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
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
1:15 pm
Pay the lawyer, buy the pills, in that order.
ByteMe
May 21st, 2012
1:17 pm
It is big-time self-inflicted wound for the Obama team.
It’s another self-inflicted wound for the man-dominant out-of-touch Catholic hierarchy.
iggy
May 21st, 2012
1:21 pm
LOL…Lovin every minute of it.
“ObaDumpty had a great fall.”
iggy
May 21st, 2012
1:23 pm
Im thinking Dick Clark would state…
“ObamaCare? Its got a good beat and its easy to dance too.”
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
1:28 pm
It will cost the Catholics much money to lose.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
1:28 pm
This administration, once elected, has shown a tone-deaf attitude towards the majority of American voters and cast a blind eye towards the U.S. Constitution; all in an effort to enact an anti-religion, anti-individual agenda.
I have rarely seen a re-election campaign so out of touch with the people they’re trying to woo and maintain from the last cycle.
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
1:32 pm
You want out of touch ? Romney and a grocery list….
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
1:38 pm
Out of touch? Biden and donations to charity.
thebob.bob
May 21st, 2012
1:40 pm
The Church is not being forced to provide birth control to women. Health Insurers and doctors are providing medicine to treat the woman’s health. The Church chooses to provide health insurance to their employees. If they do provide health insurance to all their employees (including non-believers) who serve the general public (including non-believers) then they do not get to prevent a doctor from prescribing a drug just because the drug may have, among its many uses, contraceptive properties. To prevent medication for those other conditions is unconscionable.
Does The Church forbid women from using knitting needles because knitting needles can be used to perform illegal abortions? Will the five Catholic members of the SCOTUS recuse themselves for fear of damnation and their immortal souls?
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
1:41 pm
Who started this war on women ? Why does the press keep bringing it up ?
kelly
May 21st, 2012
1:42 pm
Sorry, but the catholic church has lost it’s credibility as a moral arbiter of behavior. The federal government should counter-sue the church for operating a continuing criminal enterprise. Pedophile priests, out-of-wedlock children fathered by priests, the vatican bank scandal, et al. Mario Cuomo had it right; he follows Jesus, not the church.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
1:45 pm
thebob, you might wish to bone up on the definition of “providing”.
If the Church is providing the money for the insurance (and they are), the Church gets to decide what that insurance will cover. If they are forced to provide that in which they do not believe, the Church’s 1st Amendment Constitutional rights are being violated.
resno2
May 21st, 2012
1:46 pm
kelly – that all might be true, but do you really think that our federal government wants to open up that discussion knowing full well that their own morality will be under the microscope as well?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
1:49 pm
“out-of-wedlock children fathered by priests,”
Not sure when this became criminal behavior, kelly. Should John Edwards have new charges filed against him?
“the vatican bank scandal,”
I do not believe the Vatican Bank is based in the U.S. kelly, so they are not in our government’s jurisdiction.
But nice deflection from the real issue.
JDW
May 21st, 2012
1:58 pm
@Tiberius…”If the Church is providing the money for the insurance (and they are), the Church gets to decide what that insurance will cover.”
So does that mean an employee of Jehovah’s Witnesses can be denied blood transfusions?
How about Christian Scientists? Can they issue insurance that does not cover procedures they don’t like?
I think not. The regulatory bodies of the US are clearly within their rights to establish minimum requirements for any regulated product. Insurance is a regulated product ergo…
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
May 21st, 2012
1:58 pm
Those uppity Catholics can put a sock in it!
Pipe down, already…..the adults (Democrats) are in charge.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
May 21st, 2012
2:00 pm
If the Church is providing the money for the insurance (and they are
And who is providing that money to the church? Individual and family tithes – on a tax free basis to the church, no less. The members of the church need to decide, not a few “control freak” Catholics.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
May 21st, 2012
2:02 pm
Out of touch? Biden and donations to charity.
LOL, let’s see which charities Mitt gives to? Oh, the only charity he gives is to his cult of a church?.
Charity…..riiiiight.
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
2:02 pm
Employers have rules to follow.
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
2:03 pm
Romney is so out of touch his supporters want to change the subject.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
May 21st, 2012
2:03 pm
Where is everybody?
Tib pass gas again and run everyone off?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:12 pm
“So does that mean an employee of Jehovah’s Witnesses can be denied blood transfusions?”
No, they can just be denied the money to pay for them via the insurance they might provide. Nice try.
“How about Christian Scientists? Can they issue insurance that does not cover procedures they don’t like?”
Since they don’t issue insurance, that is a moot point, JDW. Now if you ask if they can buy insurance from a company and specify what is covered based on religious beliefs, then yes, they can.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:14 pm
“And who is providing that money to the church? Individual and family tithes – on a tax free basis to the church, no less.”
And if they don’t like it they can try to change it or go elsewhere, but until they do, the Church decides for them.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:15 pm
“LOL, let’s see which charities Mitt gives to? Oh, the only charity he gives is to his cult of a church?.
Charity…..riiiiight.”
Finn, YOU do not get to decide what is a charity and what isn’t. The government you worship does.
Deal with it.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:16 pm
“Employers have rules to follow.”
So does government, Jefferson. In case you missed it, they’re written within a document called the U.S. Constitution.
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
2:22 pm
This is a good law, they will lose.
Joe Mama
May 21st, 2012
2:25 pm
Tiberius — “I do not believe the Vatican Bank is based in the U.S. kelly, so they are not in our government’s jurisdiction.”
Yes, that’s what a number of Swiss banks thought until recently.
Move overseas and become an American expatriate. Then try to open a bank account at a bank in your new country of residence and see how free of American jurisdiction you are. I guarantee you that the experience will open your eyes to just how far the reach of American authority goes, even outside our own borders.
td
May 21st, 2012
2:25 pm
Tiberius – Banned from Bookman’s and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:16 pm
“Employers have rules to follow.”
So does government, Jefferson. In case you missed it, they’re written within a document called the U.S. Constitution.
You seem to forget that these libs think the Constitution is an outdated or “living” document and must change with the times.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:26 pm
This may be a moot point anyway, depending on how the SCOTUS rules on the individual mandate and whether severability applies (it shouldn’t, as “implied” severability is a joke of an argument).
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:29 pm
You are talking individuals, Joe Mama, not “the Catholic Church”.
