Why are Liberals lying so much about the HL Ruling?

[NYcarbineer]

and still no response as to why the left was not up in arms when ALL Americans lost the right to choose to have or not to have health insurance.

Was that the war on Americans?

It's not relevant.

 

[Jarhead]

Plan B is not the abortion bill, idiot.

Your point is well made but completely irrelevant to the debate.

Yet it is all you have....so go with it.

LMAO....you actually believe the administration intentionally lost the SCOTUS argument.

You are pathetic.

Actually you are the pathetic one spouting off misinformation about a pill that you yourself keep posting. You are Correct in that Plan B is Not an abortion pill.
Plan B can prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus.
Life begins at conception so a fertilized egg is a life. Making it impossible for a fertilized egg to implant is Killing the fertilized egg.

Your own quote ~
It is also possible that this type of emergency birth control prevents implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus by altering its lining.

Excuse me, but I have posted nothing about Plan B. I know very little about it other than what Luissa has said...but I take her posts with a grain of salt.

Your criticism of me is not warranted.

 

[Ibentoken]

and still no response as to why the left was not up in arms when ALL Americans lost the right to choose to have or not to have health insurance.

Was that the war on Americans?

It's not relevant.

That's code for..."drats, foiled again."

 

[NYcarbineer]

Not to Hobby Lobby and the USSC. Game over.

You're going on record that every Supreme Court decision is the correct one?

lol, I'll bet...

Hobby Lobby objected to their employees receiving a compensation package that included compensation that would pay for contraception HL objected to.

That is an absurd position because the paycheck portion of a compensation package can be used to pay for the same.

HL's position is contrived, petty, irrational, and illogical; that the right wing of the Supreme Court agreed with HL is unsurprising.

Do you think the religious freedom claus should be removed from the Constitution?

Your strawman evinces your inability to address the issue I presented.

 

[Jarhead]

and still no response as to why the left was not up in arms when ALL Americans lost the right to choose to have or not to have health insurance.

Was that the war on Americans?

It's not relevant.

Really?

Closed Caption was ranting about how the HL decision restricted a womans right to choose what contraception to use.

So I believe my response is very relevant.

 

[peach174]

The Plan B pill is no covered by insurance anyway. No insurance. Not even obama care.

Yes it does.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/02/health/policy/02health.html

The Obama administration issued new standards on Monday (Aug. 2011) that require health insurance plans to cover all government-approved contraceptives for women, without co-payments or other charges.
This includes plan b

 

[NYcarbineer]

and still no response as to why the left was not up in arms when ALL Americans lost the right to choose to have or not to have health insurance.

Was that the war on Americans?

It's not relevant.

That's code for..."drats, foiled again."

It's not relevant. The two topics are unrelated.

 

[Jarhead]

You're going on record that every Supreme Court decision is the correct one?

lol, I'll bet...

Hobby Lobby objected to their employees receiving a compensation package that included compensation that would pay for contraception HL objected to.

That is an absurd position because the paycheck portion of a compensation package can be used to pay for the same.

HL's position is contrived, petty, irrational, and illogical; that the right wing of the Supreme Court agreed with HL is unsurprising.

Do you think the religious freedom claus should be removed from the Constitution?

Your strawman evinces your inability to address the issue I presented.

I did address it and showed you how your logic is flawed.

I assume you will either ignore it or say it is irrelevant.

Sort of your MO, boss.

 

[ClosedCaption]

So far all these lying liberals provided links to other lying scientists and stuff...What liars!

 

[Ibentoken]

You're going on record that every Supreme Court decision is the correct one?

lol, I'll bet...

Hobby Lobby objected to their employees receiving a compensation package that included compensation that would pay for contraception HL objected to.

That is an absurd position because the paycheck portion of a compensation package can be used to pay for the same.

HL's position is contrived, petty, irrational, and illogical; that the right wing of the Supreme Court agreed with HL is unsurprising.

Do you think the religious freedom claus should be removed from the Constitution?

Your strawman evinces your inability to address the issue I presented.

In other words, you choose not to answer because your answer would incriminate you. Of course you would love to remove the religious rights claus. Be bold. Just admit it.

 

[Jarhead]

It's not relevant.

That's code for..."drats, foiled again."

It's not relevant. The two topics are unrelated.

Only because it ruins the argument.

Right to choose is the topic of Closed Captions argument.

SO right to choose is what I addressed,

So it is very relevant.

Debate like an adult NYCarbineer. Stop diverting like a frightened child.

 

[Jarhead]

and still no response as to why the left was not up in arms when ALL Americans lost the right to choose to have or not to have health insurance.

Was that the war on Americans?

It's not relevant.

LMAO...Closed Caption thanked you for your childish post...

You saved his ass in his eyes.

