Does the birth control debate...

[4est_4est_Gump]

You could be twins.

You can be our date infidel...

 

[mark197205]

You can be our date infidel...

I would rather behead myself.

 

[Peregrinator]

A. You just get pissed as hell when I point out the obvious, that you are a fan of government intervention in the name of doing good.

B. I can give you daily examples because as you know, my wife is a specialist in case management. The doctor gets interfered with because as good as he may (or, surprisingly often how not) he has other concerns to worry about and oftentimes orders litigation preventative care and tests; the hospital and the insurance companies have actuary studies to prevent inefficiencies, ironically, it is the same thing government says it will do once it has control of health insurance, but as we already see, in this case, they actually add cost and inefficiency because government makes political decisions.

C. You cannot argue personal anecdote because it does several things:
1. It promotes emotional rather than rational.
2. You get to be the arbiter of fact, and in this case, as I have had to repeatedly point out to you, at the point of treatment, not at the business end where every cost has to be justified.
3. You get to personalize the discussion in order to control it and if anyone counters your point, they are countering you personally and then can be characterized and dismissed by ad hominem.

D. In all of your carefully laid out diatribe there, the people who have to repeatedly make this decision are mischaracterized as only carting about ducats when, in fact, they are caring about maximizing scant and precious resource in order to serve as many needs as possible. If YOU were allowed to rule at the point of treatment every time in every case, then, by attrition, you would begin to deny others even basic care, but you don't see that and that is the problem with altruism, you deal with the seen benefit and never, ever, for a second concern yourself with the long-term unseen consequences of your immediate action.

E.Bastiat wrote extensively about his and I have repeatedly begged you to go online and download for free "Sophisms of the Protectionists," "The Law" and similar works

A. No, I don't. I get pissed when you repeatedly assign to me positions I don't hold and mischaracterize my opinions, education, and career in order to argue with what you like to pretend I am, rather than what I actually am.

B. I'm aware of all of this. I think the litigation-prevention is also a problem, but I am at a loss as to how to make it go away. I also maintain that the personal judgment of a skilled provider is at least as useful and effective as an actuarial table.

C. It was one example. Forget it. You're aware of plenty of your own.

D. I am hard pressed to believe in the insurance corporation employee who is motivated by a desire to "maximize scant resources." Pray, introduce me to one. No need to arrive by helicopter; I can wait for the limo to bring him or her. My answer to your problem of attrition is to point out that there are currently enough physicians in the US that if each of them were assigned--I'd have to look it up to be sure, but in the neighborhood of--twelve families, then everyone in the country could have their own personal physician. I'm not sure if your last clause is directed at me personally or the general "you," but I assure you it does not apply to me personally.

E. I do not recall you ever begging me to do any such thing. Please show me where you have in the past. I may actually be in the mood for such a thing again.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Straw man. And more diversion.

I didn't say birth control is what they're squawking about. Whay they're squawking about is forcing Catholic affiliated businesses to pay for things that are against the owners' religion and/or moral consciense. In this case birth control. This is what they are squawling about. This is what they explicitly say they're squaking about, however much you want to reframe it.

If they were squawking about what you're squawking about, why are they saying that they aew squawking about something else?

Are they or you lying?

Lying is a coward's word.

When government can force you to put a vegetable four-year old's lunch to pass inspection and pay for "free" services for one of its significant voting blocks by bureaucratic decree, not by vote or act of Congress, what else can the just mandatorily decree, like say, following perg's eternal complaint simply accelerate and strengthen CAFE standards, shut down drilling, shut down pipelines, cancel new nuke permits...,

Maybe we can use a program like Fast & Furious to mandate new, stricter gun control...

... or declare white bread a poison...

I'll tell you what, if this was a Republican, the Left would be rioting in the streets.

 

[Peregrinator]

Very well argued. When you see you're mistaken in two ways in a relatively short post, just use an emoticon.

Indeed.

 

[blunt_trauma]

i'm fetching a paddling pool filled with jello...

