New Vistas in Obamacare

Now that we are discovering that oral contraceptives may cause glaucoma, we shall, of course, pay for contraceptive-induced glaucoma treatments out of the same health care dollars that paid for the glaucoma-inducing contraceptives we are forced to pay for at gunpoint.

I presume we will soon be paying for cigarettes as health care too?  So we can pay for cancer treatment later?

"Yep. This court gives corporations more rights than actual humans."

The Standard Trump Pattern
"Thank you for the link to La Civilta Cattolica. The article by Father Spadaro is ..."

Useful Idiots
"Thanks for the link Andy. Incredible. I'm beginning to believe that what we're witnessing in ..."

Useful Idiots
""Those are the type of men to be found in our priesthood and your church."Well--yes, ..."

CatholicVote rejects being Prolife

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Marthe Lépine

    And… Glaucoma being then transmitted as a congenital disease, your country might also have to keep treating generation after generation of descendants of contraceptive taking women…

    • Raymond

      Here’s a better idea. Anyone who has a congenital disease should be forbidden to reproduce! Praise God!

    • Alma Peregrina

      Congenital glaucoma and acquired glaucoma are different. Acquired glaucoma is not transmitted to the next generation. That would be Lamarckism.

      On the other hand, I’ve heard of research that says that the hormones that contraceptive taking women excrete through urine lead to a sort of pollution that has started to induce sex-changes in certain fish species. I think that it is plausible that such water pollution could account for the infertility epidemia that flogs modern societies. But I’m speculating… and such research would be crucified from the start by the all-powerfull Planned Parenthood lobby.

  • Faithr

    And then there’s the upsurgence in breast cancer in India because of the pill. But hey, it’s healthcare!

  • Michael in ArchDen

    ObamaCare may end up “bending the cost curve” after all! Surprisingly, it will bend it upward though…

  • chad

    My grandpa started smoking again in his late 70’s and it subdues his Parkinsons. Weird.

    • chezami

      There you go! Obamacare should cover cigarettes.

      • S. Murphy

        So they can be taxed to cover Obamacare!

    • Rock

      Science is on top of it: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/746713

      Expert Review of Clinical Pharmacology
      Can Nicotine be Used Medicinally in Parkinson’s Disease?

  • Neihan

    The obvious solution is to petition the White House to force the Little Sisters of the Poor to also pay for marijuana.

  • Alma Peregrina

    I’m against oral contraceptives coverage in healthcare, just all of you are.

    But I would like to point out that this is not a good argument against it. Every pharmacological / surgical / radiological means of diagnosis or therapeutics HAS side effects. Saying that something should not be covered because it has side effects is the same as saying that the majority of healthcare should not be covered.

    And those side effects should also be covered by health care, obviously.

    This is not the best way to engage the question: the moral aspects and the fact that preventing the normal function of a body apparattus is not healthcare are much better arguments.

    Also, I haven’t read the study… but my experience tells me that we shouldn’t believe everything a news site tells about science. Sometimes they say things that are not in the study just to sell beer and shampoo. If you want to appeal to oral contraceptives’ side effects, talk about the well-established link between oral hormonal treatments and thrombo-embolic events.

  • said she

    Glaucoma meds are costing me nearly $200/month. Can’t blame contraceptives, though: just my parents and grandparents.