Judge bars birth control mandate

[Quantum Windbag]

First battle won, at least for now.

A federal judge in Colorado, acting on one of two dozen cases across the nation challenging the new health care law’s promise of free birth-control for women workers, on Friday temporarily barred the enforcement of that mandate against a Catholic family’s private business firm. The eighteen-page ruling by Senior District Judge John L. Kane, Jr., appears to be the first in those lawsuits. The order will remain in effect while the judge studies further whether to make the ban permanent. It applies only to one company, but it marked a significant initial victory for the challengers.

Under the new Affordable Care Act, Congress created a number of new requirements to assure minimum levels of health care, and the birth-control mandate is one of them — and is one of the most controversial. It requires group health plans to provide free contraceptive care and screening. But it includes many exceptions, and that was one of the reasons Judge Kane cited in rejecting the Obama Administration argument that blocking enforcement even temporarily would seriously interrupt this kind of health care.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/07/judge-bars-birth-control-mandate/

 

[tererun]

Good plan, lets us get that up to SCOTUS so they can fuck the right wing discrimination thing again. For a bunch of people who were bitching because their own rhetoric is too stupid for SCOTUS to uphold they sure seem eager to bring their discrimination before the courts.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Good plan, lets us get that up to SCOTUS so they can fuck the right wing discrimination thing again. For a bunch of people who were bitching because their own rhetoric is too stupid for SCOTUS to uphold they sure seem eager to bring their discrimination before the courts.

Care to show me where in the Constitution you have a right to birth control paid for by someone else?

 

[WillowTree]

Good plan, lets us get that up to SCOTUS so they can fuck the right wing discrimination thing again. For a bunch of people who were bitching because their own rhetoric is too stupid for SCOTUS to uphold they sure seem eager to bring their discrimination before the courts.

Run tell meister I negged ya. Ya hear?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Good plan, lets us get that up to SCOTUS so they can fuck the right wing discrimination thing again. For a bunch of people who were bitching because their own rhetoric is too stupid for SCOTUS to uphold they sure seem eager to bring their discrimination before the courts.

How is discrimination to insist on my rights?

 

[onecut39]

First battle won, at least for now.

A federal judge in Colorado, acting on one of two dozen cases across the nation challenging the new health care law’s promise of free birth-control for women workers, on Friday temporarily barred the enforcement of that mandate against a Catholic family’s private business firm. The eighteen-page ruling by Senior District Judge John L. Kane, Jr., appears to be the first in those lawsuits. The order will remain in effect while the judge studies further whether to make the ban permanent. It applies only to one company, but it marked a significant initial victory for the challengers.

Under the new Affordable Care Act, Congress created a number of new requirements to assure minimum levels of health care, and the birth-control mandate is one of them — and is one of the most controversial. It requires group health plans to provide free contraceptive care and screening. But it includes many exceptions, and that was one of the reasons Judge Kane cited in rejecting the Obama Administration argument that blocking enforcement even temporarily would seriously interrupt this kind of health care.

Judge bars birth control mandate : SCOTUSblog

To me this is an incredibly stupid ruling. In essence it says that an owners religious belief can trump the law. If the said owners religions beliefs are such that he does not believe in medical care at all (Christian Scientist) is he then allowed to disregard the law completely?

Sounds like the same principle to me. I don't think this will fly on it's own merits. Some judges, Scalia type, may try this route simply because they don't like the healthcare law.

 

[Ariux]

To me this is an incredibly stupid ruling. In essence it says that an owners religious belief can trump the law. If the said owners religions beliefs are such that he does not believe in medical care at all (Christian Scientist) is he then allowed to disregard the law completely?

You sound like an incredible piece of shit, defending the government should have the right to force people to do things that violates their deeply held beliefs. Are you a fag? Why are you so fucked up?

 

[Katzndogz]

If a business owner's religious belief denies medical care, the business owner should not have to provide medical insurance at all. Even having a law mandating insurance is wrong. Insurance has always been a perk, never a right.

 

[onecut39]

If a business owner's religious belief denies medical care, the business owner should not have to provide medical insurance at all. Even having a law mandating insurance is wrong. Insurance has always been a perk, never a right.

Fine. I am for medicare for all anyway. Selling insurance has always been a perk, never a right.

 

[California Girl]

If a business owner's religious belief denies medical care, the business owner should not have to provide medical insurance at all. Even having a law mandating insurance is wrong. Insurance has always been a perk, never a right.

Fine. I am for medicare for all anyway. Selling insurance has always been a perk, never a right.

Much like heath care then.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

First battle won, at least for now.