Your argument fails completely.
jconservative
May 21st, 2012
2:30 pm
“Will the five Catholic members of the SCOTUS recuse themselves for fear of damnation and their immortal souls?”
Actually six members of the Court are Catholic. And they will rule on the merits of the case.
From the US Constitution, First Amendment:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”
This is the issue. The suits say that the administration, through an agency ruling, is trying to tell their church what they may teach as a matter of faith and is denying them the right to freely exercise that faith.
The last case on the !st Amendment establishment clause was this session when the Court in a 9-0 decision said the EEOC could not tell a Lutheran Church how they could hire and fire ministers of their church. See Hossana-Tabor v EEOC at the Court’s website. The decision was in January 2012.
Aquagirl
May 21st, 2012
2:37 pm
And who is providing that money to the church? Individual and family tithes – on a tax free basis to the church, no less.
Really? St. Josephs is free? They’re not taking insurance money from secular atheist humanists?
This is where the religious exemption gets murky. Catholic businesses don’t run solely on money raised by the Catholic church. They accept money from other sources, including the government.
iggy
May 21st, 2012
2:39 pm
All this debating aside, he doesnt have the money but Finn still needs his birth control pills.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Over Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
2:43 pm
Claiming their “fundamental rights hang in the balance?”
WHAT ABOUT the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE children that were MOLESTED BY THEIR PRIESTS?
Their PRIORITY IS MISPLACED.
They need to STOP WORRYING about ADULT WOMEN and START WORRYING ABOUT
THE CHILDREN UNDER THEIR CARE.
What hypocrites.
JDW
May 21st, 2012
2:44 pm
@Tiberius…you are missing the point. Insurance is a regulated product. Just like the state specifies minimum auto coverages the federal government can specify minimum health coverages. They do exactly the same thing to a wide variety of products, with no regard to the issue of “political correctness”.
ByteMe
May 21st, 2012
2:45 pm
The last case on the !st Amendment establishment clause was this session when the Court in a 9-0 decision said the EEOC could not tell a Lutheran Church how they could hire and fire ministers of their church. See Hossana-Tabor v EEOC at the Court’s website. The decision was in January 2012.
That ruling was telling a church or an organization that exists to push a religion about hiring and firing. This is more similar to the ruling where the court found that church-affiliated businesses are just businesses and not exempt from general business rules. Even Scalia affirmed that view. The case will fail.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:45 pm
I see the Trashman has been released from the drunk tank . . .
I suggest you find another blog to visit if you don’t like the current subject matter, as Kyle has chosen this one on which to comment.
iggy
May 21st, 2012
2:45 pm
The difference is, mandatory auto insurance is only for those who CHOOSE to own/drive an auto.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
2:47 pm
@ByteMe
May 21st, 2012
1:17 pm
It is big-time self-inflicted wound for the Obama team.
It’s another self-inflicted wound for the man-dominant out-of-touch Catholic hierarchy.
**********************************************************
The ONLY thing they ARE IN TOUCH WITH AND TOUCHING are CHILDREN.
What hypocrites.
Joe Mama
May 21st, 2012
2:48 pm
Tiberius — “You are talking individuals, Joe Mama, not “the Catholic Church”.
Uh, no. I simply followed your lead. You made an uninformed comment about the US having no jurisdiction regarding overseas banks. Do a little research into how UBS has fared at the hands of the IRS lately and you’ll see otherwise.
“Your argument fails completely.”
Pay closer attention, please, Tiberius. I didn’t *make* an argument. I simply pointed out that you’re clearly uninformed when it comes to US jurisdiction/authority and overseas banks.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
2:48 pm
@Tiberius – Banned from Bookman’s and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:45 pm
I see the Trashman has been released from the drunk tank . . .
I suggest you find another blog to visit if you don’t like the current subject matter, as Kyle has chosen this one on which to comment.
***********************************************************************************
You ain’t no BETTER than those HYPOCRITICAL catholics and PEDOPHILE PRIIESTS.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:49 pm
“@Tiberius…you are missing the point. Insurance is a regulated product. Just like the state specifies minimum auto coverages the federal government can specify minimum health coverages.”
No, JDW, it is YOU who are missing the point. Just because government can, and does, regulate a certain product, doesn’t mean that regulatory authority is unlimited. The Constitution is that limiting authority as regards religious freedom.
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
2:49 pm
Are the women in the US going to continue to let the GOP treat them like 2nd class citizens?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:51 pm
“I didn’t *make* an argument.”
Of course you didn’t. That would require facts which you do not comprehend.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:53 pm
“Are the women in the US going to continue to let the GOP treat them like 2nd class citizens?”
Since I don’t believe that these Catholic institutions suing are GOP stooges, your comment is just plain silly, Jefferson.
Joe Mama
May 21st, 2012
2:53 pm
Tiberius — “Of course you didn’t. That would require facts which you do not comprehend.”
Your concession has been noted and is appreciated.
Now, if you’d like me to bring you up to speed on expatriate banking issues and US regulatory authority as exerted on overseas banks, just ask politely and I’ll be glad to educate you, young man.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:56 pm
“This is more similar to the ruling where the court found that church-affiliated businesses are just businesses and not exempt from general business rules.”
Not even close, ByteMe. Please make your case that private insurance companies are “church-affiliated businesses” any more than I would be if they hired me to paint their building.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:57 pm
“Now, if you’d like me to bring you up to speed on expatriate banking issues and US regulatory authority as exerted on overseas banks,”
Nope. We don’t do deflection over here at the Adult Table, Joe Mama.
We stick to facts here, unlike you over at the Children’s Table.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
2:58 pm
@Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
2:49 pm
Are the women in the US going to continue to let the GOP treat them like 2nd class citizens?
************************************************************************
The Day of reckoning IS FAST APPROACHING (November 2012) for the GOP.
Its PAYBACK TIME.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:01 pm
All Americans (and Democrats of faith) owe these Catholic groups a huge debt for standing up for the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:04 pm
In most states, auto insurance isn’t mandatory, even for those who choose to drive on public roads–it is permissible to self insure. Auto insurance is only mandatory for those who choose to drive on public roads and are so lame that they can’t self-insure.
Joe Mama
May 21st, 2012
3:09 pm
Tiberius — “Nope. We don’t do deflection over here at the Adult Table, Joe Mama.”
