As of July 31, 2012 a business owner who objects to abortion had the freedom of conscience to make sure that her company’s insurance policies did not pay to facilitate the practice. But as of today, August 1, she no longer has that freedom. The ObamaCare contraceptive and abortifacient mandates take effect today, hailed by the Obama regime as a great and wonderful thing.
According to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, “President Obama is moving our country forward by giving women control over their health care. This law puts women and their doctors, not insurance companies or the government, in charge of health care decisions.”
What about pro-life women? Do they not exist?
In reality, what this law does is force millions of Americans to abide by the radical edge of the sexual revolution. It forces millions of Americans to violate their own consciences, and it prohibits the free exercise of their religion. It is a revolutionary act that puts government in charge of what business owners can do and think. It’s un-American. If Rep. Nancy Pelosi gets her wish, the mandate will eventually even force churches to subsidize Planned Parenthood by forcing them to live under the abortifacient mandate. Pelosi said as much in February 2012:
At a press conference, Leader Pelosi was asked by THE WEEKLY STANDARD: ”The Catholic Church in Washington, D.C., is a self-insured institution. Should the Catholic Church in Washington, D.C., be required to pay for these morning-after pills and birth control if they find that morally objectionable?”
Pelosi talked about the importance of women’s health, and then said, “Yes, I think that all institutions who cover, who give, health insurance should cover the full range of health insurance issues for women.”
Concerned Women for America opposes the abortifacient mandate, which means they do not exist in the eyes of Obama, Sebelius and the other radicals who dominate the current regime. Despite the lack of media attention paid to CWA, it boasts 500,000 members, making it the largest public policy women’s organization in the US. They are fighting the mandate, according to a press release quoting CWA President Penny Nance.
“CWA is leading the charge to repeal this mandate and, of course, the underlying law because this is an absolute assault on an individual’s right to freedom and right to conscience. Let me also explain that most people think this is just about contraceptives. And no, in fact, Concerned Women for America doesn’t even have a position on contraceptives. This mandate forces employers and individuals to pay for abortion-inducing drugs as well as contraceptives. So today is really a sad day for many Americans. Our government has violated our consciences despite the fact that the president promised, in passing the Affordable Care Act, that this wouldn’t happen.”
With Obama’s birthday coming up on August 4th, it’s as if the president gave himself an early present in the form of millions of aborted children. Or a dead Constitution.
His un-American mandate cannot stand. ObamaCare delenda est.
This is a sad day. More rights being removed from the US citizen under the false pretense of helping those that cannot help themselves.
We have not seen anything yet when it comes to Obamacare.
Question, I wonder how many of the 500,000 CWA members voted for Obama?
I’ll bet that none of CWA women voted for Obama.
The government believes that all of society will be improved by having fewer children…therefore all of society must pay for their elimination or prevention. This is an idea dating from the 1960′s. To this end, the government has tried (successfully) to convince men, and esp. women, to voluntarily reduce their birth rate through abortion, contraception, sterilization and indoctrination…the “Family Planning Doctrine.” Instead of having children, the government suggests that sex without consequences is a much more acceptable blueprint for society. It has actively sought to marginalize and/or secularize every person and institution which try to protect unborn children. Please note: these policies are not intended to help women or to minimize “a war on women,” but to “stabilize” the population. Today, the national birth rate is below replacement level and by accepting these new mandates it will certainly reduce the birth rate even further. We are being “stabilized.”
It’s a lot older than the 1960s.
It was already a popular idea when Margaret Sanger wrote about it before she founded Planned Unparenthood.
You need to get edumacated, John.
This idea did not have its inception in the 1960′s. It goes back thousands of years and has been espoused by totalitarians in all ages. Nothing is more reactionary than wanted to eliminate “unwanted” segments of society.
In the United States, this philosophy took form in the writings of none other than Margaret Sanger and her trove of eugenicists during the progressive era 100 years ago. Remember, Ms. Sanger is the mother of Planned Parenthood and believed all people who could not rise to her definition of productive citizens should be euthanized. This included the very poor (hence the early push for abortion rights within black inner-city communities), those from some third world countries (“benighted societies”), the mentally ill, and even some that were physically handicapped.
In summary, it always has been the domain of statists and totalitarians to push this kind of legislation/policy. Those embracing liberty and the inalienable rights of man find this stuff repugnant, offensive, and immoral to the extreme.
Karl Marx made this sort of thing one of his key tools for taking control over people groups and sunjugating them. He realised that, as long as judeachristian family values remained intact, he’d never get anywhere with his socialistic ideas. Control of reproduction, along with state conbtrolled education and of the means of production, were keys to his takeover schema. THAT is why such pressure is being brought upon us now. There is a concerted effort to effect Marx’s idealogy as our new cultural standard. “Family planning” is only one aspect of it, but a key one. And Margaret Sanger was greatly enamoured of Marx’ philosophy. It is part of what drove her to found what has become Planned Baby Death.
Not to mention what has not been written already into that monstrocity. I mean as a business owner, even my accountants are having a hard time figuring out what we have to do to comply with some of this stuff. I mean if it is that confusing to me as a business owner, and I know a lot, how can we trust our government to implement it without fraud, abuse of power, and just plain ignorance. The only term that works with Obamacare is it sucks…just plain and simple…
We can’t trust them Fox. Remember Nancy Pelosi’s immortal words, “..We have to pass it to find out what’s in it.”
