DOJ to Colorado Family: Give Up Your Religion or Your Business

[Jackson]

Actually, it is against the doctines of several religions. But you're not one to let 'facts' get in the way of bullshit.

Why does that make a difference?

No one should be involved in that disussion but the patient and the doctor. If you are offering health coverage in leiu of compensation, that should be the end of the matter.

And no one should be paying for it except the patient.

You are absolutely right!

 

[California Girl]

They're not being asked to practice birth control or abortion, just provide access to insurance coverage. That position makes as much sense as allowing Muslim cab drivers to refuse to pick up fares that have been drinking.

Cab drivers refuse to pick up fares all the time, whether Muslim or not.

You're missing the point. We're talking religious reasons. The right was all up in arms, when people were refused service by Muslim cab drivers. What's the difference? Unlike cab drivers, the RCC doesn't even have to be in the presence of the "sinners".

Actually, the Catholic Church would disagree with that. To the Catholic Church, it is their duty to be in the presence of 'sinners'. It is their duty to provide care for the less fortunate, the sick, and those suffering. It's a core doctrine to Catholics.

 

[konradv]

You're missing the point. We're talking religious reasons. The right was all up in arms, when people were refused service by Muslim cab drivers. What's the difference? Unlike cab drivers, the RCC doesn't even have to be in the presence of the "sinners".

Do the Muslim cab drivers work for a Muslim owned cab company?

They're generally free agents with the company being no more than a dispatching agency.

 

[konradv]

Cab drivers refuse to pick up fares all the time, whether Muslim or not.

You're missing the point. We're talking religious reasons. The right was all up in arms, when people were refused service by Muslim cab drivers. What's the difference? Unlike cab drivers, the RCC doesn't even have to be in the presence of the "sinners".

Actually, the Catholic Church would disagree with that. To the Catholic Church, it is their duty to be in the presence of 'sinners'. It is their duty to provide care for the less fortunate, the sick, and those suffering. It's a core doctrine to Catholics.

Then what's the problem with insurance? You've taken my statement into something totally different. I never said anything about their duty to sinners, just that providing access to insurance, doesn't put them any closer to "sin" than at any other time.

 

[there4eyeM]

"And no one should be paying for it except the patient."

But others could pay for it if they desired.
If there were enough charities to aid poor people to live a decent life, it would never devolve to the government to do so.
When the poor are not aided, problems become much more severe.
That upsets governments and societies.
Redistribution of a violent kind takes place.
Intelligence would dictate another route.

Isn't that where the phrase "your money or your life" comes froml The ever existing threat of the poor to become violent and rob violently what they cannot get by simple demand.

A somewhat bizarre take on what was posted.
It was not intended to mean that the poor say, "Stand and deliver!" The subject was the fact that in society there are people who need help and that this help can arrive by many routes.
One would be eliminating the poor. That could be interpreted as 'kill 'em all!' or make them all richer and out of poverty.
Concentrating on the concept that people want things they don't deserve is a dead end. Remember Ed Muny, "Deserve's got nothin' to do with it."

 

[Bigfoot]

DOJ to Colorado Family: Give Up Your Religion or Your Business | CNSNews.com

Women need birth control for medical reasons too, not just social reasons. She should be allowed to get that BC under her health care plan paid for by her employer. If the employer refuses to give her birth control to aid with her periods, then perhaps they shouldn't be in business.

Do they pay health care coverage for men who need viagra? I bet they do. But when it comes to women, its different.

If their current female employees are okay with not having contraception covered by their plan, then that is fine - but if they request it, the owners should have no right to deny it.

I suspect if you assholes keep this shit up there will be a lot less women hired in the future.

It's like the democrats have a war on women.

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, it was technically the idea of the Heritage Foundation and Mitt Romney. "Conservatives" only started being against it when Obama adopted it.

I think most conservatives would disagree with you lumping in Mitt Romney with them. As far as the Heritage Foundation, their version of mandated health insurance was proposed solely as a more palatable alternative to HillaryCare, which everyone thought was going to pass and was only narrowly defeated at the last minute in the Senate.

Whether conservatives want to have Romney lumped in with them, it's not like you guys aren't going to support him in November.

So this is your argument, the Heritage Foundation really didn't mean it? You know, don't propose a comprimise and then don't live up to the comprimise when the other side agrees. No wonder nothing gets done in this country anymore.

That may be true, but they still profit off of it because it's not being provided for "free" as DHHS has claimed. The cost is simply passed off on everyone across the board. ObamaCare as a whole is an enormous windfall to the health insurance companies.

Well, only in the regard that EVERYTHING in a pool system is passed on. No matter if it's a private system or a public system, the fact is, if you are healthy, you are getting ripped off, and if you are sick, you are getting a windfall. A single payer system would be better in that it could dictate what procedures will cost and standardize which procedures are covered.

