I love it! CHURCH VOWS WAR ON OBAMA 'FIGHT IN STREETS'

[Jarhead]

Again, no one is forcing anyone to take birth control.

No. But someone is trying to force someone to offer birth control.

This is really not a religious debate...although many want to make it that.

This should be a debate about the federal government forcing an insurance company to cover birth control....

And that is very sketchy at best

It's actually about the federal government forcing an insurance company to cover a prescription.

well...yes...but not a prescription that is for the better health of the prescribed. Instead, it is a prescription to allow the prescribed to enjoy sex withoiut the concern of preganncy. Sort of a luxury if you ask me.

You can not deny that this is not like forcing an inusrance company to cover a prescription for an antibiotic.

This, to me, is akin to forcing an insurance company to cover a face lift.

 

[Jarhead]

No, but it's forcing the church to pay for it.

Violation of separation of church and state. I thought you were gung ho about that? Guess not. Which means I was right...progressives only PRETEND to believe in liberty in order to force tyranny upon people. Just like the Nazis.

No...it is not.

It is forcing insurance companies to cover it.

And the original law will force the employers to offer insurance to employees...

But it is not forcing the Church to pay for anything.

The church is forced to provide insurance, and the insurance is forced to provide contraception and abortificants...that means the church is being forced to provide contraception and abortificants in violation of the employers' first amendment rights.

But well ahead of that is the insurance company being forced to offer a service becuase the federal government says it must.

THAT is a violation of the first ammendement in my eyes.

And a side note?

It, too, will increase premiums.

 

[Jarhead]

My homeowners policyt does not carry flood.

I needed to get a separate policy for that.

Why?

Becuase my homeowners insurance company does not want to cover flood.

It was my choice to take it out anyway...I didnt have to.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Jesus wept. It runs businesses. Their colleges and hospitals are businesses and governed by employer/employee laws just like every other business.

They're not businesses because THEY NOT FOR PROFIT...

What don't you understand about that???

Profit is not what determines whether or not something is a business.

Business is a verb....

There are massive differences between a non-profit business and a for-profit business.

Both do "business" hence "business."

A business as defined by most is a collective with the motive of profit - the Church is NON-PROFIT hence technically NOT A BUSINESS.

I suppose the same capitalist accounting practices apply, however outside of that there are no capital gains...

WTF...

Businesses are in business to make money, charities exist to help people....

Of course only a progressive would attack a charity that is independent from the government...

As a matter of fact I would love to know why all these liberals favor this loony tyrannical bullshit.

It appears government is the ONLY SOLUTION, and anyone who helps another outside of the government is EVIL..

The Church is welfare....

 

[ScreamingEagle]

better question..

What right does the federal government have to tell insurance companies what services they must offer?

I uunderstand the pre-exisitng condition thing...

But forcing an insurance company to cover contraception?

What is the basis for that?

the leftie war against religion...

nah..

I see it as goverrnment control over private industry services to Americans.

that too........but remember that Obama also told the military chaplains what to say/not say in their religious services.....that was direct interference of RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.....just to protect his radical ass...

Military Chaplains Told Not To Read Criticism Of Contraceptive Mandate In Mass | Fox News

 

[Ravi]

No. But someone is trying to force someone to offer birth control.

This is really not a religious debate...although many want to make it that.

This should be a debate about the federal government forcing an insurance company to cover birth control....

And that is very sketchy at best

It's actually about the federal government forcing an insurance company to cover a prescription.

well...yes...but not a prescription that is for the better health of the prescribed. Instead, it is a prescription to allow the prescribed to enjoy sex withoiut the concern of preganncy. Sort of a luxury if you ask me.

You can not deny that this is not like forcing an inusrance company to cover a prescription for an antibiotic.

This, to me, is akin to forcing an insurance company to cover a face lift.

It's much healthier to not get pregnant every nine months.

 

[Ravi]

No...it is not.

It is forcing insurance companies to cover it.

And the original law will force the employers to offer insurance to employees...

But it is not forcing the Church to pay for anything.

The church is forced to provide insurance, and the insurance is forced to provide contraception and abortificants...that means the church is being forced to provide contraception and abortificants in violation of the employers' first amendment rights.

But well ahead of that is the insurance company being forced to offer a service becuase the federal government says it must.

THAT is a violation of the first ammendement in my eyes.

And a side note?

It, too, will increase premiums.

It costs an insurance company more to cover one birth than a lifetime of birth control.