You already did. I pointed out that you were incorrect on a point, and you decided to go the route of insulting me and behaving like a child instead of discussing the point in an adult manner.
“We stick to facts here”
Like this fact-free comment on your part. ““I do not believe the Vatican Bank is based in the U.S. kelly, so they are not in our government’s jurisdiction.”
ANY bank holding assets in the US or in US banks, or doing business with US citizens, regardless of the country of their domicile, is potentially subject to the jurisdiction of the US government. You are quite simply wrong on that point, Tiberius.
“unlike you over at the Children’s Table.”
I truly enjoy the refreshing, adult commentary here at Kyle’s; it’s so free of insults and juvenile behavior. (laughing)
Utopian Experiment #3 | j5mc
May 21st, 2012
3:12 pm
[...] guessing the real impetus is the ongoing farce over the Affordable Care Act, which mandates coverage of women’s healthcare for any employer that says they’re [...]
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:13 pm
What is and is not covered under Obozocare won’t matter in a couple of months anyway, after the Supreme Court announces that the Constitution does mean something after all, and that the federal government’s power is not without limits.
Aquagirl
May 21st, 2012
3:22 pm
All Americans (and Democrats of faith) owe these Catholic groups a huge debt for standing up for the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties.
Enforcing Catholic beliefs on non-Catholics not working in a church is a poor basis for claiming persecution. But then a lot of religious wingnuts are on that bandwagon nowadays….If they can’t control what other people do it’s somehow a violation of their religious rights.
The Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers
May 21st, 2012
3:25 pm
Tiberius – Banned from Bookman’s and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:12 pm
“So does that mean an employee of Jehovah’s Witnesses can be denied blood transfusions?”
Actually doctors can get a court order quickly and force the transfusion on a Witness anyway.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
3:25 pm
Aquagirl, if you don’t like their rules, you can either pay for the services yourself, or you can find other employment or higher education opportunities.
Its as simple as that.
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
3:27 pm
Women will have their vote (in private in the booth)…
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:27 pm
Aquagirl, please link to the Catholic policy that prohibits, as a condition of employment, employees from using birth control, abortifacients, etc.
Didn’t think so.
Ayn Rant
May 21st, 2012
3:31 pm
The Catholic bishops are making fools of themselves by calling attention to a nonsensical, outdated tenet of Vatican dogma. There is no Scriptural basis for the opposition to contraceptives, or for restricting the choice of those who disagree, or for ignoring the religious freedom of workers in Catholic-associated institutions engaged in secular activities.
The claim that the Catholics bishops might be forced to “pay” for medical insurance coverage for contraceptives is false. The revenue of Catholics hospitals comes from government and private medical insurance payments; the revenue of Catholics schools comes from tuition. The institutions pay employee wages and benefits from their revenue. The bishops pay absolutely nothing in the way of wages and benefits for the employees of Catholic hospitals and schools.
The “issue” is nothing more than a lot of political claptrap raised by Republican politicians opposed to health care for those who cannot pay for it out-of-pocket. Any health care plan that does not cover contraceptives and medically-advisable abortions is incomplete and inappropriate for working Americans.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:34 pm
Any health care plan that does not cover contraceptives and medically-advisable abortions is incomplete and inappropriate for working Americans.
———————–
I’m so glad we have Obozo and the libtards to tell us what kind of health insurance we are going to be required to purchase.
Nazis.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
3:37 pm
“The claim that the Catholics bishops might be forced to “pay” for medical insurance coverage for contraceptives is false.”
And yet no one is making that claim, Ayn Rant.
Stop making things up to try to deflect from the issue at hand.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:38 pm
For all their rhetoric about freedom, choice, and privacy, the Democrat party sure does like to tell folks what to do.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
3:38 pm
“The “issue” is nothing more than a lot of political claptrap raised by Republican politicians opposed to health care for those who cannot pay for it out-of-pocket.”
And yet the institutions suing are not associated with the Republican Party in any way . . .
Go figure.
Joe Mama
May 21st, 2012
3:42 pm
Ayn Rant — “The claim that the Catholics bishops might be forced to “pay” for medical insurance coverage for contraceptives is false.”
Tiberius, this page — “And yet no one is making that claim, Ayn Rant. Stop making things up to try to deflect from the issue at hand.”
Tiberius, previous page — “If the Church is providing the money for the insurance (and they are), the Church gets to decide what that insurance will cover. If they are forced to provide that in which they do not believe, the Church’s 1st Amendment Constitutional rights are being violated.”
Hmm.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
3:45 pm
Joe Mama, please do not respond to my posts any longer. I will not be engaging in childish games of wordsmithing and deflection with mental deficients who argue for the sake of arguing (rather than with facts) such as you.
Illegal Alien
May 21st, 2012
3:46 pm
Outlaw all abortions now!
I have stock in a coat hanger company.
Jack
May 21st, 2012
3:56 pm
Obama will lose the next election with the help of his advisors: he’d lose it anyway, but they’re making sure of it.
td
May 21st, 2012
3:59 pm
Aquagirl
May 21st, 2012
3:22 pm
“Enforcing Catholic beliefs on non-Catholics not working in a church is a poor basis for claiming persecution.”
Look at what we would not have now if it was not for the religious institutions setting up all these schools and hospitals. People know when they go to work for these places that they are administered by the church and since they are a private entity can set up any rules they wish (just like companies can require you to not smoke or turn over your Face book account as a term of employment). The worker or student has a choice of not attending or working for these places if they are not willing to follow their rules.
Joe Mama
May 21st, 2012
3:59 pm
Tiberius — “Joe Mama, please do not respond to my posts any longer.”
I don’t often post here, so if you find my posts so troubling, then scroll right on past them, Tiberius.
“I will not be engaging in childish games of wordsmithing and deflection with mental deficients who argue for the sake of arguing (rather than with facts) such as you.”
Tiberius, I’ve dinged you on two factual errors today, one of which might reasonably be termed a lie. I can understand why you’d be upset about that, but if anyone here’s being “childish” and engaging in “wordsmithing” and “deflection,” it’s you. And as far as mental deficiency goes, I’ll go up against you any time you like. OTOH, if you’d like some polite, adult discussion — and that’s assuming you’re even capable of it, which I doubt given your propensity to stoop to insults — then I’d be pleased to join and oblige you. However, I’m not going to post to please you and I doubt that you will post to please me.
