[TRIGGER WARNING: RAPE]
Speaking as an individual who isn’t, but could just as well be, the owner of any corporation that employs people: If they voluntarily choose to provide this to you, that’s nice of them and great for you. If you’re outraged that they oppose being literally forced to, fuck you. Literally.
"fuck you. Literally."
I’m sorry, but did this person just call for the rape of women who think that their employers should provide insurance that covers reproductive and sexual health services for women as well as men?
Men are absolutely entitled to have their viagra (undeniably less necessary than hormonal birth control), but if a woman wants HER reproductive health covered by HER insurance, well…”fuck her. Literally.”
Also is there a single libertarian alive that understands how taxes work? Cause I’ve been browsing some tags today and I am having serious doubts. Just a few bullet points here to clear things up:
- If something is subsidized by the government (such as healthcare) - everyone’s tax dollars go towards paying it. These women who are, gasp, asking for insurance companies to stop discriminating against them, ALSO. PAY. TAXES. Their taxes go towards delivering your mail to your home, yet they are not calling for the rape of anyone who dare use THEIR tax dollars to receive personal and possibly unnecessary mail!
- Insurance policies that are offered through employment contracts are not handed out for free. The person receiving the health care policy is trading their labor for insurance coverage. Often money is deducted from their paychecks to pay for the part of the insurance plan that is not subsidized by their employer. It’s not a handout; it’s part of a labor contract. Beyond that - employers do not write personal checks to their employees whenever they require health services. That’s the whole point of buying an insurance policy for your company (duh). So this whole idea that any possible medical service (such as providing hormonal contraception to women) offered by an insurance company is taking money out of the pockets of employers or taxpayers is pretty ridiculous. The insurance provider is the only party here that would see any possible increase in spending. And don’t pretend that insurance policy prices will skyrocket once birth control becomes covered - give it a few seconds of thought and realize that that’s not how insurance works.
- I know that for some reason many libertarians and conservatives are under the impression that this birth control situation is a taxpayer issue - but it’s not. The opposition to providing hormonal contraception through insurance for women is, and always has been, a religious issue. Conservative religious employers do not want their female employees using contraception, so they are fighting the attempt to make it more accessible. This is not, and was never, an issue of taxpayers or business owners going broke over having to pay for women’s birth control. This was about religious officials stating that it impinged on their religious freedom to play any role in providing women with contraception because contraception goes against their religious beliefs. Obviously these men don’t understand what “religious freedom” means but hey, still not a tax issue.
Oh, and sorry to harp on this again, but DID THIS PERSON REALLY JUST SUGGEST THAT ALL WOMEN WHO BELIEVE THAT THEIR BIRTH CONTROL SHOULD BE COVERED BY THEIR INSURANCE PLANS SHOULD BE RAPED?