 

[California Girl]

It's actually about the federal government forcing an insurance company to cover a prescription.

well...yes...but not a prescription that is for the better health of the prescribed. Instead, it is a prescription to allow the prescribed to enjoy sex withoiut the concern of preganncy. Sort of a luxury if you ask me.

You can not deny that this is not like forcing an inusrance company to cover a prescription for an antibiotic.

This, to me, is akin to forcing an insurance company to cover a face lift.

It's much healthier to not get pregnant every nine months.

Perhaps you'd like to see us more like China?

 

[koshergrl]

Besides which, abortions are more dangerous than repeated pregnancies.

And abortions at a very young age are more dangerous still. Besides which, they are almost always undertaken to protect the child molesters who get the girls pregnant.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Keep playing your "i am a catholic card."

I'm not a priest dummy...

You think Catholics don't have opinions?

Just because I'm a Catholic doesn't mean I wont call bullshit or talk shit to those who want to do harm to me, my religion and my country.

So what the **** you thought??

You think I have to be humble?? think again.

Hey! Just calling a spade a spade, that is all.

What exactly does that mean??

Because I argue with you that I'm not a Catholic??

Because I disagree with progressive tyrants I'm not a Catholic?

Who the **** are you to define my belief structure asshole?

You progressive ***** act like people like me have no right to an opinion and we should live in a closet... When we get pissed you act like it is hypocritical..

**** off you little ****..

 

[geauxtohell]

Fox News has picked it up!

Catholic Church Ups Ante Against Obama...Threatens Fighting in the Streets - President Obama - Fox Nation

"Fighting in the streets"? This isn't Northern Ireland, so can we tone down the rhetoric? The Catholic Hospitals can always refuse Medicare/Medicaid funding/payment. Then they could tell the government to shove it.

That is a lot more pragmatic than fighting in the streets.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You missed the point.

the point was - that the 1st, if taken literally, would allow any church to do whatever the **** it wants.

Logical fallacy, without it, the left would be speechless. Not providing contraception violates no criminal nor civil law. The administration has attempted to enforce administrative law that conflicts with religious faith. This violates the first amendment.

I think Jarhead is right. I don't think Obama realized what he was doing - he's kind of dumb. I think he was attempting to serve the abortion industry by forcing all insurance companies to provide services, but he tripped over his clit and snagged religious businesses and charities. Even Obama isn't arrogant enough to think he can win this fight.

Court Cases later clarified the limitations on said amendment.

derp derp derp

Well, you run with that fantasy...

 

[Mr.Nick]

Hey! Just calling a spade a spade, that is all.

What exactly does that mean??

Because I argue with you that I'm not a Catholic??

Because I disagree with progressive tyrants I'm not a Catholic?

Who the **** are you to define my belief structure asshole?
You progressive ***** act like people like me have no right to an opinion and we should live in a closet... When we get pissed you act like it is hypocritical..

**** off you little ****..

that's what you're doing to everyone else who you say are not catholics, dumbass. you just self-refuted.

Catholicism isn't an opinion - it's NOT liberal..

You just cant do whatever the **** you want while claiming you're a Catholic.

There are rules - if you don't follow them then you're not a Catholic.

You may be religious, however you're not a Catholic..

Christian yes - Catholic NO.

What I have been pointing out is not that difficult to understand.

 

[Ravi]

well...yes...but not a prescription that is for the better health of the prescribed. Instead, it is a prescription to allow the prescribed to enjoy sex withoiut the concern of preganncy. Sort of a luxury if you ask me.

You can not deny that this is not like forcing an inusrance company to cover a prescription for an antibiotic.

This, to me, is akin to forcing an insurance company to cover a face lift.

It's much healthier to not get pregnant every nine months.

Perhaps you'd like to see us more like China?

No. I'd like to see us more like the US. Freedom to give birth when we want to give birth.

 

[Ravi]

Besides which, abortions are more dangerous than repeated pregnancies.

And abortions at a very young age are more dangerous still. Besides which, they are almost always undertaken to protect the child molesters who get the girls pregnant.

Piss off with your crusade. This is about birth control, not abortion.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Piss off with your crusade. This is about birth control, not abortion.

It's about the constitution and the attempt by your party to crush it.

It's about the end of Obama's career as POTUS.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Besides which, abortions are more dangerous than repeated pregnancies.

And abortions at a very young age are more dangerous still. Besides which, they are almost always undertaken to protect the child molesters who get the girls pregnant.

Piss off with your crusade. This is about birth control, not abortion.

wrong....Obamacare "contraceptives" include the "morning after" pill which sometimes IS abortion....