GOP follies continue with contraception issue

The U.S. Senate votes today on an amendment by U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, that not only exempts religious-affiliated institutions from having to cover contraception through health insurance but extends that exemption to any private business that questions contraception on “moral” grounds.

Politically, Republicans apparently believe they have a winner in the issue and a number of conservative pundits have encouraged them in that faith. But every poll I’ve seen tells quite a different story.

The most recent is a newly released CBS News/NY Times poll in which 65 percent of voters back the Obama administration’s requirement that birth-control costs be covered by health insurance. Fifty-nine percent believe that requirement should also apply to religiously affiliated employers.

And among Catholic voters, the ones supposedly so upset that their church’s religious liberty has been “attacked”?

“A new New York Times/CBS News poll has found that 57 percent of Catholic voters supported the requirement for religiously affiliated employers, like hospitals or universities, to cover the full cost of birth control for their employees, while 36 percent opposed it (7 percent said they did not know). There was almost no difference between Catholic and other voters on the question.”

The Obama administration, in other words, is far more in tune with members of the Catholic Church than are the leaders of that venerable institution or the Republican Party. In fact, it’s been fascinating to see how quickly and easily conservatives can convince themselves that this time, this time, they’ve finally got the American people behind them as they rush into political battle, only to look back behind them and find that same small band of followers urging them on against the multitudes.

That’s what happened on the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance, which is why the House Republicans have had to beat such a hasty retreat on those issues in recent days. Positions that they once thought would make them wildly popular have instead become huge burdens that they are trying to shuck as quickly and quietly as possible. And it’s happening now on the contraception issue as well.

In fact, as this contraception issue plays out, the huge “gender gap” I wrote about Monday, with female voters backing Obama by more than 20 points over both Romney and Santorum, will be cemented into place and perhaps even expand. It’s a long way between now and November, but if Republicans want to turn this trend around they better start doing things differently.

And doing things differently just doesn’t come naturally to them.

– Jay Bookman

740 comments Add your comment

[...] GOP follies continue with contraception issueAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog)Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, that not only exempts religious-affiliated institutions from having to cover contraception through health insurance but extends that exemption to any private business that questions contraception on “moral” grounds. [...]

man behind the curtain

February 15th, 2012
10:15 am

Truth is “smoove” Obama has pretty much played the GOP congress his whole term. They thought handing over an economy in tatters and monstrous debt would be a stick they could beat him with. So far he’s done most of the beating.

Jerome Horwitz

February 15th, 2012
10:15 am

The Grand Ostrich Party once again sticks their heads in the sand. With all the issues that truly need attention they engage in garbage like this. I just can’t fathom why all the fuss about this – it’s the 21st century folks. Not the Dark Ages.

jm

February 15th, 2012
10:16 am

yawn. if Obama would just start regulating the rubber industry better, I bet we could get rubber prices down enough where they could just make condoms as available as straws in a fast food restaurant.

on the substance of the issue: folks, let’s tell the federal government to beat it and get their nose out of our business.

carlosgvv

February 15th, 2012
10:16 am

Republican motovations in contraception , as in all other issues, are determined solely by what they believe will get them the most votes. They believe the crazed Tea Party is the Party future and will act accordingly. If they are proven wrong in the Nov. election, look for them to do the Romney flip-flop on this and most other issues.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:17 am

and the contraception trap closes around the skinny ankles of the GOP.

too funny by half!

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:18 am

Condoms made of rubber?

Do you bounce?

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:18 am

jm

rubber?

do you bounce?

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:19 am

sorry about the double post

but count it as a double dribble for jm

Common Sense

February 15th, 2012
10:19 am

Tell us again why the government should tell the private sector what they must pay for.

So people are able to afford health insurance but cannot afford to pay for their birth control?

And because of that, the rest of us must be forced to pay for that coverage?

Who are all these people who refuse to pay for something they need because they expect others to foot the bill?

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:20 am

The Catholic poll is kind of a joke, honestly. Some Catholic churches are more conservative than others. The more conservative ones – that do not support BC – should not have to provide it as part of an insurance policy.

You can’t just say “Catholic” any more than you can say “Jewish” and assume it’s this homogeneous glob that all have the same beliefs religiously or morally.

