and the spin begins

[California Girl]

i'm pretty sure i'm not a wingnut, but feel free to consider me one if it eases the pain.

You're not the one who was caving. You're not involved in the decision making in any way.

I don't have pain over this, I don't need contraception because of a surgery but to be fighting over this in 2012 is archaic.

We're not fighting about 'contraception' G. We are fighting over religious freedom. Let me see if I can explain this in a rational way for you.

The First Amendment says...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof....

Now, the AHA exempts Churchs - because they clearly fit within that. The issue is that the Government appears to define the above Amendment as 'worship' (ie the Church).... our faith is not about 'worship' (ie attending church)... it is far broader than that. We run charities as part of our religious 'free exercise'... our faiths require us to be charitable, to help our fellow man, to be in our communities helping those who need help. That is the free exercise of our religion. Our hospitals, our schools, our social programs, etc... they are fundamentally part of the 'free exercise' of our religion.

It is not about contraception. It is about the First Amendment.

 

[Amelia]

A. No cost.
B. Had 1 year waiver already. Another BS outrage for the dupes.

Change the channel, morons.

a 1 year waiver?

So it's okay to nullify the first amendment if you give people a year to get used to it?





B.S. about no cost. There is no such thing as no cost. There will be costs to the insurance companies. The costs will be passed on to the insurance companies' clients.

Furthermore, as noted elsewhere, many Catholic institutions self-insure, so this new "accommodation" still forces Catholics to pay for things which violate their religion.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Remember when pubs have been in office?

Remember that there was never any compromise, never any discussion - It was always their way or the highway.

The Board of Bishops are happily compromising with the president of the United States but the GObP/pubs are doing their usual "won't take yes for an answer".

This compromise is perfect because women can get what they need and the outdated, archaic catholic church is happy. (Fact is, if alter boys could get pregnant ... Well, YOU know.)

 

[Sherry]

I think the dems intentionally wanted to steer the focus to social issues rather than the economy, but I don't think it's going to work out in their favor.

 

[California Girl]

Remember when pubs have been in office?

Remember that there was never any compromise, never any discussion - It was always their way or the highway.

The Board of Bishops are happily compromising with the president of the United States but the GObP/pubs are doing their usual "won't take yes for an answer".

This compromise is perfect because women can get what they need and the outdated, archaic catholic church is happy. (Fact is, if alter boys could get pregnant ... Well, YOU know.)

The Board of Bishops are happily compromising?

Really?

Link?

 

[Sarah G]

i think religious freedom is just as worthy a cause as reproductive freedom.

The Catholic church is oppressive. I think Catholic women also have the right to choose when and how many times reproduction occurs.

does the catholic church force people to become catholics at gunpoint? do they follow them home to bed?

no one's stopping catholics fro using bc; that's not the issue.

good effort, though

try again

Of course they don't want women using birth control. No you are not forced to join the Church at gunpoint, some of the women who work for them aren't even Catholic. They are simply forcing their beliefs on all employees and forcing them all to pay. $75 a month in some cases.

Contraception means birth control pills btw, the bishops are attempting to spin that it means free abortions for all!

 

[California Girl]

The Catholic church is oppressive. I think Catholic women also have the right to choose when and how many times reproduction occurs.

does the catholic church force people to become catholics at gunpoint? do they follow them home to bed?

no one's stopping catholics fro using bc; that's not the issue.

good effort, though

try again

Of course they don't want women using birth control. No you are not forced to join the Church at gunpoint, some of the women who work for them aren't even Catholic. They are simply forcing their beliefs on all employees and forcing them all to pay. $75 a month in some cases.

Contraception means birth control pills btw, the bishops are attempting to spin that it means free abortions for all!

It's not about contraception. and no, the Bishops are not attempting to spin it.

 

[del]

The Catholic church is oppressive. I think Catholic women also have the right to choose when and how many times reproduction occurs.

does the catholic church force people to become catholics at gunpoint? do they follow them home to bed?

no one's stopping catholics fro using bc; that's not the issue.

good effort, though

try again

Of course they don't want women using birth control. No you are not forced to join the Church at gunpoint, some of the women who work for them aren't even Catholic. They are simply forcing their beliefs on all employees and forcing them all to pay. $75 a month in some cases.

Contraception means birth control pills btw, the bishops are attempting to spin that it means free abortions for all!

if a woman doesn't like her terms of employment, she can leave.

spare me the drama, please.

 

[Conservative]

The Catholic church is oppressive. I think Catholic women also have the right to choose when and how many times reproduction occurs.

does the catholic church force people to become catholics at gunpoint? do they follow them home to bed?

no one's stopping catholics fro using bc; that's not the issue.

good effort, though

try again

Of course they don't want women using birth control. No you are not forced to join the Church at gunpoint, some of the women who work for them aren't even Catholic. They are simply forcing their beliefs on all employees and forcing them all to pay. $75 a month in some cases.

Contraception means birth control pills btw, the bishops are attempting to spin that it means free abortions for all!

got a link that supports this by any chance???

 

[California Girl]

Since Luddly is lying and ignoring my request to prove his claim that the 'Board of Bishops are happily compromising'... the following is the official press statement from the Board of Bishops. Does not sound like they are 'happily compromising' to me.

Regulatory changes limited and unclear
Rescission of mandate only complete solution
Continue urging passage of Respect for Rights of Conscience Act
WASHINGTON – The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) have issued the following statement:

The Catholic bishops have long supported access to life-affirming healthcare for all, and the conscience rights of everyone involved in the complex process of providing that healthcare. That is why we raised two serious objections to the "preventive services" regulation issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in August 2011.

First, we objected to the rule forcing private health plans — nationwide, by the stroke of a bureaucrat's pen—to cover sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion. All the other mandated "preventive services" prevent disease, and pregnancy is not a disease. Moreover, forcing plans to cover abortifacients violates existing federal conscience laws. Therefore, we called for the rescission of the mandate altogether.

Second, we explained that the mandate would impose a burden of unprecedented reach and severity on the consciences of those who consider such "services" immoral: insurers forced to write policies including this coverage; employers and schools forced to sponsor and subsidize the coverage; and individual employees and students forced to pay premiums for the coverage. We therefore urged HHS, if it insisted on keeping the mandate, to provide a conscience exemption for all of these stakeholders—not just the extremely small subset of "religious employers" that HHS proposed to exempt initially.

Today, the President has done two things.

First, he has decided to retain HHS's nationwide mandate of insurance coverage of sterilization and contraception, including some abortifacients. This is both unsupported in the law and remains a grave moral concern. We cannot fail to reiterate this, even as so many would focus exclusively on the question of religious liberty.

Second, the President has announced some changes in how that mandate will be administered, which is still unclear in its details. As far as we can tell at this point, the change appears to have the following basic contours:

·It would still mandate that all insurers must include coverage for the objectionable services in all the policies they would write. At this point, it would appear that self-insuring religious employers, and religious insurance companies, are not exempt from this mandate.

·It would allow non-profit, religious employers to declare that they do not offer such coverage. But the employee and insurer may separately agree to add that coverage. The employee would not have to pay any additional amount to obtain this coverage, and the coverage would be provided as a part of the employer's policy, not as a separate rider.

·Finally, we are told that the one-year extension on the effective date (from August 1, 2012 to August 1, 2013) is available to any non-profit religious employer who desires it, without any government application or approval process.

These changes require careful moral analysis, and moreover, appear subject to some measure of change. But we note at the outset that the lack of clear protection for key stakeholders—for self-insured religious employers; for religious and secular for-profit employers; for secular non-profit employers; for religious insurers; and for individuals—is unacceptable and must be corrected. And in the case where the employee and insurer agree to add the objectionable coverage, that coverage is still provided as a part of the objecting employer's plan, financed in the same way as the rest of the coverage offered by the objecting employer. This, too, raises serious moral concerns.

