Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
drvoke

Judge: Women would lose free birth control coverage under Trump's new rules

Recommended Posts

 

AP Photo: FILE - In this March 25, 2015 file photo, Margot Riphagen of New Orleans, La., wears a birth control pills costume during a protest in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington. A U.S. judge will hear arguments Friday, Jan. 11, 2019, over California's attempt to block new rules by the Trump administration that would allow more employers to opt out of providing no-cost birth control to women. The new rules are set to go into effect on Monday, Jan. 14, 2019. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, File)

 

 

Trump is trying to undo President Obama's requirement in the Affordable Care Act that free birth control be an integral part of health care coverage.

Ain't gonna happen. We have a Dem judge in California that is going to block the new rules for the entire nation.

I'm glad, because I am in favor of any legal measure that curtails the human population. 

 

 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/judge-women-would-lose-birth-control-coverage-under-rules/ar-BBS7SnK?ocid=spartandhp

(Full article at above link)

 

 

OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — A "substantial number" of women would lose birth control coverage under new rules by the Trump administration that allow more employers to opt out of providing the benefit, a U.S. judge said at a hearing on Friday.

Judge Haywood Gilliam appeared inclined to grant a request by California and other states that he block the rules while the states' lawsuit moves forward. He said he would rule before Monday, when the rules are set to take effect.

The changes would allow more employers, including publicly traded companies, to opt out of providing no-cost contraceptive coverage to women by claiming religious objections. Some private employers could also object on moral grounds.

Gilliam said the new rules would be a "massive policy shift" to women who lose coverage.

At issue is a requirement under President Barack Obama's health care law that birth control services be covered at no additional cost.  

The new coverage from employers would force women to turn to government programs that provide birth control, and if they are ineligible for those, increase the risk of unintended pregnancies.

"It's undisputed that these rules will create barriers," she said.

The rules violate President Obama's Affordable Care Act, including a provision that forbids discrimination, she said.

The states argue that millions of women could lose free birth control services under the new rules. They want Gilliam to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the rules for the entire nation.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, DeepBreath said:

That’s a hilarious sign. You want the freedom to make the decision while someone else pays? 😁

 

Yes. Besides, we end up paying much more when women have kids they cannot afford and they become a tax burden.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, drvoke said:

 

Yes. Besides, we end up paying much more when women have kids they cannot afford and they become a tax burden.

If you can’t afford birth control, you shouldn’t be having sex. Besides she’ll just saddle us with an abortion anyway.

 

Good argument for forced sterilization until a parent can prove financial, emotional and physical stability to raise children. Basically, we need to license having kids like driving a car. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, drvoke said:

 

AP Photo: FILE - In this March 25, 2015 file photo, Margot Riphagen of New Orleans, La., wears a birth control pills costume during a protest in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington. A U.S. judge will hear arguments Friday, Jan. 11, 2019, over California's attempt to block new rules by the Trump administration that would allow more employers to opt out of providing no-cost birth control to women. The new rules are set to go into effect on Monday, Jan. 14, 2019. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, File)

 

 

Trump is trying to undo President Obama's requirement in the Affordable Care Act that free birth control be an integral part of health care coverage.

Ain't gonna happen. We have a Dem judge in California that is going to block the new rules for the entire nation.

I'm glad, because I am in favor of any legal measure that curtails the human population. 

 

 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/judge-women-would-lose-birth-control-coverage-under-rules/ar-BBS7SnK?ocid=spartandhp

(Full article at above link)

 

 

OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — A "substantial number" of women would lose birth control coverage under new rules by the Trump administration that allow more employers to opt out of providing the benefit, a U.S. judge said at a hearing on Friday.

Judge Haywood Gilliam appeared inclined to grant a request by California and other states that he block the rules while the states' lawsuit moves forward. He said he would rule before Monday, when the rules are set to take effect.

The changes would allow more employers, including publicly traded companies, to opt out of providing no-cost contraceptive coverage to women by claiming religious objections. Some private employers could also object on moral grounds.

Gilliam said the new rules would be a "massive policy shift" to women who lose coverage.

At issue is a requirement under President Barack Obama's health care law that birth control services be covered at no additional cost.  

The new coverage from employers would force women to turn to government programs that provide birth control, and if they are ineligible for those, increase the risk of unintended pregnancies.

"It's undisputed that these rules will create barriers," she said.

The rules violate President Obama's Affordable Care Act, including a provision that forbids discrimination, she said.

The states argue that millions of women could lose free birth control services under the new rules. They want Gilliam to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the rules for the entire nation.

 

 

 

 

 

Not really free though is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, kfools said:

Not really free though is it?

Of course not. Now people who actually use it will pay instead of people who don’t but were forced to subsidize  the cost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, DeepBreath said:

If you can’t afford birth control, you shouldn’t be having sex. Besides she’ll just saddle us with an abortion anyway.