Mr. Holmes

February 15th, 2012
10:20 am

There is no limit to the right-wing capacity for self-delusion. I posted about this on Facebook, simply a short post asking how this issue qualifies as a political winner, and a righty friend immediately accused me of “nonsensical ranting.”

southdem

February 15th, 2012
10:21 am

This is the natural result of the development of Fox News and talk radio. The Republicans live in their own echo chamber and they never get different points of view, or if they do, they don’t believe them.

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:21 am

Who gave the president the right to force insurance companies to do anything, much less provide free contraception? Apparently there’s been another amendment to the Constitution. Guess I messed the memo…

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:22 am

“Who are all these people who refuse to pay for something they need because they expect others to foot the bill?”

Liberals……………

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
10:22 am

this arguement over “contraception” alone is a loser for the GOP…they need to focus on the mandate of “obamacare” in general, and why it needs to be repealed. Focusing on one aspect, contraception, is a loser, politically.

Mr. Holmes

February 15th, 2012
10:23 am

Who gave the president the right to force insurance companies to do anything, much less provide free contraception?

Umm, there are myriad government regulations regarding all manner of insurance, not just health. At both the state and federal level.

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

February 15th, 2012
10:23 am

Its all the GOP has now.

Other than lying, of course. “Obama is a S O O O O C I A L I S T!”

Meanwhile Larry Fink, who manages $3.7 trillion (more than anyone in the world), says go 100% into stocks.

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:24 am

No wonder there is such idiological divide, the Left has not a clue what the debate is truly about.

There is cultural and moral issues within, but the core is Liberty. The Left continues to give away their liberties in favor of the nanny state.

Obamacare is the largest give up of Liberty in our history and the current debate is but the first collateral damage with many more likely to arise.

The Right does not want to ban contraceptives. Instead, they want to give Liberty to business owners to offer or not offer it with the government’s nose out of it.

The 65% is not surprising since too many citiizens today want everything given them.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:26 am

“Who gave the president the right to force insurance companies to do anything, much less provide free contraception? ”

darlin’, if you’re paying a premium, it AIN’T FREE …

but, thanks for your poutrage …

Mr. Holmes

February 15th, 2012
10:26 am

Instead, they want to give Liberty to business owners to offer or not offer it with the government’s nose out of it.

I assume then you’re in favor of allowing employers to choose not to cover cardiac or prenatal care? Or allowing the Mormon church to “opt out” of anti-bigamy laws?

St Simons - we're on Island time

February 15th, 2012
10:26 am

so out of touch with 21st century America, it’s just cringe-worthy

what dey tryin to do mon, evoke so much pathos that they get pity-votes

can we have a 5 inning mercy rule, like in little league?

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:27 am

“Its all the GOP has now.”

If you only read the AJC, I guess that’s what you would believe. For people who can think on their own, let’s see, there is;

1) Multi-trillion dollar annual deficits
2) Douobled national debt
3) sustained unemployment
4) clownish foreign policy
5) gasoline headed to $5/gallon

etc, etc, etc

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:27 am

“The 65% is not surprising since too many citiizens today want everything given them.”

and, again, it’s not being GIVEN to you if you’re effing PAYING for it …

sheesh …

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
10:27 am

Funny how one can write about the echo chamber of “fox news and right wing radio”, in a left wing echo chamber…in a left wing echo chamber…in a left wing echo chamber…oh the irony…oh the irony…oh the irony.

Common Sense

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

SunkinUK,

If what you pay does not cover the costs of your expenses, indeed it is free.

Now if you wanted to charge higher premiums for those that choose the birth control option, we could talk.

But you know that is unacceptable. You want others to pay your way.

Nothing new here….

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

USinUK, did you make that “poutrage” term up all by yourself? Is “poutrage” what causes you libs to whine about the rich not paying enough taxes when they pay virtually ALL the taxes? LMAO…

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

Republicans is trying their bestest to show us that they can indeed by stoopider than once thought even possible. What they needs is a following with bigger torches so they can be in the majority.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

Well, I don’t see why people can’t just stop Doing It. That way, there’d be no need for birth control and this whole flap would go away. Anyhow, with this country being in so much trouble and all, seems to me people should be willing to give up fun. Matter of fact, I’m not having much fun and I don’t see why other people should have fun. Besides, it’s for having kids. What’s the point of having birth control if it blocks you from having kids?