You are quite simply wrong on the point about banking. And when you berated Ayn Rant, saying “yet no one is making that claim,” I pointed out that *you yourself* made that precise claim — the very one you claimed no one was making — on the previous page.
As was pointed out on a previous thread today, “a hit dog hollers.” And you are *certainly* hollering now.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:01 pm
All Catholics that don’t or have never used contraceptives please raise their hands.
See, this topic is a moot issue for the majority of Catholic voters.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
4:02 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:01 pm
All Americans (and Democrats of faith) owe these Catholic groups a huge debt for standing up for the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties.
*************************************************************************************
What DO the Catholic groups OWE the children who ARE and WERE molested by these
HYPOCRITES?
Are children PROTECTED BY the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
May 21st, 2012
4:03 pm
What part of “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” does obozo not understand?
Is there no Kenyan translation available for the 1st Amendment?
Could not one of the nearby dummycrats assist your little tard with his interpretations?
Keep your sewage to yourselves, liberals.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
4:04 pm
@Jack
May 21st, 2012
3:56 pm
Obama will lose the next election with the help of his advisors: he’d lose it anyway, but they’re making sure of it.
**************************************************************
OBAMA is going to WIN the next election with the HELP OF SENIORS, WOMEN, HISPANICS, GAYS AND AFRICAN AMERICANS.
“They’re making sure of it.”
heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:07 pm
What part of “this law doesn’t force Catholics to take contraceptives” do you not understand?
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
4:14 pm
@I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin…
May 21st, 2012
4:03 pm
What part of “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” does obozo not understand?
Is there no Kenyan translation available for the 1st Amendment?
Could not one of the nearby dummycrats assist your little tard with his interpretations?
Keep your sewage to yourselves, liberals.
***************************************************************************
IS THERE A PEDOPHILIA TRANSLATION FOR CATHOLIC HYPOCRITES
available for the 1st Amendment?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
May 21st, 2012
4:14 pm
I figured that one out on my own Junior, but thanks anyway.
What it does is force Catholics to promote contraception.
Need I explain?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
4:15 pm
“What part of “this law doesn’t force Catholics to take contraceptives” do you not understand?”
What part of “this law forces Catholic institutions to pay for contraceptives which they are religiously opposed to” do you NOT understand, Junior?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:16 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LA25LcbWbHc
Randall Flagg = Obozo
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
4:16 pm
What the courts will decide is anybody’s guess. The Catholic bishops should explain how allowing the women they employ to have the same rights as women anywhere else prohibits the church to exercise their religion (1st Amendment).
But if Kyle and the Republicans believe that this is a “self-inflicted wound” for Obama’s team, he and they may be very much disappointed, as many women might see it as a defense of their rights by Obama.
td
May 21st, 2012
4:17 pm
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:01 pm
Totally wrong question. The question is does the government have the right to dictate to a religious organization that they must purchase something that is against their religious tenets? This is the same lines as the current question before the court and the governments right to force a citizen to purchase a product. The difference is the government in this case will also have to bypass the 1st amendment as well as the commerce clause.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:23 pm
Remember back when, if you wanted a rubber or a birth control pill, you went out and got it?
Now look at the moochers demanding someone else pay for their incidental expenses.
You Democrats are such pathetic losers.
President Romney will turn this country around from the path of destruction you have put us on.
JDW
May 21st, 2012
4:24 pm
@Tiberius…”The Constitution is that limiting authority as regards religious freedom.”
That only applies if you are regulating the religion. Say as in hiring practices. The root of this regulation is a product, insurance. It has no religion to impinge.
It’s just like cable TV. The church buys cable TV but they don’t strip the objectionable content out for them. Yet the government regulates cable and mandates that local channels be carried even though the church doesn’t like some of the content and by paying the cable bill “funds” that content.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:26 pm
Sorry, JDW, but your analogy is faulty.
No one is forced to purchase cable TV.
Illegal Alien
May 21st, 2012
4:27 pm
Does freedom of religion allow Catholic priests to engage in pedophilia?
They must believe in since they have tried so hard to hide it from the rest of us non religious types.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
4:29 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:23 pm
Remember back when, if you wanted a rubber or a birth control pill, you went out and got it?
Now look at the moochers demanding someone else pay for their incidental expenses.
You Democrats are such pathetic losers.
President Romney will turn this country around from the path of destruction you have put us on.
********************************************************************************
MITT-ROB-ME is headed for the PATH OF DESTRUCTION in NOVEMBER.
I bet you $10,000.
JDW
May 21st, 2012
4:31 pm
LBB…”In most states, auto insurance isn’t mandatory”
More Republican math I see…47 states have mandatory auto insurance requirments. 3 states make owing insurance optional.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_auto_insurance#Compulsory_states
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:32 pm
How many states allow individuals to self-insure, JDW?
Try reading the post next time so you don’t end up looking like such a tool.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:35 pm
Catholic Priests pay income taxes.
So, does the Catholic Church support and promote executions?
Do they support or promote divorce?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
4:35 pm
JDW, the church can also choose to not buy cable TV, just as the church can choose to no longer fund health care for it’s workers and students.
As some are doing right now.
However, the church has taken the position that it is better to be able to fund health care of their choosing, rather than deciding to stop funding it entirely, which is the end result of this suit.
Tell me, which is better? Funding health care of their choosing, or letting their employees and students fend for themselves?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
4:36 pm
More deflection from Junior.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:39 pm
Wasn’t this about the Catholic Church being forced to pay for something they don’t agree to?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:40 pm
The Catholic Church doesn’t pay income taxes, so we’re not sure what you’re talking about, Junior.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:41 pm
Catholic Priests pay income taxes.
RIF
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:45 pm
Catholic priests, then, like all citizens, are free to elect representatives who will enact policies they prefer, such as ending capital punishment.
In any case, the Catholic Church isn’t funding capital punishment.
td
May 21st, 2012
4:47 pm
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
4:16 pm
“The Catholic bishops should explain how allowing the women they employ to have the same rights as women anywhere else prohibits the church to exercise their religion (1st Amendment)”
I gave you credit for being smarter then the above post. That is a political talking point and has nothing to do with the Constitution and the 1st Amendment. The 1st Amendment is clear and the SCOTUS will say this law is unconstitutional. The Obama administration knows it but wanted the political argument because they did not want to talk about their record and wanted this pretend “war on women”.
iggy
May 21st, 2012
4:48 pm
fb close $34.01…LOL.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:57 pm
Yes… everyone is free to elect representatives who will enact policies they prefer.