 

Good argument for forced sterilization until a parent can prove financial, emotional and physical stability to raise children. Basically, we need to license having kids like driving a car. 

 

Not a bad idea.

 

12 hours ago, kfools said:

Not really free though is it?

 

Not free, just less expensive.  Choose your poison, because you're going to take it one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow tough call on all these possibilities do we want to tell a female what she can and can’t do with her body?   Tough 

 

 

do we want to be stuck with kids on govt tit their entire lives.  Yikes 

 

 

do we want to fund abortions ?   Do we want to fund welfare?   Decisions decisions 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, drvoke said:

I am in favor of any legal measure that curtails the human population. 

 

You could do the UNIVERSE a BIG FAVOR and SUICIDE YOURSELF and I can assure you, it would be a MUCH better place!!

 

Really.

 

The FEWER SHlTSTAINS around, the BETTER EVERYTHING IS!!!
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, drvoke said:

 

AP Photo: FILE - In this March 25, 2015 file photo, Margot Riphagen of New Orleans, La., wears a birth control pills costume during a protest in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington. A U.S. judge will hear arguments Friday, Jan. 11, 2019, over California's attempt to block new rules by the Trump administration that would allow more employers to opt out of providing no-cost birth control to women. The new rules are set to go into effect on Monday, Jan. 14, 2019. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, File)

 

 

Trump is trying to undo President Obama's requirement in the Affordable Care Act that free birth control be an integral part of health care coverage.

Ain't gonna happen. We have a Dem judge in California that is going to block the new rules for the entire nation.

I'm glad, because I am in favor of any legal measure that curtails the human population. 

 

 

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/judge-women-would-lose-birth-control-coverage-under-rules/ar-BBS7SnK?ocid=spartandhp

(Full article at above link)

 

 

OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — A "substantial number" of women would lose birth control coverage under new rules by the Trump administration that allow more employers to opt out of providing the benefit, a U.S. judge said at a hearing on Friday.

Judge Haywood Gilliam appeared inclined to grant a request by California and other states that he block the rules while the states' lawsuit moves forward. He said he would rule before Monday, when the rules are set to take effect.

The changes would allow more employers, including publicly traded companies, to opt out of providing no-cost contraceptive coverage to women by claiming religious objections. Some private employers could also object on moral grounds.

Gilliam said the new rules would be a "massive policy shift" to women who lose coverage.

At issue is a requirement under President Barack Obama's health care law that birth control services be covered at no additional cost.  

The new coverage from employers would force women to turn to government programs that provide birth control, and if they are ineligible for those, increase the risk of unintended pregnancies.

"It's undisputed that these rules will create barriers," she said.

The rules violate President Obama's Affordable Care Act, including a provision that forbids discrimination, she said.

The states argue that millions of women could lose free birth control services under the new rules. They want Gilliam to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the rules for the entire nation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Moot int. Women are the largest voting bloc in the country now, and the days of the closet homosexuals in the church and conservative think tanks trying to limit women's reproductive choices are over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, king of the county said:

Wow tough call on all these possibilities do we want to tell a female what she can and can’t do with her body?   Tough 

 

 

do we want to be stuck with kids on govt tit their entire lives.  Yikes 

 

 

do we want to fund abortions ?   Do we want to fund welfare?   Decisions decisions 

You knock up those shameless hussies, you should pay for it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nuckin futz said:

You knock up those shameless hussies, you should pay for it!

wow you shouldn't talk about your family members like that

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Duck615 said:

wow you shouldn't talk about your family members like that

 

You, being a fag boi, don't have to worry about it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nuckin futz said:

You, being a fag boi, don't have to worry about it!

wouldn't touch them with your dick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, king of the county said:

Yes not the government 

No, Dr. Voke is right! We need to limit the braindead contards! Its either that, or the gas chambers!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Duck615 said:

wouldn't touch them with your dick

Women are thrilled to be annoited by my Magik Staff of righteousness! They beg to sire my brat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nuckin futz said:

No, Dr. Voke is right! We need to limit the braindead contards! Its either that, or the gas chambers!

ahhh and that proves liberals are nazi asswipes^^^^^^^^

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Duck615 said:

ahhh and that proves liberals are nazi asswipes^^^^^^^^

 

No, we hate to see children like you suffer! Margret Sanger was right!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nuckin futz said:

No, we hate to see children like you suffer! Margret Sanger was right!

ah a nazi and a racist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Duck615 said:

ah a nazi and a racist

Son, are the beatings getting to you? Just yell "Uncle" and we will let up!

We are your kind, benevolent MASTERS!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nuckin futz said:

Son, are the beatings getting to you? Just yell "Uncle" and we will let up!

We are your kind, benevolent MASTERS!

libtards will soon be wiped off the face of the earth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, skews13 said:

 

Moot int. Women are the largest voting bloc in the country now, and the days of the closet homosexuals in the church and conservative think tanks trying to limit women's reproductive choices are over.

Good. Let them take responsibility for themselves then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×