HHS's point was that the insurance companies would save money on this because births cost more than birth control. So they would probably be happy to do it on a cost benefit analysis.

The ironic thing is that the Catholic Church was all for Obamacare when they thought their hospitals would get a windfall in more compensated patients. Then they found this little string was attached, even though 96% of sexually active Catholic women practice birth control, they wouldn't want to look like they were condoning or anything.

No, it's not at all. Telling someone you are not allowed to use a product as opposed to telling them they have to buy it themselves is nothing close to the same thing, but you already know that.

Again, if health coverage is part of the deal, it's part of the deal. All ObamaCare did was keep employers from welching on the deal.

Pure speculation, nothing more nothing less. That's a completely invalid argument as you can't cite one example of that happening or proof it will happen in the future.

Three generations of my family have worked for the Catholic Church. Yeah, they have a lovely habit of sticking their noses where they don't belong. Reason #49 why I hate the mother fuckers with a passion.

This is why I think these people need to be slapped down- hard. Keep your religous stupidity to yourself.

And that's why we have freedom of religion in our Constitution. To protect religious people from intolerant folks like yourself.[/QUOTE]

Your perfectly free to be ignorant, bigoted and superstition in your homes and your churches.

In business, not so much. If they want to run a business, they have to follow the law.

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, it is against the doctines of several religions. But you're not one to let 'facts' get in the way of bullshit.

Why does that make a difference?

No one should be involved in that disussion but the patient and the doctor. If you are offering health coverage in leiu of compensation, that should be the end of the matter.

And no one should be paying for it except the patient.

Good idea. Let's get rid of employer based health insurance and replace it entirely with a single payer system.

Oh, wait. That's probably not what you were going for there.

 

[Nova78]

The turds are rampant in our government

 

[Dick Tuck]

Quakers shouldn't have to pay taxes that go to the military. Amish shouldn't pay taxes that go to buying vehicles. Christian Scientists shouldn't pay taxes that go to government hospitals.

Get over it people. Congress shall make no law recognizing the establishment of religion.

 

[WillowTree]

Bite me!

 

[JoeB131]

I don't know if that's true or not, but again, don't work for them if they're making it difficult. Pretty much everyone knows about this controversial policy now, so if you are a woman who expects to have your birth control pills covered through your insurance company, why would you go work for a Catholic organization? I wouldn't.

Nor would I. It will be a happy day to me the day that the Catholic Church goes out of business and they break out the bulldozers to level the Vatican.

But people shouldn't have to be put through a ringer because the men in dresses who own their company have sexual hangups. If only they had shown this much concern when their priests were molesting little boys.

What every other industrialized country in the world does is completely irrelevant. If you want that system then go live there.

Or we can fix this country after we bat down all the stupid people who live here. That works, too. And it will infinitely more satisfying.

There is nothing responsible about universal health care as there is nothing responsible about expecting someone else to pick up you or your family's bills and I'm not even going to get in to the whole totalitarian aspects of such a system. Responsibility is pulling your own weight in this world, for better or for worse. Living in freedom means having the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail, something you clearly don't seem to value.
.

That works on the assumption that I really think health care is a luxery item. I should have the freedom to eat ice cream. I should not have the freedom to decide whether or not to die of cancer.

Health care should be like police protection and fire protection and public utilities- it should be a public service. And it halfway is. Our current system could not exist without massive government support.

I really don't know what you mean here.

What I mean, my dense friend, is that instead of doing what every other country in the world had the good sense to do an establish a national health service, we decided to let employers provide it as a part of a working package.

As such, we allow employers to have more control over our lives. I should have walked away from my last job for a better paying one in 2007, but I was in the middle of a couple of health related issues I was resolving, and couldn't change insurance carriers. Ironically, when the recession hit, it was those of us who had medical issues who were the first to go.

 

[OODA_Loop]

As such, we allow employers to have more control over our lives. I should have walked away from my last job for a better paying one in 2007, but I was in the middle of a couple of health related issues I was resolving, and couldn't change insurance carriers. Ironically, when the recession hit, it was those of us who had medical issues who were the first to go.

Joe has a personal antedote to support every talking point.

Added all up he must be 147 years old.

 

[Katzndogz]

They're not being asked to practice birth control or abortion, just provide access to insurance coverage. That position makes as much sense as allowing Muslim cab drivers to refuse to pick up fares that have been drinking.

Cab drivers refuse to pick up fares all the time, whether Muslim or not.

You're missing the point. We're talking religious reasons. The right was all up in arms, when people were refused service by Muslim cab drivers. What's the difference? Unlike cab drivers, the RCC doesn't even have to be in the presence of the "sinners".

The difference is, the HVAC company is not refusing to fix air conditioners based on the religion of the customer.

If the government demanded that all muslim owned cab companies had to provide bacon for the cab driver's lunch, NOW you have an argument.