Just don’t make me pay taxes to support your kids. I’m all for forcing the women to have kids, but I draw the line when it comes to making me pay to raise them.

Have a good Hump Day everybody.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
10:29 am

B. Shockley — “Who gave the president the right to force insurance companies to do anything, much less provide free contraception?”

You clearly don’t understand how medical insurance got to the state it is in the first place. Go do some reading about the history of medical insurance in the US, then when you’ve educated yourself on the topic, come back and we can discuss.

“Apparently there’s been another amendment to the Constitution. Guess I messed the memo…”

No, you’re just unaware of that whole ‘regulating interstate commerce’ power that the Constitution explicitly grants to the government. You’re also clearly unaware of, again, how we got health coverage paid for in the way we do in this country.

John Galt

February 15th, 2012
10:30 am

Paying $3 for a $12 meal is not paying your way….

sheeesh…..

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:30 am

Holmes – you are overboard.

USinUK – employer provided insurance is paid in large part by the employer. That is the debate here – if employers must include contraceptives in their insurance plans. If there is a copay for the drug, you are only paying for a portion. No one says you can’t purchase and pay the full amount. It’s called choice; it’s called Liberty.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:31 am

“I assume then you’re in favor of allowing employers to choose not to cover cardiac or prenatal care? ”

or Scientologists to not cover ANY meds for mental health …

mm

February 15th, 2012
10:32 am

I am so tired of churches trying to dictate our laws. It’s time to strip all churches of their tax exempt status.

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:32 am

@Johnny Reb – you’re spot on. The left has no idea what this debate is about.

Liberals think – for better or worse – that is government has the ability to do something and it will benefit people, it must be inherently good. Birth control for all is, in a vacuum, a good thing.

Conservatives (well, true conservatives) think: Even though this program may be good, does the government have the right or authority to do it?

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
10:32 am

First Asscroft and now Blunt.

Missouri can really pick some winners, huh?

Since at least World War II, a Republican candidate for president has never taken a majority of Catholic votes.

And doing things differently just doesn’t come naturally to them.

No doubt, though that assessment may be a tad harsh.

I believe a compelling argument can be made that the GOP is no longer stuck in 1951.

They have rocketed up to 1952.

Joe Hussein Mama

February 15th, 2012
10:32 am

B. Shockley — “5) gasoline headed to $5/gallon”

I do not repose any trust in your prediction of commodity prices, but if you can accurately predict the COB prices of a dozen commodity prices on a date say, six months hence, then I might start believing your predictions on this score.

Not a Neal Boortz Redneck

February 15th, 2012
10:33 am

1) Multi-trillion dollar annual deficits
2) Douobled national debt
3) sustained unemployment
4) clownish foreign policy
5) gasoline headed to $5/gallon

All Bush legacy. I don’t care how many times you complain about hearing it either.

And Obama is taking foreign thugs out left and right without expensive ground wars. The Bush deficit is shrinking and the market says the economy is healing. Crude oil prices are 2/3 Bush highs and production is way up.

Hannity talking points are nothing but lies.

Jerome Horwitz

February 15th, 2012
10:33 am

Rather than say “free” it should be that these services are part of the premium. While employers pay a majority of the premium employees do indeed pay part of the premium and should have more say. This is just another good reason why we need single payer health coverage in this country. Along with the fact we spend more that any other country and have horrible overall health statistics.

One thing I’ve noted, and it is a generality, is that conservatives worry more about the rights of companies and liberals are concerned with the rights of individuals.

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:34 am

ty webb – if conservatives did not participate on this blog the bus would have ended up on the left ditch long ago. The number of posts per Jay piece would be drastically down. And most of all, the Left would think they have won.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:35 am

No wonder there is such idiological divide, the Left has not a clue what the debate is truly about.

Really? So the majority of people have no idea what this debate is about? Fascinating elitist attitude you got going there.

You just hate that your team is losing AGAIN.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:35 am

Paying $3 for a $12 meal is not paying your way….

Is that the latest Groupon deal.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:36 am

Follies is the perfect word.

Ta Ra Ra Boom De Yay!

This is a HUGE mistake for the right.

HUGE. BIG. LARGE. GINORMUS.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:36 am

The number of posts per Jay piece would be drastically down. And most of all, the Left would think they have won.

