Silent Hunter
Well-known member
You'd be surprised, b, what doctors at catholic hospitals do and prescribe . . . including . . . selective abortions and contraceptives.
toldailytopic: Is it immoral for an employer to offer a health insurance plan which i
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Yes.
PureX
Well-known member
None of which have anything to do with morality, but with the function and image of the business. Morality clauses that do not impact the function of the business would be struck down in the courts. In fact, calling them "morality clauses" is misleading.
No, they actually don't. What they can do is get their employees to sign wavers so that they cannot be prosecuted for infringing the employee's rights. But even then, I don't think such a waiver would stand up in court unless it was directly related to the business function.
That's simply not accurate. Any company that fires and employee for, say, sexual promiscuity in her private life, could be sued and would probably be found liable. Something like drug use, however, effects the employees performance on the job, and so could be grounds for dismissal, as well as mandatory testing. You are wrongly confusing the employees private life with their on-the-job image and behavior.
As expected, you are refusing to understand that pregnancy is not an on-the-job requirement. So the employer does not get ANY say in a woman's choice to become pregnant or to end a pregnancy via abortion. And because the employer has NO SAY WHATEVER in the woman's decision, they have NO MORAL RESPONSIBILITY for whatever decision she makes. And this is why they HAVE NO MORAL GROUNDS for objecting to paying for this (or any) aspect of their employees health care.
TruthSetsFree
New member
????????????
TruthSetsFree
New member
life begins at the beginning
If it did not
it would not GROW
and the time in the womb is the time of the most growth a human will EVER undergo...
Absolutely. They are giving their tacit approval of abortion by offering such insurance. By doing so they are just as a guilty as those that fund abortion.
Last edited by a moderator:
This has nothing to do with being an *on the job requirement*. I am speaking of whether or not it is immoral for an employer to offer a health care plan with abortion.
Since abortion IS immoral, why would supplying these employees with coverage for *this* unnecessary procedure be seen as anything else?
I never claimed they did ...
They DO have a say in whether or not they HELP pay for the abortion via their healthcare coverage. That is what you do not seem to understand.
They most certainly do if they are providing the means.
The *moral ground* is that abortion is the taking of an innocent life and employers should not be under any obligation to provide the employee with the means to do so.
Last edited:
I don't give negative rep, but if I did, I would do it now.
Yes. It puts the employer in a compromised position where he can't give an impartial service because he is financially interested in his employees (the female ones) having abortions.
School districts, religious organizations, Boy Scouts, the military....
Your brains don't seem to be working so good today PureX.
Better give them a rest.
Try standing up for a while.
StanJ53
New member
I'm going to assume you mean from a Christian perspective, and so yes it would be for a Christian employer to offer that.
Is this happening anywhere that anybody can confirm?
IMJerusha
New member
Interesting question. Just because a health care plan covers something doesn't mean one has to obtain that thing.
God frowns on sterilization to the point that it disqualifies one for a place in heaven and health care plans cover that. See Deuteronomy 23:1 So I would think that it is the act God frowns on and finds immoral, not the health care plan that covers it.
Mr Infidel
New member
I believe there is nothing immoral in regards to the above mentioned situation.
keypurr
Well-known member
No, they should mind their own business like we should.
How many employers are in the business of offering health insurance plans which include abortion ?
jwp98
New member
It's an issue of use versus abuse. All hormonal agents are potentially abortifacients. They work by suppressing ovulation, thickening cervical mucus, and preventing implantation. They have been wildly popular, including among Catholics and Protestants, for decades. They have dangerous and unpleasant side effects, but are not expensive. There is no legit need for insurance coverage.
I wonder whether in-patient only abortions would catalyze the necessary, unpopular, agonizing discussions. No, we like our solutions quick, dirty, free, and private. It's our "right".
I wonder whether in-patient only abortions would catalyze the necessary, unpopular, agonizing discussions. No, we like our solutions quick, dirty, free, and private. It's our "right".
Pretty much everywhere in the US.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/11/hobby-lobbys-1-3-million-obamacare-loophole/
It would be considered immoral (Leviticus 19:11) to place that in a health insurance plan. Do to the fact it is deceiving in the very nature. On one half you will be covered medically, but another you'd be opening yourself to being held accountable of possible murder.
One aspect of giving someone a medical insurance coverage, it is Leviticus 19:18 but with the ability to cover abortions it is causing Exodus 20:13 law to be broken.
One aspect of giving someone a medical insurance coverage, it is Leviticus 19:18 but with the ability to cover abortions it is causing Exodus 20:13 law to be broken.
PureX
Well-known member
I have already explained three times why it is not "immoral" for an employer to pay for employee health insurance.
Because the employer is not "supplying these employees with abortions" he is simply providing health insurance.
Health care coverage is health care coverage. The employer can offer it as part of their employment compensation, or not. What they can't do, is decide for the employee what health care coverage is and is not "moral". Nor can they choose for their employees what health care they can have.
Health care shouldn't have anything to do with employment in the first place, but since it does, we can't allow employers or insurance companies to decide what health care is, what morality is, or who can have it. And that's what you want employers to do. You don't like abortion, so you will approve of ANY method, no matter how unfair or irrational, that stops someone from having an abortion. And this only harms your own cause, because you deny the ability to discern any other moral issue but your own.
They are not providing the means. They are providing health care coverage to their employees.
And with that presumed unassailable righteousness, you approve any and all action that furthers the anti-abortion agenda.
The problem with unassailable righteousness is that it locks one's mind and heart in a coat of intellectual cement.
StanJ53
New member
This is a sad state of affairs for an act I thought was to bring BASIC health-care to ALL Americans. This doesn't happen in Canada. Health-care plans here do NOT provide these type of services because they are included in our Medicare system, funded by general tax revenue. Though effectively paid by some Christian tax dollars, it does NOT single out ANY particular group of people. I pray Hobby Lobby will be successful in defending itself.