Catholic groups sue to overturn Obama’s contraception mandate
If you thought the Catholic Church and universities affiliated with it would quietly accept the Obama administration’s “compromise” for the contraception mandate, well, think again. From Fox News:
Some of the most influential Catholic institutions in the country filed suit in federal district court Monday against the so-called contraception mandate, in one of the biggest coordinated legal challenges to the rule to date.
Claiming their “fundamental rights hang in the balance,” a total of 43 plaintiffs filed a dozen separate lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the requirement. Among the organizations filing were the University of Notre Dame, the Archdiocese of New York and The Catholic University of America.
The groups are objecting to the requirement from the federal health care overhaul that employers provide access to contraceptive care. The Obama administration several months back softened its position on the mandate, but some religious organizations complained the administration did not go far enough to ensure the rule would not compel them to violate their religious beliefs.
That “softened” position by the administration is nothing but an accounting fiction in which Catholic employers are supposed to pretend that insurance companies will pay for the procedures to which they object from some kind of mystery revenues beyond the employers’ contributions. These are not a bunch of ultra-conservative organizations: Notre Dame had President Obama as its commencement speaker three years ago.
The lawsuits ensure that the church will continue to hammer away at this issue throughout the election season. It is big-time self-inflicted wound for the Obama team.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
217 comments Add your comment
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
11:00 pm
td @10:11 pm: “I thought I answered your question but I will do it again. The government does not have the right to dictate a moral or value to a religious institution. Contraception is against the tenets of the Catholic Church (not my church) and hence for the Federal government to tell them they have to cover BC is against the 1st amendment protections.
No, you have NOT answered my question. Nobody tries to dictate a moral or value to a religious institution. Why are you so afraid to use the words of the 1st Amendment? “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; …” How does providing some benefit prohibits free exercise of religion by the people of that religion? “To exercise” a religion is an active process, even if only a mental one – prayer, meditation, congregating, serving mass, attending a mass, etc. How is allowing a benefit a prohibition of any of those or similar activities?
“I would think that in that circumstance women would not want to work for the church.”
That is not a point at all, whether the women would or would not work for the church. That is not what the lawsuit Kyle writes about is about.
td
May 21st, 2012
11:09 pm
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
11:00 pm
One last time:
In the Catholic church using contraception is a SIN. If the Federal government forces the Catholic church to provide contraception to its employees then they are forcing the church into providing the means to sin. This is a clear violation of the “free exercise of” provision to force a religious institution to violate one of its morals and values. I know you will not agree but it is pretty simple to anyone with common sense.
lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
11:10 pm
@MarkV “How is allowing a benefit a prohibition of any of those or similar activities? ” Oh, so it’s “allowing a benefit” now, eh? Not a “right”, anymore?
So you’re sticking to your “argumentum ad blockheadum”, as it were, eh? Perhaps I can explain so that even you can understand: requiring the Catholic Church to commit a sin is limiting their proper exercise of their religion as they see fit, particularly since they expend a great deal of effort in such exercise trying NOT to sin.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
11:17 pm
@lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
10:33 pm
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests? :”The Day of reckoning IS FAST APPROACHING (November 2012) for the GOP….Its PAYBACK TIME”
We conservatives REVERE our women! We conservatives LOVE Sarah Palin, for instance. No, not all of the GOP are conservatives, and most conservatives vote GOP.
BTW, I think you are jealous, because so many conservative women are beautiful AND smart!
******************************************************************************************
JEALOUS?
Jealousy is, I think, the worst of all faults because it makes a victim of both parties.
Like hatred, jealousy is forbidden by the laws of life because it is essentially destructive.
“so many conservative women are beautiful AND smart!”
Proverbs 31:30
Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.
Matthew 23:27
Woe to you, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness.
1 Samuel 16:7
For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.”
lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
11:19 pm
@Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests? “You can fool SOME of the people ALL of the time, and ALL of the people SOME of the time,…but you CANNOT fool ALL of the people ALL of the time”
You are proving that point beyond a doubt. That steel company lasted EIGHT YEARS longer than it would have, had Bain not come along. Bain tried twice to get union contract concessions TWICE, was not able to, so they sold it to another company, which eventually shut it down. It was shut down TWO YEARS after Mitt Romney was in charge. In fact, the man that was in charge at that time was a leading “bundler” for the Democrat Party!