Just like all over the south, white make southerners are convinced they are 100% right about everything, just because that’s the only people they talk to.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:36 am

Bryan G – I don’t know about “conservatives” or “liberals” – but I can tell you what *I* think …

*I* think that it’s complete and utter BOLLOCKS that ANYone has the right to deny me access to safe and legal drug in my insurance simply because THEY don’t agree with it. You don’t like it / think it’s immoral, then you have the right to NOT use it … you, however, do NOT have the right to deny anyone else access to it.

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:36 am

Jerome Horwitz – you summed up perfectly (although inadvertently) the divide here.

A religious employer should have the RIGHT to not provide something it deems against its tenants.

An employee at a religious employer has no RIGHT to birth control. As a matter of fact, there’s no RIGHT to health care. These are not individual rights.

I’m all for individual rights – speech, religion, assembly, to remain silent, to have a gun – but birth control ain’t one of them. (and I’m not anti-birth control. Heck, we need more of it.)

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:37 am

Lest I checked, Republicans can still freely liberate themselves at the RiteAid up the road. They still sell Trojans to anyone with the purchase price, no questions asked. :lol:

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:37 am

ByteMe – the way the Left and main stream media is reporting the issue, plus the fact that poll results can be manipulated with the question and who is asked, calls into question the 65%. Plus, there are so many people on the government doll now that if you subtract their affect the number is low. The true answer will be in November.

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:37 am

USinUK – If I’m your employer – and you work for me, you should work under my terms. You don’t have a RIGHT to birth control.

And, nothing about the policy says that you can’t go out an buy your own. You certainly may.

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:39 am

If JohnnyReb did not post here, how would we know what the one percent is thinking. :roll:

jm

February 15th, 2012
10:39 am

“Just like all over the south, white make southerners are convinced they are 100% right about everything, just because that’s the only people they talk to.”

Dumbest post of the day award!

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:39 am

Bryan – the problem is that we are NOT talking about churches – in that case, I completely agree with you.

But, when it comes to secular institutions (hospitals, universities, etc), then, no, the religious beliefs should NOT be allowed to dictate basic issues of access.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:39 am

A religious employer should have the RIGHT to not provide something it deems against its tenants.

Religious employers — chuches, synagogues, etc. — DO have that right (in all but 8 states, by the way).

But if the guy running Staples decides that he doesn’t want his underpaid associates to receive contraceptive care because he believes what his Catholic Church tells him about needing to make as many babies as possible, does the government have a place to step in and say “no, this is not the norm and your religious beliefs do not extend to enforcing your beliefs on others”?

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
10:40 am

“The most recent is a newly released CBS News/NY Times poll in which 65 percent of voters back the Obama administration’s requirement that birth-control costs be covered by health insurance. Fifty-nine percent believe that requirement should also apply to religiously affiliated employers”

Yes. Of course. And I would like to see how these questions were framed. Perhaps they should have been framed in a more truthful manner. For example I wonder how many would have responded favorably to the governments actions if the first question were postulated like this- “Should the govt be able to impose coverage for birth control on a religious institution whose teachings specifically are against the use of contraceptives”.

And as a corollary to that question I think a little voter enightenment should be built into the 2nd question regarding making insurance companies pay for contraceptives. The question should be framed like this- “Would you be willing to pay higher health insurance premiums if the government imposes contracptive coverage on previously exempt religious institutions?”

The educated among us understand that this contraceptives requirement is going to be passed along to the rest of us in higher insurance premiums. The liberals of course either don’t understand this or if they do they then have no problem restricting other people’s choice and freedom by imposing a benefit provided to some at the expense of everyone else.

Typical lib thought- appealing to the worst in groups of people by offering some sort of free goodie paid for by everyone else. Nothing new there.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:40 am

Dumbest post of the day award

This from the troll who thinks Mitt is going to win :roll:

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:41 am

Bryan G. should not offer insurance to his employees. There. All fixed.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:41 am

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:41 am

Yes. Of course. And I would like to see how these questions were framed

Google is ready when you are. The poll details are available online.

ty webb

February 15th, 2012
10:41 am

“And most of all, the Left would think they have won.”

