[QUOTE=cccritical;38843611]putting a condom on is yes or no choice
unless you've decided to repeatedly smash your arm with a hammer, breaking your arm will most likely come as a total surprise
doing stupid shit that will very likely leave you injured shouldn't be covered under the mandatory bare-minimum health coverage in the first place, neither should a perfectly clear and easy decision like using a condom
[editline]15th December 2012[/editline]
then I guess my problem lies in them calling it 'contraceptive' coverage[/QUOTE]
i guess you're missing the point of socializing the healthcare system, then. we should cover health problems regardless of whether we feel the person caused or deserved it. a cancer patient shouldn't be denied coverage because they smoke, and a woman shouldn't be left uncovered for exercising her right to her own sexuality.
[editline]15th December 2012[/editline]
and condoms are provided for free by the federal government so it's silly not to provide female contraception as well.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;38843632]What's wrong with "condoms and pills for everybody"? Unwanted pregnancy is a public health issue and as such should be addressed by public healthcare plans.
The costs for contraception are probably dwarfed by the costs associated with unwanted pregnancies anyway.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3115338/[/url]
[QUOTE]Cost-effectiveness of family planning
International studies confirm that family planning is among the most cost-effective of all health interventions (80, 81). The cost savings stem from a reduction in unintended pregnancy, as well as a reduction in transmission of sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. It has been consistently documented that all contraceptive methods are cost-effective in comparison to no method (82, 83). An analysis of a publicly funded family planning program calculated that long-acting contraceptives (implants and IUDs), in particular, save US $7 in costs from unintended pregnancy for every US $1 spent (84). A recent study examining the cost effectiveness of contraception over 5 years in the United States showed the copper-T IUD, the levonorgestrel-containing IUD, and vasectomy to be the most cost-effective options (83). Although data show differences among individual developing countries, the measured savings are substantial everywhere. One US dollar spent on family planning can avert from US $2 (in Ethiopia) to US $9 (in Bolivia) in health costs, with an average of US $8 annually for all women using all methods of modern contraception (14, 81). The previously cited cost-effectiveness models for Mexico calculate lifetime savings of US $10.5 million with increased contraceptive prevalence (77). However, discontinuation of contraception, which often results from dissatisfaction, negatively impacts cost-effectiveness. Thus, having many contraceptive choices available is likely to increase overall cost-effectiveness (79, 84).[/QUOTE]
Also this [url]http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2812%2960827-7/fulltext[/url]
[editline]15th December 2012[/editline]
Dominos has more to gain, it's employees have more to gain, and the American economy has more to gain by having easily accessible contraception for both sexes.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;38843632]What's wrong with "condoms and pills for everybody"? Unwanted pregnancy is a public health issue and as such should be addressed by public healthcare plans.
The costs for contraception are probably dwarfed by the costs associated with unwanted pregnancies anyway.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;38843634]Hormonal birth control is effective at treating female endocrine disorders such as poly-cystic ovary syndrome. Also, unexpected pregnancies do occur and can be prevented by access to contraception. The cost saved from not having to miss work or raise a child you aren't financially prepared for goes right back to the company and greater economy. Easy access to contraception is a good thing for everybody unless you have some weird religious hangup over it.[/QUOTE]
I don't like the idea of "free condoms for everybody" because of how insanely easy and cheap it already is to get them
if you aren't intelligent enough to attempt to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place you ought to be punished for it
I wouldn't have a problem with specifically-pregnancy-preventing contraceptives if it was an optional part of the plan and were taken out of your paycheck, but your bedroom isn't your employer's concern, is it? they don't clothe your or bathe you, you're expected to do that with the paycheck they give you. why do you want them to hold your hand while you're having sex?
Is there going to be a single pizza place left untainted with political bullshit about Obamacare before the year ends? First Papa John's, now Domino's. Next the Pizza King is going to claim all his establishments as sovereign territory of the Pizza Kingdom.
