Missouri

Sherman A1

(38,958 posts) Tue Sep 9, 2014, 06:00 AM Sep 2014

Missouri lawmaker, wife, ask court for contraception insurance exclusion

ST. LOUIS • A family should have the same right as a small business to opt out of birth control coverage in its health care plan, the lawyer for a Missouri legislator argued Monday before a federal appeals court.

Rep. Paul Wieland, R-Imperial, and his wife, Teresa, say the contraceptive benefit required by the Affordable Care Act violates their religious beliefs as Catholics and parents of three daughters.

In what may be the first court challenge of its type, they want to opt out of that coverage without giving up their state health insurance altogether and incurring a penalty under the federal law, commonly called Obamacare.

Their attorney, from the Thomas More Society, a public interest law firm based in Chicago, insisted to the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals that a family is no different from a small business whose owners have religious objections to subsidizing contraception for employees.

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/missouri-lawmaker-wife-ask-court-for-contraception-insurance-exclusion/article_9be010f0-bc90-5eec-8614-9b00cef56dd0.html

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Missouri lawmaker, wife, ask court for contraception insurance exclusion (Original Post) Sherman A1 Sep 2014 OP

Is there something in the ACA that I missed forcing women to take birth control? liberal N proud Sep 2014 #1

I think it's the paying into the pool and helping to cut the cost to other people Kalidurga Sep 2014 #2

Bearing in mind that private insurance is strangling the US, IMO, insurance is shared risk. djean111 Sep 2014 #6

I know and I don't think they are being logical at all Kalidurga Sep 2014 #12

A better mercuryblues Sep 2014 #3

This times ten million! JustAnotherGen Sep 2014 #5

Yep, I think that's a first. tridim Sep 2014 #8

Yes, just don't use birth control. djean111 Sep 2014 #4

most of the comments are spot on... handmade34 Sep 2014 #7

Hobby lobby's parking lot is lot thinner in my neighborhood. Deadbeat Republicans Sep 2014 #9

I hope it is a reflection on November Sherman A1 Sep 2014 #10

I completely agree, it's a win-win situation. Deadbeat Republicans Sep 2014 #11

liberal N proud

(60,953 posts)

1. Is there something in the ACA that I missed forcing women to take birth control?

Reply to Sherman A1 (Original post)

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 06:02 AM

Sep 2014

If you don't want the pill, don't take the pill.

I guess you can't fix stupid!

Kalidurga

(14,177 posts)

2. I think it's the paying into the pool and helping to cut the cost to other people

Reply to liberal N proud (Reply #1)

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 06:11 AM

Sep 2014

I don't agree with them. But, they do have a point. Individuals have a lot more of a right to their religious beliefs than a corporation.

djean111

(14,255 posts)

6. Bearing in mind that private insurance is strangling the US, IMO, insurance is shared risk.

Reply to Kalidurga (Reply #2)

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 07:01 AM

Sep 2014

Once we start saying oh, I don't want to pay for this or that, the insurance becomes even more expensive and unaffordable.

Kalidurga

(14,177 posts)

12. I know and I don't think they are being logical at all

Reply to djean111 (Reply #6)

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 12:13 PM

Sep 2014

I just think that is where they are coming from and it's exactly the kind of thing I expected with the Hobby Lobby ruling.

mercuryblues

(15,122 posts)

3. A better

Reply to Sherman A1 (Original post)

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 06:12 AM

Sep 2014

headline would be republican Missouri lawmaker admits they have ACA coverage.

JustAnotherGen

(33,595 posts)

5. This times ten million!

Reply to mercuryblues (Reply #3)

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 06:36 AM

Sep 2014

tridim

(45,358 posts)

8. Yep, I think that's a first.

Reply to mercuryblues (Reply #3)

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 07:27 AM

Sep 2014

"It covers too much!!!1 Waahhhh!!!11"

djean111

(14,255 posts)

4. Yes, just don't use birth control.

Reply to Sherman A1 (Original post)

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 06:15 AM

Sep 2014

Sounds more like controlling their own daughters, to me.

handmade34

(22,925 posts)

7. most of the comments are spot on...

Reply to Sherman A1 (Original post)

Tue Sep 9, 2014, 07:11 AM

Sep 2014

*Pathetic.

*How embarrassing for the daughters.

*Everyone who thinks Missouri has the dumbest politicians, raise their hands.

*Well, then, since we're in the silly season, how 'bout this as a compromise: the insurance company lets him off the hook for contraception in exchange for tripling his deductible on any coverage for pregnancy, labor or childbirth.

Deal?

*So opt out of the insurance, then. Simple. Good grief, man.
Totally agree

*This idiot couldn't care less about his insurance. He's just trying to get his 15 minutes of fame!

*Bingo

*Insureds do not pay extra to buy the contraceptive coverage. It will actually cost more to eliminate it. That is: How many pills equal the cost of one birth for the insurance company.
Also, the biggest preventative to abortion is the pill. Which is more immoral

*You're not required to use a covered item/service just because it's part of your plan. Maybe I'm not understanding their claim. What if your daughter suffers from painful menstrual cycles or extreme bleeding causing anemia or other health problems? I guess you wouldn't let her physician prescribe hormone therapy because it could also be used as birth control, you'd just let her suffer. if you're not having sex, birth control pills don't prevent pregnancy, they're just hormone therapy. There are a lot of things my insurance covers that I wouldn't use or don't agree with, but I don't cancel my insurance, I just don't use those features.

*Conservatives are obsessed with sex They want to control the lives of others.