|
posted to rec.boats
|
|
external usenet poster
|
|
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,510
|
|
I got a chuckle out of this.
"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 12/29/13, 12:44 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 07:25:56 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:
You mean through private health insurance? Well, the regressive
governors and legislatures in some states have taken care of that for
the pushy religious. Seems reasonable that if I don't want my insurance
premiums to pay for cancer treatments for smokers, why, smokers should
be S.O.L. when they need surgery or chemo or whatever, right? Right?
D'oh.
So you would also deny treatment of gallstones, type 2 diabetes, high
blood pressure, high cholesterol and triglycerides, coronary artery
disease (CAD), a stroke, and sleep apnea for fat people?
Nobody held them down and shoved that pie in their mouth.
I was being sarcastic, Gregg-ster. You didn't see the "right. Right?" I
would hope you would have realized that.
No, I wouldn't deny coverage for anything on your little list, nor would
I deny coverage for abortion. And of course, I also wouldn't allow anyone
to exclude themselves from getting coverage. Universal health care
coverage for *all* and if we have to pay for it by selling a few aircraft
carriers or nuclear submarines or F35s, so be it.
Bull**** on the being sarcastic. You actually believe this ****. I would
much more support birth control supplies being paid for by the government.
Something is really wrong with society, when almost 50% of births are out
of wedlock and welfare is paying for more than 50% of those kids. When you
get more money for more kids, and we are on 6+ generations of welfare
families!
|