We just received information about this proposal for the first time this morning; we were not consulted in advance. Some information we have is in writing and some is oral. We will, of course, continue to press for the greatest conscience protection we can secure from the Executive Branch. But stepping away from the particulars, we note that today's proposal continues to involve needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions, and to threaten government coercion of religious people and groups to violate their most deeply held convictions. In a nation dedicated to religious liberty as its first and founding principle, we should not be limited to negotiating within these parameters. The only complete solution to this religious liberty problem is for HHS to rescind the mandate of these objectionable services.

We will therefore continue—with no less vigor, no less sense of urgency—our efforts to correct this problem through the other two branches of government. For example, we renew our call on Congress to pass, and the Administration to sign, the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act. And we renew our call to the Catholic faithful, and to all our fellow Americans, to join together in this effort to protect religious liberty and freedom of conscience for all.

Bishops Renew Call to Legislative Action on Religious Liberty

The above shows no evidence of 'spinning' this to focus on abortion either.... so Sarah G, you are wrong.

*Note for the Mods: This is a full press release, not an article produced by a third party. It does not breach copyright to print it in full. That is what press releases are for.... to be reproduced. I have provided a link to the full release.... which is within copyright guidelines.

 

[Sarah G]

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism

President Obama retreated on Friday from his controversial healthcare rule requiring religious organizations such as charities and hospitals to include contraception coverage in their healthcare plans.

Obama described his compromise as “a sensible approach” in which employees who work for religious organizations that object to the use of birth control would be able to obtain contraception from the employer's insurer.

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism - TheHill.com

If it isn't about birth control, why are they calling it the birth control mandate?

You guys are not understanding how politically agressive the catholic church is.

Religious freedom, my butt.

 

[syrenn]

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism

President Obama retreated on Friday from his controversial healthcare rule requiring religious organizations such as charities and hospitals to include contraception coverage in their healthcare plans.

Obama described his compromise as “a sensible approach” in which employees who work for religious organizations that object to the use of birth control would be able to obtain contraception from the employer's insurer.

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism - TheHill.com

If it isn't about birth control, why are they calling it the birth control mandate?

You guys are not understanding how politically agressive the catholic church is.

Religious freedom, my butt.

I think now, obama is finally understanding how politically aggressively they will fight when under assault ...

as in chess... a bishop will always check and topple a king.

 

[dblack]

obama didn't cave for the catholics, he caved for the catholics

got it?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/11/h...birth-control-rule-officials-say.html?_r=1&hp

WASHINGTON — For the White House, the decision announced Friday to soften a rule requiring religious-affiliated organizations to pay for insurance plans that offer free birth control was never really driven by a desire to mollify Roman Catholic bishops, who were strongly opposed to the plan.

Obama didn't "cave". This is simply they way his administration governs. It's the hallmark of liberal corporatism, where governance becomes a matter of backroom deals and identity politics. Rule of law? Who needs it?

 

[del]

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism

President Obama retreated on Friday from his controversial healthcare rule requiring religious organizations such as charities and hospitals to include contraception coverage in their healthcare plans.

Obama described his compromise as “a sensible approach” in which employees who work for religious organizations that object to the use of birth control would be able to obtain contraception from the employer's insurer.

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism - TheHill.com

If it isn't about birth control, why are they calling it the birth control mandate?

You guys are not understanding how politically agressive the catholic church is.

Religious freedom, my butt.

yeah, it's really awful of them to uphold the tenets of their belief and demand that the govt uphold the constitution.

fascist fucking pigs

 

[Dr.House]

The Catholic church is oppressive. I think Catholic women also have the right to choose when and how many times reproduction occurs.

does the catholic church force people to become catholics at gunpoint? do they follow them home to bed?

no one's stopping catholics fro using bc; that's not the issue.

good effort, though

try again

Of course they don't want women using birth control. No you are not forced to join the Church at gunpoint, some of the women who work for them aren't even Catholic. They are simply forcing their beliefs on all employees and forcing them all to pay. $75 a month in some cases.

