wearing a condom is not?

which can be prevented by using a condom. Isn't one of the main themes of the ACA the coverage of preventive care?

Isn't most of that other stuff prescription only?

Birth control pills need to be monitored by a physician, because they are drugs with potentially harmful side effects, an IUD is a surgically implanted device; and diaphragms have to be individually fitted and prescribed.

Condoms are like band-aids, and a dime a dozen.

But the more interesting question is why you ask: do you think women are somehow getting some kind of "special privilege"? That doesn't belong on a board that touts itself as liberal.

And to boot: men can't get pregnant from sex, women can; and their bodies are the ones that incur the medical need. Whatever man-lib crap you'd like to spew about pregnancies being the province of the "sire," too ... those are financial or moral entailments, not medical ones.

Sorry, but you aren't going to get your insurer to pay for Robitussin or Tums or corn pads you chose to buy.

(Note that a 'letter of medical necessity' might also be accepted by the insurer.)

Between items that doctors write RX for even if htey're OTC, and items that they don't. Doctors don't write RXs for condoms, do they?

There could be some strange set of circumstances.

But to be clear, if a doctor writes a prescription for something, it's not considered "over the counter" for most purposes, including insurance and tax deductibility. Over-The-Counter items (i.e., available without a prescription) can be purchased by just about anybody. The whole reason for having your doctor prescribe an over-the-counter item is so that it can be reimbursed through insurance or be tax deductible.

And people don't seek them out. That is the reason. Not "It's men, so who gives a shit"

Go right ahead. Your belligerence on this count might, however, limit the number of partners willing to indulge with you.

Honestly, I'd be fine with the government handing out free condoms to everyone. But you've taken us far afield from the topic of today's Supreme Court decision. Which affects women and access to the birth-control medications or procedures that directly affect their health. And which separates women out exclusively from the health-care laws.

I'm not really interested in your picayune counter-arguments or changes of subject.

Sometimes I wonder why I even turn on my computer.

over the counter products are never covered by health insurance.

And this is certainly not a "privilege" issue. Women benefit from condoms just as much as men do (in terms of avoiding STDs as well as pregnancy).

Because there are so many of them

and one of the main themes of the ACA is preventive care, wouldn't it make sense for condoms to be covered? You do know that it is possible to have a prescription for something that is available over the counter, don't you? I'm sure that if condoms were covered by the ACA, provided that a prescription was written, doctors would write prescriptions for people who were concerned about catching STDs.

It's not a grand conspiracy against men.

reeks of that agenda.

The most expensive male condoms I could find in a quick search were about a dollar each. Female condoms from the same shop were $3.

By comparison, the lowest price I've heard of for Plan B was $32, last I heard the Nuvaring was $70/mo, and getting an IUD placed is about $800.

Can't imagine why else he wouldn't have replied to you.

I've been looking all over for those. I had to buy them online. This seems like a thing that should be more available since it often provides better protection and is preferred by many who have tried it.