
So Jehovah Witness employers should not have to pay for blood transfusions? - 10/02/2012 03:57:47 AM 201 Views
Not if it conflicts with their religious beliefs. - 10/02/2012 04:20:32 PM 229 Views
Money is not the same as speech! - 10/02/2012 07:20:56 PM 199 Views
One last point - 10/02/2012 11:35:25 PM 197 Views
The federal government forcing private groups to facilitate without committing sin also infringes. - 11/02/2012 01:03:30 AM 172 Views
You argument does not make sense - 11/02/2012 01:26:57 AM 239 Views
It was an analogy, not an equivalency. - 11/02/2012 01:48:14 AM 191 Views
Lets enhance your analogy making it closer to reality - 11/02/2012 02:19:41 AM 198 Views
Why could I not buy it with my own money? - 11/02/2012 03:46:33 AM 190 Views
Re: Why could I not buy it with my own money? - 11/02/2012 04:17:17 AM 168 Views
In other words, I could. - 11/02/2012 04:21:05 AM 133 Views
Some more points - 11/02/2012 02:30:27 AM 212 Views
Sex is not a necessity either. - 11/02/2012 03:56:51 AM 202 Views
I can't believe you just said that - 11/02/2012 04:30:12 AM 148 Views
The widespread inability to believe that is deeply worrisome. - 11/02/2012 06:33:01 AM 232 Views
LMAO due to Obama's compromise (the word compromise should have a in it ) - 11/02/2012 12:12:57 AM 225 Views
Obama just got two weeks of being portrayed as "anti-church" to the point even Dems complained. - 11/02/2012 02:00:28 AM 190 Views
The polls disagree with you. - 11/02/2012 02:32:59 AM 169 Views
It is an interesting article, but not for the polls. - 11/02/2012 04:18:17 AM 205 Views
I wouldn't put too much into that poll anyway - 11/02/2012 05:37:05 AM 291 Views
I don't think it's quite the laughing matter you think it is - 11/02/2012 12:31:23 PM 222 Views
Nossy that was not Joel, that was me - 11/02/2012 01:56:39 PM 269 Views
I know that. - 11/02/2012 03:23:32 PM 267 Views
Understood. - 11/02/2012 07:51:14 PM 209 Views
mmm... - 11/02/2012 08:20:26 PM 184 Views

Reply to Message