You see – we conservatives have totally taken over Twitter now. We hijack hashtags, or we make up our own, opposite ones (e.g. ObamaYachtNames), which trend completely out of sight of the originals. Germane to this discussion, not only do we know what a bunch of B.S. your alleged, fake “facts” are, by exchanging notes and links, Romney’s campaign is also coming up with ads to counter all your lies, and they are doing it practically instantaneously.
Like I said elsewhere – it is going to be like 2010 all over again for your party, except even worse.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
11:20 pm
@td
May 21st, 2012
10:50 pm
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
10:46 pm
“WE AIN’T NO FOOLS.”
That could really be a debatable point.
**************************************************************************
ME being a fool is debatable?
BUT PRIESTS AND BISHOPS MOLESTING CHILDREN IS NOT?
SHAME ON YOU HYPOCRITES.
lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
11:23 pm
@Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
Quoting scripture at me, eh? Did you find one about how mothers never work a day in their life in there somewhere?
“1 Samuel 16:7
For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.”
Well, you are in all kinds of trouble there, because, were I to be judgmental like you, I would say that Ann Romney has a MUCH better heart for the Lord to look at, than, say Michelle Obama.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
11:26 pm
“Therefore, if a religious dogma considered women’s work fundamentally inferior to men’s, they could deny women the protection of the Equal Pay Act?”
Once again, MarkV doesn’t have his terminology correct.
Typical.
There is a difference between treating someone equally for work being given and providing a benefit to employment. I suggest you read up on those two differences. One requires through Federal statute that both sexes are treated equally to one another in the course of payment for work. The other is a difference in providing benefits to someone for that work. Different employers choose different levels of benefits each and every day, therefore there is no requirement to provide the same benefits to everyone across the United States through any state or federal statutes.
The Constitution guarantees RIGHTS, MarkV.
NOT BENEFITS.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
11:27 pm
@lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
11:19 pm
@Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests? “You can fool SOME of the people ALL of the time, and ALL of the people SOME of the time,…but you CANNOT fool ALL of the people ALL of the time”
You are proving that point beyond a doubt. That steel company lasted EIGHT YEARS longer than it would have, had Bain not come along. Bain tried twice to get union contract concessions TWICE, was not able to, so they sold it to another company, which eventually shut it down. It was shut down TWO YEARS after Mitt Romney was in charge. In fact, the man that was in charge at that time was a leading “bundler” for the Democrat Party!
You see – we conservatives have totally taken over Twitter now. We hijack hashtags, or we make up our own, opposite ones (e.g. ObamaYachtNames), which trend completely out of sight of the originals. Germane to this discussion, not only do we know what a bunch of B.S. your alleged, fake “facts” are, by exchanging notes and links, Romney’s campaign is also coming up with ads to counter all your lies, and they are doing it practically instantaneously.
Like I said elsewhere – it is going to be like 2010 all over again for your party, except even worse.
*************************************************
I DON’T GIVE A RATS BEHIND ABOUT WHAT MIT-ROB-ME SAID HE DID AT
BAIN CAPITAL.
CONS have taken over TWITTER? YEAH RIGHT. YA’LL AINT THAT
POWERFUL. GIVE US A BREAK.
I BET YOU $10,000 it aint going to be like 2010 all over again.
YOU CAN’T PUT THE SH*T BACK INTO THE HORSE.
heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
11:28 pm
One would think that after over a dozen posts being ignored, Trashman would get the hint that no one is paying attention to his repeated nonsense.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
11:38 pm
@lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
11:23 pm
@Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
Quoting scripture at me, eh? Did you find one about how mothers never work a day in their life in there somewhere?
“1 Samuel 16:7
For the Lord sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.”
Well, you are in all kinds of trouble there, because, were I to be judgmental like you, I would say that Ann Romney has a MUCH better heart for the Lord to look at, than, say Michelle Obama.
********************************************************
Jesus said to his disciples, “I can guarantee this truth: It will be hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven.
GOOD LUCK ANN!
DOES ANN ROMNEY WEAR MORMON UNDERWEAR LIKE HER
HUSBAND?
DOES ANN ROMNEY SPEAK IN TONGUES LIKE HER HUSBAND?
