Sebelius: Decrease in Human Beings Will Cover Cost of Contraception Mandate

  • Thread starter Thread starter Scott_Lafrance
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Scott_Lafrance

Guest
(CNSNews.com) – Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a House panel Thursday that a reduction in** the number of human beings born in the United States will compensate employers and insurers for the cost of complying with the new HHS mandate** that will require all health-care plans to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception,” Sebelius said. She went on to say the estimated cost is “down not up.”

cnsnews.com/news/article/sebelius-decrease-human-beings-will-cover-cost-contraception-mandate

Can someone please excommunicate this woman? :banghead:
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
(CNSNews.com) – Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a House panel Thursday that a reduction in** the number of human beings born in the United States will compensate employers and insurers for the cost of complying with the new HHS mandate** that will require all health-care plans to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception,” Sebelius said. She went on to say the estimated cost is “down not up.”

cnsnews.com/news/article/sebelius-decrease-human-beings-will-cover-cost-contraception-mandate

Can someone please excommunicate this woman? :banghead:
Click to expand...
I believe this is the same “economic theory” we discussed yesterday. Serious organizations with significant clout hold it as creed, e.g. the World Bank, IMF, WHO, most NGOs which are not Catholic…
 
_Abyssinia said:
Archbishop Naumann had talks with Sebelius for a year and then asked her not to take Communion anymore until she publicly repudiates her support of abortion. It has been nearly four years.
Click to expand...
Yes, but this statement that we need to justify the forced institutionalization of contraception, sterilization, and abortion with fiscal benefit as the sole driver is so antithetical to the teachings of the Church that she, as self-describe Catholic, is causing scandal because of her highly public role as a government official. If I were making these claims, it could be handled between my priest and me. However, she is singing this chorus from the rooftops where the gullible can be swayed by her, simply because of her role as a public official. In Catholic terms, it is formal cooperation with heresy, because the Church has formally declared its position on abortion and artificial contraception.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
Yes, but this statement that we need to justify the forced institutionalization of contraception, sterilization, and abortion with fiscal benefit as the sole driver is so antithetical to the teachings of the Church that she, as self-describe Catholic, is causing scandal because of her highly public role as a government official. If I were making these claims, it could be handled between my priest and me. However, she is singing this chorus from the rooftops where the gullible can be swayed by her, simply because of her role as a public official. In Catholic terms, it is formal cooperation with heresy, because the Church has formally declared its position on abortion and artificial contraception.
Click to expand...
Sebelius was schooled in this, she didn’t invent it - it’s been going on since the 1950s. Somewhat surprisingly, the main proponents are men of finance. Here’s one: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Henry_Draper,_Jr… He founded Population Action International (in 1965), whose mission is described below:
Its mission is to “ensure that every person has the right and access to sexual and reproductive health, so that humanity and the natural environment can exist in balance with fewer people living in poverty.”
Click to expand...
(emphasis mine; source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_Action_International)

Plenty of scope for excommunication at various levels, I would say.
 
Okay, I do healthcare analytics for a living, and my comment to Sebelius is:

PROVE IT!

Compare plans, today, right now, that cover birth control with those that do not, controlling for age, occupation, etc, and prove that the birth rate per thousand in the plans with birth control fully or partially covered is significantly less than the plans where birth control is not covered, and that the per employee per month (PEPM) cost is demonstrably cheaper in the birth conrtol plans.
 
PaulinVA said:
Okay, I do healthcare analytics for a living, and my comment to Sebelius is:

PROVE IT!

Compare plans, today, right now, that cover birth control with those that do not, controlling for age, occupation, etc, and prove that the birth rate per thousand in the plans with birth control fully or partially covered is significantly less than the plans where birth control is not covered, and that the per employee per month (PEPM) cost is demonstrably cheaper in the birth conrtol plans.
Click to expand...
Actually I was wondering if Kathy ever considerd how the Social Security System and various other social programs are doomed by such policy.
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
(CNSNews.com) – Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told a House panel Thursday that a reduction in** the number of human beings born in the United States will compensate employers and insurers for the cost of complying with the new HHS mandate** that will require all health-care plans to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.

