toldailytopic: Is it immoral for an employer to offer a health insurance plan which i

[Nathon Detroit]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for March 15th, 2013 05:00 AM

toldailytopic: Is it immoral for an employer to offer a health insurance plan which includes abortion (including the morning after pill)?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

 

[Stripe]

Yip. Encouraging people to murder their unborn babies is about as bad a thing as you can do without going ahead and doing it yourself.

 

[chrysostom]

not if he voted republican

 

[sky.]

What's corrupt and immoral is for a government to make them offer it. What is also corrupt is people who didn't vote against a known tyrant with that on his agenda.

 

[Granite]

I don't consider the morning after pill abortion or immoral at all, so no in that case/instance.

 

[PureX]

toldailytopic: Is it immoral for an employer to offer a health insurance plan which includes abortion (including the morning after pill)?

No, because the employer is not, and cannot, make moral decisions for other human beings. So he is therefor not responsible for the moral decisions that other human beings make.

Is it morally wrong to operate a bar and sell alcohol because some people will abuse alcohol and become drunks?

Is it morally wrong to produce drugs like morphine and oxycontin because some people will abuse them and become addicted?

Is it morally wrong to operate a casino because some people will lose all their money to gambling?

Is it wrong to operate a motel because some people will have homosexual sex in the rooms?

This is the big failure of the moral argument against employer-paid health insurance: it presumes that the employers are morally responsible for the employees' health care decisions. And they are not.

 

[Rusha]

No, because the employer is not, and cannot, make moral decisions for other human beings. So he is therefor not responsible for the moral decisions that other human beings make.

They can, however, responsible for *assisting* with those decisions their employees make. IF they are offering a health plan that includes abortion, they ARE assisting any employee who utilizes that benefit.

Is it morally wrong to operate a bar and sell alcohol because some people will abuse alcohol and become drunks?

Abortion serves one purpose: to kill unborn babies. Not everyone who drinks goes out and drives drunk or abuses alcohol ..

Is it morally wrong to produce drugs like morphine and oxycontin because some people will abuse them and become addicted?

IF the sole reason for drugs like morphine and oxycontin were to kill other innocent human beings, then yes. However, that is not the purpose of why those drugs are made.

Is it morally wrong to operate a casino because some people will lose all their money to gambling?

Is it wrong to operate a motel because some people will have homosexual sex in the rooms?

Same as above ...

This is the big failure of the moral argument against employer-paid health insurance: it presumes that the employers are morally responsible for the employees' health care decisions. And they are not.

What it *presumes* is that abortion is the killing of an innocent human being and the employer refuses to be a party to such practice.

 

[99lamb]

what is immoral to the immoral?

 

[PureX]

They can, however, responsible for *assisting* with those decisions their employees make. IF they are offering a health plan that includes abortion, they ARE assisting any employee who utilizes that benefit.

That's simply false. Abortion is a choice that women have by law. No one is making the choice to have an abortion for anyone else. No one is "assisting" them in that choice. ONLY the pregnant woman decides. God has deemed that we are each responsible for our own choices. And all the sophistry on Earth doesn't change that fact. We are each responsible for our own sins. No one else.

The "devil" didn't make anyone do anything, ever.

 

[PureX]

IF the sole reason for drugs like morphine and oxycontin were to kill other innocent human beings ...

You mean like with guns?

Is it a sin to make hand guns because people use them to kill other people? (That is their sole purpose, after all.)

 

[Rusha]

You mean like with guns?

Not even close ...

Individuals have a right to protect themselves and their loved one's from predators by any means necessary.

Abortion serves one purpose ... to kill an INNOCENT human being.

Is it a sin to make hand guns because people use them to kill other people? (That is their sole purpose, after all.)

Actually it isn't. The ultimate purpose is PROTECTION. Are you really going to state that those who abort do not do it to kill the innocent child who they willingly created by their own actions?

 

[PureX]

Individuals have a right to protect themselves and their loved one's from predators by any means necessary.

They also have the right to an abortion.

But never mind. You aren't going to be able to see past your own passion.

 

[resurrected]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for March 15th, 2013 05:00 AM

toldailytopic: Is it immoral for an employer to offer a health insurance plan which includes abortion (including the morning after pill)?

