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

[NoNukes]

'NoNukes' is a 1960s has been.... or is it never was?

I walk down the street in New York City and people recognize me, which my kids think is hilarious. Would anyone know who your sorry ass is?

Sure, they know her!!! She is the neighborhood hag that screams at the kids and throws rocks at them to get off of her lawn.

Lawns?

 

[chanel]

OMG! What have these thousands of employees done until now? Conceiving bastards against their will?

Puhleez.

 

[The T]

OMG! What have these thousands of employees done until now? Conceiving bastards against their will?

Puhleez.

No kidding....

 

[Peach]

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.

I agree; vote Obama out; insurrection is treason. Catholic churches should not be forced to perform services that violate their faith, unless they receive state of federal funding.

 

[chanel]

I have a friend who left my school to become a principal of a Catholic school. Our "cadillac insurance" costs 20K. He claims their insurance is better. Go figure.

 

[Annie]

I have a friend who left my school to become a principal of a Catholic school. Our "cadillac insurance" costs 20K. He claims their insurance is better. Go figure.

That was what I found there also. I don't know which thread, too many now, but the insurance was extremely comprehensive and they had many 'at site' wellness tests and education. Discounted or free, (depending on your choice) for health club memberships, more too.

 

[Peach]

Our founder set up a system that kept a bright line between government and religion.

Why does this religion hate our founders and our government?

We don't. We're fighting for the First Amendment. Good to know you prefer trampling on the Constitution though.

"Fighting in the streets" is insurrection. Join together to defeat him in November. And make sure your representatives oppose any such action by the President.

 

[Rinata]

I walk down the street in New York City and people recognize me, which my kids think is hilarious. Would anyone know who your sorry ass is?

Sure, they know her!!! She is the neighborhood hag that screams at the kids and throws rocks at them to get off of her lawn.

Lawns?

Lawn.

 

[California Girl]

Our founder set up a system that kept a bright line between government and religion.

Why does this religion hate our founders and our government?

We don't. We're fighting for the First Amendment. Good to know you prefer trampling on the Constitution though.

"Fighting in the streets" is insurrection. Join together to defeat him in November. And make sure your representatives oppose any such action by the President.

Not anymore it isn't. It's all good now. OWS is a classic example.

This Administration should be clear. This is a First Amendment issue - it is the 'free exercise thereof' for religions. This right is enshined in our Constitution. It is 'endowed by our creator', it is an 'inalienable right'.... no government, no political party, no one can take it from us. It's not something to 'compromise' or 'accommodate'. It is our right and we will have it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

It is not a first amendment issue. It is a bullshit distraction issue.

You didn't give a shit about it until you were told to. Your religion is one of convenience.

 

[California Girl]

It is not a first amendment issue. It is a bullshit distraction issue.

You didn't give a shit about it until you were told to. Your religion is one of convenience.

Since it pertains to faiths, yes, it is a First Amendment issue.... that's the stand that the churches are taking. Your bullshit distraction is to pretend it's about poor women who need to be taken care of. **** off - I don't need you looking out for me. I can do that myself.

And... for the record... I cared about it, and was actively involved in it... long before it became the 'hot topic' on USMB or the media. And I will continue to be involved in it - in my small way - for as long as it takes.

You know jack shit about me. I suggest you stop making a fool of yourself now.

 

[Mr.Nick]

We don't. We're fighting for the First Amendment. Good to know you prefer trampling on the Constitution though.

"Fighting in the streets" is insurrection. Join together to defeat him in November. And make sure your representatives oppose any such action by the President.

Not anymore it isn't. It's all good now. OWS is a classic example.

This Administration should be clear. This is a First Amendment issue - it is the 'free exercise thereof' for religions. This right is enshined in our Constitution. It is 'endowed by our creator', it is an 'inalienable right'.... no government, no political party, no one can take it from us. It's not something to 'compromise' or 'accommodate'. It is our right and we will have it.

Besides, I love the idiots that support the supremacy of government over the Church when when an illegal alien runs up into one and claims sanctuary - then all of a sudden these twats are pro-religion....

To them our Constitution is a slinky - it bends many ways, just as long as it favors their fucked up position...

 

[Mr.Nick]

It is not a first amendment issue. It is a bullshit distraction issue.

You didn't give a shit about it until you were told to. Your religion is one of convenience.

It is because you're forcing a religion to pay for a product that goes against their morals and ethics...

It's no different than forcing a Muslim business to buy and sell pork..

What the government is doing is prohibiting a religion from practicing their religion..

This is why some religions are LEGALLY allowed to sacrifice live animals despite state laws that prohibit such...

Now, if the government can force a religion to provide a product that goes against their religion then what cant they do???

Where is the line idiot???

Oh yeah the line is the FIRST AMENDMENT......