 

[Liar]

I'll tell you what, if this was a Republican, the Left would be rioting in the streets.

It was a republican. His name was Mike. You're not paying attention.

 

[butters]

i'm fetching a paddling pool filled with jello...

no hairs in the jello, plsk? *gags*

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I am hard pressed to believe in the insurance corporation employee who is motivated by a desire to "maximize scant resources." Pray, introduce me to one. No need to arrive by helicopter; I can wait for the limo to bring him or her. My answer to your problem of attrition is to point out that there are currently enough physicians in the US that if each of them were assigned--I'd have to look it up to be sure, but in the neighborhood of--twelve families, then everyone in the country could have their own personal physician. I'm not sure if your last clause is directed at me personally or the general "you," but I assure you it does not apply to me personally.

If you so hate Capitalism and its mechanism, then I can never convince you and again, you want to drag me down into a personalized exchange, which I will not do; the employee is part of the whole and most of the time following a script developed by careful study and analysis, not "winging it" in the way you are advocating with the doctor being the only resort. Let him try to make a living without the benefit of insurance companies. That would end treatment for the poor of all sorts in a heartbeat.

The insurance company exists to pool and manage resources. ll you are doing is trying to pick at a few loose threads in order to impeach and create a self-justification for your own personal views about business, which, I assure you, would moderate, if you had ever gotten tot he point of running a business.

And, since you arguing by personal anecdote, I meant the personal you, not the general you.

You seem to think your decision-making process is humane, while the CORPORATE mind is inhumane because it does not work in every instance the way you think it should work, or the doctor thinks it should work. Please keep in mind that not every doctor is an excellent doctor. There are bad players and burned-out players just mailing it in.

My current physician is just mailing it in since he became a hospital employee...

If I were sick, Id worry about it.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

It was a republican. His name was Mike. You're not paying attention.

You've created a false equivalency and intend to ride it against a windmill...


I pointed that out and you ignored it.

Try reading the Krauthammer piece.

have a nice day.

 

[MeeMie]

I'll tell you what, if this was a Republican, the Left would be rioting in the streets.

Exactly.


Liberals everywhere were in full-throat roar protesting George Bush's Patriot Act and his War on Terror in the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11. What price in liberty to be safe from terrorism? Barack Obama himself decried the loss of liberty, the loss of personal freedoms, declaring in 2005 that the Patriot Act "puts our own Justice Department above the law."

http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/archive.htm

Today only crickets from the Left as Obama assaults liberty and freedom of choice on a nearly daily basis.


Consider the list of Obama's assaults on liberty. Any one of these done by a Republican President would bring down the wrath of the Left. Done by Obama, the action is noted in the Obama reelect media for a single news cycle and then dropped.

Obama's Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is more arrogantly intrusive than ever. The Fourth Amendment protection against "unreasonable" searches and seizures has been repealed at your local airport. Rep. John Mica, who authored the TSA legislation, observes that the unionized TSA now strip-searching grannies and detaining Senators bears little resemblance to his original idea.

Doctor-patient confidentiality? ObamaCare is requiring doctors and hospitals to make records of every aspect of your personal health, and health history, for use by Obama's Department of Health and Human Services. For use by the "death panels"?

ObamaCare tramples First Amendment religious freedom by ordering Catholic hospitals to cover free contraceptives, requiring Catholic adoption agencies to adopt kids to gay couples (resulting in the adoption agencies closing), and requiring Catholic taxpayers to fund federal abortion grants.

"No Child Left Behind" has been expanded to collect not only student test scores and grades, but the government now keeps permanent records on students' disciplinary actions, economic status, and even pregnancies. Worse, the feds discourage the states from allowing parents to access these "permanent records." What police state has ever done without such record keeping? Old East Germany's Stasi would be proud.

The federalization of K-12 education continues under Obama. A group of Bay Shore, Long Island, high school students will soon be wearing electronic monitors to allow school officials to track their physical activity around the clock to fight obesity. Is any excuse sufficient to ban all privacy?

