tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883551996126668365.post2686777330517602865..comments2024-01-11T21:24:44.379-07:00Comments on A Blog of Tom: Taxpayers' Money: an Idea Whose Time Should EndTom Cantinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06234109728445439457noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883551996126668365.post-61718925391827128092012-06-16T15:31:49.517-06:002012-06-16T15:31:49.517-06:00The issue with that whole contraception debate lie...The issue with that whole contraception debate lies in the fact that we're dealing with contracts of insurance. The contents of those contracts is not legally mandated. It just happens that, as a rule, standard health insurance contracts cover contraception as a matter of course because the insurance providers find it MUCH better for their bottom line to provide contraception as opposed to pregnancy care.<br />The right wingers were attempting to legislate that part of the contracts out. Irony: supporters of "small government" who want to get rid of as many regulations as possible, except where the regulations involve what consenting adults do in private and what a woman chooses to do with her body, in consultation with her physician.Michaelhttp://www.facebook.com/home.phpnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883551996126668365.post-27584947519246847112012-06-16T10:42:32.595-06:002012-06-16T10:42:32.595-06:00Lynne, strictly speaking her points aren't nec...Lynne, strictly speaking her points aren't necessarily in conflict with each other. She just thinks that her particular variant of Catholic values should be adopted universally, that everyone should be offended to pay for abortions and happy to pay for Catholic schools. But her points MAY be at odds with fundamental values of democratic pluralism, because they discount opposing views as not worthy of consideration.<br /><br />Michael (and Lynne), in fact the current issue in the U.S. about so-called "religious freedom" was also on my mind as I wrote this. One of the objections to President Obama's healthcare reforms is that it forces Catholic employers to pay for contraception for their employees, ostensibly a violation of their religious freedom. I have to say, I think this objection is another example of the same kind of silliness. Employers are required to pay premiums for their employees' health insurance; the money is no longer theirs. If their employees happen to use that funding for something they disapprove of, too frakking bad.Tom Cantinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06234109728445439457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883551996126668365.post-36729210789098488642012-06-16T10:24:38.351-06:002012-06-16T10:24:38.351-06:00Oops. Missed the word "not" in regard t...Oops. Missed the word "not" in regard to paying taxes. As a note, I believe that individual is facing jail time now. Talk about waste!Michaelhttp://www.facebook.com/home.phpnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883551996126668365.post-15806207289835491552012-06-16T10:19:29.901-06:002012-06-16T10:19:29.901-06:00...and as soon as I hit publish I notice that my g......and as soon as I hit publish I notice that my grammar was flawed. Ooopsie!Lynnenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883551996126668365.post-10884548454180124612012-06-16T10:19:14.249-06:002012-06-16T10:19:14.249-06:00Further, the concept leads -- has led -- people to...Further, the concept leads -- has led -- people to take the concept to dangerous extremes. There's at least one case out there of an individual who decided to to pay taxes because he was angry that "his tax dollars" were being used to fund abortions. This is the rhetoric that fuels the de-tax movement and helps spur the underground economy, which hurts all of us ultimately.Michaelhttp://www.facebook.com/home.phpnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1883551996126668365.post-77565860121822149292012-06-16T10:17:52.537-06:002012-06-16T10:17:52.537-06:00Thank you for this. I had an argument, just befor...Thank you for this. I had an argument, just before the recent election, with someone who felt that everyone would be better off if fewer taxes were paid so that she would have more money in her budget to spend on things she thought were important. When I told her that I was happy to pay taxes in order to fund the things that my society deems is important, she told me that she thought I was foolish to be willing to pay 'for the abortions of irresponsible people' and other frivolous expenditures. At the same time, she insisted that Catholic schools should be maintained and that churches should be tax exempt because those things are sacred. I must have terrible argument skills, because I was unable to get her to see how her points were rather in conflict with one another.Lynnenoreply@blogger.com