7 States Sue over Contraception Mandate. It's not just the Catholics, OBUMMER!

[JoeB131]

He has a plethora of USMB Leftists backing him.

Not a left-right issue for me.

I don't think the Church should be able to impose their morality on me just because they hired me to do a job.

If the law allows them to do that, we should change the law.

You can't have "freedom of religion" unless you have "freedom from religion".

Has zero of left-right...but sticking to Liberty as guarnteed in the Constitution protecting Life, Liberty Property as God -Given rights for no man to take away.

It's called doing the right thing and letting the excercise weigh on the conscience of that individual practicing his/her right regardless.

You seem to belive it is for government to decide.

YOU couldn't be more wrong in your explination. You are wanting your cake and eating it too.

1) There is no "God" to give rights.

2) Rights are merely privilages that society decides you have. Sorry. This is an ugly reality, but just ask Japanese Americans in 1942 how that "God given rights" thing worked out for them.

3) The Church gave up any religious freedom argument when it went into business. When it took a non-Catholics' tuition and left a Catholic kid to the mercy of the public schools when her parents couldn't afford to pay.

At that point, you are no longer talking about "Freedom" but are merely discussing the most cost-effective way of managing and regulating contracts.

The Chruch would be the first one running to government if one of its employees committed massive insurance fraud on them. There'd be no "turning the other cheek". They are the ones with their hands out to the government looking for handouts for their charities. They made the Faustian bargain, don't come whining to me when Mephistopholes collects...

 

[Quantum Windbag]

QW, you just love to hear yourself talk...

Too bad you don't ever actually say anything of note.

Fact is, once the churches became a business, they became eligible for government regulation. Too bad, so sad.

Screw them.

SCREW BALL

He has put up excellent rebuttals to your nonsense. But you being a big government guy refuse to see it.

Okay, out here in teh real world, where they all know Ron Paul is nuts, you guys just look silly.

Ron Paul is rebutting your points? Where, I would love to see him educate you in common sense.

 

[JoeB131]

What morality issue. You want the church to pay for something they oppose.

Use your money.

I want the Chruch to live up to it's contractual and legal obligations to its employees.

Which it ALREADY does in 28 states.

 

[Immanuel]

Not a left-right issue for me.

I don't think the Church should be able to impose their morality on me just because they hired me to do a job.

If the law allows them to do that, we should change the law.

You can't have "freedom of religion" unless you have "freedom from religion".

They are not. If you work for them, you can go out and buy your own insurance.

Immie

And if the Church gave them additional pay to the equivlent of what they are paying in insurance, that would be fine.

The Church and other employers don't do that.

If health insurance is a benefit, then you can't use it to get into people's personal life.

Why should they? You have declined the benefits they offer. They don't have to pay you for exercising that right too.

Immie

 

[Quantum Windbag]

QW, you just love to hear yourself talk...

Too bad you don't ever actually say anything of note.

Fact is, once the churches became a business, they became eligible for government regulation. Too bad, so sad.

Screw them.

Hate to point out the fucking obvious, but churches are actually subject to government regulation. I think that little detail makes your entire line of argument useless, don't you?

If they are subject to regulation, why are you whining about this.

There's a regulation. YOu have to provide reproductive health coverage to your employees. We're done here.

Gee, I don't know. Could it be because I have a brain that understands the difference between requiring a building to meet fire safety standards and forcing people to do things?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If they are subject to regulation, why are you whining about this.

There's a regulation. YOu have to provide reproductive health coverage to your employees. We're done here.

The only thing a company is supposed to provide is a safe working environment, workers comp. and minimum wage.

Or whatever else we as a society decide they should.

Look, I think that employer provided health insurance is an awful idea, but theres reluctance to go to single payer in this country. Private Health insurance couldn't exist without massive government subsidy and support. Medicare Part C, SCHIPP, tax credits, and so on.

This isn't an issue of cost. This is an issue of the Churches wanting to impose their religion on their employees in the part of their business that has nothing to do with religion.

The Bishops were all for ObamaCare when they realized it would subsidize a lot of new customers for them. They just saw the big dollar signs and said, "Oh, yeah!"