[QUOTE=cccritical;38843678]I don't like the idea of "free condoms for everybody" because of how insanely easy and cheap it already is to get them
if you aren't intelligent enough to attempt to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place you ought to be punished for it[/QUOTE]
"Punished"? What the fuck kind of logic is that? We have the means to provide the solution and it actually helps society as a whole in the long run. Why does anyone need to be punished?
[QUOTE]I wouldn't have a problem with specifically-pregnancy-preventing contraceptives if it was an optional part of the plan and were taken out of your paycheck, but your bedroom isn't your employer's concern, is it? they don't clothe your or bathe you, you're expected to do that with the paycheck they give you. why do you want them to hold your hand while you're having sex?[/QUOTE]
Because it makes the company money? Because it creates a healthier society? Because there are [B]literally [/B]no drawbacks and only benefits?
[quote]if you aren't intelligent enough to attempt to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place you ought to be punished for it[/quote]
it isn't a matter of intelligence, it's a matter of finances. you can't punish someone for having an unwanted pregnancy when they didn't have any access to contraception in the first place.
[QUOTE=cccritical;38843523]Words[/QUOTE]
Dude. The pill helps regulate womens hormones, it helps regulate some problems that women have with irregular or particularly severe periods. It can help women with particular conditions of no fault of their own with their cycle.
It's not just about sex and every time someone posts "I don't want to pay for their boning" is just proof of stupid ignorance.
[QUOTE=cccritical;38843678]if you aren't intelligent enough to attempt to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place you ought to be punished for it[/QUOTE]
They're not the ones being punished you wiener, it's unintended children that are being punished and it's the taxpayer or the insurance customer who are being punished by higher medicaid expenses or higher insurance premiums.
Health care is just like the environment and safety and transportation and education: it is something that affects everyone so it is something that should be treated as a public concern rather than a private one and parenthood planning is most definitely an important part of a well-rounded, effective health care plan.
Cry more Tom Monaghan
[QUOTE=mobrockers2;38843495]Yeah, why pay for contraception when you can just let them get pregnant having to pay her throughout her pregnancy whilst she isn't working (assuming you guys have paternity leave in the us).[/QUOTE]
"Paternity" would imply men leaving for being new fathers. "Maternity" leave exists, if you work at a good place, it is the female equivalent.
[QUOTE=cccritical;38843523][img]http://www.ufunk.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/mtv-sex-is-not-accident-2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
And that's why you're not gettin' any :v:
[QUOTE=yawmwen;38843717]it isn't a matter of intelligence, it's a matter of finances. you can't punish someone for having an unwanted pregnancy when they didn't have any access to contraception in the first place.[/QUOTE]
This is the biggest misconception.....
First/ the pill is amazingly cheap, on the order of 4$ a month.
Second/ if your flat out broke you can go to any gov health dpt and get them for free.
This is already federal law (preobamacare)
Tl/DR
there's no issue other then democrats trying to turn it into one by misinforming ppl
[QUOTE=Fort83;38844016]Another place I shall never eat at. Not like I eat Domino's before this anyway.[/QUOTE]
because the founder of a company represents every single business and employee of the company
food is fucking food dude
[QUOTE=The First 11'er;38844867]because the founder of a company represents every single business and employee of the company
food is fucking food dude[/QUOTE]
Well in the end, a bit of the money paid for the pizza goes to the founder.
[QUOTE=The First 11'er;38844867]because the founder of a company represents every single business and employee of the company
food is fucking food dude[/QUOTE]
Yeah what an idiot not wanting to put money in the founder's pockets. How dare he choose to eat at businesses more morally in tune.
[QUOTE=cccritical;38843468]I can understand him not liking the contraception bit
it's a little ridiculous that businesses are expected to cover expenses for worker's sex lives[/QUOTE]
hey, i know you're a giant moron and all but contraception has a lot of medical uses outside of someone's "sex life".
