Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I just don't get the whole argument. If you have sex and want birth control that is your business. If you want to use birth control, that is smart but it is also your responsibility you pay for it. Penl implants are just stupid, guy need to grow up and I am a guy.
Wrong. You claimed the right supports government-paid penile implants.You're the one claiming something exists. Burden of proof falls on you.
Prove it.
Show me the protests against it.
For those that are so militantly opposed to insurance coverage for birth control, why are you okay with insurance coverage for penile implants? Birth control actually has some medical uses beyond contraception (it's very useful for the treatment of endometriosis, for example), while penile implants don't have a medical use beyond defining the ability to have sex as a medical use.
because that would effect men, and republicans care about men.
Your lack of awareness is proof of nothing except your lack of awareness.Well, that wouldn't be much proof of anything.Show me the protests against it.
If you claimed the right supports govt-paid penile implants, that burden is on YOU to support it.
You won't be able to support it, but that doesn't mean that burden isn't on you. And, until you DO support it, it can be taken as utter bullshit until you DO support it.
If the right is so against it, why are they never protesting against it like they protest against birth control? It's the same load of crap where your side claims they were really angry about Bush's spending, but mysteriously never said anything the entire time he was in office.
We're under no obligation to validate your claims.YOU made the claim; the burden is on you.If the right is so against it, why are they never protesting against it like they protest against birth control? It's the same load of crap where your side claims they were really angry about Bush's spending, but mysteriously never said anything the entire time he was in office.
It's bullshit.
Move on or carry on and look like a moron, though.
Why is it bullshit? Hell, your side has had this entire thread to voice opposition to it and not a single person has done so.
Not a single voice of opposition, even after being given the chance to denounce it repeatedly, and yet people are supposed to believe you're firmly opposed?
Contraception is a valid medical issue, nutball.
Not a single voice of opposition, even after being given the chance to denounce it repeatedly, and yet people are supposed to believe you're firmly opposed?
Leftists like to lick yogurt off of hobos' feet.
No one has denied it. Therefore, it's true.
Wrong. You claimed the right supports government-paid penile implants.
Prove it.
Show me the protests against it.
You're really not very good at this.
Perhaps you could find message board posts, letters to the editor, or party platform statements backing up your claim.
Or you can just keep stamping your feet and insisting other people do your homework for you.
Wrong. You claimed the right supports government-paid penile implants.
Prove it.
Show me the protests against it.
You're really not very good at this.
Perhaps you could find message board posts, letters to the editor, or party platform statements backing up your claim.
Or you can just keep stamping your feet and insisting other people do your homework for you.
Rather, the First Amendment doesn't give the GOVERNMENT the right to dictate to religious organizations what they MUST do contrary to their beliefs by passing a law doing just that - that "law" that you say the religious organizations want to break. And when their breaking that "law" doesn't affect the inherent rights, guaranteed by the Constitution, of anyone.
I'm surprised you didn't learn that little detail in 8th grade civics.
They are apparently taught that the Constitution makes it illegal for people to do things.
None of the amendments is an absolutely. Just because you have freedom of religion doesn't mean you get to perform human sacrifice. Just because you have freedom of speech doesn't mean you get to yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater.
Not really. You're making a claim -- it's up to you to prove it.Perhaps you'd like to provide a link to something about the anti-penile implant protests?
You're the one claiming something exists. Burden of proof falls on you.
Except no one is forcing religions to do anything. To say any organization vaguely associate with a religion deserves First Amendment protection is to effectively nullify federal law. After all, just claim any law you don't like violates your religion.
That's one way to look at it, I suppose. Do note, however, that the 1st Amendment doesn't specify that freedom of religion is something bestowed upon religious sects as a whole. It's an individual right, not a collective one. Each person is free to practice their religion as they see fit (so long as they aren't breaking the law, of course), and it's always been generally understood that the whole idea was that the government couldn't force people of ANY faith (in any number) to compromise that faith unduly. Otherwise you could force Jehovas Witnesses in elementary schools to participate in holiday celebrations, since you're not forcing "the religion itself" to do anything, only a few members who had the nerve to try and say that the 1st Amendment protects them in particular, and not just their religion as an organization.
The crux of the issue is what you feel is undue, not what you feel qualifies as a valid religious tenet or who you feel qualifies as a valid religious person/organization. If it were subject to those opinions, it wouldn't really protect -anything-, now would it? At any point popular opinion could decide that certain religions aren't covered. If that's how it's supposed to work, why specify that freedom at all? Just get it over with and choose a state religion.
The part I highlighted in the rub, since your argument is that they should be free to break the law, by claiming the law is a violation of their religion. My point is that to read the First Amendment so broadly is to effectively nullify all laws.
Well, that wouldn't be much proof of anything.Show me the protests against it.
If you claimed the right supports govt-paid penile implants, that burden is on YOU to support it.
You won't be able to support it, but that doesn't mean that burden isn't on you. And, until you DO support it, it can be taken as utter bullshit until you DO support it.
If the right is so against it, why are they never protesting against it like they protest against birth control? It's the same load of crap where your side claims they were really angry about Bush's spending, but mysteriously never said anything the entire time he was in office.
Not a single voice of opposition, even after being given the chance to denounce it repeatedly, and yet people are supposed to believe you're firmly opposed?
That is very interesting. So all this blather about charity hospitals going out of business was just, well, blather?More on Catholic Healthcare West's decision
by Jamie L Manson on Jan. 26, 2012 NCR Today
In what could set a significant precedent, Catholic Healthcare West, "one of the nation's largest hospital systems and operator of four Bay Area hospitals, is ending its governing board's affiliation with the Catholic Church and changing its name to help the system expand," the San Jose Mercury News reports.
The system's change to a nondenominational board will create "a tremendous opportunity that will help accelerate our growth," Lloyd Dean, the president and CEO of Catholic Healthcare West, told the Mercury News.
The article also reports that "secular hospitals added to the system will be required to adhere to the 'Statement of Common Values' that apply to Catholic Healthcare West's secular hospitals."
Although the article doesn't note this, the move will also allow the hospital to provide its employees with all of the provisions included in the Affordable Healthcare Act, including access to contraception, without involvement from the hierarchy.
More on Catholic Healthcare West's decision | National Catholic Reporter
and some 'catholic' systems don't agree...imagine that
Contraception is a valid medical issue, nutball.