A federal judge in Colorado, acting on one of two dozen cases across the nation challenging the new health care law’s promise of free birth-control for women workers, on Friday temporarily barred the enforcement of that mandate against a Catholic family’s private business firm. The eighteen-page ruling by Senior District Judge John L. Kane, Jr., appears to be the first in those lawsuits. The order will remain in effect while the judge studies further whether to make the ban permanent. It applies only to one company, but it marked a significant initial victory for the challengers.

Under the new Affordable Care Act, Congress created a number of new requirements to assure minimum levels of health care, and the birth-control mandate is one of them — and is one of the most controversial. It requires group health plans to provide free contraceptive care and screening. But it includes many exceptions, and that was one of the reasons Judge Kane cited in rejecting the Obama Administration argument that blocking enforcement even temporarily would seriously interrupt this kind of health care.

Judge bars birth control mandate : SCOTUSblog

To me this is an incredibly stupid ruling. In essence it says that an owners religious belief can trump the law. If the said owners religions beliefs are such that he does not believe in medical care at all (Christian Scientist) is he then allowed to disregard the law completely?

Sounds like the same principle to me. I don't think this will fly on it's own merits. Some judges, Scalia type, may try this route simply because they don't like the healthcare law.

To me, this is an incredibly stupid post. In essence, it says that Congress can make laws that ignore the Constitution. If Congress can make laws that ignore the Constitution it can say that anyone who is not a Muslim must pay a tax for their beliefs.

Now that we have gotten your stupidity out of the way, the answer to your question about Christian Scientists is yes, a Christian Science Reading Room does not have to provide its employees with health insurance.

This is why the regulations will be overturned, they were written with no regard for the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Supreme Court precedent, or the Constitution.

 

[Politico]

Good plan, lets us get that up to SCOTUS so they can fuck the right wing discrimination thing again.

What? I guess you didn't read the ruling.

 

[Ariux]

It's always interesting how libtards respond with puzzlement over the concept of freedom.

"If you don't force Catholics to provide abortions, then what's next? We'll have anarchy!"

 

[auditor0007]

First battle won, at least for now.

A federal judge in Colorado, acting on one of two dozen cases across the nation challenging the new health care law’s promise of free birth-control for women workers, on Friday temporarily barred the enforcement of that mandate against a Catholic family’s private business firm. The eighteen-page ruling by Senior District Judge John L. Kane, Jr., appears to be the first in those lawsuits. The order will remain in effect while the judge studies further whether to make the ban permanent. It applies only to one company, but it marked a significant initial victory for the challengers.

Under the new Affordable Care Act, Congress created a number of new requirements to assure minimum levels of health care, and the birth-control mandate is one of them — and is one of the most controversial. It requires group health plans to provide free contraceptive care and screening. But it includes many exceptions, and that was one of the reasons Judge Kane cited in rejecting the Obama Administration argument that blocking enforcement even temporarily would seriously interrupt this kind of health care.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/07/judge-bars-birth-control-mandate/

I still have very mixed feelings on this. I know the company doesn't want to pay for something they do not support, but at the same time they are using that as a way to force their beliefs on those who work for them. Obviously, the employees can still buy birth control but at a much higher cost. I guess in the end it should be left up to the employer. The employee can always look for work elsewhere.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

First battle won, at least for now.

A federal judge in Colorado, acting on one of two dozen cases across the nation challenging the new health care law’s promise of free birth-control for women workers, on Friday temporarily barred the enforcement of that mandate against a Catholic family’s private business firm. The eighteen-page ruling by Senior District Judge John L. Kane, Jr., appears to be the first in those lawsuits. The order will remain in effect while the judge studies further whether to make the ban permanent. It applies only to one company, but it marked a significant initial victory for the challengers.

Under the new Affordable Care Act, Congress created a number of new requirements to assure minimum levels of health care, and the birth-control mandate is one of them — and is one of the most controversial. It requires group health plans to provide free contraceptive care and screening. But it includes many exceptions, and that was one of the reasons Judge Kane cited in rejecting the Obama Administration argument that blocking enforcement even temporarily would seriously interrupt this kind of health care.

Judge bars birth control mandate : SCOTUSblog

Going all the way back to the Supreme Court? worked out great so far, eh?

 

[onecut39]

To me this is an incredibly stupid ruling. In essence it says that an owners religious belief can trump the law. If the said owners religions beliefs are such that he does not believe in medical care at all (Christian Scientist) is he then allowed to disregard the law completely?

You sound like an incredible piece of shit, defending the government should have the right to force people to do things that violates their deeply held beliefs. Are you a fag? Why are you so fucked up?