DOES ANN ROMNEY LAY HANDS ON PEOPLE LIKE HER HUSBAND?
DID ANN ROMNEY’S GREAT GRANDFATHER HAVE
SIX WIVES LIKE HER HUSBAND’S.
DID ANN ROMNEY’S GREAT GREAT GRANDFATHER HAVE
12 WIVES LIKE HER HUSBAND’S
DID ANN ROMNEY BAPTIZE DEAD JEWS LIKE HER HUSBAND?
DOES ANN ROMNEY LIKE TO FIRE PEOPLE LIKE HER HUSBAND?
DOES ANN ROMNEY LIKE TO STRAP HER DOG ON THE ROOF
OF THE CAR LIKE HER HUSBAND?
DOES ANNY ROMNEY LOOK DOWN HER NOSE AT PEOPLE
WHO SERVE HER COOKIES AND SHE DOES NOT EAT ONE
BUT INSULTS THEM LIKE HER HUSBAND?
lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
11:39 pm
@Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
“According to a study by the Guttmacher Institute, most women, including 98 percent of Catholic women, have used contraception.”
Well, they are full of it, or just misquoting the CDC report (which is readily available online). That would be 98% of women WHO HAVE HAD SEX, have used contraception at least ONCE in their LIVES, “contraception” including male withdrawal, which doesn’t require any pharmaceutical at all, does it.
Also, many Catholic women use “Natural Family Planning”, which is a highly refined, modern version of the old “rhythm method”, which includes scientific, highly reliable methods for determining ovulation. I do not know for a fact if this would be termed “birth control” in the CDC study, though, given that they call male withdrawal “birth control”, I do not see why not.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
11:41 pm
@Tiberius – Banned from Bookman’s and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
11:28 pm
**********************************************************************
YOU DID.
So did:
@lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
11:23 pm
@Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
@td
May 21st, 2012
10:50 pm
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehheee
The Kid
May 22nd, 2012
12:06 am
These witches should be burned at the stake. There’s no outcry over pedophilia but Obama is taking away your rights. I strongly second 11:41pm. Let’s be real here.How we allow these robe wearing child molesters, who somehow come off as holy; to participate in any discussion concerning any state of affairs is beyond reason.
lloydrmc
May 22nd, 2012
12:44 am
@Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
“DON’T GIVE A RATS BEHIND ABOUT WHAT MIT-ROB-ME SAID HE DID AT BAIN CAPITAL.”
Who said anything about what Mitt Romney said? It’s a matter of public record, including the part about how Bain Capital was being run by a major Obama “bundler” when that steel company went down.
“CONS have taken over TWITTER? YEAH RIGHT. YA’LL AINT THAT POWERFUL. GIVE US A BREAK. …”
Trends don’t lie and EVERY Obama campaign/campaign surrogate/liberal attempt at getting traction on twitter is completely and immediately CRUSHED by us. Like I said, we either completely hijack hashtags (e.g. #waronwomen), or we make up our own, which immediately obliterate the original (#obamayachtnames), or we make up our own, to our endless amusement and pwnage of you people: #ElizabethWarrenIndianNames – my favorite being “Fauxcahontas” and #ObamaIndianNames – my favorite being “ThrowsLikeGirl” (e.g. do you really believe that ThrowsLikeGirl actually split somebody’s lip?
Speaking of pwnage, how about Carly Fiorina vs Barbara Boxer in 2010?
How about Elizabeth Warren? Perhaps the archetypical Democrat candidate: spews senseless, Marxist nonsense about how rich people don’t pay for the roads to their factories and fire protection, etc. for their factories (at all!). Who took advantage of hiring preferences, fraudulently, and even plagiarized cookbook recipes, and can’t – as you so crudely put below – “YOU CAN’T PUT THE SH*T BACK INTO THE HORSE. ” And that is 100% all that woman talks, all the time, every time she opens her mouth.
And she’s going to take the seat away from the guy who already won one election to take the seat once held by Ted Kennedy. Right.