“The reduction in the number of pregnancies compensates for the cost of contraception,” Sebelius said. She went on to say the estimated cost is “down not up.”

cnsnews.com/news/article/sebelius-decrease-human-beings-will-cover-cost-contraception-mandate

Can someone please excommunicate this woman? :banghead:
Click to expand...
They are obviously thinking in the very short term. The reduction in births will similarly reduce the tax basis (indeed, it already is - retiring Baby Boomers outnumber each of the following generations). This at a time when debt is mounting and Social Security is known to be unable to meet its obligations in only the next couple of decades.

We need to have more kids as our best defense.
 
PaulinVA said:
Okay, I do healthcare analytics for a living, and my comment to Sebelius is:

PROVE IT!

Compare plans, today, right now, that cover birth control with those that do not, controlling for age, occupation, etc, and prove that the birth rate per thousand in the plans with birth control fully or partially covered is significantly less than the plans where birth control is not covered, and that the per employee per month (PEPM) cost is demonstrably cheaper in the birth conrtol plans.
Click to expand...
What if she could prove it, would that make the mandate more acceptable? I don’t think so.
 
seekerz said:
What if she could prove it, would that make the mandate more acceptable? I don’t think so.
Click to expand...
She can’t prove it. That’s my point. The data are too messy, I think, to be able to control for everything.
 
PaulinVA said:
She can’t prove it. That’s my point. The data are too messy, I think, to be able to control for everything.
Click to expand...
I’d like to know where the illegals who come over here and give birth fit into all of this? Are they even accounted for in this equation?
 
PaulinVA said:
She can’t prove it. That’s my point. The data are too messy, I think, to be able to control for everything.
Click to expand...
She’ll have no need to prove it either. Malthusian economic theory (or some version of it) is about as generally accepted as the moon landing. Interestingly, Malthus is said to have favored abstinence, at least initially, as the answer to overpopulation…Look where we got from there.
 
Sabda said:
I’d like to know where the illegals who come over here and give birth fit into all of this? Are they even accounted for in this equation?
Click to expand...
They would be paid for by medicaid or written off by the hospital, so they would not be included in the commercial plans I was referring to.
 
SonCatcher said:
They are obviously thinking in the very short term. The reduction in births will similarly reduce the tax basis (indeed, it already is - retiring Baby Boomers outnumber each of the following generations). This at a time when debt is mounting and Social Security is known to be unable to meet its obligations in only the next couple of decades.

We need to have more kids as our best defense.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Ask China how that is working out.
 
PaulinVA said:
They would be paid for by medicaid or written off by the hospital, so they would not be included in the commercial plans I was referring to.
Click to expand...
Still someone has to pay. As we now hospitals and pharmaceutical companies as well as insurance companies do not work for free. The cost doesn’t get wrote off so much as pushed off onto someone else.
 
SamH said:
Agreed. Ask China how that is working out.
Click to expand...
Exactly, not only do they have less young people but they also have less girls, as the boys are the preferred sex. If they don’t change their thinking around their population as well as the whole country will crash and burn.
 
There has been no decrease in human beings, just those born in the U.S., thanks to social policies in effect since Roe vs Wade.
 
There has been decreases in other countries like Japan and especially Russia.

The Russian government recently stopped government funding of late-term abortions in all cases except rape. Russia is in a crisis - its population is in steady free fall and they are worried about the continuation of Russia as a people at the end of the century.

One reason they had the Belt of the Virgin Mary brought to Russia is that it is also considered a fertility relic - the Church there is praying for a reversal in the population decline.

As for excommunication etc. I remember reading that Jesus told some mystic that He offers mercy but to remember that He has an eternity to punish those who are in grave sin and refuse to repent. Instead of moving towards what her bishop wanted she has moved further away, so if she continues on her chosen path (which seems likely at this point based on that history) she’ll find herself in a terrifying place forever. :eek:

Prayer is needed.

God bless you.
 
When we achieve zero human beings left, then health care will cost nothing.

It is hard to refrain from making yet another sarcastic comment about our leaders, but I will, just this once … if only to reflect on the state of madness into which our country and world has descended. It is unspeakably and profoundly sad, because it is reality.

It is time to support our bishops, with everything we have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top