But can you bring a lawsuit to court saying that as a organization, we won’t pay for that, but willingly do so as an individual?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
5:03 pm
“But can you bring a lawsuit to court saying that as a organization, we won’t pay for that, but willingly do so as an individual?”
The Church is not an individual.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
5:10 pm
“But can you bring a lawsuit to court saying that as a organization, we won’t pay for that”
——————-
Kyle wouldn’t have a subject for this post if you couldn’t.
redneckbluedog
May 21st, 2012
5:25 pm
Obama looked VERY impressive at his NATO press conference today. Very cogent about every subject. I see no reason to make a change, especially in these risky times….
Joe the Prophet
May 21st, 2012
5:27 pm
BREAKING NEWS….Mormon groups are suing the US government to reinstate polygamy…..!!!!!
If the homosexuals can do it, then so can the polygamists….!!!!
iggy
May 21st, 2012
5:31 pm
“Obama looked VERY impressive at his NATO press conference today. Very cogent about every subject. I see no reason to make a change, especially in these risky times….”
LOL…ummm k Kyle!
Rafe Hollister
May 21st, 2012
5:46 pm
Glad to see that the Catholic Bishops are not as easily intimidated as Cory Booker. I’m glad that they filed this suit, and maybe this will convince their followers that maybe they should examine why the majority of them continue to support Barry Oblamer, in spite of his war on religion.
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
6:00 pm
td @4:47 pm: “The 1st Amendment is clear and the SCOTUS will say this law is unconstitutional.”
td,
So now you are not only a constitutional expert but also a seer who knows how SCOTUS will decide. The interesting part is that you have not attempted to answer the question: How does giving the women the Church employs the same rights as women anywhere else prohibit the Church to exercise their religion?
Tiberius - Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
6:11 pm
MarkV, you need to learn the difference between “rights” and “benefits”.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
6:51 pm
@Rafe Hollister
May 21st, 2012
5:46 pm
Glad to see that the Catholic Bishops are not as easily intimidated as Cory Booker. I’m glad that they filed this suit, and maybe this will convince their followers that maybe they should examine why the majority of them continue to support Barry Oblamer, in spite of his war on religion.
******************************************************************************************
Are you glad to see that the Catholic Bishops are not easily INTIMIDATED THAT THEY
MIGHT GO TO JAIL FOR MOLESTING CHILDREN?
That’s WHAT they should be INTMIDATED BY.
They talk about CORPORATE CONSCIENCE.
WHAT ABOUT MORAL CONSCIENCE?
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
6:58 pm
@iggy
May 21st, 2012
5:31 pm
“Obama looked VERY impressive at his NATO press conference today. Very cogent about every subject. I see no reason to make a change, especially in these risky times….”
LOL…ummm k Kyle!
**********************************************************************
WHY are YOU people so JEALOUS of President Obama?
Is it his SMILE?
Is it his SWAGGER?
Is it his POPULARITY?
Is it his KNOWLEGE?
Is it his INTELLIGENCE?
Is it his CHARM?
Is it his LACK OF SCANDALOUS BAGGAGE?
Is it his RACE?
WHAT IS IT?
I KNOW……HE IS IMPRESSIVE.
heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee
Tiberius - Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
7:03 pm
Anybody can look impressive when the fawning myrmidons of the media won’t challenge you.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
7:05 pm
“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. ”
**********************************************************
The lawsuits will ENSURE that people WILL NOT FORGET what the HYPOCRITICAL
PRIESTS and BISHOPS have done to INNOCENT CHILDREN.
CONS have a SHORT MEMORY.
LIBERALS never FORGET.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
7:10 pm
@Tiberius – Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
7:03 pm
Anybody can look impressive when the fawning myrmidons of the media won’t challenge you.
*********************************************************************
SO FOX News IS NOT THE MEDIA?
mmmmmmmmmmmmm.
jconservative
May 21st, 2012
7:14 pm
“Are children PROTECTED BY the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties?”
No.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
7:15 pm
“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. ”
**********************************************************
SO Cons are SUPPORTING THE Catholic Bishops?
Did Cons SUPPORT the children that WERE MOLESTED BY THEM?
CONS have a SHORT MEMORY.
LIBERALS never FORGET.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
7:25 pm
@jconservative
May 21st, 2012
7:14 pm
“Are children PROTECTED BY the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties?”
No.
**********************************************************************
No they are not PROTECTED BY the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties.
HOWEVER; they SHOULD BE PROTECTED BY ALL AMERICANS.
Including CONS, PRIESTS AND BISHOPS.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
7:27 pm
Moochers think freebies ARE their rights.
Losers.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
7:30 pm
So Obozo looks impressive, eh? How does Obozo’s DEFICIT look?
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
7:35 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
7:27 pm
Moochers think freebies ARE their rights.
Losers.
************************************************************
FREE AIN’T FREE
“There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.”
Duh!!!!!
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
7:43 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
7:30 pm
So Obozo looks impressive, eh? How does Obozo’s DEFICIT look?
****************************************************************************
HOW DOES BUSH’S DEFICIT LOOK?
The U.S. national debt grew significantly from 2001 to 2008, both in dollars terms and relative to the size of the economy (GDP), due to a combination of tax cuts and wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq.
During the George W. Bush administration, the federal government spending was increased from $1789 billion to $2983 billion (70%) but the revenues were only increased from $2025 billion to $2524 billion (from 2000 to 2008). Individual income tax revenues were increased by 14%, corporate tax revenues by 50%, customs and duties by 40%. Discretionary defense spending was increased by 107%, discretionary domestic spending by 62%, Medicare spending by 131%, social security by 51%, and income security spending by 130%. Cyclically adjusted, revenues rose by 35% and spending by 65%.
Also proportionally Bush increased government spending more than any predecessor since LBJ (including).
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Aint that something
May 21st, 2012
7:48 pm
Did the Catholic Church or the Catholic based org that provides insurance to Georgetown University staff stop funding contraceptives?
Save your rant about the girl who testified before Congress. That was a sham on all sides.