“I BET YOU $10,000 it aint going to be like 2010 all over again. YOU CAN’T PUT THE SH*T BACK INTO THE HORSE. ”
If only there were a way for me to collect. I would gladly take your money from you. That latter crudity proves my point exactly (once again)! For instance, there were TWO conservative candidates in the Republican U.S. Senate primary in Nebraska, and one of them STILL beat the Republican establishment candidate. It was a FEMALE citizen-state-legislator, and she was endorsed by Sarah Palin! Yeah, that same Sarah Palin that you, (and the Republican establishment), say caused McCain to lose. The same Sarah Palin that you people say is irredeemably dumb and irrelevant besides.
“War on Women”, eh?
Tell you what, I’ll even let you take back your bet if you check on what percentage of Palin-endorsed candidates won in 2010.
For that matter, we don’t even NEED another 2010. You people need YOUR OWN. The chances of that happening, of you winning back the house, keeping the Senate, and even winning an appreciable percentage of those 700+ state legislature seats, (that you people lost), back are approximately ZERO!.
Yep, all we Republicans need is another 1980 or 1984. Heck, another 1992 wouldn’t be bad, though I don’t see how President Obama could possibly win, no matter who was running against him.
You see, for the most part, it didn’t matter much which Republicans were on what ticket in 2010. It was all about our chance to repudiate President Obama, the Democrat parties, their policies, their lies, and their complete, utter ineptitude to do anything about what we care about, and also go quite some distance at affirmatively RUINING what we DO care about (e.g. our Justice Department, the Federal Budget, Health Care)
Name ONE substantive thing that is trending for the better for President Obama. Just what has he done to win back the independents that deserted him in droves in 2010? The “war on women”? HA! Do you think women or independents care more about gay marriage, or government-funded contraceptives (”access” indeed!), or JOBS for themselves and their families? The Obama campaign can come up with a new, “bright, shiny thing” every day until election day, and they aren’t going to care?
The real “war on women” has been from you all, and everyone who is even marginally informed and/or intelligent knows that.
Besides, I said “substantive”.
Even if he manages to shrink the labor force small enough to hit 7.1% unemployment, do you think anyone will believe that? Even the wire services admitted last month that 4/5 of the so-called improvement was NOT due to people getting jobs, but rather giving up on ever finding a job again, and out of unemployment benefits.
Did you know that the AVERAGE length of unemployment is 40 weeks, and that’s an ALL TIME record?
Did you know that Dick Morris did a poll of 6000 LIKELY VOTERS, (margin of error – 1/2 of 1%!), and he has President Obama down by 10%? And he says that ANY poll that DOESN’T poll just LIKELY VOTERS will give false results. Did you know that Dick Morris made his bones by being President Clinton’s chief pollster?
Still want to make that bet?
Tell you what – if you want to see what REAL job creation is, (not the tepid level we have now, which isn’t even enough to keep up with population increases), check out the consistent and peak levels that President Reagan achieved, with his “Trickle Down Economics” that you people say didn’t work.
And try not to cry.
lloydrmc
May 22nd, 2012
12:56 am
“These witches should be burned at the stake. There’s no outcry over pedophilia but Obama is taking away your rights. I strongly second 11:41pm. Let’s be real here.How we allow these robe wearing child molesters, who somehow come off as holy; to participate in any discussion concerning any state of affairs is beyond reason.”
Simple. The Catholic Church has gone from half-hearted measures and coverups to admitting that problem and doing something – quite a lot, actually – about it.
And in no way, shape, manner or form is the Catholic Church anything like what you say it is, nor has it ever been even close to any such thing. Even if they were the brigands that you say they were, they would still be entitled to “redress of grievances”, as specified in the Constitution of the United States, such grievances against a President and his HHS and Justice Departments who see the Constitution as being no more than “a charter of negative rights” and a hindrance to what they want to do to us – ALL of us.
And you people went BALLISTIC about the Bush administrations principle of a “Unitary Executive”, and you even went similarly ballistic about a recess appointment when the Senate was actually in recess, calling it “archaic” and whatnot, but don’t blink an eye about President Obama doing “recess appointments” when the Senate didn’t think it was in “recess”. But the Office of Legal Counsel said they were, so they were.
Or how about defying TWO Federal District Court orders that the Gulf of Mexico oil drilling ban was illegal?
Seems to me that we have some active “Constitution molesters”, and you people aren’t even bothered by that, even a little.
lloydrmc
May 22nd, 2012
12:58 am
@Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
Jesus said to his disciples, “I can guarantee this truth: It will be hard for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven.