That the dems shoved this monstrous tax down our collective throats without knowing its provisions, shows it was an exercise in extremist ideology, not policy.
As a business owner, you and your colleagues have the obligation to let every elected official from local to federal know of its detrimental effects and your intention to be loudly and actively supporting candidates seeking its overturn.
It’s interesting how HHS Secretary Kathleen–Maximus Coitus Interuptus– Sebelius and her left wing administration can cancel a traditional conscience exemption from the killing of babies while she and her ilk enjoyed a cornucopia of gender immunities and conscience exemptions from the Vietnam War draft and its “unjust” killings. Equally curious, there was no domestic American ethnic Vietnamese population that American politicians were “pandering” to for justifying the American prosecution of the Vietnam War, but apparently Obama has transcended “pandering” to Jewish Americans for a more balanced American foreign policy in relation of Israel, at least according to Walt and Herr Friedman. Why is it only Harvard graduates seem to have a monopoly on truth and the transcendence of bigotry?
My hat’s off to you Don. Cogent thoughts and well said.
To answer your question: Haven’t you heard the one about how many Haaarwood grads it takes to change a lightbulb?
Answer: “0″ — Because they don’t need to: Haaarwood grads are so bright they glow in the dark, don’t need bulbs.
Since before Nov. 2008 we have had ample opportunity to discover they’re also quite good at fiction!
Time to “honor” that new knowledge, soon, in November!
Thus, the spirit and the letter of the Constitution are being raped.
Congratulations to the totalitarians. They can now compel everybody to pay an Herod Tax, to contribute to the murder of babies.
And they call this CHOICE.
Tyranny… uh.. for the children, the less fortunate (or whatever)! Don’t you just love those left/liberals?
Vote wisely on Nov 6, folks.
America’s internecine cold war grows hotter.
We ignore the likes of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn at our peril.
“The state system which exists in our country is terrible not because it is undemocratic, authoritarian, based only on physical constraint – a man can live in such conditions without harm to his spiritual essence.”
“Our present system is unique in world history, because above and above its physical and economic constraints, it demands of us total surrender of our souls, continuous and active participation in the general, conscious lie. To this putrefaction of the soul, this spiritual enslavement, human beings who wish to be human cannot consent.”
“When Caesar, having exacted what is Caesar’s, demands still more insistently that we render unto him what is God’s – that is a sacrifice we dare not make!”
“The most important part of our freedom, inner freedom, is always subject to our will.”
“If we surrender it to corruption, we do not deserve to be called human.”
Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, From Under the Rubble, from the essay “As Breathing and Consciousness Return” – October, 1973
Vitally important words to remember, Ward; thank you for posting them, as they are critical to the topic at hand.
It should be clear to any thinking adult that the spirit which animates this administration is demonic. We sign our own death warrants if we permit its entrenchment.
“His un-American mandate cannot stand. ObamaCare delenda est.”
Cato the Elder would be proud of you for standing up for what is right. ObamaCare MUST be destroyed because it will take the entire nation down with it. We have one last shot at saving this nation, and we’ll get it in November. I’m also hoping the various law suits brought by the Catholic Church will also slow down this portion of ObamaCare. I think it will, because the Supreme Court has traditionally sided with religious groups against the government. So if I were Obama, I wouldn’t start popping any champagne corks just yet. We still have time to end this. I hope the bulk of the American people take it.
Lawsuits mean
Sorry – meant to say that lawsuits mean exactly nothing to those who hold the rule of law, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in contempt. The up front, in-your-face abrogation of all that stood as a guarantor of liberty and justice irrevocably alters the rules of engagement with these monsters.
I think the issue is much more complex than portrayed in this article. Churches are exempt, so the Catholic bishops have nothing to complain about there.
Problem is that Catholic colleges and hospitals take taxpayer dollars to help run their institutions & have employees from many walks of life and religious backgrounds. I think a case can be made that it is the bishops who are holding the Bill of Rights in contempt since they want to impose their religious beliefs on all their employees.
You missed Pelosi’s comment stuck right in the middle of the article?
I don’t take cues from Nancy Pelosi.
Nonsense. You are free to work – or not work – for a company with policies you may or may not agree with. No one in a free society compels you to work anywhere that you do not wish to.
You, on the other hand, prefer the use of a government gun to impose your own utopian desires on others. As history has shown, that never ends well. For anyone.
People can work where they want. But there is also a “right” to work in a place that is free of religious coercion. Exception is a church or a facility, such as a school, directly affiliated with a church, that does not serve the general public.
One can argue, and successfully so, I believe, that a hospital, university, social services agency, that may have an affiliation with a church, still serve a broad range of the public. The 1st Amendment and associated case law clearly establishes both a freedom of religion and a freedom from religion. I’ll offer that those in the biggest uproar over the mandate are those who, deep down inside, do not believe in separation of church and state.
You fail to see that even if you worked in a Catholic institution, you were still free to buy contraception yourself.
What this requires is that they pay for your contraception. There is a difference.
