The World Beyond BetterMost > Anything Goes
Bush appoints anti-birth control fundamentalist to run family planning program
delalluvia:
--- Quote from: LauraGigs on November 22, 2006, 02:07:13 pm ---Tell Health and Human Services Secretary Michael Leavitt to reject Keroack's appointment immediately:
http://www.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizationsORG/feministmajority/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=6020
--- End quote ---
Already did through Planned Parenthood's petition:
http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/replace_keroack2
--- Quote ---I am still furious that insurance will cover erectile disfunction drugs but not birth control! (well my friends' insurance at least...there may be some plans that cover both)
--- End quote ---
Yeah, really chaps me as well. From what I gathered, there is no real reason other than favoritism toward men. A man doesn't have to get a woody to pee, so there's no real 'health' reason for insurance to cover ED drugs and not birth control. Things are changing, thankfully.
Penthesilea:
--- Quote from: delalluvia on November 22, 2006, 09:36:08 pm ---A man doesn't have to get a woody to pee, so there's no real 'health' reason for insurance to cover ED drugs
--- End quote ---
Are you serious here or was this a cynical joke?
I hate that to play the devil's advocate here, but....
A female body getting pregnant is no illness. On the contrary, it's what the female body is made for (Edit: please keep in mind that I say female body not women. I mean the plain bodily functions of every female mammal).
Erectile dysfunction is an illness and therefore it is indeed a health reason to be covered. Only because ED drugs are misused as "lifestyle drugs" doesn't mean that ED isn't an illness. ED is often an effect of spinal cord injuries, diabetes, injuries from previous operations, etc. There are many reasons for ED, not all so clear as in these examples.
Back on topic: I agree birth control should be covered to avoid unwanted pregnancies and abortions. It's not logical, it's not fair and I understand your anger about the situation.
delalluvia:
--- Quote from: Penthesilea on November 23, 2006, 10:51:56 am ---was this a cynical joke?
--- End quote ---
Not at all.
--- Quote ---A female body getting pregnant is no illness. On the contrary, it's what the female body is made for. Erectile dysfunction is an illness and therefore it is indeed a health reason to be covered. Only because ED drugs are misused as "lifestyle drugs" doesn't mean that ED isn't an illness. ED is often an effect of spinal cord injuries, diabetes, injuries from previous operations, etc. There are many reasons for ED, not all so clear as in these examples.
--- End quote ---
EDs are symptomatic of other diseases. Not getting an erection is not an 'illness' in itself. Do people HAVE to have sex to be healthy human beings? Mentally perhaps, psychologically perhaps, but physically? Many celibates live long healthy lives. However, many women do die from pregnancy and giving birth. Which do I think more important? Well, I've already made that clear.
ednbarby:
--- Quote from: delalluvia on November 23, 2006, 12:05:47 pm ---EDs are symptomatic of other diseases. Not getting an erection is not an 'illness' in itself. Do people HAVE to have sex to be healthy human beings? Mentally perhaps, psychologically perhaps, but physically? Many celibates live long healthy lives. However, many women do die from pregnancy and giving birth. Which do I think more important? Well, I've already made that clear.
--- End quote ---
I'll drink the holiday eggnog to that. :)
Penthesilea:
--- Quote from: delalluvia on November 23, 2006, 12:05:47 pm ---Do people HAVE to have sex to be healthy human beings? Mentally perhaps, psychologically perhaps, but physically? Many celibates live long healthy lives. However, many women do die from pregnancy and giving birth. Which do I think more important? Well, I've already made that clear.
--- End quote ---
Is it necessary to be mentally and psycholigically healthy to be a healthy human being?
What about counselling sessions? Should they not be covered by health insurance?
The mental and psychological state of a person has effects on his physical well-being and vice versa because humans are more than the sum of their organs.
More apples and oranges, but I hope you'll see what I want to express with these examples:
What about the little finger of your left hand? Do you really need it? I mean is it essentially for you to survive? I, for example, could live without the little finger on my left hand. Since I'm neither a piano player nor a secretary, it wouldn't even handicap me in my daily life and job if I hadn't it.
But if I injured it tomorrow, I would expect my health incurance to cover the costs to rescue it and regain it's full functionality.
Or what about the treatment of scars? Imagine you had a big scar right across your cheek and it could be treated, so in the effect it would be far less apparent. Should health insurance cover the costs? Cause you won't experience physical illness directly as an effect from it.
Following your logic wiht ED, health insurance should not cover the costs of said scar treatment either.
Edit: I modified a statment in my earlier post, because it was perhaps mistakable:
--- Quote ---A female body getting pregnant is no illness. On the contrary, it's what the female body is made for (Edit: please keep in mind that I say female body not women. I mean the plain bodily functions of every female mammal).
--- End quote ---
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version