On 7/2/2014 10:28 AM, Mark Storkamp wrote:
> In article >,
> "Steve Freides" > wrote:
>
>> ImStillMags wrote:
>>
>>> Legally the decision is a dangerous precedent and severe misreading
>>> of the constitution. Medically it entirely misses the fact that
>>> contraceptives serve many more medical purposes than just preventing
>>> pregnancy. But theologically it is an even graver misstep. It allows
>>> no room for grace, it is coercive (the opposite of the example of
>>> Christ), and it is restrictive. None of those things reflect the vow
>>> I took on at baptism to "respect the dignity of every human being."
>>> Today's ruling disregards the dignity of the individual to chose
>>> their own path in favor of the wealthy and secure, that is a loss for
>>> us all.
>>>
>>> http://www.barefoottheology.com/2014...good-theology/
>>
>> Good for you - I agree with you 100%.
>>
>> -S-
>
> I think we can all agree that food is even more vital to our health than
> is birth control. After all this is R.F.C. Why isn't it free with no
> co-pay or deductible?
>

Some methods of male birth control have never been available under a
health plan to my knowledge. However, female birth control does seem to
require a physician's supervision at least and an implant can only
safely placed by a physician and thus a health plan should cover these.

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.