What part of don’t Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof don’t you understand? Are you so ignorant of religion in general that you don’t know that in many faiths, including Catholicism, that free exercise of religion is not limited to ministering to one’s coreligionists? That the duty to serve God includes the duty to serve the educational and charitable needs of the entire community? Or don’t you care because you aren’t a believer and don’t think you have any skin in this game? The answer to that is a no-brainer. When they get finished destroying the Constitution to teach those obstinate Catholics a lesson how much will be left to protect you?
What Obama and Sebelius are trying to do is what 20th century style totalitarians have always tried to do -redefine the free exercise of religion to mean only the freedom to worship within the four walls of a church. The reason they try to so this is also always the same, -those practicing an active faith are a direct threat to temporal political power. Christians have always been particularly dangerous to the state because the Christian definition of justice is not coterminous with that of the state. When Jesus Christ said render under Caesar what is Caesar’s he was not referring to an equitable tax rate for the rich or the latest HHS regulations. He meant that Christians owe Caesar nothing of themselves because we are creatures of God not of the state. Nothing permanent and important ever belongs to Caesar and when our moral obligations of charity and justice to the people with whom we share this world conflict with the temporal demands of Caesar there can be but one response.
The bishops mean it. So do a great many of those in the pews every Sunday.
Thanks NC Mountain Girl!
No one has stated it better !
To recap: ” Caritas Obamae esset delenda !”
Religious beliefs are only part of the issue. The issue is one similar to that of a business owner who is prohibited from discrimination against those who he does not wish to serve. Or the landlord who does not wish to rent to those whom he feels will damage his property. If the federal government considers “reproductive issues” to be importance, why doesn’t the federal government provide these services itself? Additionally, the cost of these services is considerably higher than it actually needs to be thanks to the same prescription laws that greatly increase our health care costs at no benefit to anyone but “rent seeking” doctors. People have the right of “self ownership” (we are not “owned” by the government). Those who have the right of self ownership also have the responsibility to take care of themselves instead of placing that burden upon society…
Countdown to 2012 – The Clueless Generation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50WHiYmOqTQ&feature=relmfu
Our Founding Fathers did fear a truly evil person would emerge as president, but wrote no remedy in the Constitution for it save the wisdom of the American people to use our power of the vote to remove him from office. This November we have the opportunity to do just that.
Obama told us exactly who he was four years ago, but not enough Americans were paying attention. He even expressed dislike of the Constitution. Look at the results!
While I agree with what you say, I feel it appropriate to point out that there is a constitutional redress other than voting him out. Impeachment. If the pres is evil (and the current one is) then somewhere along the line he will have committed an impeachable offense. There is another, the 2nd Amendment, which partially is there in order to give the people the ultimate ability to retake the .gov by force.
Sorry, GB, that avenue of redress is no longer operable. We impeached a lying scumbag for crimes which would have merited any regular person Federal jail time. Normal people don’t get to perjure themselves in front of a Federal grand jury and just walk away. However, if you’re POTUS and you’ve got more than 40 Senators who will vote to keep you in office even though they absolutely know you’re guilty, you stay in office.
BJ Clinton was guilty as he could possibly be. The Democrat Senators absolutely knew it. They knew it so clearly that I think only three of them even bothered to go by the House evidence depository to look at what they had assembled. BJ’s unmistakable guilt simply didn’t matter to them. Their defiant attitude was that “Clinton may be a depraved, lying, criminal S.O.B. but he’s OUR depraved, lying, criminal S.O.B. and we’re not voting him out.”
So he stayed. In doing so he made certain Bush’s election and, for me, damned the Democrats to Hell forever and a day. I will never, as God is my witness, EVER vote for a Democrat again under any circumstances. I suspect there are a lot of people who made the same resolution that day.
I’ve seen two truly sad days in American governance in my lifetime. The first was watching the last helicopter lift off the roof of the American Embassy in Saigon, as we abandoned those to whom we promised we would “pay any price or bear any burden” to help. The second was watching the Democrat Senators, and those totally craven, cowardly Maine Sisters, along with “magic bullet” Spector vote against conviction.
I’m amazed to this day that I didn’t put something through the television screen when it was clear the lying criminal would escape justice. May the Black Curse of Shielygh closely follow those who permitted that offense to God and man, and may it do so for all eternity.
I digress. Sorry. However, if the Senate wouldn’t vote to convict BJ, with such incredibly strong evidence, there is no way any other President gets impeached and convicted unless the opposition party holds a 60+ seat majority. Lord knows Obama probably deserves it, but with Democrat Party criminals holding the Senate majority, it’s not in the cards. With his protective coverage of mulatto skin, Obama is particularly safe. He could probably murder someone live on national TV and still not get impeached and convicted.
The Founders planned well. I just don’t think they thought we would ever be dealing with so many corrupt, cowardly American citizens.
I wonder if I should call up my former, and so called pro-life, congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper and thank her for this wonderful gift she allowed the gov’t to give us (sarc).
And where is the Congressional Republicrat leadership? Probably resting from the great work they did in crafting a continuing resolution to maintain appropriations at the same obscene level for 6 months, caving to the Congressional Democrats and giving away the only bargaining chip they had to start to reduce the growth of federal government spending! Reaching across the aisle in a collegial, bipartisan effort to continue scr**ing the taxpayers at the same rate is hard work!
