Roy Blunt (R) Missouri submits a bill to fight Obamas contraception rule

[Remodeling Maidiac]

What Blunt introduced was a stump-speech in an attempt to garner votes.

He may not get mine now. These stupid games may cost us. If they do. I put it on him.

As far as I'm concerned this was a debate worth having and one we could have won. But stunts like this are counter productive. NOTHING could be gained from this bill, NOTHING

Who do you include in "us" and "we"?

Any American who felt Obama crossed the line trying to force religious institutions to do something against their values.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

The way the bill is worded essentially allows any employer to exempt himself from the rule based on "Religious or MORAL" objections.

Now the left have ammunition. This is stupid to the ninth degree. Anyone can claim some bogus moral issue to avoid offering coverage. Why? WHY?!

We had the upper hand and this stupid stunt gives it right back to the left. So ******* stupid. We don't run our country based on individual supposed moral beliefs. We function off of laws and rules.

I just don't get it. This law if passed would open up businesses and insurance companies to a barrage of lawsuits.

The worst thing about this stupid bill is it will turn a religious debate into the very debate the democrats wanted. We don't have the votes to pass this bill, nor should we. So we yet again, like the last round of payroll tax cut debates, so we essentially shot ourselves in the damn foot.

The only way to deal with these issues and mandates is to take it to the people. Win seats on the merits of the debate. THEN change the laws

http://blunt.senate.gov/public/_cac...-4b37-920a-cdb15edb24d4/S. 1813 Amendment.pdf

what's wrong with moral objections...isn't that same as rights of conscience....or religious beliefs....?

btw it's being supported by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Southern Baptist Convention...

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The way the bill is worded essentially allows any employer to exempt himself from the rule based on "Religious or MORAL" objections.

Now the left have ammunition. This is stupid to the ninth degree. Anyone can claim some bogus moral issue to avoid offering coverage. Why? WHY?!

We had the upper hand and this stupid stunt gives it right back to the left. So ******* stupid. We don't run our country based on individual supposed moral beliefs. We function off of laws and rules.

I just don't get it. This law if passed would open up businesses and insurance companies to a barrage of lawsuits.

The worst thing about this stupid bill is it will turn a religious debate into the very debate the democrats wanted. We don't have the votes to pass this bill, nor should we. So we yet again, like the last round of payroll tax cut debates, so we essentially shot ourselves in the damn foot.

The only way to deal with these issues and mandates is to take it to the people. Win seats on the merits of the debate. THEN change the laws

http://blunt.senate.gov/public/_cac...-4b37-920a-cdb15edb24d4/S. 1813 Amendment.pdf

what's wrong with moral objections...isn't that same as rights of conscience....or religious beliefs....?

btw it's being supported by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Southern Baptist Convention...

No, its not the same. We all deserve equal protection under the law. As well as equal representation. Everyone has a different moral compass. We can't have laws that people can opt out of "just because". We need and must have one set of rules for all. That is part of what conservatism means to me. Anyone can claim moral objections. Who's to say if it truly is or not. That's just a stupid way to regulate a group of people.

Bottom line is this is not the time for such debates. It will only serve to weaken our platform. We don't have the power or votes to impose such new rules so what's to gain beyond extending an already damaging topic with nothing but endless debate and mockery.

Terrible political stunt.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Republicans opposing birth control is just another example of their vast stupidity

 

[ScreamingEagle]

The way the bill is worded essentially allows any employer to exempt himself from the rule based on "Religious or MORAL" objections.

Now the left have ammunition. This is stupid to the ninth degree. Anyone can claim some bogus moral issue to avoid offering coverage. Why? WHY?!

We had the upper hand and this stupid stunt gives it right back to the left. So ******* stupid. We don't run our country based on individual supposed moral beliefs. We function off of laws and rules.

I just don't get it. This law if passed would open up businesses and insurance companies to a barrage of lawsuits.

The worst thing about this stupid bill is it will turn a religious debate into the very debate the democrats wanted. We don't have the votes to pass this bill, nor should we. So we yet again, like the last round of payroll tax cut debates, so we essentially shot ourselves in the damn foot.

The only way to deal with these issues and mandates is to take it to the people. Win seats on the merits of the debate. THEN change the laws

http://blunt.senate.gov/public/_cac...-4b37-920a-cdb15edb24d4/S. 1813 Amendment.pdf

what's wrong with moral objections...isn't that same as rights of conscience....or religious beliefs....?

btw it's being supported by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Southern Baptist Convention...

No, its not the same. We all deserve equal protection under the law. As well as equal representation. Everyone has a different moral compass. We can't have laws that people can opt out of "just because". We need and must have one set of rules for all. That is part of what conservatism means to me. Anyone can claim moral objections. Who's to say if it truly is or not. That's just a stupid way to regulate a group of people.

Bottom line is this is not the time for such debates. It will only serve to weaken our platform. We don't have the power or votes to impose such new rules so what's to gain beyond extending an already damaging topic with nothing but endless debate and mockery.

Terrible political stunt.

i can see your point because the left is already making political mincemeat out of it.....

however Blunt has answered the accusations with his fact check sheet...Hot Topics - Home - Roy Blunt, United States Senator for Missouri

 

[Salt Jones]

http://blunt.senate.gov/public/_cac...-4b37-920a-cdb15edb24d4/S. 1813 Amendment.pdf

what's wrong with moral objections...isn't that same as rights of conscience....or religious beliefs....?

btw it's being supported by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Southern Baptist Convention...

No, its not the same. We all deserve equal protection under the law. As well as equal representation. Everyone has a different moral compass. We can't have laws that people can opt out of "just because". We need and must have one set of rules for all. That is part of what conservatism means to me. Anyone can claim moral objections. Who's to say if it truly is or not. That's just a stupid way to regulate a group of people.

Bottom line is this is not the time for such debates. It will only serve to weaken our platform. We don't have the power or votes to impose such new rules so what's to gain beyond extending an already damaging topic with nothing but endless debate and mockery.

Terrible political stunt.

i can see your point because the left is already making political mincemeat out of it.....

however Blunt has answered the accusations with his fact check sheet...Hot Topics - Home - Roy Blunt, United States Senator for Missouri

Blunt will be destroyed, just as Sen Brown of Mass was crushed today on a Mass TV show for co-sponsoring the bill. Scott Brown was stammering like Porky Pig over the moral objection wording.

 

[EriktheRed]

What's really nice is that even Sen. Scott Brown has found himself forced to support this stinker and future-Senator Warren is reaming him good over it.