How did Birth Control become a right?

[Ray From Cleveland]

Or we'd support enabling two parents to raise their children.

Okay, that's awesome. Given your party has been driving down middle class wages for four decades now, and supporting a massive shift of the wealth to the rich, I'm sure you'll get right on that.

They have? How did they do that?

I thought it was unions that chased jobs out of the country that did that. Or demands so high companies invested in automation. Or the virtual open border policies of the Democrat party. I guess not. I guess it was all the GOP's fault somehow.

Investment in automation had nothing to do with unions.

Investments in automation have to do with labor costs no matter what they are.

 

[Coyote]

Or we'd support enabling two parents to raise their children.

Okay, that's awesome. Given your party has been driving down middle class wages for four decades now, and supporting a massive shift of the wealth to the rich, I'm sure you'll get right on that.

They have? How did they do that?

I thought it was unions that chased jobs out of the country that did that. Or demands so high companies invested in automation. Or the virtual open border policies of the Democrat party. I guess not. I guess it was all the GOP's fault somehow.

Investment in automation had nothing to do with unions.

Investments in automation have to do with labor costs no matter what they are.

Yes. But that doesn't translate into unions being the cause. Automation began before unions and will continue it is cheaper and more efficient and more reliable then human labor.

 

[Markle]

Know what else is good for you? Going to the gym. And I have to pay for that out of my own pocket. People should pay for their own sex lives.

You're the one who said sex was recreational only. I pointed out you were, typically, WRONG. Not surprising.

 

[John Shaw]

Know what else is good for you? Going to the gym. And I have to pay for that out of my own pocket. People should pay for their own sex lives.

You're the one who said sex was recreational only. I pointed out you were, typically, WRONG. Not surprising.

What? Who even are you?

 

[Aletheia4u]

The Trump administration is rolling back the Obama-era requirement that employer-provided health insurance policies cover birth control methods at no cost to women.

According to senior officials with the Department of Health and Human Services, the goal of the new rule is to allow any company or nonprofit group to exclude the coverage for contraception if it has a religious or moral objection.

The change fulfills a promise President Trump made in May to the Catholic religious order The Little Sisters of the Poor in a ceremony in the White House Rose Garden. The nuns had sued the Obama administration over the birth control requirement.

It also sets up a fight between advocates of religious freedom and those of equal rights for women. The American Civil Liberties Union sued the Trump Administration within hours of the rule being published, claiming it violated the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause, which ensures that all people receive equal protection under the law.

Longer-acting contraception, like an intrauterine device, can cost more than $1,000, says Sarah Lipton-Lubet, a vice president at the National Partnership for Women and Families. She says the new rule is a tool for discrimination against women.

"Women shouldn't be denied access to basic health care based on their employers' religious beliefs," she says. "We all have the right to our religious beliefs. But the way that this rule treats religion is really an excuse to discriminate."

In addition to the ACLU, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, and California Attorney General Javier Becerra announced they too plan to file suit opposing the new rule.

Trump Guts Requirement That Employer Health Plans Pay For Birth Control

Maybe some of you leftists can help me out here. How in the world can you say not forcing employers to provide birth control is a violation of equal protection? What's not equal about it? And how is not paying for it "denying access" to birth control? Is there some law that states you can't buy birth control for yourself, and that only your employer can buy it for you?

Who here believes that when the founders wrote the Constitution, that they had forcing employers to provide things for their employees in mind?

Obama Just Gave HOW MUCH To Planned Parenthood To Sell Baby Body Parts?!

 

[Markle]

Bottom line is, sex is a choice, not a necessity.

As I have pointed out already, sex is indeed a necessity. It is part of good health.

 

[John Shaw]

Bottom line is, sex is a choice, not a necessity.

As I have pointed out already, sex is indeed a necessity. It is part of good health.

I guess that's why some people can go their whole lives celibate and die of old age. Makes sense.

 

[BlackSand]

Bottom line is, sex is a choice, not a necessity.

As I have pointed out already, sex is indeed a necessity. It is part of good health.

You keep that up ... And the left leaning loonies will be demanding employers pay to cover hookers ...

.

 

[jillian]

Or we'd support enabling two parents to raise their children.

Okay, that's awesome. Given your party has been driving down middle class wages for four decades now, and supporting a massive shift of the wealth to the rich, I'm sure you'll get right on that.

They have? How did they do that?

I thought it was unions that chased jobs out of the country that did that. Or demands so high companies invested in automation. Or the virtual open border policies of the Democrat party. I guess not. I guess it was all the GOP's fault somehow.

Investment in automation had nothing to do with unions.

Investments in automation have to do with labor costs no matter what they are.

As usual, you're conflating unrelated things.

 

[Markle]

No right is absolute in the US, just ask Muslims who want sharia law.

That makes no sense.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Or we'd support enabling two parents to raise their children.

Okay, that's awesome. Given your party has been driving down middle class wages for four decades now, and supporting a massive shift of the wealth to the rich, I'm sure you'll get right on that.

They have? How did they do that?

I thought it was unions that chased jobs out of the country that did that. Or demands so high companies invested in automation. Or the virtual open border policies of the Democrat party. I guess not. I guess it was all the GOP's fault somehow.

Investment in automation had nothing to do with unions.

Investments in automation have to do with labor costs no matter what they are.

As usual, you're conflating unrelated things.

I am? So do explain, why does industry invest in automation if not to replace more expensive human labor?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Or we'd support enabling two parents to raise their children.

Okay, that's awesome. Given your party has been driving down middle class wages for four decades now, and supporting a massive shift of the wealth to the rich, I'm sure you'll get right on that.