The Obama EEOC has ruled that a private employer's requirement for a high school diploma to qualify for a job might violate the Americans With Disabilities Act. The act does not cover this issue, but Obama's EEOC thinks it should.

Obama wants restrictions on guns sold to Americans in violation of the Second Amendment even as his Justice Department runs the Fast and Furious program to allow the same guns to walk across the border into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels.

EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center), a privacy advocacy group, sued Obama's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to discover through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that DHS is monitoring political dissent. EPIC has more than 300 pages of contracts and memos detailing work done by General Dynamics for DHS. One "tracking report" titled "Residents Voice Opposition Over Possible Plan to Bring Guantanamo Detainees to Local Prison-Standish MI" summarizes dissent on blogs and social networking sites, quoting commenters by name.

Angry that FOIA requests and lawsuits were revealing the extent of Obama's liberty-shredding actions, Obama's "Justice Department" issued new rules allowing federal agencies to deny the existence of requested documents even when the agency knows they in fact do exist. The Right to Lie to protect the public from knowing about the loss of their liberties is now the official policy of the Obama administration.

Obama's FBI has obtained a court order against an American woman accused of mortgage fraud to force her to decrypt her PGP-scrambled hard drive so that the FBI can fish around without a warrant in her personal computer for incriminating evidence. The judge said the Fifth Amendment did not apply. For Obama, the Constitution (that "list of negative rights") does not apply whenever it acts to restrain his objectives.

The State of the Union? Slipping into dictatorship.

Where's the ACLU now?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Indeed.

If I wanted to be bombarded with your c&p argumentation, I would be in that thread.

I don't feel like doing the lovelynice thing today...

Are you THAT slow?

... or just that committed to your crusade?

 

[blunt_trauma]

chuppy, i'm seeing sequined g-strings.

 

[mark197205]

chuppy, i'm seeing sequined g-strings.

*barfs*

 

[miles]

Today only crickets from the Left as Obama assaults liberty and freedom of choice on a nearly daily basis.

They lack any measure of intellectual honesty. In other words, they're a bunch of hypocritical frauds.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

chuppy, i'm seeing sequined g-strings.

Mine's turquoise!



It's a Heritage statement!

 

[phrodeau]

Exactly.


Liberals everywhere were in full-throat roar protesting George Bush's Patriot Act and his War on Terror in the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11. What price in liberty to be safe from terrorism? Barack Obama himself decried the loss of liberty, the loss of personal freedoms, declaring in 2005 that the Patriot Act "puts our own Justice Department above the law."

http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/archive.htm

Today only crickets from the Left as Obama assaults liberty and freedom of choice on a nearly daily basis.


Consider the list of Obama's assaults on liberty. Any one of these done by a Republican President would bring down the wrath of the Left. Done by Obama, the action is noted in the Obama reelect media for a single news cycle and then dropped.

Obama's Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is more arrogantly intrusive than ever. The Fourth Amendment protection against "unreasonable" searches and seizures has been repealed at your local airport. Rep. John Mica, who authored the TSA legislation, observes that the unionized TSA now strip-searching grannies and detaining Senators bears little resemblance to his original idea.

Doctor-patient confidentiality? ObamaCare is requiring doctors and hospitals to make records of every aspect of your personal health, and health history, for use by Obama's Department of Health and Human Services. For use by the "death panels"?

ObamaCare tramples First Amendment religious freedom by ordering Catholic hospitals to cover free contraceptives, requiring Catholic adoption agencies to adopt kids to gay couples (resulting in the adoption agencies closing), and requiring Catholic taxpayers to fund federal abortion grants.

"No Child Left Behind" has been expanded to collect not only student test scores and grades, but the government now keeps permanent records on students' disciplinary actions, economic status, and even pregnancies. Worse, the feds discourage the states from allowing parents to access these "permanent records." What police state has ever done without such record keeping? Old East Germany's Stasi would be proud.

