Mandating Fertility Coverage for Gay Couples

Monday, April 8th, 2013 and is filed under Blog, Family Values

Share with your friends

Anyone who thinks that supporting the homosexual agenda is the proper course of action for libertarian-minded people should open their eyes to reality.  There is only so much absurdity you can push before you start infringing on the freedom’s of others.  Once again, California shows us that there is no  floor to the insanity of decedent social engineering.  This, from the Weekly Standard:

Should health insurers be legally required to offer infertility treatment for gay couples? Yes, according to a bill (AB 460) filed in the California legislature by assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco). In fact, refusing to do so should be a crime.

Current California law requires group health plans to offer coverage for infertility treatments with the exception of in vitro fertilization (IVF). If such coverage is purchased, benefits must be paid whenever “a demonstrated condition recognized by a licensed physician and surgeon as a cause for infertility” has been diagnosed—or upon “the inability to conceive a pregnancy or to carry a pregnancy to a live birth after a year of regular sexual relations without contraception.” Thus, under current law, diagnosis of a physical reason for the inability to conceive or sire a child is not required. It is enough that a couple tried to get pregnant for a year and failed.

According to the fact sheet supporting AB 460, the trouble is that some insurance companies “are not complying with current law that prohibits discrimination” based on sexual orientation. Instead, they are denying infertility treatment benefits “based on [the policy holder’s] not having an opposite sex married partner in which to have one year of regular sexual relations without conception.” AB 460 would amend the law to add the following language:

Coverage for the treatment of infertility shall be offered and provided without discrimination on the basis of age, ancestry, color, disability, domestic partner status, gender, gender expression, gender identity, genetic information, marital status, national origin, race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation.

There is simply no way we can make gay relationships equal with marriages without encountering religious liberty issues.  This is lesson #200006 in why we will never have a truly libertarian society of limited government by supporting the homosexual agenda.