VERY GOOD! Three lines. Two obscenities. One slur.

No sense at all. You are ready for big time conservative politics.

 

[Papageorgio]

First battle won, at least for now.

A federal judge in Colorado, acting on one of two dozen cases across the nation challenging the new health care law’s promise of free birth-control for women workers, on Friday temporarily barred the enforcement of that mandate against a Catholic family’s private business firm. The eighteen-page ruling by Senior District Judge John L. Kane, Jr., appears to be the first in those lawsuits. The order will remain in effect while the judge studies further whether to make the ban permanent. It applies only to one company, but it marked a significant initial victory for the challengers.

Under the new Affordable Care Act, Congress created a number of new requirements to assure minimum levels of health care, and the birth-control mandate is one of them — and is one of the most controversial. It requires group health plans to provide free contraceptive care and screening. But it includes many exceptions, and that was one of the reasons Judge Kane cited in rejecting the Obama Administration argument that blocking enforcement even temporarily would seriously interrupt this kind of health care.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2012/07/judge-bars-birth-control-mandate/

I still have very mixed feelings on this. I know the company doesn't want to pay for something they do not support, but at the same time they are using that as a way to force their beliefs on those who work for them. Obviously, the employees can still buy birth control but at a much higher cost. I guess in the end it should be left up to the employer. The employee can always look for work elsewhere.

What business does the government have in the bedroom? With the law the employee can purchase their health care and have it covered, it isn't trike they don't pass out condoms in schools and other places.

 

[Ariux]

To me this is an incredibly stupid ruling. In essence it says that an owners religious belief can trump the law. If the said owners religions beliefs are such that he does not believe in medical care at all (Christian Scientist) is he then allowed to disregard the law completely?

You sound like an incredible piece of shit, defending the government should have the right to force people to do things that violates their deeply held beliefs. Are you a fag? Why are you so fucked up?

VERY GOOD! Three lines. Two obscenities. One slur.

No sense at all. You are ready for big time conservative politics.

The two obscenities and the one slur are included only so that there will be content you understand. The sense goes way over your head.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

First battle won, at least for now.

A federal judge in Colorado, acting on one of two dozen cases across the nation challenging the new health care law’s promise of free birth-control for women workers, on Friday temporarily barred the enforcement of that mandate against a Catholic family’s private business firm. The eighteen-page ruling by Senior District Judge John L. Kane, Jr., appears to be the first in those lawsuits. The order will remain in effect while the judge studies further whether to make the ban permanent. It applies only to one company, but it marked a significant initial victory for the challengers.

Under the new Affordable Care Act, Congress created a number of new requirements to assure minimum levels of health care, and the birth-control mandate is one of them — and is one of the most controversial. It requires group health plans to provide free contraceptive care and screening. But it includes many exceptions, and that was one of the reasons Judge Kane cited in rejecting the Obama Administration argument that blocking enforcement even temporarily would seriously interrupt this kind of health care.

Judge bars birth control mandate : SCOTUSblog

I still have very mixed feelings on this. I know the company doesn't want to pay for something they do not support, but at the same time they are using that as a way to force their beliefs on those who work for them. Obviously, the employees can still buy birth control but at a much higher cost. I guess in the end it should be left up to the employer. The employee can always look for work elsewhere.

The only problem you have is that you lack the ability to force your beliefs on other people. The company is not trying to force anyone to do anything, they are just refusing to let you tell them what to do.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

First battle won, at least for now.

A federal judge in Colorado, acting on one of two dozen cases across the nation challenging the new health care law’s promise of free birth-control for women workers, on Friday temporarily barred the enforcement of that mandate against a Catholic family’s private business firm. The eighteen-page ruling by Senior District Judge John L. Kane, Jr., appears to be the first in those lawsuits. The order will remain in effect while the judge studies further whether to make the ban permanent. It applies only to one company, but it marked a significant initial victory for the challengers.

Under the new Affordable Care Act, Congress created a number of new requirements to assure minimum levels of health care, and the birth-control mandate is one of them — and is one of the most controversial. It requires group health plans to provide free contraceptive care and screening. But it includes many exceptions, and that was one of the reasons Judge Kane cited in rejecting the Obama Administration argument that blocking enforcement even temporarily would seriously interrupt this kind of health care.

Judge bars birth control mandate : SCOTUSblog

Going all the way back to the Supreme Court? worked out great so far, eh?

The mandate to pay for birth control will fail to pass judicial review, I suggest you read the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the high bar it places on the government regarding matters of faith and conflict with federal laws.