[RC one]

that was a lot of BS. Homosexuality is known to be a risk factor for HIV, Can you imagine the ensuing rancor if insurance companies refused to cover homosexuals because of this? You can't even refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding let alone refuse to provide them insurance. Living in many black neighborhoods also places you in a high risk category. Insurers are not allowed to discriminate against those residents either.

Furthermore, the data that suggests that gun ownership automatically makes you a riskier individual is nothing but a custom tailored lie constructed by liberals to provide them with a false talking point and a means to attack the second amendment and the people that support it as in the case of using this bogus data to compel insurers to drop gun owners.

We are at war with the leftists. As such, I'm not going to waste a second of my time worrying about the unintended consequences of any of the tactical decisions we make in this struggle.

To hell with the consequences. We are at war and the consequences of losing this war are my only concern.

[arthurus]

The unconstitutionality involved is, of course, state and federal government interference in the insurance market at all. Government has only the duty to ensure contract and purity of product which can all come under the weights and measures clause.