Yet all you did was show you act like a frightened child when engaged in a debate you are losing

 

[NYcarbineer]

and still no response as to why the left was not up in arms when ALL Americans lost the right to choose to have or not to have health insurance.

Was that the war on Americans?

It's not relevant.

Really?

Closed Caption was ranting about how the HL decision restricted a womans right to choose what contraception to use.

So I believe my response is very relevant.

Maybe if Closed Caption were the official spokesperson for 'the left' you claim your post was relevant.

Just because the word 'choose' appears in different statements involving different issues doesn't mean that the two are somehow interdependent.

Your defense of HL's right to choose not to provide this insurance doesn't require you to support a woman's right to choose an abortion does it?

 

[Luissa]

Plan B isn't the issue, pissant.

Hobby Lobby fought against Plan B, Ella, and IUDs. The abortion pill was not apart of this case one bit. Get a fucking clue.

Hobby Lobby still provides BC in their health insurance.

Oh! My fucking God. Lol

There is no point in talking to you. You are an ignorant fool.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do you think the religious freedom claus should be removed from the Constitution?

Your strawman evinces your inability to address the issue I presented.

In other words, you choose not to answer because your answer would incriminate you. Of course you would love to remove the religious rights claus. Be bold. Just admit it.

The question is a strawman because the religious freedom in the Constitution is not unlimited as has been proven in multiple court cases, therefore what I stated has nothing to do with whether religious freedom is in the Constitution.

 

[Jarhead]

It's not relevant.

Really?

Closed Caption was ranting about how the HL decision restricted a womans right to choose what contraception to use.

So I believe my response is very relevant.

Maybe if Closed Caption were the official spokesperson for 'the left' you claim your post was relevant.

Just because the word 'choose' appears in different statements involving different issues doesn't mean that the two are somehow interdependent.

Your defense of HL's right to choose not to provide this insurance doesn't require you to support a woman's right to choose an abortion does it?

Despite your attempt to cloud the debate with gibberish as you try to slink out of it, I can address it....

I was responding to closed caption and his argument that the HL decision restricted the woman's right to choose. He played on it continually.

So I asked him his thoughts on the ACA and if he felt the same way as it pertains to ALL Americans having their right to choose restricted.

But please...continue to cloud the conversation so you and closed caption can hide behind irrelevant postings.

Or act like an adult and debate like an adult.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do you think the religious freedom claus should be removed from the Constitution?

Your strawman evinces your inability to address the issue I presented.

I did address it and showed you how your logic is flawed.

I assume you will either ignore it or say it is irrelevant.

Sort of your MO, boss.

Where did you address the issue of HL being willing to pay for abortions by giving their employees paychecks?

 

[Againsheila]

Can't Democrats be honest about anything?



The ruling didn't take away anyone's right to contraception. It simply says that certain companies, following very strict rules, can refuse to pay for it.



The woman can still get it if she wants it. She simply has to pay for it herself or use another Government programs, such as Planned Parenthood, to get it.



Hobby Lobby has been offering 16 different forms of contraception for years. They only object to 4 different specific types that caused abortions.



Democrats are such liars.

Ironic post is ironic...

I will give you a hint, none of the four cause an abortion. You lied in your OP.

bullcrap!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Really?

Closed Caption was ranting about how the HL decision restricted a womans right to choose what contraception to use.

So I believe my response is very relevant.

Maybe if Closed Caption were the official spokesperson for 'the left' you claim your post was relevant.

Just because the word 'choose' appears in different statements involving different issues doesn't mean that the two are somehow interdependent.

Your defense of HL's right to choose not to provide this insurance doesn't require you to support a woman's right to choose an abortion does it?

Despite your attempt to cloud the debate with gibberish as you try to slink out of it, I can address it....

I was responding to closed caption and his argument that the HL decision restricted the woman's right to choose. He played on it continually.

So I asked him his thoughts on the ACA and if he felt the same way as it pertains to ALL Americans having their right to choose restricted.

But please...continue to cloud the conversation so you and closed caption can hide behind irrelevant postings.

Or act like an adult and debate like an adult.

No one who supports one particular choice has to support every choice. That's preposterous.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Can't Democrats be honest about anything?



The ruling didn't take away anyone's right to contraception. It simply says that certain companies, following very strict rules, can refuse to pay for it.



The woman can still get it if she wants it. She simply has to pay for it herself or use another Government programs, such as Planned Parenthood, to get it.



Hobby Lobby has been offering 16 different forms of contraception for years. They only object to 4 different specific types that caused abortions.



Democrats are such liars.

Ironic post is ironic...

I will give you a hint, none of the four cause an abortion. You lied in your OP.

Your personal beliefs do not give you the right to take away another person's freedom.