The federalization of K-12 education continues under Obama. A group of Bay Shore, Long Island, high school students will soon be wearing electronic monitors to allow school officials to track their physical activity around the clock to fight obesity. Is any excuse sufficient to ban all privacy?

The Obama EEOC has ruled that a private employer's requirement for a high school diploma to qualify for a job might violate the Americans With Disabilities Act. The act does not cover this issue, but Obama's EEOC thinks it should.

Obama wants restrictions on guns sold to Americans in violation of the Second Amendment even as his Justice Department runs the Fast and Furious program to allow the same guns to walk across the border into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels.

EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center), a privacy advocacy group, sued Obama's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to discover through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that DHS is monitoring political dissent. EPIC has more than 300 pages of contracts and memos detailing work done by General Dynamics for DHS. One "tracking report" titled "Residents Voice Opposition Over Possible Plan to Bring Guantanamo Detainees to Local Prison-Standish MI" summarizes dissent on blogs and social networking sites, quoting commenters by name.

Angry that FOIA requests and lawsuits were revealing the extent of Obama's liberty-shredding actions, Obama's "Justice Department" issued new rules allowing federal agencies to deny the existence of requested documents even when the agency knows they in fact do exist. The Right to Lie to protect the public from knowing about the loss of their liberties is now the official policy of the Obama administration.

Obama's FBI has obtained a court order against an American woman accused of mortgage fraud to force her to decrypt her PGP-scrambled hard drive so that the FBI can fish around without a warrant in her personal computer for incriminating evidence. The judge said the Fifth Amendment did not apply. For Obama, the Constitution (that "list of negative rights") does not apply whenever it acts to restrain his objectives.

The State of the Union? Slipping into dictatorship.

Where's the ACLU now?

You're Roger Hedgecock?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=49083

 

[Peregrinator]

If you so hate Capitalism and its mechanism, then I can never convince you and again, you want to drag me down into a personalized exchange, which I will not do; the employee is part of the whole and most of the time following a script developed by careful study and analysis, not "winging it" in the way you are advocating with the doctor being the only resort. Let him try to make a living without the benefit of insurance companies. That would end treatment for the poor of all sorts in a heartbeat.

The insurance company exists to pool and manage resources. ll you are doing is trying to pick at a few loose threads in order to impeach and create a self-justification for your own personal views about business, which, I assure you, would moderate, if you had ever gotten tot he point of running a business.

And, since you arguing by personal anecdote, I meant the personal you, not the general you.

You seem to think your decision-making process is humane, while the CORPORATE mind is inhumane because it does not work in every instance the way you think it should work, or the doctor thinks it should work. Please keep in mind that not every doctor is an excellent doctor. There are bad players and burned-out players just mailing it in.

My current physician is just mailing it in since he became a hospital employee...

If I were sick, Id worry about it.

What makes you think I hate capitalism? I hate having an insurance accountant make decisions about patient care in order to save money. I don't hate capitalism across the board, at all. I've derived tremendous benefit from it, in fact, and so has the whole damn country. The difference here is that the script is not personal to the patient, which medicine really should be.

The insurance company exists to "pool and manage" a single resource, cash, and in the process make a lot of money for those who work there and own shares.

Well, once again, you have decided I "don't see" something and have argued accordingly. I hope you enjoy that.

No. I think the corporate mind is inhumane because the corporation has but one purpose and one purpose alone: maximize profit for shareholders. If you can, please convince me that some corporations exist for another purpose, and specifically, that insurance corporations exist to improve patient care in the general and/or the specific. It's true that there are lousy doctors, and there are mechanisms in place to remediate, mitigate, or remove them from practice. Try changing insurance companies with the same ease. And if your current physician is such a dud, why is he your current physician? Fire him and get a new one.

I agree with what I take to be the sense of that last sentence; I keep myself as healthy as possible as well. Having worked in the system for almost twenty years now, I have an insider's horror of it.




This post:

Exactly.


