obama caves again

[Synthaholic]

Actually, he has a valid point. You are not a conservative, Jokey. You are a RINO.

On the bright side, you are smart enough to see past the hyperbole to the issue on this and, for that, I respect your view.

It's just a pity that we seem to have absolutely no rational liberals on this board. Not one will address the First Amendment issue... just deny that it qualifies... which it clearly does... and which is why so many faiths have joined the Catholics.

Is religious liberty an absolute right?

If it is, can I be a Rastafarian?

Do you know the tenets?

#1: pass the dutchie to the left.

 

[Synthaholic]

Hey moron - your sig is a lie: how is birth control "murder of the unborn"?

Shhhhhh... you'll confuse her.

Too late!

 

[Synthaholic]

Liability is a far right extremist who would not know a real conservative if he came up and shook his hand. I will let you have the follow up remark wiithout rebuttal and you will still look silly.

He's actually a discredited Neo-Con.

Another Simply Assholic deliberate lie.

I never was a neo-con.

Simply Assholic has no valid points to make nor any ability to make a genuine argument.

This is why he resorts to lies and such.

And I have yet to be discredited. Simply-Assholic has been exposed time and again, however. Stupid putrid hack that he is.

Bullshit. You supported the Iraq War and the Bush Doctrine.

If you don't remember what that is, ask Poor Sarah Palin.

 

[del]

I'm just amazed that they can't even muster a lame response, just crickets.

I got no problem answering your, "when did you stop beating your wife" question. I just thought it was rhetorical given the childishly transparent nature of it. But hey, you want it...

There is NOTHING wrong with organizing your community...as long as it's not FORCED organization. THAT is called fascism and it appears to be the aspirations Obama developed during his days as an organizer!

Show where Obama - or even Saul Alinsky - has EVER forced anyone to do anything.


FAIL

so he's not forcing ins cos to provide contraceptives for free?

really?

 

[Synthaholic]

It isn't a first Amendment issue. Nothing in this ruling restricts their ability to practice their base and silly superstitions.

They just can't impose them on other people. Which is how it should be.

The Catholic Church doesn't run schools or hospitals as a matter of faith, they do it to make money.

And once it becomes about the money, the faith isn't an issue anymore. Then it simply becomes a matter of commerce.

"Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" - someone said that once.

If that is true.... that we 'run schools and hospitals to make money', would you care to explain why the Church contributes $5.7 billion per annum to run its hospitals? Where, exactly, is the 'profit'?

Fact is, this is a first amendment issue.... in that the government does not have the authority to define what constitutes the 'free exercise thereof'. Many churches - not just the Catholic Church - run charities, schools, hospitals, etc as a core part of their Christian Duty. That is protected by the First Amendment..... which is why your messiah is backtracking on his clusterfuck of a healthcare bill.

You do know that Catholic hospitals depend on a LOT of Federal money, don't you?

Oh...you don't????

Will you be starting a petition to get Federal money out of church businesses?

Oh...you won't?

*bump* for the Ignorer In Chief.

C'mon, CowardGirl - debate!

 

[Sheldon]

You're so deluded. The Catholic church can run charities. When they run a business, however, they are subject to the same laws that govern other businesses. They are free to run charities in some other manner.

A church in a secular engagement as a CHURCH does not divorce itself from 1st Amendment protection, Ravi. The liberal shtick of secularism on this issue simply will not work.

There is no first amendment issue here. A business must follow business law or they should cease to operate a business....just like every other business.

Yeah apparently if religious institutions don't get special treatment it's an infringement of their First Amendment right. They're not entitled to government money and if they want it they (should) have to play by the same rules as everyone else.

 

[Synthaholic]

I got no problem answering your, "when did you stop beating your wife" question. I just thought it was rhetorical given the childishly transparent nature of it. But hey, you want it...

There is NOTHING wrong with organizing your community...as long as it's not FORCED organization. THAT is called fascism and it appears to be the aspirations Obama developed during his days as an organizer!

Show where Obama - or even Saul Alinsky - has EVER forced anyone to do anything.


