A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Where is the news coverage on this?

Posted: Sep 5, 2011

600,000 uninsured people now have health insurance under Obamacare. I can't believe super-conservative Forbes magazine covered this. http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/05/23/more-solid-proof-that-obamacare-is-working/;

Good news - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
As someone who spent many years not being able to have health insurance, I am really glad to hear this. No need to eat your words, just be glad. Political wars are terrible. Many politicians have good ideas and the "other side" convinces people they are bad ideas. This is something we have needed for many, many years and I am glad to see good things happening.

That's wonderful to hear. This President is being - picked on for every (sm)

[ In Reply To ..]
single thing he does (good and bad), and the Republicans are particularly against Obamacare and are ready to repeal it.

Just wait until 2014 changes kick in.

This certainly is a major achievement on President Obama's part and, as you say, for Forbes Magazine to give it a thumbs up is certainly something good.

Thanks so much for posting this.

what!!!?? - me

[ In Reply To ..]
It doesnt take a brain surgeon to see this president is doing everything he can to eliminate any freedoms the american people have left. You watch too much MSNBC! Once obamacare kicks in even you will REGRET voting for him. How misinformed you are. It's obvious this government has been breached.

Could you name a few freedoms he's eliminated - and cite few links

[ In Reply To ..]
to back this claim or is this just another case of hot air coming from out of nowhere and going no place?

Thank you. I'd like to know the same! nm - OP

[ In Reply To ..]

We can start with the freedom to decide not to - purchase health insurance.

[ In Reply To ..]
nm

You still have that freedom. Just like opting out of - insuring your car,

[ In Reply To ..]
there is a steep price to pay for ignoring the law, should you get stopped or are involved in an accident. What do you think of uninsured motorists? Do you pay for the extra uninsured rider on your policy with a smile on your face each time you send the premium renewal check? If not, then how would you feel if you were hit by one, have to hire an attorney to go chasing after them in court to recover your damages and possibly end up at a dead end, footing the bill yourself? Would it make all that OK by you if they simply explained that they were exercising their "freedom of choice" to violate THAT law? How is protecting the value of chrome and metal and maintaining public safety more legitimate than preserving the integrity of flesh and blood and promoting public health?

It is not the same. First off, I can chose not to drive. - and, therefore, not buy car insurance.

[ In Reply To ..]
I suppose I can chose not to live, too, but that is ridiculous. Also, nobody is calling for me to be able to purchase insurance on my car after I get in an accident and then forcing the insurance company to pay for the prior damage. The two are clearly not the same that was a ridiculous argument, but nice try.

I'd like to know that myself. - This is really good news

[ In Reply To ..]
and it's worrisome it has not surfaced in more visible media venues in the past 3 months. I'm a news junkie and can't recall hearing about it even from any of the more liberal outlets. To their credit, the administration and president don't seem to be tooting their horns about it either. Maybe they're biding their time to allow for even more progress to occur between now and the election as Forbes predicts. I am curious to know how you stumbled across it. Whatever the case, thanks for posting this great piece of news, a rare commodity these days.

Check your sources. - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
About Rick Ungar (author of article in question.

In 2009, Ungar became more interested in his years long study of health care policy in the United States and left the animation world to begin writing on the subject of the online site, Culture11. From there he moved on to True/Slant before ending up at Forbes.com, writing on health care policy and politics from a more liberal perspective than what is typically found at Forbes. He currently can be read on Forbes.com and is a frequent guest on American radio programs.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/115xx/doc11579/06-30-LTBO.pdf

According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office "federal spending on the government’s major mandatory health care programs
will continue to rise relative to GDP." (see Ch. 2).

One of the "marketed" goals of Obamacare as presented Congress and the American people was that it would bend the cost curve downward. CBO doesn't anticipate that happening.

This is

Slay the messenger, change the subject, ignore the content. - Red herring alert

[ In Reply To ..]
For starters, the entire article is about better than predicted health care INSURANCE ENROLLMENTS, specifically by young healthy populations, who bring money into the pool without placing substantial claims demands on the insured group as a whole. The article is NOT about about predicted health care costs vis-a-vis the GDP. Your trying to divert attention from all this positive good news tells us there is not much in the content of the article itself you are able to take issue with. Hence, you take aim at the author instead.

I guess if the word liberal has been uttered in the same breath as the author's name, it supposedly discredits the entire article. Another problem I suspect you may be having with the content is the simple logic that underpins the piece, especially when he reminds us of the GOP's "end of Medicare as we know it" battlecries during the HCR debate versus the Ryan Plan that would essentially end Medicare as we know it, a prime example of GOP grandstanding, phoney outrage and in-your-face hypocrisy. Unger put it a bit more delicately. I believe his comment was, "the irony was exquisite." Indeed. Then there is that recollection of which GOP primary contenders were for the mandate before they were against it.