And now there's a string attached they don't like. can't feel sorry for them.

Really? If we, as a society, decided that everyone named Joe who works at any company should give anyone who asks a blowjob would you think that was perfectly acceptable?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

QW, you just love to hear yourself talk...

Too bad you don't ever actually say anything of note.

Fact is, once the churches became a business, they became eligible for government regulation. Too bad, so sad.

Screw them.

Hate to point out the fucking obvious, but churches are actually subject to government regulation. I think that little detail makes your entire line of argument useless, don't you?

Then why do you have about 500 posts in the last two weeks arguing against that fact?

I bet you can't find one post in the entire time I have been on this board arguing against that fact.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Or whatever else we as a society decide they should.

Look, I think that employer provided health insurance is an awful idea, but theres reluctance to go to single payer in this country. Private Health insurance couldn't exist without massive government subsidy and support. Medicare Part C, SCHIPP, tax credits, and so on.

This isn't an issue of cost. This is an issue of the Churches wanting to impose their religion on their employees in the part of their business that has nothing to do with religion.

The Bishops were all for ObamaCare when they realized it would subsidize a lot of new customers for them. They just saw the big dollar signs and said, "Oh, yeah!"

And now there's a string attached they don't like. can't feel sorry for them.

Or whatever else we as a society decide they should.

You just came out of the fucking closet with this post.
In a free market system society doesn't get to decide a damn thing how a private sector company is run, with exception to what I said. You're a fucking socialist.

Companies are required to pay payroll tax. They are required to withhold taxes. They are required to comply with all mandated standards on their products. They are required to comply with labor laws beyond min. wage and comp. If they are publicly traded they are subject to whole other layer of regulation/laws. They must comply with hiring regulations regarding such things as discrimination.

Actually, individuals working for companies are required to pay payroll taxes. Personally, I would prefer to have all the money I earn end up in my wallet instead of the government lying to me and insisting that some of the money I earn isn't mine to begin with, and then tell the company to take my money and give it to them.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You just came out of the fucking closet with this post.
In a free market system society doesn't get to decide a damn thing how a private sector company is run, with exception to what I said. You're a fucking socialist.

Companies are required to pay payroll tax. They are required to withhold taxes. They are required to comply with all mandated standards on their products. They are required to comply with labor laws beyond min. wage and comp. If they are publicly traded they are subject to whole other layer of regulation/laws. They must comply with hiring regulations regarding such things as discrimination.

Well shit you know I wasn't talking about taxes, but a tax hungry bitch like you wouldn't understand that.

What do you expect from anyone that thinks companies, and not people, pay taxes.

 

[JoeB131]

[
Gee, I don't know. Could it be because I have a brain that understands the difference between requiring a building to meet fire safety standards and forcing people to do things?

But you can't have a regulation without forcing people do to things.

If we were all moral paragons, we wouldn't need any regulations. People would know what the right thing to do is and do it. We'd have no conflict.

We have fire safety standards because there are people out there who would build a building that is unsafe to make a quick buck or because they are just plain lazy.

 

[The T]

Companies are required to pay payroll tax. They are required to withhold taxes. They are required to comply with all mandated standards on their products. They are required to comply with labor laws beyond min. wage and comp. If they are publicly traded they are subject to whole other layer of regulation/laws. They must comply with hiring regulations regarding such things as discrimination.

Well shit you know I wasn't talking about taxes, but a tax hungry bitch like you wouldn't understand that.

What do you expect from anyone that thinks companies, and not people, pay taxes.

Statists have already tried to foist the argument that Corporations aren't people.

 

[JoeB131]

The only thing a company is supposed to provide is a safe working environment, workers comp. and minimum wage.

Or whatever else we as a society decide they should.

Look, I think that employer provided health insurance is an awful idea, but theres reluctance to go to single payer in this country. Private Health insurance couldn't exist without massive government subsidy and support. Medicare Part C, SCHIPP, tax credits, and so on.

This isn't an issue of cost. This is an issue of the Churches wanting to impose their religion on their employees in the part of their business that has nothing to do with religion.