[QUOTE=H8Entitlement;38844561]This is the biggest misconception.....
First/ the pill is amazingly cheap, on the order of 4$ a month.
Second/ if your flat out broke you can go to any gov health dpt and get them for free.
This is already federal law (preobamacare)
Tl/DR
there's no issue other then democrats trying to turn it into one by misinforming ppl[/QUOTE]
Neither of these are compelling arguments for why contraception [I]shouldn't[/I] be part of a public option, FYI; they're only reasons why it isn't currently difficult to obtain without being part of the plan (I don't accept current ease of access as a compelling argument for it's absence from a public option either).
The only argument that still exists is that he shouldn't have to pay for contraception because it goes against his religious beliefs and that's fucking stupid for reasons I am praying to satan I shouldn't have to enumerate.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;38844165]"Paternity" would imply men leaving for being new fathers. "Maternity" leave exists, if you work at a good place, it is the female equivalent.[/QUOTE]
We have both, so I was confused.
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;38845532]Neither of these are compelling arguments for why contraception [I]shouldn't[/I] be part of a public option, FYI; they're only reasons why it isn't currently difficult to obtain without being part of the plan (I don't accept current ease of access as a compelling argument for it's absence from a public option either).
The only argument that still exists is that he shouldn't have to pay for contraception because it goes against his religious beliefs and that's fucking stupid for reasons I am praying to satan I shouldn't have to enumerate.[/QUOTE]
sadly this isn't a public option.
i absolutely hate the democrats for caving to corporate interests like that.
[QUOTE=Lazor;38845293]hey, i know you're a giant moron and all but contraception has a lot of medical uses outside of someone's "sex life".[/QUOTE]
[quote]
On January 20, 2012, Health and Human Services' Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced the mandate requiring that all health plans provide coverage at no cost (including deductibles and co-payments) for all contraceptives approved by the Food and Drug Administration as part of preventive health services for women.[4] The mandate also required coverage for sterilizations.[5]
The FDA has approved the following medicines and devices for birth control:[6]
[b]
Male condom
Female condom
Diaphragm with spermicide
Sponge with spermicide
Cervical cap with spermicide
Spermicide alone
[/b]
Oral contraceptives (progestin-only) "The Minipill"
Combined oral contraceptives (extended/continuous use) (estrogen and progestin) "The Pill"
Patch (estrogen and progestin)
Vaginal contraceptive ring (estrogen and progestin)
DMPA shot/injection (progestin)
Emergency contraceptives “The Morning After Pill”
Copper IUD
IUD with Progestin
Implantable rod (progestin)[/quote]
So yeah he still has a perfectly valid point.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;38843367]but it stops people from having to get abortions which you don't like either.
The Roman Catholic Church confuses me intensely.[/QUOTE]
"The meek shall populate the earth" can be taken more than one way, you know...
[QUOTE=Noble;38847174]So yeah he still has a perfectly valid point.[/QUOTE]
this doesn't address my point at all
It really doesn't surprise me, Domino's manages to out McDonalds McDonalds in fucking over its employees. I knew a guy making $7 an hour as a fucking [I]manager[/I] there. It's not religion, it's just money.
[editline]16th December 2012[/editline]
lazor, as a business owner you have to abide by certain guidelines and respect other peoples' religious choices. Certainly as a large chain store owner. You can't just hire/fire who you want, can't provide what services you feel like, etc. And the CEO needs to man up, put his big girl panties on, and admit that the entire world doesn't share his viewpoint.
[QUOTE=Fort83;38844016]Another place I shall never eat at. Not like I eat Domino's before this anyway.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=RedReaper;38848019]It really doesn't surprise me, Domino's manages to out McDonalds McDonalds in fucking over its employees. I knew a guy making $7 an hour as a fucking [I]manager[/I] there. It's not religion, it's just money.
