You know, with all of the issues that Michigan is facing as a state, I can\’t imagine how something like this became a priority, especially since it is guaranteed to create litigation.
What about an organization that doesn\’t believe in sex outside of marriage? If they cover pregnancies for married persons, can they turn around and deny claims for unmariied persons who get pregnant?
Or a self-insured organization that adheres to the philosophy that non-whites are inferior? Can they refuse to offer coverage to their non-white employees (assuming they have any)?
Was anyone really thinking when they proposed this?
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
You know, with all of the issues that Michigan is facing as a state, I can\’t imagine how something like this became a priority, especially since it is guaranteed to create litigation.
What about an organization that doesn\’t believe in sex outside of marriage? If they cover pregnancies for married persons, can they turn around and deny claims for unmariied persons who get pregnant?
Or a self-insured organization that adheres to the philosophy that non-whites are inferior? Can they refuse to offer coverage to their non-white employees (assuming they have any)?
Was anyone really thinking when they proposed this?