Skip to comments.
Ky. court rules Christian-only health plan is insurance
Dispatch ^
| August 26, 2010
| AP
Posted on 08/26/2010 5:00:36 PM PDT by combat_boots
(No story. Link only. Interesting thought.)
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: christian; deathcare; insurance; kentucky
.
To: combat_boots
2
posted on
08/26/2010 5:01:50 PM PDT
by
combat_boots
(The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spirito Sancto.)
To: combat_boots
Which means it is subject to unfunded mandates and lawsuits.
Prediction: Medishare leaves this state.
3
posted on
08/26/2010 5:20:11 PM PDT
by
Nachum
(The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
To: combat_boots
I have to agree with the court, assuming they were right about how Medi-Share operates. When you look past all the disclaimers and religious and “charitable” trappings, Medi-Share appears to have essentially been an insurance union - a customer-owned, non-profit insurance company.
The dissent’s reasoning that Medi-Share isn’t “in the insurance business” just because its members, rather than some separate company, bears the risk is just like saying that a credit union isn’t in the banking business.
4
posted on
08/26/2010 5:28:01 PM PDT
by
The Pack Knight
(Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and the world laughs at you.)
To: combat_boots
5
posted on
08/26/2010 5:30:33 PM PDT
by
Outlaw Woman
(Extremism in defense of Liberty is sometimes necessary...)
To: Outlaw Woman
I noticed this statement from the article:
A legislative white paper written by the Citizens Council on Health Care in January 2010 just after the Senate inserted that exemption, noted that, There are three medical sharing ministries in the United States: Medi-Share, Christian Healthcare Ministries, and Samaritan Ministries International. They serve from 25,000 to 42,000 people.
Common membership requirements include an agreement not to smoke, drink heavily or use illicit drugs. Members must attend church regularly, and agree not to have sex outside of marriage
monthly fees for a family of four are between $240 and 400.
The Democrats passed their mandatory health care bill, yet all conservative Christians are exempt if they want to be and the only requirement is that they have to live a biblical lifestyle.
Living a biblical lifestyle is not necessarily the only requirement. What the article fails to note (and the Kentucky Supreme Court did note) is that Medi-Share, at least, also excludes individuals based on certain pre-existing conditions, just like conventional health insurance does.
6
posted on
08/26/2010 5:43:24 PM PDT
by
The Pack Knight
(Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and the world laughs at you.)
To: The Pack Knight
I noticed that too. I didn’t note the pre existing condition clause..will have to reread the post. My brother is currently looking into the Samaritan Ministries. My own vices would preclude me (smoking/drinking). I’m not doing anything yet though.
7
posted on
08/26/2010 5:49:33 PM PDT
by
Outlaw Woman
(Extremism in defense of Liberty is sometimes necessary...)
To: The Pack Knight
A Biblical lifestyle might, in some quarters, be more like that of Nebuchadnezzer than what we usually think of.
Watching the Sopranos lately, and I see the possibilities here.
8
posted on
08/26/2010 5:55:02 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
To: Outlaw Woman
Samaritan ministries no longer excludes people who enjoy “natural” (undistilled) adult beverages. Good news for those of us who enjoy a few beers.
It’s a way of helping folks in straitened circumstances, who could not afford regular insurance.
And yes, it “discriminates” against sodomites — that 4% of the population that “enjoys” 60+% of the syphilis, and nearly a monopoly on Gay-Related Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome (GRIDS — better known today by a less accurate acronym).
9
posted on
08/26/2010 6:52:16 PM PDT
by
RJR_fan
(Christians need to reclaim and excel in the genre of science fiction.)
To: RJR_fan
Oh that’s good to know. lol.. I generally drink only wine or beer. I admit that I’ve indulged in shots of Jack now and again though but it’s rare. Glad they do exclude the depraved. I have to say though that I’m extremely suspicious of why an exemption for ‘Conservative Christians’ would be inserted into the marxist bill to begin with. Any thoughts on that? Of course my mind immediately flashes to a ‘database’ with names. Paranoid?
Anyway, thank you for letting me know about the ‘non distilled’ spirits! lol Now...if I could kick smoking, I may have a chance.
10
posted on
08/26/2010 7:08:37 PM PDT
by
Outlaw Woman
(Extremism in defense of Liberty is sometimes necessary...)
To: Outlaw Woman
The pre-existing condition clause actually wasn't mentioned in the post, either. It was mentioned in the Kentucky Supreme Court opinion at page 4, a PDF of which can be found
here.
11
posted on
08/26/2010 11:25:32 PM PDT
by
The Pack Knight
(Laugh, and the world laughs with you. Weep, and the world laughs at you.)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson