Catholic nation

[rykat]

Obamunists - working hard every day to shred the Constitution
Just remember the ATTEMPT after they back down on this one -hopefully 51% will remember but I doubt it.

[clover]

The First Amendment rights can be exercised at will.  If you are a Catholic and do not want to participate in common birth control methods approved for the general population so be it.  Muslims aren't required by the Constitution to eat pork, but citizens of the United States are.  At some point you guys need to see that the Constitution was written for ALL the people...not just the right wing fanatics that would rather see it modified to limit the rights of the general population.  In essence if you're a Catholic abide by your religious belief....but don't expect everyone else in the nation to do the same.  This is America............land of the FREE and home of the brave.....not home of the crazed right wing fanatics who expect everyone to be just like them.  Get over yourselves......and if you don't like America and it's laws of equality.....LEAVE

This is about the rights of ALL Americans...The Catholics, like the Muslims can practice whatever they want as long as it doesn't violate the rule of law.  Military men will do exactly what their directed to do or stand court martial.  Get over this shit.  The POPE isn't in charge of America and never will be.,...he can just kiss my ass

[rykat]

Ha-Ha.... clover quoting clover...........................classic!
LOSER on this one sport!

[ragman]

Her first mistake was trusting Numbnuts to keep his word.   He has no honor and with him the end justifies the means.  

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dem-rep-kathy-dahlkemper-i-wouldnt-have-voted-obamacare-if-id-known-about-hhs-regulation_626302.html

Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the "week-after" pill "ella" that can induce early abortions.

"I would have never voted for the final version of the bill if I expected the Obama Administration to force Catholic hospitals and Catholic Colleges and Universities to pay for contraception,” Dahlkemper said in a press release sent out by Democrats for Life in November. "We worked hard to prevent abortion funding in health care and to include clear conscience protections for those with moral objections to abortion and contraceptive devices that cause abortion. I trust that the President will honor the commitment he made to those of us who supported final passage."

Of course, most abortion opponents disagree with Dahlkemper that the HHS regulation is Obamacare's only moral problem. Under Obamacare, each state's federally subsidized health care exchange is required to offer a health insurance plan that covers elective abortions unless the state passes a law opting out of the requirement.

As former Democratic congressman Bart Stupak said when the Senate passed Obamacare in December of 2009, "A review of the Senate language indicates a dramatic shift in federal policy that would allow the federal government to subsidize insurance policies with abortion coverage. Further, the segregation of funds to pay for abortion is another departure from current policy prohibiting federal subsidy of abortion coverage."
Stupak, Dahlkemper, and a handful of other Democrats who held back on voting for final passage of Obamacare eventually voted for the exact same language in the Senate bill because the president signed an executive order saying the law wouldn't fund abortions.
 
But the executive order signed by President Obama did nothing to prevent the subsidized health care exchanges from covering elective abortions.

[clover]

Ha-Ha.... clover quoting clover...........................classic!
LOSER on this one sport!

I just hate repeating myself.  This is pretty simple....if a government begins by accommodating Catholics....next up will be the Muslims.............And that's why the Bill of Rights was incorporated into the Constitution...get it. 

[rykat]

"accommodating Catholics"

Now thats funny right there!

[clover]

http://publicreligion.org/research/2012/02/january-tracking-poll-2012/

oooppppsssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[ragman]

First of all the poll number you quoted had to do with birth control.  Ask the question using abortion instead and see where the support goes. I suggest that the result would be different. Abortion is the main issue, not birth control.  The church takes a stand on birth control but  it is not popular.  Most people realize that late term; partial birth, and post abortion should have no place in our society extra in very extreme defined circumstances. 

In the article I posted there would not have been an Obamacare if he had not agreed to not force religious organizations.  He agreed and now has broken his word.  He would have been 10 or 12 votes short without that agreement.  Because of the Scott Brown election he had a small window to complete this and this is what he agreed to.  Of course when you deal with a dishonorable person who will tell you anything to get you to do what he wants this is the result. 

I will make the prediction that he backs down on this.  He'll have to do a poll first and see which way will gain him the most votes.   