[editline]16th December 2012[/editline]
lazor, as a business owner you have to abide by certain guidelines and respect other peoples' religious choices. Certainly as a large chain store owner. You can't just hire/fire who you want, can't provide what services you feel like, etc. And the CEO needs to man up, put his big girl panties on, and admit that the entire world doesn't share his viewpoint.[/QUOTE]
Glad to see people are doing, "Hard hitting research" before jumping to conclusions:
[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Monaghan[/URL]
"Monaghan sold Domino's in 1998 and has subsequently dedicated his time and considerable fortune to Catholic causes. A champion of the pro-life movement and other conservative causes, Monaghan has spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting these causes.[1]"
It was the FORMER founder, not Domino's itself. From their Facebook:
"Earlier this week, news stories came out that Domino's Pizza founder Tom Monaghan had filed suit against the federal government regarding healthcare. Since that time, the story has been widely misreported to indicate Domino’s was involved in this action, which is completely untrue. Tom Monaghan sold Domino’s Pizza in 1998 and today has NO active affiliation with our company. The media often neglect to note this fact. His views are not our views, nor are his actions in any way related to our actions. Domino's Pizza has made no public statements about health care, as we are still waiting to see how the final rules will affect our network of small business owners. Domino's is not a political company; it is not a religious company - we are a pizza company."
[URL]https://www.facebook.com/Dominos[/URL]
Not surprising coming from Sensational Headlines.
soon people boycotting things that don't like obamacare will have no pizza at all
[QUOTE=The First 11'er;38844867]because the founder of a company represents every single business and employee of the company
food is fucking food dude[/QUOTE]
god i hate it when people don't blindly support any company and help fill the founders pockets even if they express detestable opinions and try to influence politics using my money i paid on a pizza it makes me so FREAKING ANGRY
[editline]16th December 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ezhik;38848086]soon people boycotting things that don't like obamacare will have no pizza at all[/QUOTE]
yep nobody wants obamacare (except for the majority of americans)
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk[/media]
I bet he listens to this every morning
[QUOTE=Combin0wnage;38848077]Glad to see people are doing, "Hard hitting research" before jumping to conclusions:
[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Monaghan[/URL]
"Monaghan sold Domino's in 1998 and has subsequently dedicated his time and considerable fortune to Catholic causes. A champion of the pro-life movement and other conservative causes, Monaghan has spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting these causes.[1]"
It was the FORMER founder, not Domino's itself. From their Facebook:
"Earlier this week, news stories came out that Domino's Pizza founder Tom Monaghan had filed suit against the federal government regarding healthcare. Since that time, the story has been widely misreported to indicate Domino’s was involved in this action, which is completely untrue. Tom Monaghan sold Domino’s Pizza in 1998 and today has NO active affiliation with our company. The media often neglect to note this fact. His views are not our views, nor are his actions in any way related to our actions. Domino's Pizza has made no public statements about health care, as we are still waiting to see how the final rules will affect our network of small business owners. Domino's is not a political company; it is not a religious company - we are a pizza company."
[URL]https://www.facebook.com/Dominos[/URL]
Not surprising coming from Sensational Headlines.[/QUOTE]
why would you expect people to offhandedly know this lol
point remains that when a company's leadership expresses shitty views it's entirely logical to not support them (dominos isn't one of those cases tho clearly)
[QUOTE=Zally13;38843538]sex is kind of a need for happiness
at least i'm pretty sure that's the ongoing psychological thought[/QUOTE]
virgins can't ever be happy
[QUOTE=Kopimi;38848117]why would you expect people to offhandedly know this lol
point remains that when a company's leadership expresses shitty views it's entirely logical to not support them (dominos isn't one of those cases tho clearly)[/QUOTE]
It took me 5 seconds to Google, "Domino's Pizza" and "Tom Monaghan". Less than that to realize he doesn't even work with the company anymore lol.
I can see that, but why would you boycott a company that explicitly rejects the views of someone you don't agree with?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.