Liberal Forum

Again, which would be more cost effective? Routine tests and doctor's visits that would diagnose cancers early, or treating cancer in it's advanced stages? And don't give me some **** about how people should pay out of pocket for routine tests and treatment, doctor's visits, etc. Unlike you, I live ...

How did the majority of men and women get contraceptive services prior to those who don't need it paying for it?...

WOW! Where to start? How exactly does providing women with contraception as a routine part of their health care take away your freedom? And how would making contraceptives widely available and affordable, have no effect on accidental pregnancies? And how does any of that violate the Constitution? I...

Oh, I agree....

Which only worsens the present system. And will result in more people without insurance, not fewer....

The problem is the insurance mandate's primary purpose is not to make sure you, and those like you, have all those preventive services included. It mandated so that the insurance companies have a pool of money available to cover someone else....

What Obama "commitment to clean coal, oil drilling and natural gas extraction on private lands?" He's gradually moved against all that and is significantly expanding with further restrictions. You've fallen for his dishonest PR campaign....

I should have used a term other than "emergency." If someone develops cancer or some other sickness or condition that required extensive treatment, I personally would want insurance that covered it. But I wouldn't want my plan to cover routine tests and treatment, doctor's visits, etc, and I would ...

Depends on your definition of a fetus....

Or like comparing a fetus to a baby, except one of them is dead, and missing some stem cells - yummy....