FAIL

so he's not forcing ins cos to provide contraceptives for free?

really?

We were talking about community organizing.

I asked what is wrong with it.

This JD guy said 'nothing, as long as it isn't forced'.

I asked for evidence that Obama or Alinsky had ever forced a community to organize anything.

Now you're up to speed.

 

[The T]

I got no problem answering your, "when did you stop beating your wife" question. I just thought it was rhetorical given the childishly transparent nature of it. But hey, you want it...

There is NOTHING wrong with organizing your community...as long as it's not FORCED organization. THAT is called fascism and it appears to be the aspirations Obama developed during his days as an organizer!

Show where Obama - or even Saul Alinsky - has EVER forced anyone to do anything.


FAIL

so he's not forcing ins cos to provide contraceptives for free?

really?

of course he is...procaliming private business has to...but whom gave him that power? Was the Constitution voted out of existence while we weren't looking?

 

[Synthaholic]

A church in a secular engagement as a CHURCH does not divorce itself from 1st Amendment protection, Ravi. The liberal shtick of secularism on this issue simply will not work.

There is no first amendment issue here. A business must follow business law or they should cease to operate a business....just like every other business.

Yeah apparently if religious institutions don't get special treatment it's an infringement of their First Amendment right. They're not entitled to government money and if they want it they (should) have to play by the same rules as everyone else.

For the WIN!

 

[del]

Show where Obama - or even Saul Alinsky - has EVER forced anyone to do anything.


FAIL

so he's not forcing ins cos to provide contraceptives for free?

really?

We were talking about community organizing.

I asked what is wrong with it.

This JD guy said 'nothing, as long as it isn't forced'.

I asked for evidence that Obama or Alinsky had ever forced a community to organize anything.

Now you're up to speed.

hallelujah

 

[Liability]

He's actually a discredited Neo-Con.

Another Simply Assholic deliberate lie.

I never was a neo-con.

Simply Assholic has no valid points to make nor any ability to make a genuine argument.

This is why he resorts to lies and such.

And I have yet to be discredited. Simply-Assholic has been exposed time and again, however. Stupid putrid hack that he is.

Bullshit. You supported the Iraq War and the Bush Doctrine.

If you don't remember what that is, ask Poor Sarah Palin.

I did support the Iraq War. Still do. It was proper. In your completely idiotic estimation, that serves to make one a" neo-con," which only proves that you are one of the idiot scumbags who places no value on the actual meaning of words.

Such a surprise.

And, oh, btw, you dishonest stupid partisan hack. The term "Bush Doctrine" had no fixed meaning. There ARE aspects of what many came to see as the so-called "Bush Doctrine" that I DO agree with. And again, in your petty-ass partisan hack world, that translates into being a "neo-con." And again, that means only that you have no use for the actual meaning of words.

You remain, fundamentally, just a dishonest low life.

 

[saveliberty]

A church in a secular engagement as a CHURCH does not divorce itself from 1st Amendment protection, Ravi. The liberal shtick of secularism on this issue simply will not work.

There is no first amendment issue here. A business must follow business law or they should cease to operate a business....just like every other business.

Yeah apparently if religious institutions don't get special treatment it's an infringement of their First Amendment right. They're not entitled to government money and if they want it they (should) have to play by the same rules as everyone else.

What government money? You mean medicare and medicaid that pay below regular rates? The government would go broke even faster without these hospitals. Further, the healthcare network depends on these hospitals to provide quality care for the communities they serve. There is definitely a first amendment right being violated by Obama. All religions are offended, not just Catholics.

 

[Liability]

Show where Obama - or even Saul Alinsky - has EVER forced anyone to do anything.


FAIL

so he's not forcing ins cos to provide contraceptives for free?

really?

We were talking about community organizing.

I asked what is wrong with it.

This JD guy said 'nothing, as long as it isn't forced'.

I asked for evidence that Obama or Alinsky had ever forced a community to organize anything.

Now you're up to speed.

Another dopey quibble.

That they allegedly didn't "succeed" in forcing people to do anything somehow removes the blot from their records as community activists who SOUGHT to impose shit on others?