It's not the argument...

Nobody is forcing any behavioral changes in these women... You just can't look to the Church to pay for it... The alternative, for those who would sacrifice a good job in today's 0bamaconomy, is to find employment at a location who will pay for your $20 copay...

Contraception means birth control pills btw, the bishops are attempting to spin that it means free abortions for all!

No, they're not....

 

[California Girl]

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism

President Obama retreated on Friday from his controversial healthcare rule requiring religious organizations such as charities and hospitals to include contraception coverage in their healthcare plans.

Obama described his compromise as “a sensible approach” in which employees who work for religious organizations that object to the use of birth control would be able to obtain contraception from the employer's insurer.

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism - TheHill.com

If it isn't about birth control, why are they calling it the birth control mandate?

You guys are not understanding how politically agressive the catholic church is.

Religious freedom, my butt.

Firstly, I quoted the official press statement by the Bishops. There is no 'spin' about abortion. That is bullshit from the left... again.

Secondly, I explained earlier in this thread exactly why it is about religious freedom.

Thirdly, the Catholic Church is aggressively defending it's religious freedom.

 

[whitehall]

He never answers questions and if he does they are softballs from soft headed liberal reporters.

 

[California Girl]

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism

President Obama retreated on Friday from his controversial healthcare rule requiring religious organizations such as charities and hospitals to include contraception coverage in their healthcare plans.

Obama described his compromise as “a sensible approach” in which employees who work for religious organizations that object to the use of birth control would be able to obtain contraception from the employer's insurer.

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism - TheHill.com

If it isn't about birth control, why are they calling it the birth control mandate?

You guys are not understanding how politically agressive the catholic church is.

Religious freedom, my butt.

I think now, obama is finally understanding how politically aggressively they will fight when under assault ...

as in chess... a bishop will always check and topple a king.

Very well put, mo chara.

 

[Conservative]

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism

President Obama retreated on Friday from his controversial healthcare rule requiring religious organizations such as charities and hospitals to include contraception coverage in their healthcare plans.

Obama described his compromise as “a sensible approach” in which employees who work for religious organizations that object to the use of birth control would be able to obtain contraception from the employer's insurer.

Obama shifts on birth control mandate after heavy criticism - TheHill.com

If it isn't about birth control, why are they calling it the birth control mandate?

You guys are not understanding how politically agressive the catholic church is.

Religious freedom, my butt.

they being the Catholic bishops? Or they being the author of your linked piece? Or are you assuming this author speaks for the Catholic bishops?

 

[dblack]

i'm pretty sure i'm not a wingnut, but feel free to consider me one if it eases the pain.

You're not the one who was caving. You're not involved in the decision making in any way.

I don't have pain over this, I don't need contraception because of a surgery but to be fighting over this in 2012 is archaic.

We're not fighting about 'contraception' G. We are fighting over religious freedom. Let me see if I can explain this in a rational way for you.

The First Amendment says...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof....

Now, the AHA exempts Churchs - because they clearly fit within that. The issue is that the Government appears to define the above Amendment as 'worship' (ie the Church).... our faith is not about 'worship' (ie attending church)... it is far broader than that. We run charities as part of our religious 'free exercise'... our faiths require us to be charitable, to help our fellow man, to be in our communities helping those who need help. That is the free exercise of our religion. Our hospitals, our schools, our social programs, etc... they are fundamentally part of the 'free exercise' of our religion.

It is not about contraception. It is about the First Amendment.

It's about neither. It's about a president who runs the country by granting favors and exemptions to power blocks in exchange for support.

No one should get special exemptions from following the law just because it conflicts with their beliefs - personal, spiritual or otherwise. That's the key compromise of the social contract. We all agree to follow the rules, even when we don't agree with them. The first amendment isn't meant to give religions exemptions - it's to keep government out of the religion business. It's there to both prevent theocracy and to protect religions from government persecution. Unless a law specifically targets the practice of religion, the first is no protection.