Contraception Coverage Mandate

It's funny how this debate was allowed to be framed as something it is not. The issue isn't contraception, pro or con. It's about whether gov't can force religion to do something that violates one of it's core fundamentals.

 

I say the same thing about car insurance... "Why should I be forced to buy car insurance so rich people can get lower rates?"

Just curious, how much do you think the premium will rise if contraceptives are included? My guess is that if your yearly premium is $5000 at worst it'd be a buck or two. At best it may reduce the rate you'd pay.

 

I was heading in that direction too lol ...that by preventing pregnacies, pregnacies that are covered by insurance, the insurance industry may lower premiums, or pay for the products, for people who buy contraceptives.

 

It can... if the core fundamental is illegal. In this case though, how is requiring contraceptives on insurance religiously fundamental? Every person has a choice on whether or not to use contraception. Requiring it be covered by insurance does not mean the religious have to use contraceptives. If the law said the religious must use contraceptives then I'd agree that the law violates a fundamental religious right. Requiring insurance to cover contraceptives is not a violation of religious rights.

 

You're assuming I asked for one, I didn't. But, I doubt you could make an edible cake... and there's no way in Hell you could convince me to eat it anyway... so eat it yourself.

I suggested that anyone who remembers midas may want to pay their respects to him... since he is no longer in the top 12. That could change... he could come back and knock me back down...unlikely though. My comment was for the people who remember him and the idea is just that... to remember him.

 

Really? Are you serious or is this post a joke?
The Catholic belief that the use of contraceptives is illegal? Really? You just gotta humor me & explain this one.

 

here you go! Now we find out that Sebeliushas not consulted with the Catholic bishops be fore implementing the new contraception mandate and;

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/...ops-on-contraceptive-mandate.html?s_cid=rss-5

And you wonder why they keep getting in trouble!

 

It's no wonder with exchanges like this between Hatch and Sebelius that so many people think the entirety of Obamacare is unconstitutional. Even if she had contacted Holder's Justice Department, I doubt she would have gotten an honest, straight answer. Holder is too busy right now trying to save his own skin.

 

You misunderstood. Again. I said if a core fundamental is illegal, then the government can step in. I never said the Catholic's belief about contraceptives is illegal. I will say it's stupid though, since you've "asked".

An example of an illegal core fundamental belief would be that a young virgin girl must have her heart cut out and eaten by the elders to ensure a good harvest.

(sighs) Now, you probably think I'm saying Catholics eat young girls hearts. I'm not. I'm saying that if a core fundamental belief is illegal, then the government can step in.

As for Catholics, some may not want to use contraceptives, but some do. How is requiring it on insurance unjust to those that don't want to use contraceptives? It doesn't require they use them. What about those Catholics that want it required, why is it justifiable to say they can't have it on their insurance?

 

Again, it's not necessarily about contraception it's about gov't mandating that a Church to support something that violates it's fundamental teaching. Can't you get that?

 

Who's asking them to support it? Support it or don't, either way the overwhelming majority of people in America don't have an issue with it. But that's not even the point brainiac... the point I'm making is that religious beliefs don't trump law. It's the other way around. Otherwise any nut-job can use "religious freedom" to do anything they want.

 

It doesn't matter if people have a problem with it or not. The issue is religious freedom. Gov't does not have the right to impose it's social values on the Church. I'll bet you BO would never require the Muslim community to eat sausage for breakfast, would he?

 

Don't be too sure, David. Obama's been feeding the rest of America a plate of crap for the last 3 years.

 

Religious freedom isn't being impaired. They are not required to use a condom, diaphram, or whatever. In your example, muslims would be required to eat sausage and that isn't the case with contraceptives... the religious can choose to use them or not to use them, they have a choice.

 

Sure it is. The Church is being required to offer something (or at least provide access to something) that violates it's basic teachings & fundamental beliefs. I'm surprised you don't get......well, maybe I shouldn't be.

 

If I was a religious nut-job, I'm sure I'd understand. A lot of religious people aren't nut-jobs though, and they want condoms (they cover your penis), diaphrams (a type of vaginal sperm barrier which may or may not contain spermicides and/or microbicides), IUDs (look 'em up ), and oral hormones (the "pill", as an example). There are more methods available like spermicides (including a type of vaginal lozenge), sterilization (tubal ligations and vasectomies), fertility-awareness (many methods, essentially knowing when to **** and when not to), coitus interruptus, as well as many others.

The point is: Religious nut-jobs are not being required to use these methods if they don't want to, but the insurance they choose to buy must have it included for any members who do want it. Religious beliefs should never dictate to society what laws that society decides to create. Look at the Taliban for reasons why.

 

It sounds like someone ought to be reading the US Constitution instead of the Koran.

 

The constitution can AGAIN A BIG NO NO

 

What does that mean exactly? When you leave words blank, it's the same as if you don't speak every other word. Or maybe I should say, "___ the ___ as ___ you ___ speak ___ other ___".

 

This entire controversy is backfiring on Obama:
Not just a Catholic controversy: Protestant colleges threaten to drop student health care over contraceptive mandate

February 21, 2012
On a chilly winter day earlier this month, 120 college presidents--mostly of Protestant schools--from around the country met in Washington for an annual meeting sponsored by the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities, a group that represents 136 American schools and more than 400,000 students. One topic kept coming up in the discussions: How to combat President Barack Obama's proposed mandate for religious employers to provide health insurance that offers free contraception, a decision that would affect all of their institutions--and could violate some of their deepest-held beliefs.

During the conference, 25 of the presidents held a separate policy meeting to discuss the proposed directive, which was first established in the Affordable Care Act in 2010 and was upheld this year by the Department of Health and Human Services. The mandate, later softened by the Obama administration, would have required non-church religious institutions like schools and hospitals to offer health insurance plans that include free access to contraceptives and abortifacient drugs. Many of these presidents made trips to the offices of their representatives to urge them to fight against the decision.

Much of the news coverage of the battle over the contraception mandate focused on the outcry from the Catholic Church, but employers affiliated with Protestant denominations--especially religious colleges who offer insurance plans to students--waged an equally outspoken crusade against the decision. A coalition of more than 60 faith-based groups co-signed a letter to President Obama in December urging him to broaden exemptions to the mandate, and the council's president, Paul Corts, twice sent letters to the administration urging them to reconsider.

After the Obama administration first announced the mandate, colleges associated with Protestant churches and schools founded as expressly Christian institutions fought for exemptions, warning that the mandate could force them to deny health insurance to students who rely on the school's health care plans.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...testant-colleges-threaten-drop-232819956.html