If a muslim business owner were to insist on his american, non-muslim employees only eating halaal food… Not only at the workplace, but at home, because it was against his religion to pay for his employees eating non-halaal food… Would this be within his religious freedom rights?
I doubt that you would agree that it would be.
And yet, what you are saying is worse than that. It is not non-halaal food you are disinclined to pay for, but essential medical procedures.
You do not get to decide that other people’s rights do not apply because you pay them. You pay them, they decide how and on what they spend their money. This is known as economic freedom. I had heard you liked that. Was I mistaken?
(And you may well disagree that these medical procedures are essential. You would be wrong. And it is none of your business anyway. Not your body. Not your business.)
And now, you may start foaming at the mouth. Oh, pardon, I see you already started.
The only time that abortion is an essential medical procedure is when it is life threatening–and even the Catholic Church recognizes that as a legitimate reason for abortion. There’s a reason that these are called elective abortions.
Imagine if the government decided to require insurers to pay for cosmetic breast enhancement procedures, or facelifts, or tummy tucks. The difference, of course, is that no one considers those fundamentally immoral.
I am surely not surprised that you decided to answer a question that wasn’t asked, rather than one you couldn’t answer, but why on earth would you believe that a reiteration of a “pro-lifers” basic stance would have any interest to anyone whatsoever? You need to try harder.
Apples and Oranges. Let’s put your analogy in proper perspective. If a muslim business owner were to decline to offer insurance because it is against his religion how would that compare to a catholic church owned business not offering coverage for non-essential procedures? Remember we’re not even talking about a muslim church owned business. Seems a little two faced to me. Now remember that there is an exemption from the Obamacare mandate for any individual who is a member of a religion which does not believe in insurance. You are more than happy to force the Christians to do something which is against their religion but not muslims?
Hypocrite much?
I am sorry (for you), but you are making no sense.
Would you like to try again?
He already has explained it to you; however, he cannot understand it for you.
If we are to take his statements at face value, he seems to be claiming that the church has religious rights that individuals do not. That a church owning a business is apples to a religious person’s owning a business being oranges. Of course, this is flat out wrong. A church has no more religious freedom as an employer than a religious individual has. I believe that is actually in your constitution. “Shall make no law respecting…” and so on.
The next bit of the rant seems to suggest that 1. “Obamacare” says that religions that do not believe in insurance do not have to pay for insurance. And that 2. islam is a religion which does not believe in insurance.
2. is nowhere close to right, and 1. is unlikely.
His triumphant conclusion thus stands on mud feet. There is nothing there. Nothing to understand, nothing to discuss. No sense.
Would either of you like to try again?
He is not responsible for your jejune obtuseness.
As far as I am concerned all an employee should ever be responsible for is what he or she negotiates with his employees. Indeed it makes zero economic sense for the employer to send a sum to a third party on the employees’ behalf so the the employees’ doctors can later bill that third party for reimbursement. Put the federal government into that equation and the amount of useless and costly paperwork skyrockets. In the world of physical goods such wasteful middleman systems have been in rapid decline because consumers have recognized they add costs to the end product. Why some people now want to add additional layers of such middlemen to the health care system seems to have only three possible answers. These people are bureaucrats who seek power over other humans. They are so so stupid they really do believe the politician’s promises they are going to get something for nothing. Or they are puerile nihilists who enjoying destruction for destruction’s sake.
He is within his rights to say, “No non-halal food on the premises.” He is likewise within his rights to say that he will not purchase non-halal food for them, but no matter what the employees retain their right to do with their money as they please. As for the Catholic business owner, he is free to say, “No contraceptives on the premises, and no contraceptives in the health plan. If you want contraception, pay for it yourself on your own time.”
Furthermore, I dispute the claim that contraception is healthcare at all, much less “essential health care.” Contraception exists for one purpose: disrupt the natural function of a healthy organ system. That is the description of a poison, not medicine.
You can dispute the claim that contraception is health care all you want. And you can make whatever statement about it being “poison” that you want. No one forces you to use contraception. But your right to such an opinion ends when you try to force your religious views on others.
The bishops have failed miserably in trying to prevent Catholic women from using contraception. Since they can’t persuade Church members to follow their dictates, they’re now trying to use litigation to try and force their dictates, not just on Catholic women, but on other citizens.
Wow… The fail, it is big with this one! (Must be compensating for something…)
All antibiotics “interfere with healthy systems”. Of course, said systems are the bacteria that are attacking you, but in fact antibiotics also interfere with the bacteria in your gut, which are absolutely essential for your survival.
Vaccines expose you to a weakened strain of the bacteria you are being vaccinated against.
Anthistamines (anti-allergy drugs) interfere with your body’s ability to produce histamines.
In fact, I would challenge you to find *any* medicine which does not “interfere with healthy systems”. Most medicine *is* poison. Take enough of it, and it will kill you. Take the wrong thing, and it will kill you.
Medicine exists to solve problems. An unwanted pregnancy is a larger problem (and in fact, more dangerous) than most medical problems we face today. So yes, contraception is essential health care.