The Bishops were all for ObamaCare when they realized it would subsidize a lot of new customers for them. They just saw the big dollar signs and said, "Oh, yeah!"

And now there's a string attached they don't like. can't feel sorry for them.

Really? If we, as a society, decided that everyone named Joe who works at any company should give anyone who asks a blowjob would you think that was perfectly acceptable?

Nope, there are laws against that... But you bring up an interesting point.

Why do we have those laws? Because someone somewhere really thought that employment gave them the right to demand sexual favors from employees.

So a condition was put on employers that they can't do that shit unless they want to pay a shitload of money in fines.

I think you just defeated your own arguments. Congratulations.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Or whatever else we as a society decide they should.

You just came out of the fucking closet with this post.
In a free market system society doesn't get to decide a damn thing how a private sector company is run, with exception to what I said. You're a fucking socialist.

Why should they provide those things if they should be allowed to provide the others?

I mean, if you "logic" that requiring a business to follow common sense laws is imfringing on their freedom, why should they be required to provide minimum wage or workers comp or a safe working environment? (There are exemptions to all of those rules, by the way.)

I frankly like drinking clean water and I like breathing clean air and I like the fact that when I pay money into health insurance as a condition of my employment, I'm not going to find out I've been cheated when I get sick or need care.

This law makes sense.

Here's the dirty little secret. The modern workplace is based on the ability of women to control WHEN they get pregnant. So most sensible businesses have no problem with family planning as part of the coverage.

A pregnant worker costs a company a lot more than one on the pill.

Case in point. - Our HR director went out for a pregnancy last year. They had to pay her medical expenses, had to hire a temp to cover for her for those three months and for one month after and before she left. She took her vacation time for some of that leave and I think there was some paid leave involved there, but I'm not entirely sure.

Making this an argument of "capitalism" vs. "socialism" is just laughable. And Freedom? Sorry, that's a joke.

I have a few suggestions for you.

• If you want clean drinking water set up a still and distill all your water before you drink it, other wise all you get is what they send you, which is not actually required to be clean by any law or regulation.
• If you want clean air it is going to be a lot more expensive. I honestly don't think the technology exists, but you can get relatively clean air with HEPA filters and breathing masks, but you will look really stupid. Not that you look all that smart without them, but I thought I would throw it in.
• As for not getting cheated, the only way I can see that working is if you never do business with anyone. I can, however, solve your complaint about it being a condition of your employment, which it actually isn't, but you are obviously too stupid to understand the difference between a condition and a benefit. Why don't you ask your employer if, instead of getting insurance, you could get a raise that equals his cost in providing insurance, and then go buy your own?

Here's a dirty little secret, if the modern workplace is actually based on the ability of women to not get pregnant than you are arguing that women do not have any reproductive rights because it might inconvenience their employers. Since only right wing assholes, if we believe the rhetoric spouting up over this issue, want to control women, you just outed yourself as a right wing asshole by insisting that companies should have control over when women get pregnant.

Come to think of it, that does explain a lot of the fauxrage here. Feminists have often objected to women who chose to get pregnant and raise a family, maybe this is just the first step to taking that choice away from them.

Want to explain again why this law is a triumph for individual freedom, human rights, and women's rights?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

SO IN THE REAL WORLD YOU HAVE NO FUCKING CLUE.

Now we know for fact you are a big government guy who doesnt mind giving up liberty.

So before you mouth off you might consider how many will come forward in agreement.

He has a plethora of USMB Leftists backing him.

Not a left-right issue for me.

I don't think the Church should be able to impose their morality on me just because they hired me to do a job.

If the law allows them to do that, we should change the law.

You can't have "freedom of religion" unless you have "freedom from religion".

They can't. How is not taking money out of your pocket and buying something that you, if you are actually as old as you claim you are, do not need, imposing their beliefs on you? If they took a 10% tithe out of your check they would be imposing their beliefs on you, if you actually worked for them. Frankly, knowing you, you would argue with everyone in the office of any Catholic organization that made the mistake of hiring you, which would promptly get you fired.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Not a left-right issue for me.

