As a human being I believe that we need to compromise in life to some degree for there to be peace and harmony. This is my own personal opinion and belief. You see the need for compromise within the political factions, you see it at the work environment, you see it at schools, and even in your daily marriage life. “Yes dear I’ll wash those dishes and stop leaving my undies on the floor”. Nearly everything in life requires compromise.
But you know what, at some point we have to draw a line in the sand and say enough is enough. This world is headed in a direction that doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense to me at times. Case in point, let’s talk about California and the proposed legislation in AB 460. According to my research, I have come to the understanding that insurance companies are required to provide infertility coverage to a couple if the couple says that they have been engaging in sexual relations regularly for a period of one year and have not been able to become pregnant or bring a child to live birth. This applies to male and female couples engaging in sexual relations.
The “problem” with this policy, according to California State Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (a democrat, sur-freaking-prise) is that insurance companies are “discriminating” based on sexual orientation. You know, if a man and a man apply for infertility coverage, I would imagine that they would be denied coverage, for very obvious reasons. Such as what you ask? I don’t know? Maybe because two penises can’t possibly make a baby? Makes sense doesn’t it, am I right?
Enter Assemblyman Tom, who’s legislature aims to stop these “discrimination” practices. For instance, based on this legislation if a lesbian or gay couple cannot have a baby after a year of having sex and trying to get pregnant, the legislature says that the insurance companies MUST cover their infertility treatments. Should they refuse, according to this legislation, that would be a crime. What? What? WHAT?
I’ll give you the super simple, layman version of it, if you want the complex version, just search AB 460 at your leisure. Basically, the legislation says that if a gay couple is trying to have a child for a year via sexual relations, and they do not get pregnant that they are legally entitled to insurance coverage for infertility. So if two men are having sex, or two women are having sex, for one year, and they do not get pregnant during that year, then the insurance company has no choice but to cover treatments the same way they would for heterosexual couples. Whatever those treatments may be.
Now, how under God’s green Earth would anyone ever expect a woman and a woman, or a man and a man to get pregnant and conceive a child through sex? Look, I don’t care what your particular view on homosexual marriage is, or whether or not you love or hate the life style, this post isn’t about that topic. This post is to state that there are some basic common sense items that simply cannot be changed or legislated into existence.
Dudes! A penis and a penis will never make a baby. A vagina and a vagina will never make a baby. Why is this legislature even being discussed? It is physically impossible to get pregnant by having sex unless you have a man and a woman in the picture. It’s physiology and common sense, there is nothing discriminatory about that. Come on people! How far is this politically correct insanity going to go?
If there is anyone out there, anyone, say a Mr. Ammiano, that can somehow explain to me how this topic isn’t absolutely ridiculous and how it would serve any practical purpose, please do tell me. Seriously, I’m not being sarcastic here, I want to hear the reasoning processes behind this. Maybe I’m missing something? Maybe I misread something? Please, someone help me understand, because this is cray cray. Mmm-kaaay…
This post was originally featured on Clashdaily.com
Read more at http://clashdaily.com/2013/04/the-ridiculous-and-biology-defying-legislation-that-is-ab-460/2/#P6XkGwBrfGEAO1UZ.99
Note the date on a post as it may be an old point of view. If you learn that your views are wrong, yet they remain the same, then you are a fool.
The opinions and views expressed are solely those of the author.