Congratulations. You are now a little less ignorant than you used to be.
As for your first point, I fail to see how there is a moral difference between the employee being paid money and then using it to buy an abortion or contraceptives and the employer paying for health insurance which is then used to pay for abortion or contraceptives. In neither case is it up to the employer to say “you can only use this for reasons I consider valid”. He has paid for work that has been done. This is *all* he has done. He has concluded a commercial transaction.
If I pay you to cut my hair, I have no say over how you spend the money I pay you. If I pay you in goods (barter) I have no say in how you use the goods I give you. That is sort of the point. It is your money. They are your goods. Not mine, not anymore. This is known as “owning things”. Just because the goods are in the form of services provided by other people does not change this essential truth. Not does the fact that
Wow… The fail, it is big with this one! (Must be compensating for something…)
All antibiotics “interfere with healthy systems”. Of course, said systems are the bacteria that are attacking you, but in fact antibiotics also interfere with the bacteria in your gut, which are absolutely essential for your survival.
Vaccines expose you to a weakened strain of the bacteria you are being vaccinated against.
Anthistamines (anti-allergy drugs) interfere with your body’s ability to produce histamines.
In fact, I would challenge you to find *any* medicine which does not “interfere with healthy systems”. Most medicine *is* poison. Take enough of it, and it will kill you. Take the wrong thing, and it will kill you.
Medicine exists to solve problems. An unwanted pregnancy is a larger problem (and in fact, more dangerous) than most medical problems we face today. So yes, contraception is essential health care.
Congratulations. You are now a little less ignorant than you used to be.
As for your first point, I fail to see how there is a moral difference between the employee being paid money and then using it to buy an abortion or contraceptives and the employer paying for health insurance which is then used to pay for abortion or contraceptives. In neither case is it up to the employer to say “you can only use this for reasons I consider valid”. He has paid for work that has been done. This is *all* he has done. He has concluded a commercial transaction.
If I pay you to cut my hair, I have no say over how you spend the money I pay you. If I pay you in goods (barter) I have no say in how you use the goods I give you. That is sort of the point. It is your money. They are your goods. Not mine, not anymore. This is known as “owning things”. Just because the goods are in the form of services provided by other people does not change this essential truth. Not does the fact that you “work for me” change this essential dynamic.
Your claim to the religious freedom to deny other people essential medical care (essential, as stipulated above) is wrong. It is wrong on a moral basis, and on an economic basis.
Thank you.
Interesting that you compare human babies to poisonous bacteria. I think I understand your arguement now. The Catholic church must not only supply the means to kill poisonous bacteria, they must also supply the means to kill healthy babies, because they are, after all, both medical procedures. And medical insurance is supposed to pay for medical procedures. Neat!
I’m over here. When you’re done bashing that strawman, let me know.
What is forcing the employees of said Muslim employer to remain employed to an employer who is making such unreasonable demands? If the employees are unhappy with the demands, they are free to resign and find employment elsewhere. To state otherwise is to imply that the employees are slaves.
The same logic applies to employees of faith based hospitals. If they don’t like the conditions of employment they are free to resign and seek employment elsewhere.
You do know that this isn’t actually *true*, right? That in fact having to change jobs just to get away from bloody idiots is in fact a hardship and not a matter of “just” doing it? Also, you don’t seem to have noticed that you’re in a depression? (I am not, as I live in socialist Norway and we’re doing fine, thank you.)
In short, the balance of power between employer and employee is not equal. Hence “Just go and get another job” is not an acceptable excuse.
NEXT!
Going out and getting another job is not easy…. I guess that would apply to concentration camp guards too, huh ?
The problem arises when the “faith based” hospital is the only hospital in town. In effect this is a problem where I live. The only hospital is a Catholic hospital. In such a case do the laws of the USA or the laws of the Catholic Church apply? What happens if a doctor prescribes contraceptive drugs that can’t be filled in that town because the only drug store is run by a Catholic? If there is a food store owned by a follower of a religion that prohibits the eating of pork (Jews and Muslims), can that food store refuse to sell any food product made from pigs? Once you allow a church to start deciding what is allowed not for its own members, but for everyone else, where does this sort of thing end?
They sure can. Sucks to be you if you can’t deal with it. I suggest you give them some competition if you can’t handle them running their businesses according to their beliefs.
Disclaimer: I do not endorse the use of contraceptives or abortion in any form, nor do I advise anyone to go into business administering the same.
Kathleen–Maximus Coitus Interuptus– Sebelius. Lady start looking for Mediterranean Cruises on or about January of 2013. These are good prices for a Greek isles cruise. And if you can make it an extended cruise. Hasta La vista baby
When, oh when, will the Catholic church actually have the guts to excommunicate people like Pelosi? Is the Church that cowardly? Of course, if you read Ann Barnhardt, you would say yes.
So the government is allowed to spend more than 75% of our taxes spending on the military, which many Christians strongly disagree with, but forcing insurance to provide procedures people actually want & need, suddenly the country is falling apart? Why can’t people make their own choices? Sharing is caring y’all. You have to share this place we live with everyone, and more than 50% of those people believe abortion should be legal. Suck it up hypocrites!
