The Bill Passed

**786** · 03-23-10, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

If the HBAC deemed it "medically necessary", then it would be included as part of it's list of essential benefits.

AND SO WHAT if they did? You act like gender reassignment surgery is immoral. WTF? It's not like it's common. Do you think you know better than doctors and psychologists?

Hahaha.... I'm not against it- thats why I said : Welcome- have a sex-change.. Paid for by the American Populace

Peace be unto you

**spidergoat** · 03-23-10, 02:33 PM

It's not covered, so you are complaining about a hypothetical. What the hell is your problem?

**786** · 03-23-10, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

It's not covered, so you are complaining about a hypothetical. What the hell is your problem?

Some of it will be- don't worry, our people are experts in finding ways to get the government to pay for stuff. Especially gay rights lobbyists.

Peace be unto you

**spidergoat** · 03-23-10, 02:39 PM

Again, so what? Every interest has it's lobbyists, including the massive health care industry, which is probably one of the biggest. What do you have against gays?

**786** · 03-23-10, 02:41 PM

I have nothing against anyone.... Let them practice their crap just keep them out of my wallet.

Peace be unto you

**spidergoat** · 03-23-10, 02:43 PM

This isn't free health care you understand, people will be paying premiums.

**786** · 03-23-10, 02:44 PM

I know, and people will also be paying taxes.

Peace be unto you

**spidergoat** · 03-23-10, 02:47 PM

The Party of Cruelty
By James Howard Kunstler
on March 22, 2010 7:13 AM

It was amusing to see the Republican party inveigh against health insurance reform as if they were a synod of Presbyterian necromancers girding the nation for a takeover by the spawn of hell. This was the same gang, by the way, who championed the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003, then regarded as the most reckless giveaway of public funds in human history. Along the way, they enlisted an army of nay-sayers representing everything dark, disgraceful, and ignorant in the American character. If the Republicans keep going this way, they'll end up with something worse than Naziism: a party that hates everything but believes in absolutely nothing.

The most striking elements of so-called health care in America these days is how cruel and unjust it is, and in taking a stand against reforming it the Republican party appeared to be firmly in support of cruelty and injustice. This would be well within the historical tradition of other religious crusades which turned political -- such as the Spanish Inquisition and the seventeenth century war against witchcraft. Whatever else the Democratic party has stood for in recent history, it has tended to oppose institutional cruelty and injustice, and notice that it has also been the party for keeping religion out of government.

Now a health care reform act has passed and there's some reason to hope that insurance companies will be prevented from doing things like canceling the coverage of policy-holders who have the impertinence to actually get sick, which has been their main device for revenue enhancement, and we'll see how they cope with the idea that being alive in a treacherous world is the fundamental pre-existing condition.

I surely don't know if the nation can afford to pay for what this law requires, but then can we really afford to pay for anything? -- including the salaries, retirement benefits, and health insurance of congressmen, not to mention two wars, bailout life support for banks, rising unemployment benefits, shovel-ready stimulus projects, et cetera, blah blah? Probably not.

My guess is that the health care "industry" will unravel in the years ahead under the weight of its own hypercomplexity just as all the other hypercomplex systems of normal American life (such as it is) groan and collapse under their own unworkable immensities -- and I speak here of industrial-style farming, Big Box "consumerism," Happy Motoring, too-big-to-fail finance, centralized public education, and the pension racket. All the activities of daily life in this country have poor prospects for continuing in their current form.

At least this once a workable majority in the government has stood up to the forces of cruelty and injustice, and whatever else happens to us in the course of this long emergency, it will be a good thing if the party of fairness and justice identifies its adversaries for what they are: not "partners in governing," or any such academical-therapeutic bullshit, but enemies of every generous impulse in the national character.

I hope that Mr. Obama's party can carry this message clearly into the electoral battles ahead, painting the Republican opposition for what it is: a gang of hypocritical, pietistic sadists, seeking pleasure in the suffering of others while pretending to be Christians, devoid of sympathy, empathy, or any inclination to simple human kindness, constant breakers of the Golden Rule, enemies of the common good. In fact, the current edition of the Republican party has achieved something really memorable in the annals of collective bad intentions: they have managed to create a sense of the public interest whose main goal is the destruction of the public interest.

This is exactly what the Republican majority on the Supreme Court did earlier this year by deciding that corporations -- which are sociopathic by definition in being answerable only to their shareholders and nothing else -- should enjoy the same full privileges in election campaign contributions as human persons, who are assumed to have obligations, duties, and responsibilities to the common good (and therefore to the public interest). This shameful act by the court majority only underscores the chief defining characteristic of Republicans in their current incarnation: an inability to think. And so, naturally Republicans gravitate toward superstition and the traditional devices of improvident religious authorities -- persecution of the weak, torture, denial of due process, and dogmas designed to spread hatred.

I hope the American public begins to understand this, because they have been manipulated in their own pain and hardship by these dark forces, and their thrall to the likes of John Boehner, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush, Hannity, and the rest of these vicious morons could easily increase as their economic hardships deepen. We're facing a comprehensive contraction of wealth and economy that is going to challenge every shared virtue in our national soul, and we're not going to meet these difficulties successfully without a sense of mutual obligation and sympathy for each other. The Republican party is just itching to turn a giant thumbscrew on the US public -- that is, before they try to start burning their enemies at the stake. We understand that the Health Care Reform Act is a first stand against that.