[ragman]

The Pope and Obama are on the same stage in Yankee Stadium in front of a huge crowd.

The Pope leans towards President Obama and said, "Do you know that with one little wave of my hand I can make every person in this crowd go wild with joy? This joy will not be a momentary display, but will go deep into their hearts and they'll forever speak of this day and rejoice!"

Obama replied, "I seriously doubt that! With one little wave of your hand....Show me!"

So the Pope backhanded him and knocked him off the stage!

AND THE CROWD ROARED & CHEERED WILDLY and there was happiness throughout the land!

Kind of brings a tear to your eye, doesn't it?   

[rykat]

http://publicreligion.org/research/2012/02/january-tracking-poll-2012/

oooppppsssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

So....6 in 10 Catholics are assholes just like the 6 in 10 that voted for Obama. And I dont recall the Catholic Church operating on majority rule.

Oooops.

[ragman]

Well this was sent to me and seems to fit the occasion.  

An atheist was walking through the woods.

'What majestic trees'!  'What powerful rivers'! 'What beautiful animals'! He said to himself.

As he was walking alongside the river, he heard a rustling in the bushes behind him. He turned to look. He saw a 7-foot grizzly bear charge towards him..

He ran as fast as he could up the path. He looked over his shoulder & saw that the bear was closing in on him. He looked over his shoulder again & the bear was even closer. He tripped & fell on the ground. He rolled over to pick himself up but saw that the bear was right on top of him, reaching for him with his left paw & raising his right paw to strike

At that instant the Atheist cried out, 'Oh my God!'

Time Stopped. The bear froze. The forest was silent.

As a bright light shone upon the man, a voice came out of the sky. 'You deny my existence for all these years, teach others I don't exist and even credit creation to cosmic accident. Do you expect me to help you out of this predicament? Am I to count you as a believer'?
The atheist looked directly into the light, 'It would be hypocritical of me to suddenly ask you to treat me as a Christian now, but perhaps you could make the BEAR a Christian'?

The light went out. The sounds of the forest resumed. And the bear dropped his right paw, brought both paws together, bowed his head & spoke:

"Lord bless this food, which I am about to receive from thy bounty through Christ our Lord, Amen"

[clover]

http://publicreligion.org/research/2012/02/january-tracking-poll-2012/

oooppppsssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

So....6 in 10 Catholics are assholes just like the 6 in 10 that voted for Obama. And I dont recall the Catholic Church operating on majority rule.

Oooops.

It's so easy for fanatics to bow to the Pope and discriminate against women....oh I forgot..........Republicans, like Muslims think nothing of discriminating against women   America first.....religious zealot despots second.

[rykat]

"discriminate against women"
Has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the conversation. ZIP-ZERO-NADA!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5QGkOGZubQ&feature=related

 

[clover]

To deny a woman the right to choose is discrimination.  Not all employees of the Catholic Church are Catholics. 


"Let's try a little experiment. Exchange the Catholic Church's aversion to birth control with the Jehovah's Witnesses' objection to blood transfusions. If the Jehovah's Witnesses ran, say, a liberal arts college, would it be a violation of religious liberty to require it to cover blood transfusions in its employee health insurance plan?

Even the suggestion sounds absurd, yet this is the argument the Catholic Church is making. It wants to dictate the type of medical services available to any woman employed anywhere within its vast system of enterprises. The religious liberty of its employees is of no concern.

For anyone who has been under a rock for the last week, the Catholic Church has been positively apoplectic over new rules under the Affordable Care Act that will require employers to provide free contraceptives within their employee health insurance plans. The president's political opponents, including U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, Florida's Republican star, jumped to defend the church and its efforts to force its doctrines — ones that hardly any U.S. Catholic women abide — on its huge secular workforce.

Even though churches and religions are exempt from the rule, the political firestorm forced the administration to adjust. On Friday, President Barack Obama announced a change that would give nonprofit, religiously affiliated employers, such as hospitals, universities and foster care agencies, the ability to exclude contraception as well. Their health insurers, however, would be responsible for providing free contraception and informing employees of the benefit.