JohnnyReb
well, they have “won” in the short term…however, when the other party takes over the reigns(maybe 2012, maybe 2016, maybe not even until 2020), me thinks they might object to turing over their liberty to the federal government…I just hope they haven’t thrown all their “not in our name” bumper stickers away.

Granny Godzilla

February 15th, 2012
10:42 am

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:42 am

USinUK – if it’s a Catholic hospital, my position is that it should be allowed to determine employment and insurance by its religious beliefs. If employees do not like that, they can vote with their feet and go elsewhere. I respect your opinion, but that is mine.

ByteMe – I don’t think there’s a difference. I really don’t. The people can work at Office Max or a different Staples if they don’t like it (in your example).

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
10:42 am

Bryan G – “A religious employer should have the RIGHT to not provide something it deems against its tenants.”

“If I’m your employer – and you work for me, you should work under my terms. You don’t have a RIGHT to birth control.”

Super Duper, now, why don’t you provide us all with a copy of the letter you sent to the 28 states (including Georgia) that have had the BC provision on the books for over a decade. I’d be curious to see if your concern then matches your concern now. Or, did you just become concerned when Obama said it?

JohnnyReb

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

TaxPayer – you need to read up on how much income it takes to put one in the 1%. A married couple filing jointly who owns an S-Corp with medium and above success can easily go into the 1% category. It does not mean they are rich, it just means they pay high federal income taxes, more than a 1/3 of their income.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

The U.S. Senate votes today on an amendment by U.S. Sen. Roy Blunt, Republican of Missouri, that not only exempts religious-affiliated institutions from having to cover contraception through health insurance but extends that exemption to any private business that questions contraception on “moral” grounds.

Would the US Senator push forward something in the same manner if it violated Islamic beliefs?? Hindu beliefs?? Judaism beliefs?? Does that law not violate the 1st Amendment by creating a law that specifically respects a religion?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Seems like somebody’s trying to do an end around the Constitution. No self-respecting Conservative would run afoul of the Constitution, would they?

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

Taxpayer – no, I’m all for employees having access to contraception. Were I an employer, by all means they could. Obviously you don’t understand what we’re talking about. Heck, I’m not even religious. But I believe in religious freedom

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

ByteMe – I don’t think there’s a difference. I really don’t. The people can work at Office Max or a different Staples if they don’t like it (in your example).

Spoken like someone who hasn’t seen the stats on unemployment amongst that crowd. You act like those jobs are just sitting there waiting for someone to come get them.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:43 am

Bryan – 10:42 – sorry, but whether it’s a Catholic / Jewish / Methodist hospital makes no difference. They’re providing a HEALTHCARE service, not a religious one.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:44 am

Get Religion Out Of My Government!!

Misty Fyed

February 15th, 2012
10:44 am

It’s called Religious freedom. If you want insured contraception….Don’t work for someone who is opposed to it. What is so hard to understand about the bill of rights Jay? the percentage of people favoring or opposed is irrelevant. Here you have an administration trying to deny the free exercise of their religion. They aren’t forcing people to do anything…join any religion…pray at certain times. They just want to run their business and are opposed to contraception.

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:45 am

Butch – honestly I didn’t know that was the law until now. That doesn’t make my objection (or the objection that many others have) any less relevant.

Just because something – that I believe is contrary to the 1st Amendment – happens elsewhere does not make it okay now.

And I’m not anti-Obama. I get that it’s easier for you to shoot the messenger (me) than the message.

godless heathen

February 15th, 2012
10:45 am

“does the government have a place to step in and say “no, this is not the norm and your religious beliefs do not extend to enforcing your beliefs on others”?”

Today’s short answer: No.

St Simons - we're on Island time

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

there’s manufactured outrage, then there’s poutrage,
but manufactured poutrage?

manufacturing poutrage, to make a hail mary (haha) pass
for the catholics, 98% of who disagree with them on this.

This is how far down they have gone. This is how out of touch
they are. The once proud pahhty of Lincoln, reduced to this.

Heck, I wouldn’t wanna believe in evolution, either.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

Ben Shockley

February 15th, 2012
10:22 am
“Who are all these people who refuse to pay for something they need because they expect others to foot the bill?”