With that said, if it is enough to sue then I would assume that anywhere that it isn’t already mandated the Catholic Church and any of its affiliates must have stopped providing coverage for contraceptives.
Michael H. Smith
May 21st, 2012
8:07 pm
How does giving the women the Church employs the same rights as women anywhere else prohibit the Church to exercise their religion?
First, the presumption on the part of liberals or Marxists is that healthcare is a RIGHT, as in an “unalienable right” (which it ain’t), and particularity with respect to a woman’s reproductive healthcare(which is less of an individual right, with its’ gender based bias).
Second, churches regardless of which one or even any private employer is not obligated constitutionally to provide healthcare to anyone let alone a gender specific one that serves reproductive health (even should ObumerCare survive Constitutional challenge, which it won’t).
Third, religious freedom IS A PROTECTED RIGHT under the Constitution from government powers given specifically to churches and established religion, which private employers anywhere else have never enjoyed.
obumer is going to lose on this one as rightly he and these Marxist “so-called Progressives” should, for once again failing to amend the Constitution to make fit room for a healthcare law rather than as they have since Woodrow Wilson ignoring the constitution and passing laws outside the confines of our nation’s “legal canon”.
PS. With regards particularly to the Catholic Church, as they have long opposed any form of birth control on the bases of their Theological views: While I do not agree with their view on this particular issue of “all contraception” use, I will defend and protest with them for their rights to exercise it as if it were my own religious belief, by reason that if any religion suffers a denial of religious liberty, then all faiths, churches, religious establishment are endanger of persecution if not the very threat of an extinction.
td
May 21st, 2012
8:11 pm
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
6:00 pm
“How does giving the women the Church employs the same rights as women anywhere else prohibit the Church to exercise their religion?”
Since when has giving a person contraceptives for free become a right? Since when has a benefit become a right? Is is not true that an employer does not even have to offer insurance at all to its employers? Also, how can the Federal government force an employer like Notre Dame, who self insures, to offer contraception coverage?
Michael H. Smith
May 21st, 2012
8:19 pm
Well, td, bad as I hate to quote Boe Jiden…
They don’t get us!
They will never learn what the amendment process is all about and why it is necessary to first amend the Constitution to allow for expansions, even if they are SOCIALIST, as long as they can get’em ratified, so be it. That is the legal legitimate process used to expand what are deemed fundamental rights to conditional privileges, like healthcare.
Out by the Pond
May 21st, 2012
8:19 pm
Catholic Charities provides contraception coverage as mandated by GA Law. So what is the problem? Oh a democrat is in the white house.
Michael H. Smith
May 21st, 2012
8:29 pm
So what is the problem?
Try getting your socialist democrat comrades to amend the U.S. Constitution to fit your unconstitutional healthcare law for starters.
BTW, health departments and other organizations provide contraception at reduced cost or free contraceptives in many cases so why do you socialist have this problem of insisting on forcing religious organization to bend their moral convictions over backwards to satisfy your petty peeves?
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
8:30 pm
td @8:11 pm
First, you should think twice before adopting the comment of a mental midget regarding the difference between “right’ and a “benefit.” What we deal with here is a labor law, which gives the women a right to a benefit. Thus the issue in not about whether benefit becomes a right, or a falsity about “giving a person contraceptives for free.” You could claim the same for anything that medical insurance pays for.
The main issue is whether a church, any church, can proclaim anything in a law to be inapplicable to its employees, regardless of their religious affiliation, on the basis of a religious dogma. This would lead to a religious dictatorship.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
8:32 pm
MHS, forcing religious organizations to provide contraception is a two-fer…it allows Democrat politicians to buy the votes of their parasite base, and it sticks it to one of their mortal enemies–people of faith.
Communists fear organized religion and have a long history of trying to eliminate it.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
8:36 pm
The main issue is whether a church, any church, can proclaim anything in a law to be inapplicable to its employees
————————–
Wrong. The main issue is whether a government, any government, can force a religious organization to violate their beliefs.
Note to libtards: The separation of church and state that you (situationally) cling to works both ways.
iggy
May 21st, 2012
8:37 pm
Swagger? I really not sure what “swaggalin, swaggin, swaggleRock” is or is supposed to be.
Michael H. Smith
May 21st, 2012
8:38 pm
Labor laws do not trump the U. S. Constitution.
The main issue is whether a church, any church, can proclaim anything in a law to be inapplicable to its employees, regardless of their religious affiliation, on the basis of a religious dogma. This would lead to a religious dictatorship.
Totally false claim. Other places of employment and other organizations public and private provide contraception and they are not subject to any religions authority. Churches do enjoy exemptions on moral grounds as a matter of religious freedom particularly where this freedom does not preclude any individual the liberty to go elsewhere to worship or obtain desirable employment.
Michael H. Smith
May 21st, 2012
8:42 pm
And there is a major difference between a Right, a Benefit or a Privilege. Only the mentally cripple don’t know this fact.
Michael H. Smith
May 21st, 2012
8:45 pm
Communists fear organized religion and have a long history of trying to eliminate it.
Yeah that does sound familiar…
Marx: Religion is the opiate of the people.
Tiberius - Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
9:04 pm
MarkV gets chippy when his cherished fantasies are exposed for the frauds they are.
td
May 21st, 2012
9:06 pm
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
8:30 pm
Let us forget for a moment that you seem to forget about the 1st amendment and it is way more important then labor law. and ask the following question. Let us take a company like Lockheed, can they deny contraceptive coverage? Can they fire a person or charge them more for insurance if they smoke or are overweight?
Tiberius - Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
9:06 pm
MarkV also needs to bone up on his understanding of the term “dictatorship “.
@@
May 21st, 2012
9:10 pm
I thought the CC was gonna drop healthcare coverage altogether. It would have been interesting to see their employees reaction.
I guess this is where “the rubber” meets the road?
Mary Grabar
May 21st, 2012
9:14 pm
Faustian pact. Why did so many Catholics vote for Obama in the first place?
Tiberius - Banned by Bookman and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
9:24 pm
Certain Catholic universities had announced they were dropping coverage,@@.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
May 21st, 2012
9:29 pm
The Obama campaign’s attacks on Bain haven’t gone very well, in part because the claims are so transparently cynical. Everyone knows they’re cherry-picking facts, focusing on the rare Bain Capital failures while ignoring the successes—all in order to distract attention from the failed results of Mr. Obama’s economic policies.
obozo is the best campaign manager that Romney could ask for.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
9:54 pm
@Michael H. Smith
May 21st, 2012
8:07 pm
PS. With regards particularly to the Catholic Church, as they have long opposed any form of birth control on the bases of their Theological views: While I do not agree with their view on this particular issue of “all contraception” use, I will defend and protest with them for their rights to exercise it as if it were my own religious belief, by reason that if any religion suffers a denial of religious liberty, then all faiths, churches, religious establishment are endanger of persecution if not the very threat of an extinction.
**************************************************************
“According to a study by the Guttmacher Institute, most women, including 98 percent of Catholic women, have used contraception.”
98%
98%
98%
98%
98%
CATHOLICS ARE HYPOCRITES.
On one hand they oppose the use of contraception.
On the other hand THEY TURN A BLIND EYE TO CHILD MOLESTATION BY
THEIR OWN PRIESTS AND BISHOPS.
WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT?
CONTRACEPTION OR CHILD MOLESTATION?
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
9:55 pm
td @ 9:06 pm: “ Let us forget for a moment that you seem to forget about the 1st amendment and it is way more important then labor law…”
Let’s NOT forget. You still have not answered the question how providing a benefit, any benefit required by the law, prohibits an exercise of religion.
And let’s go to the crux of the issue. You claim that a religious organization can deny a benefit on moral grounds based on a religious dogma. 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?
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
10:03 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
8:32 pm
MHS, forcing religious organizations to provide contraception is a two-fer…it allows Democrat politicians to buy the votes of their parasite base, and it sticks it to one of their mortal enemies–people of faith.
Communists fear organized religion and have a long history of trying to eliminate it.
**************************************************************************
mmmmmmmm
The views of socialism and communism differ in the distribution of wealth produced by the economy.
Socialism supports the view that the goods and services produced should be dispensed based on the productivity of an individual.
In contrast, communism believes that the wealth should be shared by the masses based on the needs of the individual.
td
May 21st, 2012
10:11 pm
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
9:55 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.
You are giving a hypothetical that has no basis in fact that I am aware of but to answer your question then I would say that if it was a well defined then I would say that the government could not dictate to them about pay. I would think that in that circumstance women would not want to work for the church. It would be also true if the said church said men were worth less pay, so this is not about just women.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
10:17 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
8:36 pm
The main issue is whether a church, any church, can proclaim anything in a law to be inapplicable to its employees
————————–
Wrong. The main issue is whether a government, any government, can force a religious organization to violate their beliefs.
Note to libtards: The separation of church and state that you (situationally) cling to works both ways.
****************************************************************************************
NOTE TO CONS:
The main issue is whether a government, can force a religious organization
like the CATHOLIC CHURCH TO STOP MOLESTING CHILDREN.
‘The problem is not just with the fraction of priests who molests youngsters, but in
an ecclesiastical power structure which harbours pedophiles, conceals other
sexual behaviour patterns among its clerics and uses the strategies of duplicity
and counterattack against the victims.’
The evidence is that a higher percentage of Catholic priests and male Religious molest
children more than other ministers of religion.
The minor victims of priest abuse are overwhelmingly boys and teenagers, (80­90%), which is
contrary to the pattern of abuse in the general population.
American studies are not the only ones which defy the assumption that clergy of
all denominations abuse equally. . It found that 93% of convicted and imprisoned
child molesters had themselves been sexually abused as children and 60%
stated that they had been abused by a Catholic priest or Brother.
The Conspiracy
There has been a nationwide pattern over the last 35 years.
Bishops know of ongoing sexual misconduct by Catholic priests and
religious and bishops co-operate to keep such misconduct from becoming public
knowledge.
The following are uniform practices:
failing to investigate indications of any sexual misconduct, even with children;
failing to supervise properly the cleric in his assignment,
failing to ensure that the cleric is prosecuted for misconduct with children.
Once an incident occurs, energy and policies at the highest levels of Church authority
have been directed to damage control, avoidance of scandal at all costs,
and efforts to placate and manipulate victims and families.
The latter often involves intimidation, misleading information, and
even fraudulent means, if necessary. Policy also involves maintaining the priest in
a new assignment without proper supervision and without informing the
congregation where the abusive behaviour usually continues.
lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
10:20 pm
@ByteMe “It’s another self-inflicted wound for the man-dominant out-of-touch Catholic hierarchy.” That would be “…male dominated…” If you want to sound like a feminist, at least get your syntax straight
@thebob.bob “To prevent medication for those other conditions is unconscionable.” Well, that’s good, because they don’t. Or at least Georgetown U. – home of Sandra Fluke – doesn’t. Try checking your facts before parroting DNC talking points.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
10:23 pm
@iggy
May 21st, 2012
8:37 pm
Swagger? I really not sure what “swaggalin, swaggin, swaggleRock” is or is supposed to be.
**********************************************************************
IF YOU ARE NOT SURE WHAT IT IS OR SUPPOSE TO BE…………
THEN YOU DON’T HAVE IT.
Swagger –
A very confident gait or manner.
Walk or behave in a very confident way.
Pizzaman
May 21st, 2012
10:30 pm
In the Bible Jesus says “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar and to God the things that are God’s” It seams that the Church that taught me that 60 years ago has forgotten it and I’m ashamed to be Catholic!
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”
Yeah, sure. Just like 2010, except the Democrat Party is going to get paid back even worse than they were, then. Politically, it was a complete bloodbath, all the way up and down the ticket, including the loss of the U.S. House of representatives and 700+ seats in state legislatures.
For instance, did you know that Scott Walker got more votes in the Wisconsin recall primary than the two Democrat candidates combined? And there was no actual need to vote for Walker at all?
As for Republicans treating women like second class citizens, what in the WORLD do you mean by that? That we aren’t letting Sandra Fluke “access” birth control? Somehow, the word “access” in some magic way being defined as “paid for by the government”? When she can buy her own damn birth control pills for $9/month at a Target store 2 miles from Georgetown?
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.
Someone even made a bunch of leading conservatives into superheroes:http://www.thelookingspoon.com/index.php/73-may-2012/3416-conservative-superheroines
BTW, I think you are jealous, because so many conservative women are beautiful AND smart!
lloydrmc
May 21st, 2012
10:40 pm
@MarkV -”How does giving the women the Church employs the same rights as women anywhere else prohibit the Church to exercise their religion?” Are you really as utterly ignorant as that?