 

[WillowTree]

Why does that make a difference?

No one should be involved in that disussion but the patient and the doctor. If you are offering health coverage in leiu of compensation, that should be the end of the matter.

And no one should be paying for it except the patient.

Good idea. Let's get rid of employer based health insurance and replace it entirely with a single payer system.

Oh, wait. That's probably not what you were going for there.

single payer system won't work.. becuase 50% of you assholes don't pay Federal Income TAX.

 

[Katzndogz]

I don't know if that's true or not, but again, don't work for them if they're making it difficult. Pretty much everyone knows about this controversial policy now, so if you are a woman who expects to have your birth control pills covered through your insurance company, why would you go work for a Catholic organization? I wouldn't.

Nor would I. It will be a happy day to me the day that the Catholic Church goes out of business and they break out the bulldozers to level the Vatican.

But people shouldn't have to be put through a ringer because the men in dresses who own their company have sexual hangups. If only they had shown this much concern when their priests were molesting little boys.

What every other industrialized country in the world does is completely irrelevant. If you want that system then go live there.

Or we can fix this country after we bat down all the stupid people who live here. That works, too. And it will infinitely more satisfying.

There is nothing responsible about universal health care as there is nothing responsible about expecting someone else to pick up you or your family's bills and I'm not even going to get in to the whole totalitarian aspects of such a system. Responsibility is pulling your own weight in this world, for better or for worse. Living in freedom means having the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail, something you clearly don't seem to value.
.

That works on the assumption that I really think health care is a luxery item. I should have the freedom to eat ice cream. I should not have the freedom to decide whether or not to die of cancer.

Health care should be like police protection and fire protection and public utilities- it should be a public service. And it halfway is. Our current system could not exist without massive government support.

I really don't know what you mean here.

What I mean, my dense friend, is that instead of doing what every other country in the world had the good sense to do an establish a national health service, we decided to let employers provide it as a part of a working package.

As such, we allow employers to have more control over our lives. I should have walked away from my last job for a better paying one in 2007, but I was in the middle of a couple of health related issues I was resolving, and couldn't change insurance carriers. Ironically, when the recession hit, it was those of us who had medical issues who were the first to go.

I should not have the freedom to decide whether or not to die of cancer.

Really? The government should make this decision for you? Should gays and drug addicts be prohibited the freedom to die of AIDS or syphyllis or any other blood borne disease. Should the government be empowered to decide for you how many hours of sleep to get?

 

[JoeB131]

As such, we allow employers to have more control over our lives. I should have walked away from my last job for a better paying one in 2007, but I was in the middle of a couple of health related issues I was resolving, and couldn't change insurance carriers. Ironically, when the recession hit, it was those of us who had medical issues who were the first to go.

Joe has a personal antedote to support every talking point.

Added all up he must be 147 years old.

Well, more like 50... and yeah, that's a lot of living.

Math isn't one of your strong point, either, is it?

 

[JoeB131]

I should not have the freedom to decide whether or not to die of cancer.

Really? The government should make this decision for you? Should gays and drug addicts be prohibited the freedom to die of AIDS or syphyllis or any other blood borne disease. Should the government be empowered to decide for you how many hours of sleep to get?

Wow, you missed the point entirely...

I could try explaining it to you again, but given your track record of Home Skule reading comprehension, you probably still wouldn't get it.

For anyone else, health care should be a public service, NOT a consumer choice. Period.

Then, yeah, maybe we will have to make hard decisions on whether to extend a patient's treatment, but the determining factor will not be, "When a company stops making a profit on it." Which seems to be the concern of these bought and paid for "Libertarians".

 

[JoeB131]

And no one should be paying for it except the patient.

Good idea. Let's get rid of employer based health insurance and replace it entirely with a single payer system.

Oh, wait. That's probably not what you were going for there.

single payer system won't work.. becuase 50% of you assholes don't pay Federal Income TAX.

The sad thing is, you probably believe that figure to be true.

Leaving aside that most of us "assholes" are indeed paying not only federal income tax, but state income tax, Social Security Tax, Medicare Tax, Sales tax, property tax, licenses and fees...

But do you really think the 50% don't pay taxes is the reality...

It's A Myth That 47% Of Americans Pay No Taxes, In Truth 86% Pay Taxes

Let me explain—repeat actually—what this means: About half of taxpayers paid no federal income tax last year. It does not mean they paid no tax at all. Many shelled out Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. In fact, only 14 percent of Americans didn’t pay either income or payroll taxes. Some paid property taxes and, it is fair to say, just about all of them paid sales taxes of one kind or another. So to say they pay no taxes is flat wrong.

 

[Katzndogz]

Score one for freedom of religion.

Score One for Religious Freedom | CowboyByte

A federal district court in Colorado has issued an injunction against the government enforcing ObamaCare’s abortifacient/contraceptive and sterilization mandate against Hercules, a private company.