It is you that is the hypocrite. I believe in empowering all women, not just the ones whose mothers wanted them. Don’t force your beliefs (or lack thereof) on me. Abortion scientifically constitutes murder, it ends human life. Salve your conscience however you must, but you will not force your immorality on me, nor can you insist that I pay for it.
Pacifists pay taxes that support military who in turn provide them security. There is NO benefit to me that you end the life of an unborn human child. In fact, you debase all humanity with the act.
And yet I would say that offering safe, legal abortion services does benefit you.
It serves to make certain that the women who have abortions do not die or become crippled by them. Dead mothers, crippled mothers… these are expensive.
Abortion happens. It is something we would both, I am sure, prefer didn’t have to happen. But you do not focus on making the choice to carry forth the potential child easier, nor do you focus on making contraception easily and cheaply available so that fewer women become pregnant when they had not planned to be.
You merely focus on making the act of abortion illegal.
This is not helping. It is merely making yourself feel morally superior by destroying other people’s lives. And destroyed lives are expensive.
I do not endorse fornication as an alternative to adultery, nor shoplifting as an alternative to robbery. How then could I possibly endorse contraception as an alternative to abortion?
Awww… Cute!
Fornication… That’d be the “sin” of “onanism”, I assume? That sin was this: He did not want to impregnate his brother’s wife, because the children would be his brother’s, and not his. The whole thing about the “sperm falling to the ground” wasn’t actually the point. He was not following the tribal law on marriage, not “wasting his holy sperm”. Look it up. It’s amusing.
But, more to the point… Wow! You really think that using contraception is as bad as robbery?
I am intrigued. Who exactly does the use of contraception hurt?
Ah ha! It always gets down to costs. You have assigned a price on human life:
“these are expensive”
Murdering for a price is okay with you? I’ve got a newsflash for you. There hasn’t been a child born that wasn’t expensive in some way or another. I put mine through college$ and then ho$ted wedding$. My cousins who had to go abroad to find children to adopt (most are aborted here) are grateful for the ‘expensive’ children someone was human enough to spare.
Interesting that you think that the time to decide if one wants a child is ‘after one is pregnant’. Is there some mystery as to how that happens? If so, liberal woman are dumber than rocks and maybe that’s why they want to elect people to take care of them cradle to grave. You just want your children in the grave sooner rather than later. BTW, children do not DESTROY lives just because they breathe, their parent’s transference of blame is key to continued personal misery; murdering one or fifty infants won’t fix it.
The cost to society for all these aborted babies should be something even a democrat could understand. You’re murdering future taxpayers. To me even that value should not be applied. Life is priceless.
Idiot.
At least manage to remember why I am writing what I am writing. You said:
“Pacifists pay taxes that support military who in turn provide them security. There is NO benefit to me that you end the life of an unborn human child. In fact, you debase all humanity with the act.”
And I told you that there *is* a benefit to you. Hence, your statement is *wrong*.
And if you want less abortions, have more contraceptives. Have cheaper contraceptives. Give your lower and middle-class families the tax-breaks you would give to the rich so maybe they can afford kids. Compared to that, the effects of banning abortion, or refusing to pay for it are miniscule.
And, lady, I am not a democrat. I am a Norwegian. I, and most of my country, exist so far over on the other side of your democrats that you wouldn’t be able to see us, since you define democrats as “Marxists”. If they are, then we’re the lovechild of Mao, Stalin and somebody so red they have to be from Mars.
As for the rest of your screed, it does nothing. I don’t know why you need to insist that the other side are evil, ignorant and malicious, all at once, but it seems to work for you. And since you don’t listen, but just look for the next thing you can fit into your monologue about evil leftists, I see no point in further discussion. I make no claim as to my ability to avoid making fun of you, though.
Fornication is sex between two unmarried people, in contrast to adultery, which is sex between two people, at least one of whom is married to someone else.
As for Onan, Judah and Shelah violated the tribal law on marriage, but they lived. Onan, however, did something worse- rather than be forthright about his desire not to sire children in accordance with the law of levirate marriage, he perversely went through the motions of the marital act but then subverted it by spilling his seed on the ground.
“Abortion scientifically constitutes murder……..” You should say that abortion is wrong, based on your personal religious views. There is nothing scientific about it and all citizens have the right to control their reproduction, despite the continuing efforts of some citizens to use big government to impose a state religion.
I don’t know what science you are familiar with but I am a chemist. We call things what they are. According to you it’s a human only if the mother wants it. I don’t believe in alchemy. Abortion is wrong based on my scientific views. A human heartbeat stops by force – that is murder. Don’t believe it? Why have people been convicted of murdering two people when a pregnant woman is murdered?
I know people who are not religious who acknowledge that abortion ends human life by force. You are the one who introduced religion. In your faith, humans are not really human if their mother finds them inconvenient. I’ve got more science on my side.
Your argument is that of the typical anti-abortion zealot. Where did I say in my comment: “it’s a human only if the mother wants it”? Answer: I didn’t say that. Where did I say anything at all about my “faith?” Answer again: I didn’t say anything about my own beliefs.
And like the typical anti-abortion activist, you completely ignore any statement at all about citizens being able to control their own lives. I find little difference between the secret police spies of the old Soviet Union and those who would be the “bedroom police” of today’s America.