————————————————————————————————————–
Wow! Are you saying that President and Mrs. Obama aren’t rich? Did you have similar objections to John Kerry, who was (and is) WAY richer than Mitt Romney?
lloydrmc
May 22nd, 2012
1:04 am
@Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
“DOES ANNY ROMNEY LOOK DOWN HER NOSE AT PEOPLE
WHO SERVE HER COOKIES AND SHE DOES NOT EAT ONE”
In a word “no” – you ignoramus! Cardinal Rule One of Politics – you NEVER, EVER eat in public, when there even MIGHT be a camera on you. A Kennedy scion ignored this rule, to her own peril, and did NOT get on the ticket to replace Hillary Clinton as NY Senator.
And do you HONESTLY think that religious bigotry card is worth a hoot in this election? You people say we can’t bring Reverend Wright into the discussion, and then spew all this venomous, hateful GARBAGE in the same breath? Who’s the hypocrite here, “Mr./Ms. projector”!
lloydrmc
May 22nd, 2012
1:09 am
“DOES ANN ROMNEY LIKE TO STRAP HER DOG ON THE ROOF
OF THE CAR LIKE HER HUSBAND?”
Case in point – you people tried to start this meme (including on twitter), and we utterly crushed it the same day, including Rush Limbaugh playing an excerpt from President Obama’s audio book, read by President Obama, saying that he had EATEN dog. Yes, he did so as a child, but was NOT a child when he put that in his book. Or when Bill Ayers put that in his book, anyway.
I must say, I have NEVER EVER engaged in a debate with someone who so thoroughly proves MY POINTS for me, over and over.
Bravo!
The Kid
May 22nd, 2012
4:48 am
IIoydrmc;…just like a Repub;… like to here yourself talk. I bet you ‘even’ like war, or those who start them like Chickenhawk Cheney; the draft-dodger. What do you say about lying to start a war; that has killed more Americans than al-Qaeda ever did? Innocent Ameriicans at that; I might add.
@@
May 22nd, 2012
7:17 am
Geez!
Must Trashy repeat everything a poster says before having his/her say?
Could he/she possibly stick with one name?
Perhaps the webmaster could deliver the message: “It appears as though someone ELSE already said that.”
“Duplicate post.”
Something? Anything?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 22nd, 2012
7:38 am
The libtards cannot understand why the Catholic Church objects to the Obozo administration’s infringement of the separation of church and state, and the right to practice their religion.
Why else would the Catholics be suing? They otherwise supported Obozocare.
In a way, it’s poetic justice. In the battle to get Obozocare passed, Catholics lay down with dogs. Shouldn’t surprise them that they woke up with fleas.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 22nd, 2012
7:45 am
Trashman’s posts have graduated from annoying to a distraction and a huge waste of space and time.
Kyle needs to put a stop to him.
jconservative
May 22nd, 2012
8:19 am
“In a way, it’s poetic justice. In the battle to get Obozocare passed, Catholics lay down with dogs. Shouldn’t surprise them that they woke up with fleas.”
Good point. The Catholic bishops did support Obamacare and it has come back to bite them.
Yesterdays cases are not the only cases filed. The following cases have been filed previously to yesterday.
Ave Maria University v. Sebelius
EWTN v. Sebelius
Colorado Christian University v. Sebelius
Belmont Abbey College v. Sebelius
Notice that it is not “The Church” that is filing the suits but individual entities. Colorado Christian is not a Catholic college.
And this from the Southern Baptist Convention: “Neither the current HHS rule nor the so-called “compromise” provides an exemption for religious employers that self-insure, which means they serve as the source of benefit payments instead of contracting with a third party. That includes GuideStone Financial Resources, the Southern Baptist Convention’s medical plan provider covering tens of thousands of pastors, church workers, professors, secretaries, social workers, missionaries, other agency workers, and their families. The HHS mandate reflects a sobering disregard for the unique and historic structure and role of self-insured medical programs like GuideStone and other large and established church health plans, as well as a shocking encroachment on religious freedom.”
GuideStone Financial has stated that they will go out of business rather than comply.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 22nd, 2012
8:25 am
jconservative, your last line goes right to my question (unanswered) to JDW yesterday.