 

[LoneLaugher]

It is not a first amendment issue. It is a bullshit distraction issue.

You didn't give a shit about it until you were told to. Your religion is one of convenience.

Since it pertains to faiths, yes, it is a First Amendment issue.... that's the stand that the churches are taking. Your bullshit distraction is to pretend it's about poor women who need to be taken care of. **** off - I don't need you looking out for me. I can do that myself.

And... for the record... I cared about it, and was actively involved in it... long before it became the 'hot topic' on USMB or the media. And I will continue to be involved in it - in my small way - for as long as it takes.

You know jack shit about me. I suggest you stop making a fool of yourself now.

Idiot. I don't think it is an issue worthy of attention, period. To claim that I am using it as a distraction is stupid.

I don't believe you re: the idea that you were actively involved in the issue before three weeks ago. Just another lie from you. I only know you as you present yourself here. I find you to be a person with a surly personality........nasty and ugly. I think you use religion to score points and you rely on the "faith" argument when you are in need of common sense.

 

[Peach]

We don't. We're fighting for the First Amendment. Good to know you prefer trampling on the Constitution though.

"Fighting in the streets" is insurrection. Join together to defeat him in November. And make sure your representatives oppose any such action by the President.

Not anymore it isn't. It's all good now. OWS is a classic example.

This Administration should be clear. This is a First Amendment issue - it is the 'free exercise thereof' for religions. This right is enshined in our Constitution. It is 'endowed by our creator', it is an 'inalienable right'.... no government, no political party, no one can take it from us. It's not something to 'compromise' or 'accommodate'. It is our right and we will have it.

Some OWS "supporters" have been arrested. And it did not begin as a FIGHTING IN THE STREET group. Occupy does not mean FIGHT; though the OWS folks need to return home. So fight in the street if you wish, do not be surprised if you end up behind bars. Organizing a GOV campaign might accomplish something; violence most likely will not.

 

[Warrior102]

I don't believe you re: the idea that you were actively involved in the issue before three weeks ago. Just another lie from you. I only know you as you present yourself here. I find you to be a person with a surly personality........nasty and ugly. I think you use religion to score points and you rely on the "faith" argument when you are in need of common sense.

Boy - are you wrong

 

[LoneLaugher]

I don't believe you re: the idea that you were actively involved in the issue before three weeks ago. Just another lie from you. I only know you as you present yourself here. I find you to be a person with a surly personality........nasty and ugly. I think you use religion to score points and you rely on the "faith" argument when you are in need of common sense.

Boy - are you wrong

I wish that were the case.

 

[Peach]

It is not a first amendment issue. It is a bullshit distraction issue.

You didn't give a shit about it until you were told to. Your religion is one of convenience.

It is because you're forcing a religion to pay for a product that goes against their morals and ethics...

It's no different than forcing a Muslim business to buy and sell pork..

What the government is doing is prohibiting a religion from practicing their religion..

This is why some religions are LEGALLY allowed to sacrifice live animals despite state laws that prohibit such...

Now, if the government can force a religion to provide a product that goes against their religion then what cant they do???

Where is the line idiot???

Oh yeah the line is the FIRST AMENDMENT......

Whether the procedures are paid for by the hospital or not, they defy the beliefs of the hospital's founders. The legal problem arises if PUBLIC funds are given to the hospital

Instead of obscene language, insults,and silly ratings on message boards, organize a write in campaign to your state & federal reps. Make your VOTES pro life.

 

[California Girl]

It is not a first amendment issue. It is a bullshit distraction issue.

You didn't give a shit about it until you were told to. Your religion is one of convenience.

Since it pertains to faiths, yes, it is a First Amendment issue.... that's the stand that the churches are taking. Your bullshit distraction is to pretend it's about poor women who need to be taken care of. **** off - I don't need you looking out for me. I can do that myself.

And... for the record... I cared about it, and was actively involved in it... long before it became the 'hot topic' on USMB or the media. And I will continue to be involved in it - in my small way - for as long as it takes.

You know jack shit about me. I suggest you stop making a fool of yourself now.

Idiot. I don't think it is an issue worthy of attention, period. To claim that I am using it as a distraction is stupid.

I don't believe you re: the idea that you were actively involved in the issue before three weeks ago. Just another lie from you. I only know you as you present yourself here. I find you to be a person with a surly personality........nasty and ugly. I think you use religion to score points and you rely on the "faith" argument when you are in need of common sense.

Your 'beliefs' are irrelevant. Other posters know.... you don't. Sucks to be you.

 

[California Girl]

I don't believe you re: the idea that you were actively involved in the issue before three weeks ago. Just another lie from you. I only know you as you present yourself here. I find you to be a person with a surly personality........nasty and ugly. I think you use religion to score points and you rely on the "faith" argument when you are in need of common sense.

Boy - are you wrong