Neumayr, via Belvedere:
During last year’s campaign, Obama said that religions will remain free
to determine their own “sacraments.” Shouldn’t that go without saying?
The very fact that Obama made such a declaration should scare people.
Whenever a pol says “I won’t do [fill in the blank],” it usually means that very activity is on his mind.
The sacrament of marriage comes to mind.
Paranoia strikes deep.
ReplyDeleteIt's only paranoia if you *think* they're out to get you.
ReplyDeleteObama is.
No evidence, much less proof of that. Only paranoia.
ReplyDeleteThe Statist-in-Chief is also on record (along with HRC) that the 1A protects "freedom of worship."
ReplyDeleteIt does no such thing.
It protects freedom of RELIGION.
Language matters except to the willing blind, like Jimbo.
No evidence, much less proof of that. Only paranoia.
ReplyDeleteThe HHS mandate, which specifically targets Catholic teaching, is proof enough.
But thanks for playing!
Anon 6:21, you don't know what you are talking about.
ReplyDeleteHHS mandate says that health insurance policies cover contraception with no copay by the covered insured.
The HHS mandate does not target Catholic teaching any more than it targets ANY religious group, which is to say not at all. The use of contraception is TOTALLY at the discretion of the laborer or their family. Employer-provided health insurance is a payment for employee labor, the same as wages, vacation, 401k matching. By your logic, an orthodox Jewish employer could deny those wages used for buying bacon. A Mormon employer could disallow vacations to Las Vegas or deny wages for buying liquor. And so forth.
Compensation for labor is a cost of business. What the laborer does with that compensation is their business.
Several Federal courts disagree with Jim.
ReplyDeleteThat's because he's wrong on the facts, as usual.
The use of contraception is TOTALLY at the discretion of the laborer or their family.
ReplyDeleteThen it should be at the cost of the laborer or their family. Target and Wal-Mart have scripts for less than $10/mo.
By your logic, an orthodox Jewish employer could deny those wages used for buying bacon. A Mormon employer could disallow vacations to Las Vegas or deny wages for buying liquor. And so forth.
Please show me where this, or Catholics "withholding" wages to prevent the buying of birth control happened. Otherwise, your argument is invalid.
While we're at it, name another major mainstream religion where artificial contraception has been verboten as in Catholicism.
Conversely, however, the HHS mandate could *force* Jews, Muslims and Mormons to buy bacon or alcohol since the culture thinks they're okay or they're a "right."
Several Federal courts disagree with Jim.
That's because he's wrong on the facts, as usual.
Facts? Where are the facts in his statement. All I see is illogical emotionalism used as a guise to strip a group of their fundamental right.
Then it should be at the cost of the laborer or their family.
ReplyDeleteThat's the POINT! It IS at the cost of the laborer. Wages, health benefits, vacations are compensation for work performed. Health insurance provided or subsidized by an employer costs the employee their labor.
Catholics refusing to provide health insurance that covers contraception are denying employees the legal fruits of their labor and the free choice to use or not use contraception.
Catholic employers are not involved in the equation. They provide insurance to employees. Employees use it as needed per their OWN religious beliefs.
name another major mainstream religion where artificial contraception has been verboten as in Catholicism.
Since most Catholics don't adhere to this restriction, it's pretty much moot.
Several federal courts agree with Jim.
Feel free to point out the "illogical emotionalism". The only group stripped of their rights is employees who wish to use their OWN conscience and needs to use the fruits of their labor.