Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 234567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 101
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception



    Give it up Galen. You're getting your ass kicked in here.

    Rush was sure right, OBY didn't cave. He got what he wanted.

    Today the WH says there's nothing new about what he announced on Fri.
    It's the same result but there are two Cath groups, one Galen mentioned
    that liked it even though it changed nothing.

    Meanwhile, the Bishops smelled a rat and still oppose.

    This is tooooo funnnnnnyy. Link says OBY announced a new policy
    but now says there's nothing new about it. It just speeds
    things up.

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/pres...ief-staff-says




  2. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tenuous
    Posts
    4,920

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    Okay, then answer this. How would you feel about the POTUS telling you what services you offer to your clients? Forget the free part.
    Well let's think of something that around 85% of my clients would ask for.....ummmmmmm....hmmmmmmm...thinking......................................

    ......................okay, I would guess that 85% of my clients might ask for some type of relaxation technique. Maybe they would ask for a meditation practice or some type of mindfulness training. I would guess this idea might get 85% approval and it is something insurance companies do not currently cover as far as a standard psychotherapy hour. Does the analogy work for you? In some ways it also taps into the spirtual realm as it is an Eastern approach to spirituality.

    So let's review the analogy for equivalence:

    1. 85% of my clients would probably want this benefit.

    2. Insurance currently doesn't cover it as a benefit so they would have to pick it up as a new benefit.

    3. There is even a religious/spiritual quality to the practice or at least it taps into that realm as does contraception.

    So how would I feel about this? Including the fact that insurance companies (ie. client's premium) are going to foot the bill. How would I feel about Obama mandating this on my practice?

    Where do I sign up?








  3. #78
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,744

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    Playing stupid to pretend to miss the point of the question I see. Moving on.




  4. #79
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tenuous
    Posts
    4,920

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    Playing stupid to pretend to miss the point of the question I see. Moving on.
    Sorry dude but you can try to whittle this thing down to something that fits into your rigid little black and white world but its really not fitting there too well. In the end Obama is mandating something 85% want and are probably willing to pay for through their insurance premiums. The Church's role in it has been diminished to the satisfaction of most everyone except some 75 year old Bishops who are well past thier times as contemporary figures. The world moves on and you might as well hang it up and move on with it.








  5. #80
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    That 85% stat is wrong and another stat pulled out
    of Galen's ass.

    This Rasmussen poll shows 54% favor repeal of O BUMMER
    CARE.

    That doesn't come out to 85%, except out of Galen's
    ass. Nothing but Galen BS.

    ______________________________________
    the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 54% of Likely Voters at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care law, while 41% oppose repeal. These figures include 39% who Strongly Favor repeal and 27% who Strongly Oppose it.
    ______________________________________


    Galen's ass is kicked again.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ealth_care_law




  6. #81
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tenuous
    Posts
    4,920

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    Quote Originally Posted by AirFlacco View Post
    That 85% stat is wrong and another stat pulled out
    of Galen's ass.

    This Rasmussen poll shows 54% favor repeal of O BUMMER
    CARE.

    That doesn't come out to 85%, except out of Galen's
    ass. Nothing but Galen BS.

    ______________________________________
    the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 54% of Likely Voters at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care law, while 41% oppose repeal. These figures include 39% who Strongly Favor repeal and 27% who Strongly Oppose it.
    ______________________________________


    Galen's ass is kicked again.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ealth_care_law
    Come on Trap...you are sleeping in class again. Do I need to move you up front so you are closer to me? we are talking about contraception not the healthcare. You need to try to focus here. Did you take your Adderall today?








  7. #82
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    GALEN -

    The whole contraception/health care issue is part
    of OBUMMER CARE. HHS is a federal agency
    enforcing this contraception coverage under the
    law.

    http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/cochr...erage-mandate/



    WE'RE DISCUSSING THE INSURANCE'S ROLE. THAT
    IS MANDATED BY THE NEW LAW. THAT WAS PART
    OF THE SO CALLED COMPROMISE THAT WASN'T A
    COMPROMISE THAT THE INSURANCES WOULD COVER
    IT NOT THE CHURCH BUT THE CHURCH IS PAYING
    FOR THE INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES AND MANY INSURANCE COMPANIES
    ARE CATHOLIC OWNED.


    YOU SAID 85% WOULD FAVOR INSURANCE COVERAGE OF CONTRACEPTIONS.

    I SAID BS, 54% FAVOR REPEAL OF THE LAW WHICH
    ALL OF THIS DISCUSSION COMES UNDER AND IF THE
    LAW IS REPEALED OR STRUCK DOWN BY THE SC
    WE WON'T HAVE THIS DISCUSSION ANY MORE.