"A more liberal perspective that is typically found at Forbes" covers quite a bit of territory and certainly does not automatically mean we are dealing with (gasp) a liberal. Even if Unger were a liberal progressive socialist commie pinko whatever whatever, he has provided meticulous citations in the article, so why not check the source's SOURCES instead? Now let's see here: Wellpoint, Aetna, Kaiser, Highmark, United Health Group....hardly your bastions of progressive liberal political persuasions. Reminder: Their numbers don't lie.

Bottom line here is that you can't stand to see something Obama did working out. Along with those 600,000 newly insured young folks and the 46% more small busineses who can now afford health insurance for themselves and/or their employees (quite remarkable really, considering the disproportionately higher unemployment numbers in that age cohort), I say give credit where credit is due.

Now excuse me while I climb out from under this wet blanket, put the sour grapes back on the shelf and go celebrate this piece of good news, especially since my healthy 34-yo son joined the ranks of the newly insured last February when he signed up for decent coverage on an individual plan that he now can actually afford for the first time.

Excellent post. - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
"Bottom line here is that you can't stand to see something Obama did working out."

You nailed it. I'm in favor of everyone being insured who presently isn't being insure. The neocons must be seeing red!! Of course, they're threatening gridlock of Obama's economic plan -- you know, the one he hasn't revealed yet.

LOL. Last I heard, they don't even want to hear it and - some of them plan to be no shows.

[ In Reply To ..]
Imagine what would happen to any one of us who tells the administators of our companies we refuse to be a "prop" to the grandstanding manager whose fall campaign departmental meeting we plan to boycott.

What a bunch of losers.

I'm sorry... - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
I should have left you to celebrate this nearly 4-month-old report.

Got any TIMELY news?

You try awfully hard to miss points, don't you? - Rewind to the first OP

[ In Reply To ..]
You know, the one penned by someone who was brave enough to admit she might have to eat her words (a refreshing statement if ever there were one). Notice the first words that came out of her mouth: "Where is the news coverage on this?"

This rhetorical question made me realize that I had not heard anything about this even on the most liberal of outlets, including Democracy Now! which I listen to every morning because of Amy Goodman's very thorough coverage. That would make this report (the very same one you have yet to refute) very TIMELY, from my point-of-view. BTW, since Obama is the first president in the history of our country who was able to succeed in passing comprehensive health care, though others have tried in the past and, considering it is a work in progress that is still unfolding, any update on the success of its various elements is always welcome and pertinent, unless of course you are one of those who is rooting for failure. Like I said. Wet blanket. Sour grapes. Get over yourself.

As Rush Limbaugh said... - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
I hope Obama fails.

And when he does, I'll come back and rub your nose in it.

It must be very difficult to be a TP Republican - I feel sorry for you.

[ In Reply To ..]
It would probably less stressful for you if you came over to the light.

What stress? - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
Actually reading liberal posts on here are a stress reliever. You make me laugh...

If this is stressful for YOU, it's because I've struck a nerve.

Nothing you can say will anger me, although sometimes I pity you.

I already know how the story ends...and I know WHO wins.

This is just the intermission, and I'm gonna go grab a box of popcorn and a cold drink.

I know exactly how you feel! - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
I frequently pity you for your rudeness.

I've never been rude. - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
Believe me, if I wanted to give you rude, you'd still be crying.

Don't pity me - I'm heaven bound, while you are firewood.

She's not rude. She's heaven bound and you're firewood. - Boy, I guess the hummer

[ In Reply To ..]
being a legend in her own mind and all thinks she's reduced you to a blubbering heap of your former self now that she's delivered her message from on high. All knowing, immune from anger and insult, she wields the awesome power to strike a nerve like a mighty sword, condemning libs of all persuasions to burn in the fires of the inferno for all eternity.

Textbook teagagger garbage in garbage out fare when confronted with such rhetorical obstacles as logic and fact. If I were a moderate, normal or sane republican, I would be running fast and furious to get as far away from association with this plague of locusts as I possibly could.

Still celebrating 600,000 new affordable first-quarter health insurance enrollments.

You mean the 600,000 grownups still living in their mama's basements? - hmm

[ In Reply To ..]
When I was 26 the last thing I wanted to do was ride on mommy and daddy's coattails.

As to the rest of your misguided statement:

No weapon forged against me will prevail, and I will refute every tongue that accuses me. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and this is their vindication.

For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.

Hebrews 4:12

All you can rely on is liberal group think and talking points. My trust is in the living God.

I like my team better.

Evidently you STILL haven't read the article. New enrollees - paying new premiums, not

[ In Reply To ..]
new dependents added to existing policies. Look. We get it. Your panties are all in a bunch because something good came out of HCR and you can't find a legitimate way to refute these facts, so you have to resort to personal attacks and Bible quotations. As for those twenty-somethings still under their parents' roof, that's just another unfortunte social phenomenon that emerged during Ws protracted decimation of the economy. I have to wonder. Did God tell you to begrudge them health care coverage, or was it Rush, your alternate diety?