They have? How did they do that?

I thought it was unions that chased jobs out of the country that did that. Or demands so high companies invested in automation. Or the virtual open border policies of the Democrat party. I guess not. I guess it was all the GOP's fault somehow.

Investment in automation had nothing to do with unions.

Investments in automation have to do with labor costs no matter what they are.

Yes. But that doesn't translate into unions being the cause. Automation began before unions and will continue it is cheaper and more efficient and more reliable then human labor.

Do you really believe that unions started in 1998 or something?

Automation is becoming cheaper and more reliable as technology advances. Human labor is becoming more expensive. Machines don't need minimum wage hikes, they don't need six weeks of vacation, they don't need paid family leave, they don't need medical care coverage, they don't need overtime pay, they don't count as employees that could put a company past the 50 employee mark that makes them subject to Commie Care.

If unions didn't advance overpaying employees, then what did unions actually do?

 

[Markle]

Bottom line is, sex is a choice, not a necessity.

As I have pointed out already, sex is indeed a necessity. It is part of good health.

I guess that's why some people can go their whole lives celibate and die of old age. Makes sense.

Once again:

Is Sex Necessary for Good Health?

 

[Coyote]

Okay, that's awesome. Given your party has been driving down middle class wages for four decades now, and supporting a massive shift of the wealth to the rich, I'm sure you'll get right on that.

They have? How did they do that?

I thought it was unions that chased jobs out of the country that did that. Or demands so high companies invested in automation. Or the virtual open border policies of the Democrat party. I guess not. I guess it was all the GOP's fault somehow.

Investment in automation had nothing to do with unions.

Investments in automation have to do with labor costs no matter what they are.

Yes. But that doesn't translate into unions being the cause. Automation began before unions and will continue it is cheaper and more efficient and more reliable then human labor.

Do you really believe that unions started in 1998 or something?

Automation is becoming cheaper and more reliable as technology advances. Human labor is becoming more expensive. Machines don't need minimum wage hikes, they don't need six weeks of vacation, they don't need paid family leave, they don't need medical care coverage, they don't need overtime pay, they don't count as employees that could put a company past the 50 employee mark that makes them subject to Commie Care.

If unions didn't advance overpaying employees, then what did unions actually do?

When do you think automation began to take the place of human workers?
Industrial Revolution - Wikipedia

Even sweatshop labor can't compete with automation, and I hope you wouldn't propose going back to that.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They have? How did they do that?

I thought it was unions that chased jobs out of the country that did that. Or demands so high companies invested in automation. Or the virtual open border policies of the Democrat party. I guess not. I guess it was all the GOP's fault somehow.

Investment in automation had nothing to do with unions.

Investments in automation have to do with labor costs no matter what they are.

Yes. But that doesn't translate into unions being the cause. Automation began before unions and will continue it is cheaper and more efficient and more reliable then human labor.

Do you really believe that unions started in 1998 or something?

Automation is becoming cheaper and more reliable as technology advances. Human labor is becoming more expensive. Machines don't need minimum wage hikes, they don't need six weeks of vacation, they don't need paid family leave, they don't need medical care coverage, they don't need overtime pay, they don't count as employees that could put a company past the 50 employee mark that makes them subject to Commie Care.

If unions didn't advance overpaying employees, then what did unions actually do?

When do you think automation began to take the place of human workers?
Industrial Revolution - Wikipedia

Even sweatshop labor can't compete with automation, and I hope you wouldn't propose going back to that.

I've been working in industry for decades. Sure, automation was always around, but scarce due to cost years ago. As wages and benefits kept increasing, and the ability to build machines much cheaper, it's wiping out the blue collar jobs in this country.

Now that communication technology is advancing as well, it's taking out even more jobs. McDonald's and Wendy's already have partially automated restaurants around the country, and I'm sure it won't be long until an entire restaurant is run by two or three people.

Inevitable? Maybe, but the union labor force put automation and outsourcing in overdrive. Unions that convinced their members that their job of putting nuts onto bolts would not only be there forever, but would always pay just as well in the future.

 

[strollingbones]

 

[initforme]

So should workers not get raises ever, no vacation time, no overtime pay? That's a bizarre way of thinking. And then you would wonder why nobody wants to apply for those jobs and would complain that they are unfilled by American workers. Why such an anti worker mentality. You want them to show up and work hard yet go backwards in pay and other things....remember if you pretend to pay me I pretend to work.

 

[initforme]

So you would have fought to work for a lower wage and less benefits correct?

 

[Taz]

You realize the birth control is a tiny fractional part of a company's health bill, don't you? And you realize also that it shows your unhinged Christian mindset, don't you? Well, probably not.

Don't care. Fucking has nothing to do with health (unless you have a STD).

Er, I'm an athiest....

So you just admitted that it does have something to do with health. Thanks for clearing that up.

So does going to the gym, but I don't expect government or my employer to pay for it.

He already lost, move along.

 

[Taz]

It's Un-American for Americans to have health coverage overseen by the Feds?

Overseen and force are way two different things. Whenever you have the two words "force" and "government" in the same paragraph, look out, because you are about to lose some liberty.

Having government help with health care is losing liberty?

Yep. Ask any employer that paid the fine for not providing insurance, or those who did provide insurance and had to meet government standards. That's right, businesses lost liberty.

There's no such thing as absolute liberty, the government has to regulate all kinds of things in your life for the good of everyone, that's the government's job.

No, that's the Democrats job. Every time they come out with something new, it takes freedom away from people.

There's no such thing as absolute freedom, that's why the jails are full.