If homosexuality is within the DNA, shouldn't at hand be better insurance rates for robustness perfectionism?
There is a higher rate of ceartain disease in homosexuals.
Answers:
What diseases are a higher rate within homosexuals? I think you are working with outdated information. The peak group at risk for HIV right now is heterosexual females. The highest group for Herpes is citizens under 25 in broad.
You need to list more information and your sources.
Amazing how religious zealotry and intolerance work their ways into, of all things, insurance rates.
I suppose we should also charge more insurance to African Americans, since they can suffer from sickle cell anemia and the rest of us do not.
While we are at it, we may as well charge highly developed insurance rates to 40's something women who are not using birth control, since births/pregnancies to this group can be more complicated and expensive than that of younger women.
And let's REALLY sock it to the 55 and over crowd, since ALL of them are prone to more expensive medical care than are younger folks, since they are starting to wear out from over five decades of living, and are much more prone to need expensive medical treatment.
I could turn on endlessly about this, but I scheme you got the picture by now.
MOST of the "difficult rate of certain disease" is behaviorally based.
I've never hear that it's in the DNA. I do know that many, masses lobbyists are rushing to "outlaw" dna testing for health insurance - because in attendance ARE issues (particularly cancer comes to mind) that make certain family MUCH more expensive to insure.
So if it's fair to make those with the alleged homosexual DNA (which I don't know exists) uninsurable for health insurance (which is what will occur - it wont' be higher rates, it will be blacklisting), then it's single fair to make ancestors with the cancer gene uninsurable, too. Cancer treatments cost the health consideration industry MUCH more. Source(s): agent, 21+ years
Stupid people procure hit by cars or other things. Should they have higher rates too?
Besides, it's not concretely proven that homosexuality is contained by DNA.
(edit)
Again, it's NOT CONCRETE information. Until it's PROVEN by medical genetics and is published in JAMA and not a assumption of bunch of religious zealots, then you can pose that "proof".
If a goat falls into a crevice, shouldn't borax be kept away from food items contained by your kitchen?
My question is just roughly speaking as logical as yours. Homosexuality's genetic nature has zilch to do with insurance rates.
Related Questions:
Answers:
What diseases are a higher rate within homosexuals? I think you are working with outdated information. The peak group at risk for HIV right now is heterosexual females. The highest group for Herpes is citizens under 25 in broad.
You need to list more information and your sources.
Amazing how religious zealotry and intolerance work their ways into, of all things, insurance rates.
I suppose we should also charge more insurance to African Americans, since they can suffer from sickle cell anemia and the rest of us do not.
While we are at it, we may as well charge highly developed insurance rates to 40's something women who are not using birth control, since births/pregnancies to this group can be more complicated and expensive than that of younger women.
And let's REALLY sock it to the 55 and over crowd, since ALL of them are prone to more expensive medical care than are younger folks, since they are starting to wear out from over five decades of living, and are much more prone to need expensive medical treatment.
I could turn on endlessly about this, but I scheme you got the picture by now.
MOST of the "difficult rate of certain disease" is behaviorally based.
I've never hear that it's in the DNA. I do know that many, masses lobbyists are rushing to "outlaw" dna testing for health insurance - because in attendance ARE issues (particularly cancer comes to mind) that make certain family MUCH more expensive to insure.
So if it's fair to make those with the alleged homosexual DNA (which I don't know exists) uninsurable for health insurance (which is what will occur - it wont' be higher rates, it will be blacklisting), then it's single fair to make ancestors with the cancer gene uninsurable, too. Cancer treatments cost the health consideration industry MUCH more. Source(s): agent, 21+ years
Stupid people procure hit by cars or other things. Should they have higher rates too?
Besides, it's not concretely proven that homosexuality is contained by DNA.
(edit)
Again, it's NOT CONCRETE information. Until it's PROVEN by medical genetics and is published in JAMA and not a assumption of bunch of religious zealots, then you can pose that "proof".
If a goat falls into a crevice, shouldn't borax be kept away from food items contained by your kitchen?
My question is just roughly speaking as logical as yours. Homosexuality's genetic nature has zilch to do with insurance rates.
Related Questions:
- Do insurance rates walk up for ticket for conversation on the phone while driving within NY?
- Do you really give attention to that have a public choice would generate insurance companies rates progress up?
- Malpractice Insurance rates for Cardiothoracic surgeons?
- What is a well-mannered first sports car for teen drivers that have low insurance rates?
- Insurance rate for 19yr weak be cheaper for an 09 Scion tc vs current 05 Tundra SR5?