Bravo! Great post. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]

Enjoy your "team" better all you want. - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Just keep it out of my politics. You've managed to turn a political board into a faith/religion board. There is NO ROOM for mixing politics and religion in this country. That's why the Constitution addresses this issue. You are free to believe in whichever god you wish, but so am I, and the laws we pass need to take that into consideration.

The LAST thing I want is for this country to become a theocracy.

If he fails, the country fails, but we already knew TP won't let - a little thing like human suffering

[ In Reply To ..]
stand in the way of their political aspirations and delusions of grandeur when it comes to seizing power.

Come on, now. - If he fails the country fails?

[ In Reply To ..]
Then I guess we're in for it, because I haven't seen much that I would call success out of him. The things that he has done successfully look to be very bad for our country from where I sit. I have to say, if passing this mess of a healthcare bill is Obama's success, I sure hope he fails, too. His failure just might save our country.

We can thank corporate America for all those - uninsured young people - the ones (sm)

[ In Reply To ..]
they're starving us more experienced workers out out in order to hire --- with no insurance benefits.

Big Business should be taxed through the nose to pay for that, and to help fund the cost of Obamacare.

Just think of all the other good things that could have come from Obama's term as President, if only the GOP (Geriatric Old Poops) would give him the chance.

"obamacare" - StPat

[ In Reply To ..]
Fact of the matter is--and I was an employer back then--many companies had to start laying off employees because of the soaring costs of benefits--specifically health care. Had we had an easier way to insure our employees--like a national health care system, as other countries in the free world do and legislators with the 'nads to stand up to carriers, we might not be in this mess. You'll notice that layoffs have steadily risen since the 80s, as have mortgage problems. Back in the late 80s, one saw full, two-page spreads (at least here in New England) that did nothing but list foreclosures on homes that had been purchased within the last five years by their new owners. To my disgrace, I even helped a neighbor do so and they lost the property in just a couple of years--that was in the first Bush Administration and things have been going downhill since. Still, no accountability is required by the financiers (BOA, etc). No one was expected to account for expenditures in the first bailout and now there are calls for de-regulation.

I don't understand why people are against more of our countrymen having health care coverage or accountability and regulation for bailout recipients are negative things!

The Constitution does not actually address health care, so arguments to the contrary seem to be spurious.

I find it difficult to give "street creds" to candiates who are neither familiar with our Constitution or, worse, our history (they should have paid attention in school).

The Constitution does not directly address health care - Zville MT

[ In Reply To ..]
and it is a good thing for more people to have health insurance. The problem is when the government tells you that you have to enter into a contract with an insurance company and pay for it, against your will, or be fined or jailed. The Constitution does not allow for this, even under the commerce clause.

My main concern with this is if they can make us buy health insurance, what else can they make us buy? A hybrid car? Energy efficient appliances? More fish than red meat? All are good things, yes, but where do we draw the line for the government's intrusion into our lives?

Slippery slope. If you had the choice to buy - a hybrid versus a SM

[ In Reply To ..]
gas guzzler, or an energy efficient appliance versus one that was not, and the costs were relatively the same, why wouldn't you anyway? Only an ignorant fool would not (and I know there are many of those types in this country, not referring to you BTW). I get your point about government preempting our freedoms, but I don't think your examples hold water. Also, as far as government butting into our lives and deciding for us, why do the conservatives insist on regulating womens' health issues? Talk about government taking away freedoms, trying to defund PP, an organization that helps uninsured women/financially strapped women obtain access to necessary healthcare not otherwise affordable. They want to do that but they don't want mandated health coverage? Basically, it seems like they want the poor/less fortunate to go without insurance, no help from organizations like PP to get birth control, and no choices if a women does have an unwanted pregnancy. It makes absolutely no sense to me, especially because they also want to cut all programs which would help these women take care of that baby that the government insisted these women have.

I really like your post because you nailed it. - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
Nobody wants to butt into our private lives more than the Republicans, and certainly reasonably intelligent people can see that and even hear it from the horse's mouth because they don't try to hide that fact.

As far as unwanted pregnancies, of course they're not in favor of any safety net programs for these mothers and babies. They just want to control what goes on in everyone's bedroom. It's all a part of helping to make the poor, poorer as the rich get richer.

If conservatives are as heartless as you think they are... - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
then why aren't they advocating more abortions so there are fewer of these "poor babies" to take care?

Because it's not as much fun - JS

[ In Reply To ..]
First, they wouldn't be able to guilt, shame and/or try to regulate what women do in the bedroom or whom they decide to do it with.

Second, they wouldn't be able to push that overinflated sense of morality on others.

Third, they wouldn't be able to try to cut off any funding to feed, shelter, and provide necessary healthcare services for these children. That's a blast!

And finally... and this may be the most fun... there wouldn't be any scapegoat for all the country's financial woes if there weren't any welfare mothers/children. I mean, there are still the unions and their middle-class big fat pensions and bene packages as well as seniors, but I guess they're a distant second/third to the poor in terms of the fun to pick on/blame factor.

As far as PP goes... - Zville MT

[ In Reply To ..]
Any of the services they offer besides abortion (which is what most conservatives are against) can be obtained for free at any county health department; mammograms, pelvic exams, prental checks, and birth control - I've had to use these services before, so I know they are readily available. Those kinds of programs have to be regulated or anyone could use them, not just the people that need them.

I don't know why you don't think my examples hold water. Like you said, it's a slippery slope. Where do we draw the line? Once the government is paying for your health insurance, what's to stop them from telling you what to eat and what not to eat? And I've shopped for hybrid cars - at this time, they are quite a bit more expensive than gas-guzzlers. And for large families, those small cars really aren't adequate anyway.

You may think now that these things won't ever happen, but 15 years ago, could you have imagined that the CIA or FBI could wire tap your phone or bust into your house and search it without a warrant? I sure couldn't. The government is like a little kid - you give them an inch and they take a mile - when do we say enough already?

The county health department receives most of its funding - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
The county health department receives most of its funding through federal and state block grants. I know this because I worked at one. The county portion is very small, but it has to be implemented at the local level. You don't want to travel to D.C. for your pap smear. In some areas, it may be Planned Parenthood that coordinates services. It makes more sense to have one clinic for women's health issues. You don't like duplication of services, do you? This has been this way for 40 years and the government has not yet forced anyone to have an abortion.

We don't have a PP in our area - Zville MT

[ In Reply To ..]
And do just fine with the health department - I guess I just don't see why more areas can't - maybe if government money wasn't going to PP, more could go to the health departments. No, I don't like duplication of services, but I also don't like that my taxes may be going to pay for someone's abortion.

And of course the woman has no responsibility whatsoever - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
to keep her pants pulled up and her backside out of a man's bed.

Call it what it is. Abortion is murder. It's not a "choice."

Seeking family planning services - JS

[ In Reply To ..]
is one of the most responsible things women of childbearing age can do. Bearing personal responsibility should NOT be a right exclusive to those of a certain income level. That is the goal of Planned Parenthood. Unfortunately an overinflated sense of morality blinds some people from seeing that. Stop concerning yourself with where other women's backsides are.

How much does it cost to be celibate? - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
Show me THAT statistic.

Maybe I am off track.

If there had been way more liberal abortions in the last 20-30 years, maybe the US wouldn't be in the shape it's in.

In fact...some of you might not even be here...

When are you tea party types going to realize - sm

[ In Reply To ..]
that American people don't WANT you in their bedrooms. Ironically, the CONS whine that there's too much government in people's lives, yet they want to interfere and judge certain people.

If someone is trying to get birth control because she doesn't want to become pregnant, she should be able to have that access.

But I suppose you're even against contraception, and I'd bet you'd want someone to carry a rapist's baby to term and to raise it.

That old saying from the Reagan years ("Just say no") simply is not working nor has it ever worked.

I believe in birth control and a woman's right to choose. I don't pretend to be walking in their shoes while reading posts like yours where you always seem to know what total strangers are doing.

Sometimes there are shades of gray in your black and white world.

I don't care what people do in their bedrooms. - What I care about is what they do

[ In Reply To ..]
to the babies they create there. Why is it that you all whine and whine and whine about how everyone deserves healthcare and everyone deserves abortions (I guess those babies deserve what they get, right?) and everyone deserves part of someone else's paycheck if he/she does not make as much, even if the reason is because he/she is too irresponsible to hold a job, hooked on drugs (which is a disease of one's own making, by the way, if you must call it a disease), et cetera, et cetera, but with all your bleeding heart righteousness, you think it is okay to make a baby and then kill it?

No one deserves an abortion - JS

[ In Reply To ..]
I can't stress enough that just because someone is pro-choice, that does not in any way, shape, or form mean that someone is pro-abortion. No one in their right minds would wish a woman in a situation where abortion would be the outcome. Yes, I call my girlfriends on the weekend and make a date to go to the mall, get our nails did, stop for a quick abortion, and then get a bite for lunch. Really? Also, it is a myth that the only people who cannot afford healthcare/family planning services are those who are irresponsbile, lazy, or feel that they are somehow entitled to have others support them. Many, many, MANY of them are full-time employees paid wages low enough that they cannot afford to see a doctor (raising my hand here).