You may not believe in alchemy, but you rely on it every day. Today it’s known as nuclear science or nuclear engineering, but it’s transmutation all the same.
Libertyship 46: “I think it will, because the Supreme Court has traditionally sided with religious groups against the government.” No offense Patriot, but I was absolutely ASTONISHED that you would think (or believe?) the current Supreme Court would go against THIS government, considering the fact John Roberts showed “We, the People” his TRUE ALLEGIANCE (to Obama) when his deliberate un-Constitutional “vote” FOR O-Care made that scam an official LAW against us? Oh pleeezzzz! “We, the Sheeple” have been so successfully indoctrinated for 236 God-awful years to “put our faith in specific institutions” (i.e. The Supreme Court) that ignorant (i.e. uninformed) millions STILL expect MERE HUMANS to “do the right thing!” The “powers that be” (i.e. The Supreme Court, all Politicians, etc.) that “The Majority” ignorantly CONTINUE looking to for JUSTICE are either “bought off, threatened or die suddenly” to DO WHAT THEY ARE TOLD TO DO by the crooks, thieves, liars and cheats in Washington who are mercilessly CONTROLLING everything in the daily life of 310,000,000+ people who are helpless to do anything about the tyranny . . . and this government KNOWS we’re helpless!!!
Even though he was said to be a Deist, I still believe Thomas Jefferson must have loved America at some point because of all the “warnings” he spoke to the future generations. For example: “When injustice becomes Law, resistance becomes duty.” AND “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain SILENT.” May our great God have mercy on our beloved America!!
This is why: because 6 of the Justices are Catholics, and it is the Catholic Church filing suit to preserve our liberty in the face of persecution. To side against the Constitution is oath-breaking, but to side against the Church is to deny Christ! If they stand up and strike down the law, they may risk their lives, but if they cower and uphold the law, they risk their souls.
Ahh…
This bit explains a lot. You’re actually insane. No wonder you have no clue. I do apologize for wasting your time trying to inform you. I mean, you surely had some foaming to do.
This is not about women’s health. This is about depopulation and getting the tax payer to pay for their own demise.
It only becomes a woman’s choice or Pro Choice if she decides to abort. When she kills the child, the left will congratulate her and pat her on the back, Good for you and your good health. If she elects to have the child, she will be demonized by the left wing fascist. That is what its about!
Its all quite sick when you think about it! The left and their propaganda machines like Hollywood make movies and TV shows loaded with violence, nudity and as much sex as possible to promote as much immoral behavior as possible and then gets the sick gratification of slaughtering as many babies as possible after endlessly promoting free sex. Im I missing something?
And the extreme violence in movies today, and then they use what happened in Colorado as a way to end the 2nd amendment. Its all a freaking set up.
Yeah, you’re missing something. Both frontal lobes, I’d say. That’s some of the more important bits of your brain. Did you have an accident with the second amendment? You’re not supposed to arm the bears. Or bare your arms, either. It only encourages the blighters.
What?? I have heard nothing but calls for gun control and ending the 2nd amendment since Colorado. What the f-ck are you talking about!
Okay. I’ll assume you didn’t read what you wrote. (This is generally seen as something one might like to do before hitting “send”.)
You claim that the left is encouraging sinful behaviour through hollywood movies, then reaping the harvest of tasty, tasty human babies afterwards. And that the left also demonizes women who have babies.
This. Is. Insane.
I mean, thinking it inside your own head is insane. Going out and plastering it all over a public forum? Insane on toast.
And wow! Imagine! Someone uses a gun made for killing people to kill people, and some people think we should have a discussion about whether, maybe, possible, not having quite so many guns about, or maybe not letting obviously insane people buy said guns would be a good idea…
And you think that this discussion is …what? A plan to take your guns away? Well, yeah! I think someone who thinks their political opponents are baby-eating monsters from planet hollywood *might not be someone I would want to have a gun*. Duh!
The other side is *people*. Just like you. Although possibly, from my (Hi! I’m Norwegian!) viewpoint, somewhat less insane. They believe in things, they hope for things, they want to make the world a better place. They *disagree with you* on how this is to be done. But no, they are not baby-eating monsters from planet hollywood.
It’d be nice if I could be as sure that you aren’t.
Mjaum, do you have children?
Mjaum, my heritage is Norwegian on my father’s side. The land of the barbarians who went a-viking has degenerated into a bunch of socialist, big government slaves. You babble on about gun control. How well did that work out when Anders Breivik committed his ghastly attack? Every sentient entity on the planet has the right to self defense, except, apparently, to socialists, humans. There is a great video on YouTube called Innocents Betrayed, the worldwide history of gun control. Watch it and then try to practice a little self reliance for your own sake.
Look, you support the murder of innocent kids, I dont. I will leave it at that. I am not the one encouraging abortion, YOU ARE! Its people JUST LIKE YOU that is creating the decay of this country my little troll.