    AS COULTER SAID - THE INSURANCES ARE BEING USED

    LIKE COMMUNISM. THEY'RE BEING FORCED TO
    COVER THIS STUFF. IT WAS NEVER EVEN DISCUSSED
    UNTIL O BUMMER CARE CAME ALONG AND
    MANDATED IT.

    AS THE CATO LINK ABOVE STATES, INSURANCE COVERAGE IS FOR CATASTROPHIC PURPOSES.

    GIVE IT UP GAL.
    Last edited by AirFlacco; 02-14-2012 at 01:06 AM.




  8. #83
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tenuous
    Posts
    4,920

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    Quote Originally Posted by AirFlacco View Post
    GALEN -

    The whole contraception/health care issue is part
    of OBUMMER CARE. HHS is a federal agency
    enforcing this contraception coverage under the
    law.

    http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/cochr...erage-mandate/



    WE'RE DISCUSSING THE INSURANCE'S ROLE. THAT
    IS MANDATED BY THE NEW LAW. THAT WAS PART
    OF THE SO CALLED COMPROMISE THAT WASN'T A
    COMPROMISE THAT THE INSURANCES WOULD COVER
    IT NOT THE CHURCH BUT THE CHURCH IS PAYING
    FOR THE INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES AND MANY INSURANCE COMPANIES
    ARE CATHOLIC OWNED.


    YOU SAID 85% WOULD FAVOR INSURANCE COVERAGE OF CONTRACEPTIONS.

    I SAID BS, 54% FAVOR REPEAL OF THE LAW WHICH
    ALL OF THIS DISCUSSION COMES UNDER AND IF THE
    LAW IS REPEALED OR STRUCK DOWN BY THE SC
    WE WON'T HAVE THIS DISCUSSION ANY MORE.

    AS COULTER SAID - THE INSURANCES ARE BEING USED

    LIKE COMMUNISM. THEY'RE BEING FORCED TO
    COVER THIS STUFF. IT WAS NEVER EVEN DISCUSSED
    UNTIL O BUMMER CARE CAME ALONG AND
    MANDATED IT.

    AS THE CATO LINK ABOVE STATES, INSURANCE COVERAGE IS FOR CATASTROPHIC PURPOSES.

    GIVE IT UP GAL.
    Are you drinking in class???








  9. #84
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    GALEN - Again, and for the final time you said:

    ______________________________________
    In the end Obama is mandating something 85% want and are probably willing to pay for through their insurance premiums.
    ______________________________


    Again, OBY is mandating something. I proved that
    85% wrong. The majority don't wont to pay thru
    their insurance programs. This has never been
    related before until O BUMMER CARE.

    That's why it's called O BUMMER CARE.

    ___________________________________

    The Obama administration has approved a recommendation from the Institute of Medicine suggesting that it force insurance companies to pay for birth control and drugs that can cause abortions under the Obamacare government-run health care program.
    ____________________________________

    IT IS BEING FORCED, FORCED, FORCED ON
    INSURANCE COMPANIES TO PAY FOR .......




    http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/...t_ceiling.html


    Insurance is for catastrophic purposes, not to prevent
    getting knocked up but the cost of everyone's insurance will rise to cover contraceptives.

    Two posters are backing me up, not you.

    You are being ridiculous.
    Last edited by AirFlacco; 02-14-2012 at 04:00 AM.




  10. #85
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    Again, OBY doesn't have the right to
    mandate a damn thing. As Rush says:


    To those of us who say, "What you're done is unconstitutional," they say, "Stop us. I challenge you to stop us. We're gonna do it." What they know is they can do anything they want if nobody stops them.

    And Galen's redundancy on the 3-days news bit shows
    how desperate he is. As other's said above, Galen question is irrelevant. I posted original news from the
    hierarchy of the church nobody did and they hold
    the same position now. My posts were relevant.
    Last edited by AirFlacco; 02-14-2012 at 03:58 AM.




  11. #86
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,744

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    Quote Originally Posted by Galen Sevinne View Post
    Sorry dude but you can try to whittle this thing down to something that fits into your rigid little black and white world but its really not fitting there too well. In the end Obama is mandating something 85% want and are probably willing to pay for through their insurance premiums. The Church's role in it has been diminished to the satisfaction of most everyone except some 75 year old Bishops who are well past thier times as contemporary figures. The world moves on and you might as well hang it up and move on with it.
    And what gives him the power to do that?




  12. #87
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,526
    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    And what gives him the power to do that?
    Exactly!