Now, if your concern here really is the welfare of the unborn babies (and I'm not here to argue whether or not life begins at conception), we have a very low cost and effective way to prevent unplanned pregnancies and thus prevent abortion. It's called the birth control pill. Babies will stop being killed if women of childbearing age who do not want to become mothers take 1 pill each day. Poor babies will stop being killed if we collectively pay the minimal cost of providing birth control pills to low-income women. There is nothing bleeding heart, righteous, or whiny about it.

It seems like your outrage at those you see as lazy moochers is preventing you from seeing a viable and effective solution.

I am not against providing birth control and I - never said I was. I am

[ In Reply To ..]
against abortion. It is amazing to me that people can trick themselves into believing that pro-choice is anything other than pro-abortion. You either condone abortion or you do not. If it makes you feel better to say that it is okay for someone else, but I wouldn't do it, you are just fooling yourself because you clearly know it is wrong. There is a way to get the pill and free condoms and free spermicide for poor people and even those college and high school students who have health insurance, but just don't want to go to their family doctor, lest their parents find out, and yet, 332,278 abortions were performed by Planned Parenthood in 2009. That access to the pill is really working out well, isn't it?

I don't understand why it's so important - JS

[ In Reply To ..]
to those who equate abortion with murder what pro-choice people think. Do you really care? You believe that abortion = murder (and life beginning at conception is a faith-based belief) and I'm saying that that's fine. I actually respect that, and you can practice that as much as you'd like, and I'm not going to sit here and try to change your mind. I also expect the same amount of respect to not have a religion and not believe that life begins at conception. It's that concern over what the other side believes, IMO, that is stopping both sides from working together toward a very common goal: Less abortion.

Now, I don't have exact statistics, and again I'm too lazy to Google, but if you wanted to get an idea of how that access to the pill through Planned Parenthood is working out, you would:

1. Get the number of Planned Parenthood patients who have been prescribed the pill.
2. Get number/percentage of sexually active women of childbearing age who do not practice effective birth control who wind up pregnant and do not miscarry.
3. Get the statistics on how many unplanned pregnancies do not end up in abortion.
4. Subtract #2 from #1, then subtract #3 from that, then add that total to the 332,278.

(For example, and I'm just using made-up figures here, if PP has 10,000 patients on the pill who would not be using effective BC otherwise, and 50% of those women statistically would wind up pregnant and not miscarry, there would be 5000 unplanned pregnancies. If out of that 5000 75% would carry to term and 25% would choose to abort, that would equal 1250 more abortions).

So, as to your question about access to the pill working out, I would say yes. Even if it prevents 1 abortion/baby killing, wouldn't it be?

Look... I'm taking part in this conversation with you because you truly sound passionate in your stance on abortion without the distorted view on sex. I won't bother talking to people who are the sex police, and I actually feel that many of them aren't so concerned about the welfare of the unborn (and they're certainly not concerned about the welfare of the pregnant woman) as they are with trying to instill their moral values on society as well as their backwards attitudes on sex as a standard for all. I firmly believe that stopping unplanned pregnancies and therefore a large percentage of abortions is only a matter of granting access to effective birth control as well as educating those of childbearing age about sex as well as a healthy respect for one's body and how it works (usually people who respect themselves are less likely to engage in risky behavior). I think the only question that should be asked here is how we go about accomplishing that and how much government involvement there should be. IMO, if we can get past all the stereotypes and arguing about which side is right and which side is wrong, we could get more done.

Thanks for listening.

I have gotten birth control from Planned Parenthood. - It's not that hard.

[ In Reply To ..]
The fact remains that no matter how you slice it, my tax money pays for abortions, to which I am morally opposed. PP can say that they separate the funds and only pay for this out of government provided funds, but that's just semantics. I can move it around the other way, too. I don't care when you think life begins because I know that if you leave that baby in the womb, more often than not, it will be a baby. Stopping that process is murder and I cannot condone it and I cannot sit idly by while other people say it's okay. The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. This has nothing to do with religious or other beliefs, actually. Where I formed my opinion on abortion (after being told by my mother for years and years that it should be the woman's choice) was in the NICU when I finally got to pick up my oldest son. Even those who don't believe in God tend to have a moral sense of right and wrong (whether or not they listen to it), and I came to believe that abortion is inherently wrong, long before I found Jesus.

It might very well be that this turning point is - how he found me, I'm not

[ In Reply To ..]
really sure, but I do know that abstinence does work, 100% of the time. There is only one time in history that it didn't and many pro-choice (pro-abortion) people don't believe that anyway. Please, give me ONE other instance where abstinence doesn't work. The thing of it is that the ONLY positive outcome of a rape is a baby (since that seems to be the pro-abortion argument of choice, although it is VERY VERY VERY VERY rare). And by the way, the pill doesn't work 100% of the time, either. I know because that is why I have two sons. I had two unplanned pregnancies and it makes me sick to my stomach that someone else might have thrown these people, who are the most important people in my entire life, away like trash. Religion aside, how can you think that's okay?

