whatever said:
Uddermode said:
whatever said:
This debate is about allowing a company to not follow the law simply because of the owners religion. That is the debate. It has nothing to do with being entitled.
|
I'm fully aware of what the debate is and the debate itself is flawed. I'm a hardcore religious person but religion has no place here. Anybody should be able to deny paying for other people's contraceptives regardless of what they believe in. The money that goes to contraceptives should be covered by the salary of the employee if he choses to spend his money like that but the employer doesn't have to provide extra money or coverage if he does not want to. Paying for contraceptives is like providing a salary, insurances, and then an extra drinking fund so that the workers could go by booze after work, its unneccessary, pointless, and at the cost of the employer for the choices the employee decides to make with the employers money.
|
Then work to change the law. I completely disagree with you. Contraception is an important benefit that should be provided as part of any basic insurance package. It is nothing like providing a "drinking fund". There are sometimes health benefits as well as preventing unwanted pregnancies.
|
You know what else prevents unwanted pregnancies? Not having relations. And you know how much that cost people? Zero dollars. If you can't afford contraceptives, then you can't afford a kid most likely then why the hell would you risk that?