While this at least provides employees with the same coverage, the change shouldn't have been necessary. The administration's initial policy was absolutely right. But with denunciations flying from the pulpit, as if Obama had demanded a cut of the collection plate, politics demanded an accommodation. Never mind that an estimated 45,000 people die each year from lack of health insurance and Obama's health reforms will extend health insurance to 32 million people who are currently uninsured.

Catholic leaders claim there is no daylight between Catholic enterprises and the religion itself. They say the work is a religious exercise. But they can't have it both ways. Since it is unconstitutional for government to fund the practice of religion, Catholic hospitals and universities must be claiming to be doing something other than that to qualify for billions of dollars in public money.

Moreover, this is not "unprecedented" as opponents claim. Currently, 28 states require contraception to be included when insurers provide prescription drug coverage. Of those, eight states have no opt-out for religious employers and four others offer an exemption that essentially mirrors the language the administration adopted.

Catholic institutions have adjusted. For example, DePaul University in Illinois, the nation's largest Catholic university, says that it provides contraceptive coverage in its employee health insurance and students can opt for an insurance plan with that coverage as well. Also, Dignity Health (formerly known as Catholic Healthcare West), a network of hospitals including a number that are Catholic-affiliated, has offered contraception in its health care packages since 1997. And somehow religion survived.

It is important to remember that health insurance is compensation, just like salary, vacation days and sick leave. These are benefits employees receive in exchange for work. It's not the church's business how they are used. Imagine if the church told an employee she couldn't use her salary to pay for contraception or take a sick day to see a doctor and at the same time renew a prescription for contraception.

But if the church simply cannot abide offering health insurance that includes contraception, it should bow out of doing secular work. There are plenty of experienced, professional and compassionate nonprofit organizations that would happily — eagerly, even — receive the pile of taxpayer money that the church gets every year. Hey, sometimes sticking to principles can be expensive. Let's see how many public dollars church leaders are willing to give up to stick to theirs."

http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/there-is-the-secular-and-the-religious/1214897

[ragman]

I think this explains what the real problem is.  You can obscure it with other issues but it is really about too much central power.  Hopefully this will be corrected in two ways.  In a few months the supreme court will make a decision on Obamacare and then next November when we kick Obama himself out of office.   

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obamacare-decree-isn-t-merely-affront-religious-liberty_626553.html

But this issue isn’t confined to the liberty of the Catholic Church or even to religious liberty more broadly; it affects the liberty of every American. It isn’t about the freedom to worship; it’s about the freedom to follow one’s own moral convictions, whether those convictions are religiously rooted or not. It’s about whether every American should be at liberty to decide what sort of health insurance he or she wants to buy, or whether Kathleen Sebelius — and hence Obama — should be empowered to decide what sort of health insurance 300 million citizens will be forced to buy. 

Not only is the decree issued by Sebelius (Obama’s secretary of Health and Human Services) wrong on at least seven levels, but if the Obama administration were to reverse course and subsequently decree that Catholic and other religious organizations will henceforth be granted an exception, this would merely confirm the politicized nature of the process. It would merely show that such groups have enough clout to secure an exception to the rule.
 
And the rule is appalling. Why is the federal government telling us what items our health plans have to cover and which of those items should or shouldn’t involve copays? It’s a ludicrous and almost comical overreach of centralized power. The next thing you know, the federal government will be telling us what kinds of light bulbs we have to buy. (You laugh, but it could happen.)
 
In truth, the problem isn’t really (or at least centrally) that the Obamacare decree would prohibit religious organizations from offering health plans that don’t provide free access to the birth control pill, the morning-after pill, and ella. The problem is that the decree would prohibit all civil associations and private businesses from offering — and therefore all Americans from freely choosing — plans that don’t provide “free” access to such “preventive medicine.” Otherwise stated, it would preclude Americans from choosing plans that are different from those that Sebelius and Obama would choose on their behalf.
 
As the decree indicates, the Obama administration considers civil associations and private businesses (whether religious or not) to be entities that can, and should, be made to do its bidding. As Yuval Levin writes at National Review Online,