#1 Is it wrong to deny life insurance to a reefer smoker?02-26-2010, 05:52 PM
These people actually think they are smart enough to “regulate” health insurance!
Philosoraptor (1000+ posts) Fri Feb-26-10 08:17 AM
Is it wrong to deny life insurance to a reefer smoker?
It's a common problem, a friend of mine applied for life insurance and was denied after being forced to pee in a cup. His marijuana levels were 'too high'. Apparently they allow for a certain level of thc in the system, 1 to 45 points on their scale, he unfortunately registered at 145, by whatever stupid scale they've come up with.
I'll bet the insurance companies don't give a shit if you're an alcoholic, but they deny pot heads outright, I don't know how they handle the cigarette smokers.
There are a lot of people out there who enjoy this illegal activity for better or worse, but what is the reasoning behind denying life insurance to a person based solely on the fact that they like to get high? Sometimes we almost forget that it's illegal, but it is for some stupid ass reason.Give a liberal a fish - he will eat for a day
Teach a liberal to fish - he will come back tomorrow wanting more free fish!
02-26-2010, 06:00 PM
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- NE Indiana
In regard to cigarette smokers:
They charge us lots and lots of extra money!
02-26-2010, 06:01 PM
I know lots of responsible adults who are occasional to frequent pot smokers. They are smart enough to get it out of their systems before being tested.
02-26-2010, 06:05 PM
Considering THC has something like 3 times the carcinogens of cigarrettes, I think it's safe for the life insurance company to not want to go into a deal with someone who smokes pot like cigarrettes.In most sports, cold-cocking an opposing player repeatedly in the face with a series of gigantic Slovakian uppercuts would get you a multi-game suspension without pay.
In hockey, it means you have to sit in the penalty box for five minutes.
02-26-2010, 06:06 PM
Last edited by Jumpy; 02-26-2010 at 06:09 PM.
02-26-2010, 06:16 PM
Smokers, contrary to popular myth, pay way more in health insurance than obese people, old people, suicidal teens, anorexics, depressed people, or people who enjoy random gay sex in public parks or other facilities.
In real life, smokers don't cost more than pregnant women. Now, a pregnant smoker might cost more. Most people who suffer fatal heart attacks are evenly divided between people who have no risk factors and those those smoke, are fat, have a first degree relative with heart problems, or have unusual blood lipid levels.
Fat people, people who have relatives who have died before 60 of cardiovascular issues, or people with unusual blood lipid levels generally don't pay anywhere near the premiums of smokers. Since only 24% of the population smokes, and most of them not for 30 years, and since only around a third of deaths in smokers can be attributed to smoking, they just aren't the big issue in health care.
Women are the big issue in health care. Women require near constant evaluation for hormonal birth control, prenatal care, neonatal care, pre-cancerous and cancerous factors of the reproductive system, abortion, birth control, menopause intervention, bone density management, depression, birth, PMS, and pharmaceutical management of anxiety.
Who would be for charging women more because we suck up 70% of every healthcare dollar?
02-26-2010, 06:34 PM
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Sonora, Texas
If you have a motorcycle endorsement on your drivers license you get charged a higher rate also.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|