Which is better: having religious organizations such as the Catholic Church be able to opt-out of providing coverage for that which they do not agree, or opting out of health care coverage entirely?
That is what this administration has driven people to consider with their over-the-top policies.
SBinF
May 22nd, 2012
8:38 am
“It is big-time self-inflicted wound for the Obama team.”
Really? I’m not sure which news cycle you’ve been following, Kyle. A bunch of out of touch old men mandating how a woman may use her uterus. It’s not exactly a winning argument in the public sphere.
tiredofIT
May 22nd, 2012
8:39 am
Ann Romney: “It’s our turn”. Please tell me why she feels entitled?
iggy
May 22nd, 2012
8:39 am
Obama will say/do anything at anytime. The man is morally bankrupt.
Becky
May 22nd, 2012
8:42 am
Does the catholic “church” medical coverage cover viagra?
iggy
May 22nd, 2012
8:44 am
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
10:23 pm
Back to Obama and his “swagguh”. I consulted a few fem friends about this so-called “swagguh” and overwhelming they stated, “Swagguh is for boys, class is for men.”
Glad we’ve gotten cleard up.
Becky
May 22nd, 2012
8:45 am
iggy-there is an ointment for that.
JohnnyReb
May 22nd, 2012
8:55 am
This issue is so incredibly anti-American and stupid that it alone should send Barry into retirement.
It also is very telling of the Left, that being, they will sell their soul for anything that is “free.”
Cosby
May 22nd, 2012
8:56 am
They miss the point..it is not about religion but about the Federal government telling a private industry what benefits it must provide to its workers as well as telling another private industry – the Insurance company – what products it must provide….totally unconstitutional.
md
May 22nd, 2012
9:05 am
“A bunch of out of touch old men mandating how a woman may use her uterus.”
Me thinks this poster is the one that is out of touch……way off the mark on the issue and sadly has no clue as to what the real issue really is.
iggy
May 22nd, 2012
9:09 am
For those interested…
fb IPO $38
fb High $45.00
fb premarket $32.85
Addl thrashing T – 8 minutes and counting…
Terrence
May 22nd, 2012
9:12 am
The Catholic Church isn’t dictating what women can do with their uterus. They’re simply saying that if a woman decides to terminate her pregnancy with an abortifacient, their religious beliefs dictate they cannot, in any way, support it–financially or morally.
md
May 22nd, 2012
9:14 am
Yep….19 billion for Zuckerberg…..how much does he need to live? Bet he, like other very rich dems, don’t practice what they preach. He’ll control HIS billions until the day he dies…..just like the others.
Richard
May 22nd, 2012
9:19 am
Cosby,
“They miss the point..it is not about religion but about the Federal government telling a private industry what benefits it must provide to its workers as well as telling another private industry – the Insurance company – what products it must provide….totally unconstitutional.”
Actually, you miss the point. Go read the constitution again. Once a person decides to engage in commerce (like when he opens a business) the government, under the authority of the constitution, can now regulate that commerce. That concept has been upheld in every court since the founding of the country.
In turn, the government passes laws like the American Disabilities Act, the Family Medical Leave Act, the National Fire Protection Act, etc. All of them are completely within their power and, yes, they are constitutional.
Obamacare brings in a different problem in that the government is trying to regulate inactivity (Anthony Kennedy brought this up in the Supreme Court hearing). But, this rule about requiring insurance companies to include contraceptive care within the plans is very constitutional.
For those of you saying it’s a First Amendment violation, go read it again. The government in this case is not preventing anyone from exercising their religion. Nowhere in this mandate does it say that a person MUST use or purchase contraception.
MarkV
May 22nd, 2012
9:22 am
td @11:09 pm: “In the Catholic church using contraception is a SIN. If the Federal government forces the Catholic church to provide contraception to its employees then they are forcing the church into providing the means to sin. This is a clear violation of the “free exercise of” provision to force a religious institution to violate one of its morals and values. I know you will not agree but it is pretty simple to anyone with common sense.”
Not only I do not agree, I will say that your logic is faulty. You are still failing to address the meaning of the word “exercise religion” Providing means to sin prohibits anybody to exercise his/her religion? How? You have repeatedly failed to explain that. Name one thing that the law in question PROHIBITS anyone of Catholic denomination TO DO!