I don't think the Church should be able to impose their morality on me just because they hired me to do a job.

If the law allows them to do that, we should change the law.

You can't have "freedom of religion" unless you have "freedom from religion".

They are not. If you work for them, you can go out and buy your own insurance.

Immie

And if the Church gave them additional pay to the equivlent of what they are paying in insurance, that would be fine.

The Church and other employers don't do that.

If health insurance is a benefit, then you can't use it to get into people's personal life.

They don't? No one who goes in and tells an employer he would prefer to self insure and asks for a raise to cover the expense, while simultaneously pointing out the money it would save the employer, ever gets it? Do you really believe that?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I want the Chruch to live up to it's contractual and legal obligations to its employees.

Which it ALREADY does in 28 states.

It does, idiot.

FYI, those 28 states allow copays, which means the church doesn't pay for contraception, the employee does, if they want it.

 

[JoeB131]

They can't. How is not taking money out of your pocket and buying something that you, if you are actually as old as you claim you are, do not need, imposing their beliefs on you? If they took a 10% tithe out of your check they would be imposing their beliefs on you, if you actually worked for them. Frankly, knowing you, you would argue with everyone in the office of any Catholic organization that made the mistake of hiring you, which would promptly get you fired.

Well, I wouldn't work for a Catholic organization because my hypocrisy only stretches so far.

Hey, and I might marry a hot young trophy wife at some point and want to put her on my coverage.

Point is, once they started going into enterprises that have nothing to do with religion, the First Amendment issue is dead, over with and done at that point.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Gee, I don't know. Could it be because I have a brain that understands the difference between requiring a building to meet fire safety standards and forcing people to do things?

But you can't have a regulation without forcing people do to things.

If we were all moral paragons, we wouldn't need any regulations. People would know what the right thing to do is and do it. We'd have no conflict.

We have fire safety standards because there are people out there who would build a building that is unsafe to make a quick buck or because they are just plain lazy.

Aren't you the same person that keeps arguing that this regulation is not forcing anyone to do anything? Does that mean you admit you are wrong, or are you just stupid?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Or whatever else we as a society decide they should.

Look, I think that employer provided health insurance is an awful idea, but theres reluctance to go to single payer in this country. Private Health insurance couldn't exist without massive government subsidy and support. Medicare Part C, SCHIPP, tax credits, and so on.

This isn't an issue of cost. This is an issue of the Churches wanting to impose their religion on their employees in the part of their business that has nothing to do with religion.

The Bishops were all for ObamaCare when they realized it would subsidize a lot of new customers for them. They just saw the big dollar signs and said, "Oh, yeah!"

And now there's a string attached they don't like. can't feel sorry for them.

Really? If we, as a society, decided that everyone named Joe who works at any company should give anyone who asks a blowjob would you think that was perfectly acceptable?

Nope, there are laws against that... But you bring up an interesting point.

Why do we have those laws? Because someone somewhere really thought that employment gave them the right to demand sexual favors from employees.

So a condition was put on employers that they can't do that shit unless they want to pay a shitload of money in fines.

I think you just defeated your own arguments. Congratulations.

Genius, you missed my point, as usual.

If we, as a society, which was your argument, decide that it is legal, does that make it right. You can't argue that from the point that we, as a society, decided it is wrong and that proves it is wrong. Either things are wrong because they are, or majority rules and slavery is right. You cannot have it both ways.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

They can't. How is not taking money out of your pocket and buying something that you, if you are actually as old as you claim you are, do not need, imposing their beliefs on you? If they took a 10% tithe out of your check they would be imposing their beliefs on you, if you actually worked for them. Frankly, knowing you, you would argue with everyone in the office of any Catholic organization that made the mistake of hiring you, which would promptly get you fired.

Well, I wouldn't work for a Catholic organization because my hypocrisy only stretches so far.

Hey, and I might marry a hot young trophy wife at some point and want to put her on my coverage.

Point is, once they started going into enterprises that have nothing to do with religion, the First Amendment issue is dead, over with and done at that point.

Point is, the constitution does not say that freedom of religion only applies to churches, nor has any court ever upheld that view.