It costs HUGE amounts of money!! - JS

[ In Reply To ..]
Despite what Palin the Younger might get paid to preach, celibacy costs tons of money - not to mention emotional turmoil - when it DOES NOT WORK! Some who aren't bunched up over the topic of sex, including myself, may even say that it costs one their sanity, too. I'm not gonna stop doing it because you think I shouldn't. And, why should couples refrain from being with each other - including low-income married couples - because you have a problem with them having sex as a healthy part of their relationship w/o wanting to become parents? Should having sex with one's partner be an income-dependent privilege as well? Can't afford it... don't do it?

If the goal was to prevent abortions, one would be in favor of granting access to effective birth control for everyone regardless of income level. Take a pill a day, you have a 99.9% chance of NOT having an abortion. Sounds good, right? If you are for controlling what others do in their bedrooms and forcing your own morality on others, you will express opinions like these.

Can you explain to me how celibacy DOESN'T WORK?1 - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
Really? So if you keep your clothes on, and you never get into a bed, the back seat of a car, or the any other horizontal surface with a man, are some commando sperm going to seek you out and impregnate you against your will? Seriously.

Having sex with a partner is not dependent on income. Where we have lost our way is when we decided that any body should jump into bed with anybody regardless of how that "relatioship" is defined. Sex was never intended as a source of recreation, but for procreation.

For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. Eph. 5:31

The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord. I. Cor. 6:13

You're quoting the Bible again - JS

[ In Reply To ..]
and in terms of public health issues (believe it or not, that is where this debate falls... not a debate on morality), the Bible does not belong here. In your life, if you would like to practice celibacy, that's great. However, to expect the public to conform to your moral/religious standard when it comes to sex (as well as disease and pregnancy as a consequence), it's not going to fly. Period. No one should have to consult you, your church, or any church for that matter to to get a green light to do what they want with their bodies. With that being said, in order to prevent the consequences of sex as I stated above, the most effective way to do so is through family planning services and disease prevention... not the Bible or prayer.

You are way too concerned about what other women do in their bedrooms. If you could get past that, and you really think that abortion equals murder, you could work more effectively toward preventing it. The pill is 99+% effective. Just look at Palin the younger (abstinence spokesperson) to see how effective celibacy is.

God - The Ultimate Authority - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
So...I should take your input on "public health" and "morality" rather than the Creator of the universe.

Wow...tough call. Choose God... Choose you...

In his hand is the life of every creature and the breath of all mankind. Job 12:10

Then the Lord answered Job out of the storm. He said:

"Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge? Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me.

“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand.
Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!

Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?

Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,
when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,
when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,
when I said, ‘This far you may come and no farther;

Where is where your proud waves halt’?

“Have you ever given orders to the morning,
or shown the dawn its place,
that it might take the earth by the edges and shake the wicked out of it?

The earth takes shape like clay under a seal; its features stand out like those of a garment.

The wicked are denied their light,
and their upraised arm is broken.

Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea or walked in the recesses of the deep?

Have the gates of death been shown to you? Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death?

Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?

Tell me, if you know all this.
What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?
Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?

Surely you know, for you were already born!

You have lived so many years! Job 38:1-21

When you can compete with that, get back to me.

Please - JS

[ In Reply To ..]
Go to church... or at least over to the Faith Board. Your posts have nothing to do with public health issues in this case or politics in other posts, and your anger is completely out of line coming from someone who is quoting the Bible. Maybe someone at church can teach you that you shouldn't use your faith in order to control and/or shame others. You might want to confess about being waaaaay to preoccupied with what other women are doing with their backsides, too. Tsk tsk.

I'm not angry... - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
If there is anger, it's on your part.

Yes, when politics deals with "family planning issues" versus the rights of the unborn, the Bible is the ONLY authority.

If that bothers you - don't read the posts.

If there is shame, it's because you recognize your own sinfulness, and maybe God is speaking to you.

I'm not telling you what women should do with their backsides. God did a pretty good job of that Himself. Shake your fist at Him if you want, your call.

Woe to him who quarrels with his Maker,
to him who is but a potsherd among the potsherds on the ground.

Does the clay say to the potter,
‘What are you making?’
Does your work say,
‘He has no hands’?
Woe to him who says to his father,
‘What have you begotten?’
or to his mother,
‘What have you brought to birth?’

“This is what the Lord says—
the Holy One of Israel, and its Maker:
Concerning things to come,
do you question me about my children,
or give me orders about the work of my hands?

It is I who made the earth
and created mankind upon it.
My own hands stretched out the heavens;
I marshaled their starry hosts. Isaiah 45:9-12

People here will bring up Christianity when they want to run it down, or the Bible when they want to poke fun at it.