You're asking if it would be immoral for an employer to offer to their employees the opportunity to commit an immoral act.

Of course.


Would it be immoral for an employee to offer their employees training on how to avoid getting caught molesting children?

 

[resurrected]

No, because the employer is not, and cannot, make moral decisions for other human beings. So he is therefor not responsible for the moral decisions that other human beings make.

So, in the never never land in which PureX finds himself stuck, an employer who offered a bed and a locked room for employees to cheat on their wives and husbands would bear no moral responsibility for the use of that bed and room?

Is it morally wrong to operate a bar and sell alcohol because some people will abuse alcohol and become drunks?

Is it morally wrong to operate a bar and sell penny shots to inebriated people? Would it be morally wrong to have a contest "Chug until you pass out?"

Is it morally wrong to produce drugs like morphine and oxycontin because some people will abuse them and become addicted?

Is it morally wrong to produce those drugs without attempting to keep them from abusers and addicts?

Is it morally wrong to operate a casino because some people will lose all their money to gambling?

Is it morally wrong to operate a casino with the intent of reducing your patrons to paupers?

Is it wrong to operate a motel because some people will have homosexual sex in the rooms?

Is it wrong for a motel operator to offer discounts to homos?

This is the big failure of the moral argument against employer-paid health insurance: it presumes that the employers are morally responsible for the employees' health care decisions.

This is the big failure of PureX's "reasoning". Employers are responsible for their actions. If their actions promote immoral behavior, they are responsible for them.

In providing abortifacients to their employees, employers are facillitating immoral behavior.

And that's immoral. :thumb:

 

[bybee]

You're asking if it would be immoral for an employer to offer to their employees the opportunity to commit an immoral act.

Of course.


Would it be immoral for an employee to offer their employees training on how to avoid getting caught molesting children?

I believe it is immoral to offer to another person something which you would not do yourself.
I chose to work in a Catholic hospital because the problem of abortion did not exist there.
It is not sufficient to state that "abortion is legal". Either you stand for something or you don't.

 

[Rusha]

They also have the right to an abortion.

Currently, yes it is legal. Which does not make it moral ...

BTW, their employer has no say what they do OUTSIDE their legal activities outside the working environment. They are simply stating "we will not facilitate you in killing any unborn babies".

But never mind. You aren't going to be able to see past your own passion.

My passion in this particular issue has to do with allowing employers to decide whether they will pay for an unnecessary procedure that they deem as morally objectionable. Secondly, on the issue of abortion, my passion lies with protecting the innocent and vulnerable ... the unborn.

 

[PureX]

BTW, their employer has no say what they do OUTSIDE their legal activities outside the working environment. They are simply stating "we will not facilitate you in killing any unborn babies".

The employer has neither the ability nor the right to facilitate any moral or immoral behavior by anyone. This is the fact that you need to face, to finally understand why this is a foolish issue, and an irrational argument by anti-abortion proponents.

 

[resurrected]

The employer has neither the ability nor the right to facilitate any moral or immoral behavior by anyone.

That's a really retarded thing to say.

 

[Dena]

No. Not all abortions are immoral so to offer coverage would not be immoral. I do not consider using the morning after pill to be an abortion so no moral issue there either.

 

[Rusha]

The employer has neither the ability nor the right to facilitate any moral or immoral behavior by anyone.

WRONG. There are things such as moral clauses. There are also employers that utilize random drug testing.

Employers absolutely DO have the right as long as it is KNOWN by the employee upfront. It is the employer who can lose money as well as reputation should one of their employees private decisions affect the companies reputation.

This is the fact that you need to face, to finally understand why this is a foolish issue, and an irrational argument by anti-abortion proponents.

Having a policy to NOT facilitate abortion is only foolish in the minds of those who are pro-abortion. Even in the case that an employee is pro-abortion, they have absolutely no right to demand that their employer assist or accommodate them in obtaining one.

While I will not defend the rights of the religious to make arbitrary laws that limit the rights of others in the privacy of their own homes, I will certainly not cater those who wish to take away the rights for private citizens, employers and business owners to run their business and lives by their own conscience.