Liberals……………

Oh lawdy. Ben Shockley done hit em wif da truth.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

But I believe in religious freedom

Whose religious freedom is being infringed? No one is telling him he can’t pray to his God or believe what he wants. We’re all saying he can’t impose that belief on others through economic means. And we’re not telling him he can’t avoid birth control. We’re all for him doing that if he wants. We’re saying he can’t force his belief on others. And, yes, the government can and does enforce that (see polygamy.. or not).

Pizzaman

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

A reminder “Republicans”!!!!!!!:
1. 28 states, including GA already “require” this same coverage, didn’t ecome an issue till the President supported it in an election year;
2. 5$ a gallon gas is ONLY possible because gas is sold on the “Free” market. NO federal regulation on the price, only emissions;
3. PLEASE, PLEASE…… nominate a “businessman/religious one. I remember all too well what a great job the last Repunlican, business school grad, conservative Christan did as President!!!!!!!!!!!

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

as I pointed to yesterday … the fact of the matter is that the US is at a turning point in regards to healthcare:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/152621/Fewer-Americans-Employer-Based-Health-Insurance.aspx

if it is going to be completely severed from employment, then there needs to be nationalized health care

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
10:46 am

Misty Fyed – “It’s called Religious freedom”

Precisely. Now, please show us where it states in the BC provision that everyone who has it made available to them will be forced to use it against their will and/or religious beliefs.

Bill Orvis White

February 15th, 2012
10:47 am

If anyone can read between the lines, he would know that this is about big gov’t dictating their lack of values on religious institutions. This president and his enablers in Congress, the liberal media and George Soros have once again, acted arrogantly by forcing contraception on the population. This gives the green-light to the public that sexual debauchery and secularism are OK. It’s all NOT OK! We need to get back to the basics whereby we promote marriage between man and woman. This is one of many examples of how Hussein Obama has been running a socialistic administration with this dictate. This needs to stop. I’m warmed over that the honorable Senator Santorum is getting much-deserved attention. If He does not get the nomination, I truly hope that He would have a major role in a Romney administration.
Amen,
Bill

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
10:48 am

(CNN) — Mitt Romney is learning that there are costs to an ugly, extended primary fight marked by a rush to the far right. Independent voters get alienated by the extremism.

This is a problem with polarization — and it’s already showing signs of benefiting President Barack Obama.

After trailing Romney for months among independent voters in a hypothetical matchup, the president is back on top — 51% to 42% in a new Pew Research Center Poll.

Just four months ago, the numbers were almost reversed, totaling a 19% swing since the primaries began in earnest. This isn’t subtle — it’s something close to an outright revolt of the independents in response to the spectacle they’ve seen in the Republican contests since Iowa — avalanches of negative ads and an outright pander-fest to various forces on the far right.

A new CNN/ORC International poll finds that 53% of independents have an unfavorable view of Romney, compared with 44% last month.

Mission Accomplished as Flip Romney shoots his own feet off…

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:48 am

“What is so hard to understand about the bill of rights”

because, my dear, INSURANCE /= the rosary, stations of the cross, etc … THOSE are, in fact, the practice of religion … insurance coverage is not.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:48 am

Pizzaman, they can’t hear you over the noises in their heads. In fact, we can barely hear them.

Paul

February 15th, 2012
10:48 am

“Dear Policyholder

Thanks to recent legislation sponsored by House Republicans giving employers the right to drop health care provisions we find morally objectionable, we are informing you that the following benefits of your health coverage are being eliminated.

1.

2.

3.

4…

Additionally, we are considering dropping hospice provisions, any coverage that artificially extends life beyond what God intended without man’s intervention, as well as all vaccines. If God wanted you to live, he’d have given you a better immune system.

On the bright side, your premiums will remain the same.

Thank you for your attention, and thank the Republican House.”

Yup, that’s a sure-fire vote getter!

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:49 am

(and, FWIW, government has stepped in and prohibited certain “religious” practices in the past … which is why snake-handling is against the law in GA)

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:49 am

if it is going to be completely severed from employment, then there needs to be nationalized health care

That’s really what businesses want, but the Democrats didn’t have the guts to pull the trigger.

AmVet - Like most decent Americans, I'm a Marxist.

February 15th, 2012
10:49 am

Who are all these people who refuse to pay for something they need because they expect others to foot the bill?

