Sic et Non
FollowPatheos Mormon on:
As the President would say.
End of story.
The common people need firm guidance from those who have been trained and empowered to give it.
Then, Mr. Petersen, can I assume that you do not believe in taxes?
What kind of question is that? Everyone knows that taxes are real.
Silly me. I had been a taxes atheist until now.
That’s quite a clever observation; taxes are an idea “so good that they’re obligatory.” However, the crucial difference is that taxes are unabashedly to serve the interests of the state; nobody pretends that we are forced to pay taxes for our own good. As such, they’re not a manifestation of nanny statism.
(They may ultimately be used to fund nanny statism, but that’s another discussion.)
I think you may have missed the point, bofl.
You’re right. Lazy thinking on my part. But when I see references to statism, I often think of taxes. Sorry to derail the discussion.
Why should an employer decide what forms of health coverage to offer its employees? If you want to be a “good Catholic” then don’t use contraception, abortion, etc. This is basically a religious test for working at this company.
There are many reasons why an employer should make the decision.
One of them is that health coverage, like salary and wages, is part of the overall compensation package that an employer offers, as part of a bargaining process, to a potential employee in order to attract him or her to sign a contract. A lower salary will be less attractive, and a higher salary more attractive. Less adequate healthcare will be less enticing than really good healthcare will be.
It’s what some of us rather quaint types call a free market.
Follow Patheos on