**madanthonywayne** · 03-23-10, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by James R

I don't know how it works, but there's some arcane American procedure called "Reconciliation" that means the Democrats can ensure the Bill passes the Senate. Then, as long as Obama signs it, it's law.

30 states say they plan to challenge its constitutionality legally, though it remains to be seen if they will. The Republicans say they will repeal it if they get a majority in the mid-term elections; that also remains to be seen.

This bill is an unmitigated disaster. I may personally be forced to fire some employees because of this law. The Democrats will pay for this come November.

But repealing it will be tough, so long as Obama is in office because he can always veto any law passed so we'd need a 2/3 majority of both houses to trash can this piece of garbage.

That would be pretty damned tough to get, but who knows. If November is devastating enough for the Democrats, it may just shock them into joining with the new majority to ditch this idiocy and pass some reasonable reform.

**spidergoat** · 03-23-10, 04:01 PM

Originally Posted by madanthonywayne

This bill is an unmitigated disaster.

Why? It's pure fascism, the merging of government and corporate interests!

**navigator** · 03-23-10, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

Why? It's pure fascism, the merging of government and corporate interests!

The only thing they passed was an aggreement to fix the first POS they tried to pass.

I doubt there has ever been a bill passed that still is at the level of fluidity this one is.

**spidergoat** · 03-23-10, 04:19 PM

No doubt it is an example of political wrangling, but it seems well within the rules. It wouldn't have to be this way if Republicans were at all interested in the welfare of the citizens.

**Ganymede** · 03-23-10, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by 786

So its not deniable.... whats the point? Its a disorder, even if you don't consider it a pre-existing condition. Apparently a 'list' doesn't mean much when in real life being a woman is a pre-existing condition.

Just SHOW ME THE EXCLUSION!

Even IF GID is not considered a pre-existing condition- pre-exting conditions aren't the only things that get treated now do they? All medical disorders can be treated UNLESS EXCLUDED.

Also the list says which pre-existing conditions allow for DENIAL of insurance- but denial doesn't even matter now does it?

Peace be unto you

It's a cosmetic surgery, it's not a pre-existing condition. You can't point to anything in this bill that specifies that insurance companies would be mandated to pay for drastic procedures such as sex changes. Nor can you point to any credible medical source that lists GID as a pre existing condition.

Knowledge be on to you!

**Omega133** · 03-23-10, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

Why? It's pure fascism, the merging of government and corporate interests!

I always thought it had more of a socialist vibe to it. While it has fascist ideals(such as complete government control) it is similiar to what the soviets did after the Russian Revolution. They put healthcare(as well as everything else) under government control. Or am I wrong on this one?

**spidergoat** · 03-23-10, 04:23 PM

You are wrong, this isn't government health care, as much as I would like that. It's a giveaway to the private insurance industry. Sadly, this seems to be the extent of what's possible in this corporate environment.

**786** · 03-23-10, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by Ganymede

It's a cosmetic surgery, it's not a pre-existing condition. You can't point to anything in this bill that specifies that insurance companies would be mandated to pay for drastic procedures such as sex changes. Nor can you point to any credible medical source that lists GID as a pre existing condition.

Knowledge be on to you!

You know what a 'pre-existing' condition is and what it means? it is any medical condition prior to having benefits.

You think if I have insurance and I now get asthma that they will 'deny me'? (Its on that list)- NO!

The question of 'pre-existing' only comes in play if you don't have coverage at the time- The bill will take care of that so IRRESPECTIVE of it being 'pre-existing' or 'not'- the question is- is it excluded?

Go read what AMA, WPATH say about it- they believe it is medically necessary to be treated.

They can take tax credits for these procedures-

Why do you care? The whole world of socialized medicine treat it- why shouldn't we? You don't want to pay for their sex-change?

Peace be unto you

**Omega133** · 03-23-10, 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by spidergoat

You are wrong, this isn't government health care, as much as I would like that.

Universalized Healthcare is another way of saying Federalized Healthcare.

It's a giveaway to the private insurance industry. Sadly, this seems to be the extent of what's possible in this corporate environment.

Actually it is private healthcares demise. The bill basically says you must have government healthcare. Unless you have healthcare currently; in which case you have 5 years before you must switch.

**quadraphonics** · 03-23-10, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by Omega133

Universalized Healthcare is another way of saying Federalized Healthcare.

Nope.

Originally Posted by Omega133

The bill basically says you must have government healthcare.

Also wrong.

Thanks for playing :]

**Omega133** · 03-23-10, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by quadraphonics

Nope.
Also wrong.
Thanks for playing :]

Can you explain your post

**spidergoat** · 03-23-10, 04:32 PM

The AMA supports "public and private health insurance coverage for treatment for gender identity disorder as recommended by the patient's physician.

And so do I. It's none of my business what is deemed medically necessary between a patient and their physician. What else do you want to impose your opinions on? Breast reconstruction? Harelip? Acne?