Leave the banksters and BIG business out of this…

Mr. Snarky

February 15th, 2012
10:49 am

The Repubs are just playing to their base…shocker!
They don’t actually care what most Americans think.

hryder

February 15th, 2012
10:50 am

The official position of the Catholic Church is no artifical birth control. This current controversy should never have arisen. The so called Obama health care bill should never have been proposed let alone passed by Congress. Vote out ALL incumbents in the November elections.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
10:50 am

USinner @ 10:48

Some think that just because it involves a church in some form or fashion that it’s automatically deemed religious. You’re better off trying to bake cookies using cement instead of flour. :)

TaxPayer

February 15th, 2012
10:50 am

I know if I were Obama, I’d be having a field day with the anti-Obama Republicans. Watching them try their best to be opposite and their little heads just essplodin’ all over themselves. But wait. He is. :lol:

That Obama! He can be so uppity at times. :lol:

Bryan G.

February 15th, 2012
10:51 am

I’m sorry…I feel like this whole chain is people not understanding what the argument is.

The Federal government is telling an employer – that is tied to a religion – that it must provide contraception to the employees, in contrast to that employers religious beliefs.

When you work for an employer, you give up some of your personal freedom – that’s a fact. You can’t run around saying “my employer sucks, I hate him!” You have a RIGHT to do that, but you don’t have a right to keep your job after saying it.

The people that want BC can still get it – and buy it on their own.

I’m not anti-Obama, anti-health reform, or anti-contraception. I know it’s easier just to say that about someone rather than actually listen. I think the Federal Government is overstepping. If you disagree, that’s fine. Then don’t fuss when the government oversteps again. Or again.

Butch Cassidy

February 15th, 2012
10:53 am

Bryan G. – “honestly I didn’t know that was the law until now”

I will definitely give you a free pass on that one. My point is that it’s been on the books for a long time without anyone having any issues with it.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:53 am

Brocephus – by the way, LOVING the new tagline!

and, yes, I totally agree with your 10:50 – just because it’s Our Lady of Perpetual Guilt Hospital, it’s a HOSPITAL, not a church,.

Brosephus™ "Browning America since 1973"

February 15th, 2012
10:54 am

The Federal government is telling an employer – that is tied to a religion – that it must provide contraception to the employees, in contrast to that employers religious beliefs.

Although the employer is “tied” to a religion, the employment, itself, is not religious based. Therefore, it does not fall under the religious exemption.

Thulsa Doom

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

“I loves me some birth control mandated by the friendly folks at big gubment and subsidized by other taxpayers”- Thomas Jefferson

Why oh why?

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

I’m loving the late-2011/early-2012 incarnation of the Regressive Party. They really seem to want to make this one easy for the President and his party. Me likey!!! :)

Jay – jm still spewing infantile, hate-filled invective; does not reflect well on the blog. Just sayin’.

(ir)Rational

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

USinUK – Snake handling churches creep me out. I (quite literally by accident) wandered into one up in the woods in NE Alabama when I was a kid. I had been out camping for a few days and didn’t realize what time it was, or really even that it was Sunday, but knew the church was open to the public pretty much always, so I thought I would take a peak. Yeah, not going back there again.

N-GA

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

Actually this is similar to the issue of selling alcohol/beer/wine. It is perfectly legal to do so, yet some counties refuse to permit it, or they permit sales on any day but Sunday.

The bottom line is: If you don’t want to drink alcohol because of religious beliefs, don’t buy it! The same holds true for contraceptives! However don’t impose your religious views on others.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:55 am

“The Federal government is telling an employer – that is tied to a religion – that it must provide contraception to the employees, in contrast to that employers religious beliefs.”

The Federal government is telling an employer OF A SECULAR ORGANIZATION (hospital/university) – that it must provide contraception to its employees

full stop.

ByteMe

February 15th, 2012
10:56 am

Although the employer is “tied” to a religion, the employment, itself, is not religious based. Therefore, it does not fall under the religious exemption.

And just so Bryan understands, there’s quite a bit of Supreme Court case law to back this position up. We’re not making it up and even Scalia has re-affirmed it in his writings.

USinUK

February 15th, 2012
10:56 am

““I loves me some birth control mandated by the friendly folks at big gubment and subsidized by other taxpayers”- Thomas Jefferson”

considering how many little red-headed slaves were running around at Monticello, he probably would have …