So...if the Bible offends you so much, I'll end with a quote from another author.

The Bible is like a lion. ... Just turn it loose, it will defend itself. Martin Luther

There are a lot more things that go into my - purchasing choices than

[ In Reply To ..]
energy usage. Believe it or not, I actually take performance and appearance and comfort into account. I certainly don't need the government to dictate to me what the important factors are in determining what appliance or car I purchase. Surprisingly, I do have a car that I purchased based mostly on fuel economy and we have one big ridiculous pickup that makes eco-nuts cringe. The funny part, my car is not a hybrid, but it does get better mileage than most of them.

I'm just curious... - Zville MT

[ In Reply To ..]
how many people on this forum have read the entire health care bill. Not trying to start an arguement or debate, I'm just wondering how many have read it and know what all it entails for now and over the next several years.

Nancy Pelosi didn't read it. - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
She said it had to be passed before we would know what was in it.

I've read a chunk of it, but not all 1200 pages or however long it wound up being.

I've enjoyed your contributions, Zville. A refreshing change from the liberal anger that is touted as logical debate here.

LOL! I know she didn't read it! - Zville MT

[ In Reply To ..]
Along with the majority of congress and the president. I'm just curious to hear how many of those who oppose it and those that are for it have actually read it so they know all the implications. I think there has to be knowledge to have a knowledgable debate.

I made my way through all of it about two months after it passed - there's a lot of legalese that's not easy to understand. It's definitely not a page-turner - LOL!

I have enjoyed your contributions as well and appreciate that you never back down ;)

But it might be a great sedative... - hmmm

[ In Reply To ..]
on those nights when it's hard to get to sleep.

Nope - never gonna back down - no way, no how. Unconquered and unconquerable is the slogan of my tribe - and I'm sticking with it.

Similar Messages:

Nov 09, 2009
This was a pretty good skit. LOL. http://rawstory.com/2009/11/snl-parodies-fox-news-election-coverage-videode/ ...

Mar 16, 2012
Do you believe insurance should not cover maternity costs also. It is a lady's choice to become pregnant, so is that the same category of covering birth control pills. How about should employers be allowed to deny coverage of pregnancy if mother is not married. That might violate some employers religious beliefs to pay for illegitimate children. Interested in where people draw the line. ...

Jul 05, 2011
My family called me not understanding how a mother not report a child missing for 31 days and no criminal charges were made. I keep hearing from commentators saying the justice system worked. I want to know how the justice system worked, freeing an obviously guilty person to continue her life as if her daughter was not murdered. Just heard on the news the Anthony family is being threatened. Can you imagine what happens to Casey once she is free as far as threats on ...

Nov 15, 2012
Now that the elections are over, it seems Obamacare will be going into effect. What do you think the MTSOs are going to do? The new law will require all businesses with over 50 employees to offer insurance. It really would be nice if the large companies did the right thing and offered insurance without having to meet line count guidelines. Insurance being tied to line count always leaves a bad taste in the mouth of employees because when work is low, you ...

Feb 17, 2015
as justices take up Obamacare challenge. What a mess this will be if the court rules against the ACA subsides in the states that declined to set up their own exchanges. ...

Feb 02, 2013
Now birth control is a disease treatment. Oh my. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXLv3NY1Njk&noredirect=1 ...

Jul 27, 2017
Major cable news networks have given no coverage to the burgeoning scandal involving IT staffers to former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, according to a Washington Free Beacon analysis. Reporting by the Daily Caller News Foundation has revealed that Wasserman Schultz's top information technology staffer Iman Awan was arrested Monday after trying to flee the country amidst investigations into Awan concerning banking fraud and a criminal cybersecurity probe. Awan wired over $280,000 ...

May 14, 2015
Do the Fox News junkie talking heads on "Fix News" ever listen to their own drivel? Let's review how Obama was correct about Fox at the link below. ...

Aug 05, 2017
Has this happened to anyone else? No offense, but I could not care less what is going on Greenwich, CT (the local news location now appearing on my news page). I tried adding my town multiple times, but it did not take. I also added Greenwich, CT, and then deleted it, but it's still there. ...

Jan 22, 2012
reat news! Despite months of fierce lobbying by the U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Obama administration announced today that it would not exempt Catholic hospitals from the Affordable Care Act requirement for insurance plans to cover employees’ birth control. The news, which comes on the first day of Trust Women Week, is a welcome victory for feminists.Back in November, feminists were concerned that President Obama might cave in to the Bishops’ pressure ...

Mar 27, 2010
Posted Thursday, Mar. 25, 2010 By JAN JARVIS jjarvis@star-telegram.com At birth, Houston Tracy let out a single loud cry before his father cut the cord and handed him to a nurse. Instantly, Doug Tracy knew something was wrong with his son. "He wasn't turning pink fast enough," Tracy said. "When they listened to his chest, they realized he had an issue." That turned out to be d-transposition of the great arteries, a defect in which the two major vessels that carry blood away from t ...

