President Pious
President Pussy Grabber is doing his best to make it more difficult for women to get contraception. I hope Princess Ivanka comes darting out to tell us how empowering this is.
The Trump administration issued a rule Friday that sharply limits the Affordable Care Act’s contraception coverage mandate, a move that could mean many American women would no longer have access to birth control free of charge.
No, that they would no long have access to birth control as part of their insurance. It was never “free of charge”; it was included in insurance coverage.
The new regulation, issued by the Health and Human Services Department, allows a much broader group of employers and insurers to exempt themselves from covering contraceptives such as birth control pills on religious or moral grounds. The decision, anticipated from the Trump administration for months, is the latest twist in a seesawing legal and ideological fight that has surrounded this aspect of the 2010 health-care law nearly from the start.
What could be more edifying than seeing President “you can grab them by the pussy” making it more difficult for women to get contraception on “moral” grounds? You can grab them by the pussy, and they can’t even get contraception through their employee health insurance; hahaha it sucks to be a woman doesn’t it.
As part of the rule, made publicly available in the Federal Register late Friday morning, administration officials estimate that 120,000 women at most will lose access to free contraceptives — many fewer than critics predict.
They’re not free. Wouldn’t you think journalists for the Post could get this right? They’re part of employer-based insurance. That’s not the same thing as free – it’s part of their compensation, that they work for.
The rule follows some social conservatives’ increasing frustration with the pace at which the Trump administration has addressed their demands on issues such as the ACA contraception requirement. “An awful lot of people who voted for this president did so believing this was going to be something he would solve,” said Mark Rienzi, senior counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, who hailed the rule as a correction of overly aggressive liberal actions under President Barack Obama. “There are other ways to get contraceptives. You don’t need to force nuns to give people contraception.”
Nuns, and the Catholic church more broadly, don’t need to try to run the lives of everyone who works for them. And they don’t give the contraception in any case; they provide insurance coverage that includes it. It’s an included benefit, not a donation.
In his sweeping May 4 executive order on free speech and religious liberty, Trump directed his Cabinet to address the concerns of those who had “conscience-based objections” to contraceptive coverage.
In previewing the rule for reporters, Roger Severino, director of HHS’s office for civil rights and a longtime proponent of religious liberties, reiterated Trump’s May pledge from the Rose Garden. The president had promised that “we will not allow people of faith to be targeted, bullied or silenced any more . . . We are ending the attacks on religious liberties.”
On Friday, Severino elaborated: “That was a promise made, and this is the promise kept. … We should have space for organizations to live out their religious identity and not face discrimination because of their faith.”
But not, of course, for women to live without fear of unwanted pregnancy.
Seems quite reasonable to me. Trump is saying that an insurance company (or, indeed, anyone) who has religious objections to certain acts should not be forced to provide them by law.
Are you assuming that everyone must do what you want them to do, and should be forced to do it legally if they have an objection?
As if this is a problem that needs to be solved.
Silent is not a word I would use to describe people of faith. Nor have they been targets or bullied; they are usually the ones doing the bullying. And if you look throughout history, you will see this same claim being made by the religious. During the periods of history where the government tended toward a more open, tolerant stance toward other religions, Christians have cried persecution. They consider it persecution to allow others to not worship their god.
Dodgy Geezer, I had an answer written for you. I’ve hit delete. You’ve been here before. You are not interested in our answering your questions, you just want to come in and make statements that you assume are profound and carry some undefeatable argument. I’ll let someone in a mood to fight tangle with you today, as I am tired of you and all like you.
Oh for goodness’ sake, Dodgy Geezer.
That’s pure trolling. Nothing but trolling. And you’re doing it deliberately.
Put another way: the Trump administration is allowing companies to reduce the compensation packages of employees arbitrarily, so long as those employees are women and the compensation is specifically contraception.
Boss man gets to tell you how to spend your money – earned by you, from your work – and gets to pay you less just in case you’re a woman in need of contraception. Because poor, poor employers have been suffering too long from giving employees compensation for work, and here’s a bit they can shaft employees for under cover of “freedom” and “values”.
Well somebody has to pony up for Price’s jet fleet.
If they are in the business of providing health cover, and part of said cover involves providing/paying for contraceptives, then no a religious objection is not reasonable in the slightest.
A blatantly dishonest phrasing.
I’d like someone to show me the bit in the bible that says “thou shall not provide contraception as part of a health insurance package. Worry thou not, this will totally make sense in two thousand years”
Catwhisperer @#7: Well said.
I’m sure the many women who need The Pill for medical reasons will have no problems at all getting such treatment covered. Right?
And I’m sure the women denied coverage will be reimbursed whatever amount their employers save on their health plans.
That will happen, right?
…right?
When I was in my 20s, my insurance did not pay for birth control. It was a fight that women finally won, mostly because insurance companies realized that paying for birth control was immeasurably cheaper than paying for a single birth, let alone covering a child until they were 18.
There won’t be any savings. The insurance companies will lose big if they have to pay for pregnancy, delivery, and child medical care.