HHS Argument: How Should I Respond to My Senator?

  • Thread starter Thread starter prodigalson2011
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

prodigalson2011

Guest
After writing to one of my Senators to express my concern over the HHS mandate, I received the following reply:

“…However, the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act (also known as the “Blunt amendment” after its sponsor, Senator Blunt) goes too far. It would allow any employer or insurance provider to block any service, preventive or otherwise, that is “contrary to the religious beliefs or moral convictions of the sponsor, issuer or other entity offering the plan.” This not only includes preventive birth control medication, which millions of American women rely on, but could also include transfusions, organ transplants or hospice care, which some “sponsors” may find objectionable.”

I intend to write back to her; how should I respond to this particular objection?
 
This is where religious freedom gets sticky in the US. It’s all fine when it’s about us and what we believe, but when it means we have to let religions we don’t practice have the same freedom it’s different.

It’s going to be a difficult task to balance everyone’s freedoms and still make sure that people who might end up working for employers whose faith differs from their own can still access the care they need.
 
I believe it is time to take action in the following manner. Discuss this topic with three or more constituents and help them make the shift to voting this senator out of office if this sentator is in favor of opressing the catholic church.

This is the message I got from Justice Alito. The people you vote into office incur consequences.
 
Either:

a) People can find employers that provide the type of health care they want, or

b) they can buy their own insurance or supplemental insurance themselves.

Religious freedom is a real thing, and cannot be discarded because it appears to be inconvenient.
 
I would not bother to respond, but wait unitl her re-election and offer your volunteer services to her opponent and help kick her out of office.
 
If you want insurance that pays for blood transfusions, then don’t work for Christian Scientists. Or buy your own. (insurance or blood transfusions)
 
Allegra said:
If you want insurance that pays for blood transfusions, then don’t work for Christian Scientists. Or buy your own. (insurance or blood transfusions)
Click to expand...
Yup. It really is that simple. Of course, the government wants control not solutions.
 
…don’t get mad, get even. Even though I did not vote for Obama I will go door to door for HOPE and Change come November.
 
Goes to far, eh?

Meaning, it goes right back to where it has always been? I suppose America was on the verge of collapse until your glorious Senator fixed it.

Yeah, I’d just write back to say that he has given you a great deal of motivation to do whatever it takes to get him ousted. Personally, I’d pray for his conversion daily. But, you can also get involved politically if you’d like.
 
Better yet, why keep health care insurance tied to specific employment? What about an option that takes the employer out of the equation? That benefits both employer and employee, the employer doesn’t have to pay for anything that violates his/her conscience and the employee doesn’t have to worry about losing insurance if they change jobs and they can buy insurance that follows their conscience.

I worked for the Federal Government and every year we has a choice of health care plans that competed for our business. Each employee picked the one best for their needs and the cost was directly removed from our paychecks. All the government did was move the money from paycheck to private company. Why couldn’t we do that on a larger scale?
 
Seeker1961 said:
Better yet, why keep health care insurance tied to specific employment? What about an option that takes the employer out of the equation? That benefits both employer and employee, the employer doesn’t have to pay for anything that violates his/her conscience and the employee doesn’t have to worry about losing insurance if they change jobs and they can buy insurance that follows their conscience.

I worked for the Federal Government and every year we has a choice of health care plans that competed for our business. Each employee picked the one best for their needs and the cost was directly removed from our paychecks. All the government did was move the money from paycheck to private company. Why couldn’t we do that on a larger scale?
Click to expand...
The ironic thing about the whole situation is that health insurance tied to an employer as a benefit stems from GOVERNMENT WAGE CONTROLS imposed during the Great Depression! So government, yet again, by interfering with capitalism, caused unintended consequences that haunt us to this day! :mad:
 
prodigalson2011 said:
After writing to one of my Senators to express my concern over the HHS mandate, I received the following reply:

“…However, the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act (also known as the “Blunt amendment” after its sponsor, Senator Blunt) goes too far. It would allow any employer or insurance provider to block any service, preventive or otherwise, that is “contrary to the religious beliefs or moral convictions of the sponsor, issuer or other entity offering the plan.” This not only includes preventive birth control medication, which millions of American women rely on, but could also include transfusions, organ transplants or hospice care, which some “sponsors” may find objectionable.”