What if the church learns that some of their employees, let’s say those not belonging to the same denomination, are using their income from the work to do sinful things, whether it is buying contraceptives or anything else that is sinful in the Catholic dogma. Then, by your logic, the church has provided means to sin. Can they fire the employees for that?
And while it is not necessary to consider in this case, let’s keep in mind that the First Amendment Right against prohibition of exercising religion is far from inviolate. Denominations have learned to confine their activities to conform to existing laws, and it is clear that they cannot exercise activities that would violate other laws.
Becky
May 22nd, 2012
9:50 am
Kyle-perhaps you should send a check:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/22/newt-gingrich-bankrupt_n_1535295.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009
Or maybe Noot and Calista can find a job or sell the jewels?
nate from detroit
May 22nd, 2012
9:56 am
When did denying someone access become to mean that if you have to actually pay for something that you are going to use then you have been denied access to that product. When I can’t pay for my cell phone can I claim that Cingular denied me access to cell phone service because they actually expected me to pay for it. Obama is obviously very worried that the more we learn about him and his abilities, the more he is revealed for the fraud that he is. These new attacks on Romney and his Bain Capital experience should be welcomed by the Romney camp. Mitt should get up and say since Obama wants to talk about business experience, let’s talk about his experience in the business community. After you hear crickets chirping for about 5 seconds, then Mitt can say well that didn’t take long did it!
md
May 22nd, 2012
9:59 am
What some of you evidently fail to see is the choice being forced upon churches…..go against ones beliefs/convictions or pull back on services/institutions. If the administration insists on this measure, churches will be forced to honor their convictions and pull out. Long term, that would cause more harm than good.
iggy
May 22nd, 2012
10:05 am
fb $31.50 *FLUSH*
MarkV
May 22nd, 2012
10:06 am
lloydrmc@11:10 pm” Oh, so it’s “allowing a benefit” now, eh? Not a “right”, anymore? So you’re sticking to your “argumentum ad blockheadum”, as it were, eh?”
If you want to all anybody names, you should stand in front of a mirror. The law provides a right, not a benefit. In this case, the insurance company provides the benefits, while the law establishes the right of the women to receive them. Don’t people have a right to, say, Social Security, which is a benefit, because there is an appropriate law?
Aquagirl
May 22nd, 2012
10:36 am
What some of you evidently fail to see is the choice being forced upon churches…..go against ones beliefs/convictions or pull back on services/institutions.
What you evidently fail to see is that Catholic institutions cover Viagra for unmarried men, men not married in the Catholic church, or for that matter men in general. Strangely enough they’ve chosen to single out women’s healthcare. What a coincidence! Funny how people always want to take a principled stand on other people’s turf.
Keep spinning boys. I think some of you believe your own BS because you think all women are as dim as Michelle Bachmann or Sarah Palin.
AmVet
May 22nd, 2012
10:46 am
The 98% of the Catholic sluts, prostitutes and FemiNazis who who use contraception need to send El Pigbo their videos…
iggy
May 22nd, 2012
10:46 am
Michelle Bachmann/Sarah Palin VS Nancy Pelosi/Maxine Waters.
I would take Bachmana/Palin all day long and twice on weekends.
MarkV
May 22nd, 2012
10:56 am
lloydrmc @1:09 am: “I must say, I have NEVER EVER engaged in a debate with someone who so thoroughly proves MY POINTS for me, over and over.”
Nobody should engage in a debate with you or anybody else who so completely lacks a sense of proportion. You compare an action of a child, who was given a dog meat to eat, and who later writes about that event, with a deliberate action of an adult regarding his pet? That IS incredible.
md
May 22nd, 2012
11:01 am
“What you evidently fail to see is that Catholic institutions cover Viagra for unmarried men, men not married in the Catholic church, or for that matter men in general.”
In case it escaped you, viagra only allows for the equipment to work, what one does with it after that is where the choice comes in. There is no comparison between viagra and contraceptives…..none.
In other words, viagra is a medication to repair a malfunction…..no different than any other organ needing repair.
md
May 22nd, 2012
11:12 am
And for the record, I have nothing against contraceptives……or prophylactics…..but go buy your own.
I do have a problem forcing people to go against their convictions though….