If you and your idols in Hollywood do not like here because of our Bill of Rights, please head to your closest exit smart @ss. You talk big and brave behind that little keyboard my little man! hahahaha
Could you at least *try*? I mean, this place is usually like shooting really *dumb* fish in a barrel, but you could at least *try*…
Now, see if you can follow this: I am not American. I am Norwegian. I have no skin in your game of democrats vs republicans. Hence, telling me to leave is sort of redundant. Means “pointless”. I am not there.
As for your Bill of Rights, as a norwegian I have more rights than you do, I have more safety, I have the ability to get more guns, I have more money, I have more security in my old age, I have less crime, less pollution, more of a say in my country’s political system… I could go on, but really, what’s the point? I *live* in a country that is what you couldn’t even dream of. If there is superiority of culture, if there is, nowadays, a shining city on a hill, it is in Scandinavia, not in your rotten little empire of the super-rich and the flag-draped coffins.
Shining city on a hill ?
Hmmm…. seems like the Breivik massacre indicates there’s something rotten in the State of Norway
Mjaum, it is nice that you live in such a wonderful country. When I go to Europe (I have never been to Norway) I love the orderliness, the cleanliness, and the great cultural artifacts of the past that are so well preserved. There is a good reason, however, that all of that is able survive in a world that is, as history demonstrates, inherently as violent and destuctive as it is creative. How is it that little countries like yours can feel so secure in such a world? Europeans of all people should appreciate the paradox. The fact is that little countries like yours exist in a world order created by greater powers. (Do I really need to explain this?) Your country lives in peace and security because of NATO. NATO is effectiely the United States, with basing rights in European countries. Europe left to its own resources could not contain the likes of Slobodan Milosovic or depose a clown like Mohammar Ghadaffi (or however you spell it, I don’t care.) Right now there is one great power in the world, the United States. We sometimes make mistakes, for we are only human. But our eye has always been on the goal of freedom and democracy. The two contenders for Great Power are China, a communist dictatorship, and Russia, which is run by a criminal gang of former KGB agents, and is doing all in its power to dominate Europe, which it now rightly sees as weak and vulnerable. Mjaum, you should hope, or if you still believe in God, pray, that the United States remains in the position of Great Power. We are willing to defend Europe because it is our own motherland, the source of our ideas about freedom and democracy, man’s relationsip to God and to the world. My own people are from Bavaria, France, Scotland, England and Ireland. We do not forget our roots. I am sorry that Europeans are allowing themselves to be overrun by bararic cultures and are failing even to secure a future by something so elemental to survival as having children. And I think you should apologize to the families of our dead servicemen. We cover them with our flag because they are dear to us.
The obamacare mandate reflects the sea change that is occurring in this country. The pond is freezing over. The radical is mainstream, the revolution is normal. Christian conservatives will now know what it’s like to live as a Jew in Egypt…….
Yeah, what a pathetic show of support for Dan Cathy. snicker And Ted Cruz, the underdog, against the establishment politician who outspent him 3 or 4 to 1. Dewhurst had his ass handed to him. Left wing politics is on the way out in America. You clowns had your chance and blew it. Most likely because you think most people are as irresponsible and selfish as yourselves. The tide first started to turn in 1994. The cleansing tsunami is coming a little over 3 months from now.
And, yet again, no-one even notices that none of this would matter if not for the US requirement for employers to provide health cover to employees.
While employers are required to provide health cover, there is guaranteed to be a conflict of interest. The only way around this is everyone getting – or not – their own individual coverage, and insurers being able to offer a variety of coverage options. (You’re not going to have children? Don’t check the box for maternity cover. Have half a dozen interacting chronic conditions? Pick the higher level coverage of specialist visits. And so forth).
Instead we get the worst of all possible worlds with insanely expensive coverage of everything and then some, and people being stuck with paying for something they don’t need, don’t want, or find ethically reprehensible.
Exactly correct!
You might also wish to explain to women who have been through menopause why they are forced to participate in this mandate.
“In reality, what this law does is force millions of Americans to abide by the radical edge of the sexual revolution……..”
And TENS of millions are quite happy with that mandate. Millions of Americans are still a very small minority, the curse of living in a republic that spans an entire continent………
Our First Amendment has vanished. The remainder of our “Bill of Rights” will topple like dominoes if the left is allowed to stay in power.
Contraception and the killing of fetuses isn’t women’s healthcare that I can see. It simply enables giving in to either men who want sex (women unwilling to just say “no”)or their own carnal impulses. Why the rest of us should pay for this I can’t understand. The Left-wing of America has propagandized much of the American voter to believe their actual lies.
We fell for it all, and now they’re going further, further and further. It’s not about sin, good or bad, it’s about self control. Democrats clearly do not want us to practice that.
“Contraception and the killing of fetuses isn’t women’s healthcare…….” How about letting WOMEN make the decisions as to what is their health care?
“Self control. Democrats clearly do not want us to practice that.” Determining what is health care and what is “self control” is an individual decision and is non-partisan in nature.
As the late Senator Goldwater, the founder of the modern conservative movement, once said: “Abortion is not a conservative issue. It’s a matter between a woman and her doctor.” (and her family). Same for contraception.
I like how the rules for commenting say that there should be no ad hominem attacks, but the main article talks about Obama giving himself a birthday present of many aborted babies, because, apparently, that is the kind of present he would really like. Conservatives seem to have little self-awareness.