Damn but you're dishonest.

 

[The T]

There is no first amendment issue here. A business must follow business law or they should cease to operate a business....just like every other business.

Yeah apparently if religious institutions don't get special treatment it's an infringement of their First Amendment right. They're not entitled to government money and if they want it they (should) have to play by the same rules as everyone else.

For the WIN!

For what win you partisan hack?

 

[Synthaholic]

so he's not forcing ins cos to provide contraceptives for free?

really?

We were talking about community organizing.

I asked what is wrong with it.

This JD guy said 'nothing, as long as it isn't forced'.

I asked for evidence that Obama or Alinsky had ever forced a community to organize anything.

Now you're up to speed.

hallelujah

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrLk4vdY28Q&ob=av2n]Leonard Cohen - Hallelujah - YouTube[/ame]

 

[saveliberty]

Deflection warning: This thread has been issued a deflection warning. A deflection warning means the possibly exists that severe multiple unrelated arguments will be made by the left in order to avoid reality. Damage to the Constitution and economy can result from such arguments. You should seek shelter in the factual sources and links provided.

 

[The T]

There is no first amendment issue here. A business must follow business law or they should cease to operate a business....just like every other business.

Yeah apparently if religious institutions don't get special treatment it's an infringement of their First Amendment right. They're not entitled to government money and if they want it they (should) have to play by the same rules as everyone else.

What government money? You mean medicare and medicaid that pay below regular rates? The government would go broke even faster without these hospitals. Further, the healthcare network depends on these hospitals to provide quality care for the communities they serve. There is definitely a first amendment right being violated by Obama. All religions are offended, not just Catholics.

Highlighted for posterity.

AMEN.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I don't care how many times you repeat it, this is not a first amendment issue.

Can you tell me which part of the constitution actually covers churches then?

The church is excluded from this mandate. Their businesses are not. It really is pretty simple.

I can't run a business and state that my religion forbids me from paying taxes.

The church is not a building, it is everyone that believes. Since the 1st Amendment, doesn't actually cover those people, despite what my teachers and every lawyer I know telling me otherwise, can you tell me what part of the constitution actually covers the church?

By the way, you can do what you just said you can't. It won't actually help, and is completely irrelevant to the discussion, but you can still do it. I guess that makes you wrong twice in one sentence.

 

[Synthaholic]

Another Simply Assholic deliberate lie.

I never was a neo-con.

Simply Assholic has no valid points to make nor any ability to make a genuine argument.

This is why he resorts to lies and such.

And I have yet to be discredited. Simply-Assholic has been exposed time and again, however. Stupid putrid hack that he is.

Bullshit. You supported the Iraq War and the Bush Doctrine.

If you don't remember what that is, ask Poor Sarah Palin.

I did support the Iraq War. Still do. It was proper. In your completely idiotic estimation, that serves to make one a" neo-con," which only proves that you are one of the idiot scumbags who places no value on the actual meaning of words.

Such a surprise.

That was and is an exclusively Neo-Con view.

Thanks for the confirmation, Bushie!

And, oh, btw, you dishonest stupid partisan hack. The term "Bush Doctrine" had no fixed meaning. There ARE aspects of what many came to see as the so-called "Bush Doctrine" that I DO agree with. And again, in your petty-ass partisan hack world, that translates into being a "neo-con." And again, that means only that you have no use for the actual meaning of words.

You remain, fundamentally, just a dishonest low life.

Oh - I see you HAVE consulted Poor Sarah!

"In what respect, Charlie?"


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaSECfQqty8]Sarah Palin on Bush Doctrine - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Companies that are self-insured have been exempt all along from health care mandates.

Up to this point in time that is true, but that will change very soon.

It is my understanding that the mandates only cover for profit insurers and not companies that self insure but if you have a link to evidence to the contrary I'll take a look at it.

It is my understanding that the mandate for birth control is not the same thing as the Obamacare mandate that requires everyone to buy insurance that meets certain minimum standards which actually includes the mandate for birth control. If you have a link that proves otherwise feel free to post it, otherwise I will assume that the law is the law.