Liberals everywhere were in full-throat roar protesting George Bush's Patriot Act and his War on Terror in the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11. What price in liberty to be safe from terrorism? Barack Obama himself decried the loss of liberty, the loss of personal freedoms, declaring in 2005 that the Patriot Act "puts our own Justice Department above the law."

http://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/archive.htm

Today only crickets from the Left as Obama assaults liberty and freedom of choice on a nearly daily basis.


Consider the list of Obama's assaults on liberty. Any one of these done by a Republican President would bring down the wrath of the Left. Done by Obama, the action is noted in the Obama reelect media for a single news cycle and then dropped.

Obama's Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is more arrogantly intrusive than ever. The Fourth Amendment protection against "unreasonable" searches and seizures has been repealed at your local airport. Rep. John Mica, who authored the TSA legislation, observes that the unionized TSA now strip-searching grannies and detaining Senators bears little resemblance to his original idea.

Doctor-patient confidentiality? ObamaCare is requiring doctors and hospitals to make records of every aspect of your personal health, and health history, for use by Obama's Department of Health and Human Services. For use by the "death panels"?

ObamaCare tramples First Amendment religious freedom by ordering Catholic hospitals to cover free contraceptives, requiring Catholic adoption agencies to adopt kids to gay couples (resulting in the adoption agencies closing), and requiring Catholic taxpayers to fund federal abortion grants.

"No Child Left Behind" has been expanded to collect not only student test scores and grades, but the government now keeps permanent records on students' disciplinary actions, economic status, and even pregnancies. Worse, the feds discourage the states from allowing parents to access these "permanent records." What police state has ever done without such record keeping? Old East Germany's Stasi would be proud.

The federalization of K-12 education continues under Obama. A group of Bay Shore, Long Island, high school students will soon be wearing electronic monitors to allow school officials to track their physical activity around the clock to fight obesity. Is any excuse sufficient to ban all privacy?

The Obama EEOC has ruled that a private employer's requirement for a high school diploma to qualify for a job might violate the Americans With Disabilities Act. The act does not cover this issue, but Obama's EEOC thinks it should.

Obama wants restrictions on guns sold to Americans in violation of the Second Amendment even as his Justice Department runs the Fast and Furious program to allow the same guns to walk across the border into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels.

EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center), a privacy advocacy group, sued Obama's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to discover through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that DHS is monitoring political dissent. EPIC has more than 300 pages of contracts and memos detailing work done by General Dynamics for DHS. One "tracking report" titled "Residents Voice Opposition Over Possible Plan to Bring Guantanamo Detainees to Local Prison-Standish MI" summarizes dissent on blogs and social networking sites, quoting commenters by name.

Angry that FOIA requests and lawsuits were revealing the extent of Obama's liberty-shredding actions, Obama's "Justice Department" issued new rules allowing federal agencies to deny the existence of requested documents even when the agency knows they in fact do exist. The Right to Lie to protect the public from knowing about the loss of their liberties is now the official policy of the Obama administration.

Obama's FBI has obtained a court order against an American woman accused of mortgage fraud to force her to decrypt her PGP-scrambled hard drive so that the FBI can fish around without a warrant in her personal computer for incriminating evidence. The judge said the Fifth Amendment did not apply. For Obama, the Constitution (that "list of negative rights") does not apply whenever it acts to restrain his objectives.

The State of the Union? Slipping into dictatorship.

Where's the ACLU now?

...followed by this one:

If I wanted to be bombarded with your c&p argumentation, I would be in that thread.

I don't feel like doing the lovelynice thing today...

Are you THAT slow?

... or just that committed to your crusade?

...is hilarious

Where did I c&p anything? I have yet to c&p a post in this thread, other than to point out that when you can't come up with an argument, you roll your eyes.

 

[phrodeau]

They lack any measure of intellectual honesty. In other words, they're a bunch of hypocritical frauds.

Likewise, if you weren't outraged during the Bush admin, and you're outraged now, you too are a hypocritical fraud with no measure of intellectual honesty.

 

[butters]

chuppy, i'm seeing sequined g-strings.

ewwwwww - you are one sick puppy

*barfs*

*double gags*
i hate it when people throw up in a thread.

hiya, sweetie

 

[KRCummings]

make America look foolish? I was just curious, looking for a different prospective on the issue. The fact that Americans are currently debating whether women have the same rights to prescription coverage as their male counterparts in this day and age, makes me, as an American, feel foolish. So, how does it look from an outside prospective?

Either you don't know what prospective means or you mean another word entirely.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

What makes you think I hate capitalism? I hate having an insurance accountant make decisions about patient care in order to save money. I don't hate capitalism across the board, at all. I've derived tremendous benefit from it, in fact, and so has the whole damn country. The difference here is that the script is not personal to the patient, which medicine really should be.

The insurance company exists to "pool and manage" a single resource, cash, and in the process make a lot of money for those who work there and own shares.

Well, once again, you have decided I "don't see" something and have argued accordingly. I hope you enjoy that.

No. I think the corporate mind is inhumane because the corporation has but one purpose and one purpose alone: maximize profit for shareholders. If you can, please convince me that some corporations exist for another purpose, and specifically, that insurance corporations exist to improve patient care in the general and/or the specific. It's true that there are lousy doctors, and there are mechanisms in place to remediate, mitigate, or remove them from practice. Try changing insurance companies with the same ease. And if your current physician is such a dud, why is he your current physician? Fire him and get a new one...

We have come to and end of our discussion. You say you don't hate Capitalism, you just hate the way it works and then you state it only manages cash.

This is just a simple variation on. "We support the Troops, but not the Mission."

(btw, a favorite response of ThrobDownSouth.)

I could go into economic argument, I could quote from the masters, but you are emotionally vested in this argument to the point that you will ignore anything but your own viewpoint.

I'll say one last thing before I go, "maximize profit for shareholders" is a goal which stems from efficiency and a proof of success and valuation, a by-product of services provided to willing consumers who have the power in a free market to fire bad players. t is a good thing, a healthy thing, and a necessary thing if you want to provide goods and services to the masses instead of a small pool of elites.

In health care, we have a government market bound by state lines and now Federal mandate. If you want better insurance with more "humane" flexibility, then you need to go in the opposite direction. You need more, not less shareholder profit.

It is popular today to blame capitalism for everything that displeases. Indeed, who is still aware of what he would have to forego if there were no "capitalism?" When great dreams do not come true, capitalism is charged immediately. This may be a proper procedure for party politics, but in Scientific discussion, it should be avoided.
Ludwig von Mises
A Critique of Interventionalism (1929)

 

[Peregrinator]

We have come to and end of our discussion. You say you don't hate Capitalism, you just hate the way it works and then you state it only manages cash.

No, I didn't.

 

[Liar]

You've created a false equivalency and intend to ride it against a windmill...


I pointed that out and you ignored it.

Try reading the Krauthammer piece.

have a nice day.

You're arguing for a valid point. But it's a separate point and a strawman diverting from the only point I've made here, about the argument and rhetoric of Huck, who us not talking about states' rights and goverment overreach in general, but about the catholic church and birth control specifically.

Either he thinks that if it's done by him, on state level, it's not a problem while the same thing on a federal level is constitutionaöly problematic. And then he should be honest about that.

But that is npt the words he say nor the tone in which he says it.

So someone should ask him: is it ok for states like tye one you governed to force catholics to pay for birth control? And if so, is it really the religion thing that's the issue? Theres a better case to make. Why dont you make that instead?

 

[JoeRockStar]

make America look foolish? I was just curious, looking for a different prospective on the issue. The fact that Americans are currently debating whether women have the same rights to prescription coverage as their male counterparts in this day and age, makes me, as an American, feel foolish. So, how does it look from an outside prospective?

The media is turning it into a womens' issue, when in reality, it's a separation of church and state issue.