DontBeStupid
Look it up!
You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you.
Catholics sue Obama
- Thread starter SniperFire
- Start date
You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you.
The T
George S. Patton Party
I suggest YOU look in the nearest mirror.
BlindBoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 28, 2010
- 58,797
- 17,688
- 2,250
Facts do not matter. They're told what to believe. Once they are told what to beleive, their faith dictates they hold on to that belief no matter what.
The T
George S. Patton Party
VaYank5150
Gold Member
That'll teach him to shake his fist at God!
BREAKING: Cardinal Dolan of NY, Cardinal Wuerl of D.C., Notre Dame--And 40 Other Catholic Dioceses and Organizations--Sue Obama Administration | CNSNews.com
Where is the GOP outcry for tort reform when we REALLY need it?
The T
George S. Patton Party
Claimed what I did...Fluke was demanding something she had NO right to demand from a Catholic School...but made an issue and ASS out of Obama and the Statist Democrats.
I applaud the Diocese for thier lawsuit.
*I AM CATHOLIC FOR THE CAUSE OF LIBERTY*
DontBeStupid
Look it up!
You can claim it all you want. Doesn't make it true.
The T
George S. Patton Party
Translation: "I Don't be Stupid didn't get the point..."
Not the first time Stupid...and certainly NOT the last.
RightWingFerret
Rookie
- Banned
- #30
and now he's on TV giving long boring and confusing questions to the press, and when he was asked about that Romney/Baines ad being its an outright lie,,he wouldn't comment on it,,just went off on left field about the private sector,,,,,,what a wuss! why didnt obama just admit the ad was a total farse?
The T
George S. Patton Party
Because he loses credability...and that can't happen. HE has to obfuscate issues other than the economy...
SniperFire
Senior Member
- Thread starter
- #32
"We need God. We need each other. We are important to each other. '
-Obama last week, as he struggles to force millions of Catholics to violate their faith
-Obama last week, as he struggles to force millions of Catholics to violate their faith
Dick Tuck
Board Troll
- Aug 29, 2009
- 8,511
- 505
- 48
Who's being forced to violate their faith? If Catholics want to play Vatican roulette for birth control, no one is taking that right away.
Artevelde
Senior Member
So you are opposed to freedom of conscience? Noted.
SniperFire
Senior Member
- Thread starter
- #35
C_Clayton_Jones
Diamond Member
The Church has a considerable uphill climb with its lawsuit, as there are no First Amendment violations, either with regard to the Free Exercise Clause or the doctrine of free association.
The policy in question clearly passes the religious test established in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971):
This is obviously the case, since the measure is designed only to ensure consistent availability of healthcare coverage for all employees.
Â…second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion,
This prong of the test is also not at issue; no Catholic is forced to use a contraceptive therapy or have an abortion, no Catholic is denied any ritual of the Church, neither doctrine nor dogma is being preempted.
The argument by some that the policy ‘forces’ the Church to provide treatments in ‘violation’ of its religious tenets is ignorant idiocy: the relationship between the Church and its ‘affiliated employers’ is tenuous at best. Indeed, the health insurance coverage provided is a contract between the insurer and insured only, the employer is not involved in the insurance contract in any way, even less so for the Church.
…finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion.”
Not only is there not an excessive government entanglement, thereÂ’s no connection whatsoever. The premium payments made by the affiliated employer constitute compensation, the same as a wage or leave, to be used as the employee sees fit. That all or part of the premium payment is made directly to the insurer is immaterial, the affiliated employer can no more dictate to the employee how to use his healthcare compensation than how he may spend his wage or where he may or may not go on vacation.
In order to have any success with its suit, the Church would have to demonstrate a direct link between the policy and how its provisions in any way interfere with religious practice. Since no interference exists, the link can not be established.
In addition, many contraceptives are used as a therapy having nothing to do with birth control, and that an employee might use her health insurance for birth control is insufficient grounds to invalidate the policy.
Moreover, the Church has a serious inconsistency problem with regard to its argument. Many Catholic affiliated employers currently provide employees birth control coverage in their insurance plans: the University of Scranton, DePaul University in Chicago, and Christian Brothers University in Memphis are but a few examples of Catholic affiliated employers who provide such coverage.*
This lawsuit isnÂ’t about the law, the Constitution, or religious freedom, itÂ’s about partisan politics, itÂ’s a contrived non-issue by social conservatives.
* Many Catholic Universities, Hospitals Already Cover Contraception In Their Health Insurance Plans | ThinkProgress
The policy in question clearly passes the religious test established in Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971):
First, the statute must have a secular legislative purposeÂ…
This is obviously the case, since the measure is designed only to ensure consistent availability of healthcare coverage for all employees.
Â…second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion,
This prong of the test is also not at issue; no Catholic is forced to use a contraceptive therapy or have an abortion, no Catholic is denied any ritual of the Church, neither doctrine nor dogma is being preempted.
The argument by some that the policy ‘forces’ the Church to provide treatments in ‘violation’ of its religious tenets is ignorant idiocy: the relationship between the Church and its ‘affiliated employers’ is tenuous at best. Indeed, the health insurance coverage provided is a contract between the insurer and insured only, the employer is not involved in the insurance contract in any way, even less so for the Church.
…finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion.”
Not only is there not an excessive government entanglement, thereÂ’s no connection whatsoever. The premium payments made by the affiliated employer constitute compensation, the same as a wage or leave, to be used as the employee sees fit. That all or part of the premium payment is made directly to the insurer is immaterial, the affiliated employer can no more dictate to the employee how to use his healthcare compensation than how he may spend his wage or where he may or may not go on vacation.
In order to have any success with its suit, the Church would have to demonstrate a direct link between the policy and how its provisions in any way interfere with religious practice. Since no interference exists, the link can not be established.
In addition, many contraceptives are used as a therapy having nothing to do with birth control, and that an employee might use her health insurance for birth control is insufficient grounds to invalidate the policy.
Moreover, the Church has a serious inconsistency problem with regard to its argument. Many Catholic affiliated employers currently provide employees birth control coverage in their insurance plans: the University of Scranton, DePaul University in Chicago, and Christian Brothers University in Memphis are but a few examples of Catholic affiliated employers who provide such coverage.*
This lawsuit isnÂ’t about the law, the Constitution, or religious freedom, itÂ’s about partisan politics, itÂ’s a contrived non-issue by social conservatives.
* Many Catholic Universities, Hospitals Already Cover Contraception In Their Health Insurance Plans | ThinkProgress
SniperFire
Senior Member
- Thread starter
- #38
There are 12 separate lawsuits, each of which invokes and demands a civil jury trial.
RightWingFerret
Rookie
- Banned
- #39
Obama just wants to kill catholic babies cause he hates the religion and wont tolerate them multiplying.
40 Catholic dioceses and organizations.
God v. Obama.
Who will win?
The one who isn't imaginary.
Similar threads
New Topics
-
-
Chicago Bulls Offer To Reinstate Jayden Ivey If He Will Do Some Cocaine And Beat A Few Women- Started by Votto
- Replies: 0
-
-
Trump says we should not have child care, Medicare or Medicaid because of wars.- Started by JLW
- Replies: 5
-