I intend to write back to her; how should I respond to this particular objection?
Click to expand...
Send her a copy of your check to her opponent.

😃
 
TheRealJuliane said:
The ironic thing about the whole situation is that health insurance tied to an employer as a benefit stems from GOVERNMENT WAGE CONTROLS imposed during the Great Depression! So government, yet again, by interfering with capitalism, caused unintended consequences that haunt us to this day! :mad:
Click to expand...
So since the time machine DeLorean isn’t handy, what is wrong with wanting to move towards a different solution for the future?

I have to admit that the constant doom and gloom and everything is so terrible attitude here gets old really fast.
 
Seeker1961 said:
Better yet, why keep health care insurance tied to specific employment? What about an option that takes the employer out of the equation? That benefits both employer and employee, the employer doesn’t have to pay for anything that violates his/her conscience and the employee doesn’t have to worry about losing insurance if they change jobs and they can buy insurance that follows their conscience.

I worked for the Federal Government and every year we has a choice of health care plans that competed for our business. Each employee picked the one best for their needs and the cost was directly removed from our paychecks. All the government did was move the money from paycheck to private company. Why couldn’t we do that on a larger scale?
Click to expand...
Well, that’s exactly what I hoped that Obama would do, based on his own promises in 2007-2008 before he was elected. I heard him say more than once, “You will have access to the same insurance plans as we the Congress members have access to, as Federal employees.” I think Obama should have kept this promise, plus he (and Congress) should have passed a Federal Law that everybody should be eligible to buy health insurance with no checks for pre-existing conditions. That’s it. Just mandate, federally, that health insurers must provide certain plans regardless of pre-existing health conditions, and open up these plans for everyone, whether they are Federal employees, self-employed, un-employed, whatever.
 
For one thing, organ transplants and blood transfusions are treatments, not prevention. Vaccines prevent disease. Those things are reasonable things to expect from a provider or insurance plan. Preventing pregnancy, which is a natural process, is completely elective. Its like botox for wrinkles. If you want it, pay for it yourself. If your doctor objects to providing an elective service or medication, go elsewhere.

Im not a great arguer, but your senator is lumping together prevention and treatment as well as lumping together real diseases with pregnancy, which is not a disease. As a woman, I am beginning to get offended by everyones objection to how our bodies were created to work!
 
And another thing…as a medical provider, I can refuse to see a patient for birth control. They can go somewhere else then return to me for other issues. Same with any other provider who doesn’t do what “womens health” has become.
 
Seeker1961 said:
So since the time machine DeLorean isn’t handy, what is wrong with wanting to move towards a different solution for the future?

I have to admit that the constant doom and gloom and everything is so terrible attitude here gets old really fast.
Click to expand...
It is just good to understand how we got here, so we don’t keep going down the same road again and again. Of course we can look at solutions but it would seem that no one thought of yours…Being able to shop for insurance across state lines would help as well.

But this was never about solving any created health care crisis. It’s about taking all the power over others from cradle to grave. If you think that politicians are out to help us, I’ve got a bridge in London for sale.
 
TheRealJuliane said:
It is just good to understand how we got here, so we don’t keep going down the same road again and again. Of course we can look at solutions but it would seem that no one thought of yours…Being able to shop for insurance across state lines would help as well.

But this was never about solving any created health care crisis. It’s about taking all the power over others from cradle to grave. If you think that politicians are out to help us, I’ve got a bridge in London for sale.
Click to expand...
I don’t think they’re trying to help-I say that all the time to people who think if they vote for so and so, he or she is going to fix everything.

Politicians want power-and they will sign on to anything that is popular enough to keep them elected. Make something popular and a politician will jump in front of it claiming it was their idea all along. So, instead of carrying on about how horrible everything is-come up with a better idea and promote that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top