    And that's why he's backtracking.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  13. #88
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    Everyone gets it but Galen. Everyone is kicking Galen's ass now and I was the first to
    question OBYs right to mandate anything using quotes from Rush.

    Speaking of power:

    Hey Mr. Uber - I haven't used Drudge since you
    said not to. My last links were from colorline.com, Cato and Rush.


    And speaking of old Bishops, Galen probably loved these pro life suckers that were duped by
    OBY when they placed their faith in him, most of these dupes were Catholic congressmen
    who were not re-elected. They should have trusted their old bishops, not the Prez. Another non-Drudge link.


    ___________________________________________

    It was an executive order that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, National Right to Life, Americans United for Life, LifeNews.com, Priests for Life, Susan B. Anthony List, and every reputable pro-life organization or leader said would be ineffective in preventing abortion funding under "Obama-care." These pro-life Democrats, however, trusted not these lifetime fighters for life but a man who as U.S. senator had co-sponsored the Freedom of Choice Act, the most radical piece of pro-abortion legislation in the history of the republic; who, his first week as president, signed an executive order reversing the Mexico City policy, thus publicly funding Planned Parenthood International; who signed an executive order providing taxpayer funding of the deliberate dissection and destruction of human embryos; and who has done far more still. Before all of that, this guarantor of healthcare for every American repeatedly refused (as a state senator in Illinois) to provide mandatory healthcare for babies that somehow survived abortion procedures. In a 2007 speech to Planned Parenthood, Barack Obama hailed America's largest abortion provider as a "safety net.







    http://spectator.org/archives/2012/0...-presidents-pr
    Last edited by AirFlacco; 02-14-2012 at 11:39 AM.




  14. #89
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tenuous
    Posts
    4,920

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    I can't imagine any of you actually reading this in its entirety so I cut out several paragraphs that sum it up pretty well. It's political plays like this that demonstrate Obama the politician and make a mockery of the rights suggestion that Obama is "over his head". I questioned Obama's decision to go for this when he had the political winds at his back but this article makes it clearer as to what the gain is for him by doing it now. He is tacking slightly back to the left and will begin solidfying his base while highlighting the stark contrast between himself and the fundamentalist right. Fun stuff to watch.

    Andrew Sullivan: How Obama Set a Contraception Trap for the Right


    The more Machiavellian observer might even suspect this is actually an improved bait and switch by Obama to more firmly identify the religious right with opposition to contraception, its weakest issue by far, and to shore up support among independent women and his more liberal base. I’ve found by observing this president closely for years that what often seem like short-term tactical blunders turn out in the long run to be strategically shrewd. And if this was a trap, the religious right walked right into it.

    and,

    This kind of rhetoric is not about protecting religious freedom. It is about imposing a particular religious doctrine on those who don’t share it as a condition for general employment utterly unrelated to religion at all. And if that is the hill the Catholic hierarchy and evangelical right want to fight and die on, they will lose—and lose badly. Which may in part be why the American bishops, in responding to Obama’s compromise, suddenly took a much more restrained tone.

    and,

    As for politics, the Republican fusion with the Vatican is also, it seems to me, a terrible mistake for the party. Obama’s greatest skill is in getting his opponents to overreach and self-destruct. And this issue could not be more tailor-made to benefit the candidate with real potential pull with far-right-wing Catholics and evangelicals: Santorum. If the GOP really makes this issue central in the next month or so, Santorum (whose campaign claims to have raised $2.2 million in the two days following his victories last week) is by far the likeliest candidate to benefit. It could finally unite the Christian fundamentalist right behind him—especially since Romneycare contained exactly the same provisions on contraception that Obamacare did before last week’s compromise was announced. That’s right: Romneycare can now accurately be portrayed as falling to the left of Obamacare on the contraception issue. This could very well be the issue that finally galvanizes the religious right, especially in the South. Imagine how Santorum could use that on Super Tuesday. In fact, it could be the issue that wins him the nomination. And do you really think that would hurt Obama in the fall?

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/newswee...the-right.html








  15. #90
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Tenuous
    Posts
    4,920

    Re: HHS Says Religious-Affiliated Organizations Must Cover Contraception

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    And what gives him the power to do that?
    I guess you also have problems with the governement mandating civil rights then? Is it wrong to mandate businesses to allow blacks to eat lunch at the counters with white folk? drink from white folk fountains? ride up in the front seat of a bus?

    How is it different to mandate equal access to healthcare options? Why should a non-catholic woman working at Johns Hopkins be allowed birth control through their health insurance while a non-catholic woman working at St. Josephs not? How is that equal or maybe you don't care about women's rights? 98% of all women either use or have used birth control. How is it okay to prohibit a class of people from access to something that others have unlimited access to?








Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland