Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Money and Finance > U.S. Federal Policy

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 18th, 2012, 08:39 PM   #1
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Vpqw0f2xbg[/youtube]
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 18th, 2012, 10:29 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
mikelew007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 4,579
King Obama and the Church of Obamacare? God bless the hype, makes for good television. Last time I checked though, Catholics are still free to not use contraception or any form of birth control, even though they do in overwhelming numbers. And when you think about it, wouldn't contraceptives be a good thing for an organization that opposes abortions even more? T
hey, the insurance companies, and not those suddenly-hypersensitive employers (Ok, for real, mostly the Catholic hierarchy, and Republican Congressmen searching desperately for a cultural issue to cling at who actually are the most upset. Need them votes, yo. ), are being required to cover it with their insurance policies. Considering how many non-Catholics work in the system, including in Catholic-owned hospitals and universities, it's rather arrogant to demand everyone abide by their religious doctrine. Should we pick apart at what we can and cannot insure based on everyone's religious objections, even when they fly against the face of reality, or is the Catholic Church above US law?



Or am I totally wrong this?
mikelew007 is offline  
Old February 19th, 2012, 08:00 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,333
Only in wingnut land (and the confederate south) are the religious views of an employer allowed to trample the religious liberty of all the employees, or to constrain how an employee chooses to use the earned benefits of his labor.



Should a Scientologist who runs a coffee shop be permitted to exclude mental health care from the heath care package and thereby force his employees to buy that coverage in the individual market? Can a Jehovah's Witness who runs a grocery store refuse coverage for blood transfusions to his employees?



Similarly, can a Jehovah's Witness deny sick time to a person who needs a blood transfusion? Or are we going to "force" that employer to pay for something which "violates his religious views"?
skrekk is offline  
Old February 19th, 2012, 11:55 AM   #4
Bye, Ya better behave.
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Not in MD
Posts: 13,844
Will you stop listening to Fox News right-wing lies tadpole please. The facts tell a different tale.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNn4XdNRXKU
Fayt is offline  
Old February 19th, 2012, 01:39 PM   #5
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 40,186
I'm shocked that Tad is the one that posted this.



There is clearly no issue with the solution to the first amendment incident that we had over the birth control coverage mandate, an issue that was ginned up by the Bishops to begin with. The Sisters are satisfied and the church is satisfied. And one way to actually make this stupidity by the right go away is to challenge them on it exactly in the manner skrekk did in the post by him above. And the best thing to do would be to have universal coverage and take health insurance out of the employment equation all together.
waitingtables is offline  
Old February 19th, 2012, 01:44 PM   #6
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
I'm shocked that Tad is the one that posted this.



There is clearly no issue with the solution to the first amendment incident that we had over the birth control coverage mandate, an issue that was ginned up by the Bishops to begin with. The Sisters are satisfied and the church is satisfied. And one way to actually make this stupidity by the right go away is to challenge them on it exactly in the manner skrekk did in the post by him above. And the best thing to do would be to have universal coverage and take health insurance out of the employment equation all together.


I never said I agreed with it...



I thought it would spur some interesting discussion...
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 19th, 2012, 01:45 PM   #7
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fayt View Post
Will you stop listening to Fox News right-wing lies tadpole please. The facts tell a different tale.



[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNn4XdNRXKU[/media]


Oh Fayt... It's cute that you think that because I post something means I endorse it...
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 19th, 2012, 01:46 PM   #8
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 40,186
Quote:
Originally Posted by tadpole256 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables' timestamp='1329691167' post='384558

I'm shocked that Tad is the one that posted this.



There is clearly no issue with the solution to the first amendment incident that we had over the birth control coverage mandate, an issue that was ginned up by the Bishops to begin with. The Sisters are satisfied and the church is satisfied. And one way to actually make this stupidity by the right go away is to challenge them on it exactly in the manner skrekk did in the post by him above. And the best thing to do would be to have universal coverage and take health insurance out of the employment equation all together.


I never said I agreed with it...



I thought it would spur some interesting discussion...


Aaaahhhh, I see. That makes sense.
waitingtables is offline  
Old February 19th, 2012, 01:48 PM   #9
The Chief
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Planet Earth (Mostly)
Posts: 14,270
Sometimes you have to stir the pot...
tadpole256 is offline  
Old February 19th, 2012, 01:57 PM   #10
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
Only in wingnut land (and the confederate south) are the religious views of an employer allowed to trample the religious liberty of all the employees, or to constrain how an employee chooses to use the earned benefits of his labor.



Should a Scientologist who runs a coffee shop be permitted to exclude mental health care from the heath care package and thereby force his employees to buy that coverage in the individual market? Can a Jehovah's Witness who runs a grocery store refuse coverage for blood transfusions to his employees?



Similarly, can a Jehovah's Witness deny sick time to a person who needs a blood transfusion? Or are we going to "force" that employer to pay for something which "violates his religious views"?




The whole question of employer-subsidised health insurance is riddled with flaws and only postponing the day when American finally joins the rest of the industrialised world and comes up with some form of Universal health Care.



Until then it's unthinkable that the US Government should ignore the First Amendment and force any religious organisation to help fund behaviour which contravenes its doctrinal position.



Contraception is freely available to anyone at millions of pharmacies all over the country. If you disagree with your employer's stance then either pay for it yourself or get a new job.
garysher is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Money and Finance > U.S. Federal Policy

Tags
&, freedom, obamacare, religious

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Republican House Hearing On "religious Freedom" skrekk Current Events 17 June 18th, 2013 12:57 PM
Mississippi official recognizes that gays have religious freedom..... skrekk Gay and Lesbian Rights 13 August 16th, 2012 08:46 PM
Republicans try to deny religious freedom to gay servicemembers skrekk Gay and Lesbian Rights 4 June 10th, 2012 09:30 AM
Church Reacts to Obama's War on Religious Freedom: Let Us Be Catholic garysher Christianity 0 June 3rd, 2012 03:14 PM
Religious Freedom vs Patients' Rights Tirya Abortion 96 August 12th, 2008 06:03 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.