Jan 20, 2015
At a time when Republicans are trying to roll back certain provisions of the Affordable Care Act (if not the entire law), a liberal advocacy group is looking ahead to the next round of taxpayer-subsidized health care "reform." Families USA says the ACA was a good start, but it has now outlined 19 specific proposals "to improve health care for everyone in our nation." The plan, called Health Reform 2.0, would "improve coverage and extend care." That means making dental coverage universall ...

Jun 20, 2011
James Richard Verone spent his whole life playing by the rules and staying out of trouble. Having worked as a delivery man for Coca Cola for 17 years, Verone was known as a hard worker and honest man.Yet when he was laid off from Coca Cola three years ago, Verone was desperate to find work. He eventually found employment as a convenience clerk, yet he began to notice a protrusion in his chest. He developed arthritis and carpal tunnel syndrome, and soon the pain became too much for him to bear. H ...

Apr 12, 2013
The Anti-Choice Monster Blog ››› April 12, 2013 1:28 PM EDT ››› ARI RABIN-HAVT Kermit Gosnell, currently on trial for murder, appears to be a monster. There are no adjectives strong enough to describe the horrors that a grand jury says took place at the Women's Medical Society. In recent weeks, anti-choice media figures have been agitating for more coverage of the Gosnell trial in the mainstre ...

Oct 16, 2016
http://www.westernjournalism.com/carson-explodes-on-medias-biased-coverage-of-trump-what-a-bunch-of-crap/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=THENewVoice&utm_campaign=manualpost Carson explodes on media’s biased coverage of Trump: What a bunch of crap! ...

Jul 01, 2014
Unbelievable. The scandals/shams (whatever one wants to call them) never end with this administration. ...

Nov 26, 2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/26/fox-news-interview-guest-network-wing-republican-party_n_2192506.html This is a link to an actual Fox News clip of an interview that they cut off after 90 seconds. Now there is that good ol' freedom of speech. ...

Jul 23, 2010
Nothing like dragging your feet....this all boils down to the 2008 investigation that was started then. Guess they just completed a full investigation now. This article is 2 pages and there is video on there, too, but I could barely hear it. A House ethics subcommittee announced Thursday that it found that Rep. Charles B. Rangel violated congressional ethics rules and that it will prepare for a trial, probably beginning in September. The panel is expected to make the details of his alle ...

Feb 22, 2015
The CEO of Aetna Insurance has decided, after conducting a review, to raise the pay of some 5,700 of their employees to $16.00 per hour. The CEO said that many of these employees were making $13 or $14 per hour and were unable to purchase the companies health insurance for themselves or their children forcing them onto public assistance. Half a million low-wage workers will get a raise in April, when Walmart lifts hourly wages at its stores in the United States to at least $9. The raise, an ...

Aug 01, 2017
Pretty disgusting all in all. Then they retracted the entire story. Many of you were up in arms about Seth Rich, what happened to that story? Well, maybe Fox realized they would be exposed for being Trump's errand boy so he could distract the media with his, wait for it, FAKE NEWS! ...

Apr 19, 2013
Your favorite station is saying there is a 3rd subject and that police stopped an Amtrak train going from Boston to CT. This kid is very dangerous. He and his brother had Facebook pages, too. I've been watching since 5 a.m. Very interesting. FBI did a fantastic job. Too badk they didn't catch the younger one. Too bad CM and his ilk was totally WRONG as usual. Will they apologize? Of course not! They;ll keep trying to find a link between these Chechyans and the right wing, but since ...

Feb 19, 2017
investigated - Roger Ailes case? ...

Feb 16, 2017
When even the Conservative Propaganda Channel, Fox News, turns against their darling Mr. Trump, you know he's in trouble... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fysSDYkhHlU ...

Feb 02, 2015
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/trans-pacific-partnership_b_6585028.html ...

Dec 17, 2016
has confirmed the Russians hacked our election do you believe it? ...

Jul 30, 2015
Fox does so much that is offensive and an absolute waste of time. About a page down you can view the Fox video. http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/fox-host-the-role-of-modern-women-is-to-engage-in-a-little-horizontal-hula-and-then-make-him-a-sandwich/ ...

Feb 11, 2012
that Whitney Houston has died. She was only 48. Cause of death unknown . Too bad, she was too young. ...

Feb 06, 2012
Fox News announces that the world is flat. Thousands of loyal viewers are killed in stampede to get "falling off the earth" insurance also known as the OOPSY policy (off of planet, see ya). ...

Sep 28, 2011
x ...

Oct 15, 2009
BREAKING NEWS: This just in!!! Obama wins the Heisman Trophy after watching a college football game!!! ...