1) Birth control is NOT a right. Even SCOTUS has not crossed that bridge. So how, pray tell, can someone be deprived of a right that doesn’t actually exist?
2) The Catholic Church considers birth control to be sinful. So requiring them to provide it is forcing the Church to engage in what it considers sinful behavior, which is an affront to their most basic beliefs. It’s right there in the Free Exercise clause of the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (which you people are so wont to forget about or simply ignore).
Again I say, making the Catholic Church do something it considers sinful is in violation of the First Amendment.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
10:46 pm
@I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin…
May 21st, 2012
9:29 pm
The Obama campaign’s attacks on Bain haven’t gone very well, in part because the claims are so transparently cynical. Everyone knows they’re cherry-picking facts, focusing on the rare Bain Capital failures while ignoring the successes—all in order to distract attention from the failed results of Mr. Obama’s economic policies.
obozo is the best campaign manager that Romney could ask for.
******************************************************************************************
FOR US LIBERALS……
Mit-Rob-Me was a GODSEND.
“attacks on Bain haven’t gone very wel”
THAT’S WHAT YOU THINK.
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.
WE AIN’T NO FOOLS.
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.
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….
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
May 22nd, 2012
11:19 am
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.
The Catholic church sees child molesters as sinners. Not criminals. Thats the problem.
This is the same group that just forgave Galileo a few years ago.
They aren’t the most enlightened bunch.
I demand to see Cheesy Grits Birth Certificate- Long Form Please
May 22nd, 2012
11:24 am
Most Catholics I know don’t follow the teachings of the Church to the letter anyway and they pretty much all think their leadership is far too extreme. They live in the real world where people use condoms.
This is a non issue for Obama.
Richard
May 22nd, 2012
11:25 am
Obama should pass a law that outlaws divorce for Catholics. Let’s see how serious Catholics really are in their convictions.
md
May 22nd, 2012
11:35 am
“This is a non issue for Obama.”
Actually, it’s a big issue for Obama…..it’s kin to talking bad about one’s mother-in-law…..the spouse can bash the family all day long, but the dynamics change rapidly when the other spouse joins in.
There is a big contingent of believers within the democratic and independent ranks, and forcing them to choose is not the best political strategy……
iggy
May 22nd, 2012
11:37 am
interesting reading regarding the kenyan.
http://news.investors.com/article/612225/201205211900/voters-do-not-know-the-real-obama.htm?p=2
Aquagirl
May 22nd, 2012
11:45 am
viagra only allows for the equipment to work, what one does with it after that is where the choice comes in.
If you’re not married, “working it” in any way is a sin. Unless those men are taking Viagra merely to admire the effects, it’s directly facilitating sin.
iggy
May 22nd, 2012
11:47 am
AquaGirl does not understand the “technicals”. This being the case I bet she purchased a butt-load of fb which is taking its daily beating.
Rockerbabe
May 22nd, 2012
11:49 am
the catholic church and its henchmen could easily solve this issue by NOT ACCEPTING GOVERNMENT MONEY and fund their operations with private money.
the catholic church seeks government funds in the form of tuition loans for students, money grants for social services programs and reimbursement for medical services provided to recipients of Medicare and Medicaide. STOP accepting government money and then you will not have to respect the rights of women and others, when they demand equal treatment as provided by our laws and constitution. There is a big different between employment law and religious belief. In any case, the government just needs to STOP giving these bigots taxpayer money.
JDW
May 22nd, 2012
11:56 am
@Tiberius…”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?”
I don’t believe it is an either or choice. It is better for there to be a defined set of medical insurance benefits that are enjoyed by every American. Then additional services can be purchased or provided as employment benefits as desired.
As for the current system, should religious businesses choose to not provide health care benefits over this issue so be it. They will then have to compete for talent on those terms.
td
May 22nd, 2012
11:56 am
Aquagirl
May 22nd, 2012
11:45 am
viagra only allows for the equipment to work, what one does with it after that is where the choice comes in.
If you’re not married, “working it” in any way is a sin. Unless those men are taking Viagra merely to admire the effects, it’s directly facilitating sin.
Where is your evidence that the Catholic churches are paying for this for single men?
Rebar
May 22nd, 2012
12:45 pm
This is pretty simple. The Catholic Church can do whatever it wants, but a Catholic business has to abide by the rules of the workplace. And this has already been decided in court before, and the Catholics lost. All of you screaming about the 1st amendment don’t have a clue. This isn’t forcing a religion to provide this, but a BUSINESS!
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 22nd, 2012
1:21 pm
“Don’t people have a right to, say, Social Security, which is a benefit, because there is an appropriate law?”
I was waiting for this argument to come forward. Thought it might surface earlier due to it’s elementary nature and lack of logic, but it took 4 pages.
Social Security is a benefit – not a right. It’s benefits continue only so long as the government has money to fund them OR chooses not to fund them.
Just like private health insurance, MarkV.
Another epic fail on your part.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 22nd, 2012
1:24 pm
“The Catholic Church can do whatever it wants, but a Catholic business has to abide by the rules of the workplace.”
A private insurance company is no more a Catholic business than I am if I contract to paint their church, Rebar. They are merely a contractor.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 22nd, 2012
3:50 pm
MarkV
May 22nd, 2012
9:22 am
————————-
Why are Catholic groups suing?
Don Abernethy
May 23rd, 2012
11:50 am
Keep praying that the Supreme Court will kill this thing in July.
Julie Camp
May 23rd, 2012
2:32 pm
I can’t understand why one little request is denied by Obama. Large companies were given waivers to opt out of the health care reform. The Catholics only want a waiver on one thing. I’m Christian and would like to have my contraception covered by my health care, heck, I would like to have just one of my prescriptions covered. But, Catholics should be allowed to have their beliefs, no matter what non Catholics feel. That is the very foundation of this country.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 23rd, 2012
4:51 pm
Not to put to fine a point on it, Julie, but no one is “allowed” by any one or by the government to have their religious beliefs. As the Constitution states, that right is inalienable and is given to us by our creator. Obozo and the Democrats find the Constitution to be an impediment to their Marxist beliefs, but are about to receive a smackdown courtesy of the Supreme Court.
I cannot wait.