Absolutely firm, until it looked like it might cost him some votes, then absolutely change. I guess he is all about hope and change. Like hope I can change the minds of some voters. Barry only takes a principled stand when it is easy.

This was all a well-crafted effort by the Obama administration to draw attention to the issue and remind voters that it was Romney who had a virtually identical program in place while governor of Massachusetts. You are going to start hearing nothing from Democrats except information about Romney's Massachusetts contraceptive plan. Obama then backs off the plan by expanding waivers for religious employers, something Romney can no longer do, of course. Another vivid reminder to conservative, Catholic voters that Romney, as a liberal Mormon, imposed virtually the same program on Catholics in Massachusetts.

I don't like this idea that the federal government can mandate whats in insurance plans for anybody. And why is this issue only for women? Shouldn't men also be held accountable for birth control? Should the government tell my insurance company to pay for vasectomy or condoms?

kaysbrew, are you trying to say the liberals can't also be good christians?

analertcitizen wrote: "The trouble I'm having is that the Fed. Government is telling Catholic Employers what they must cover contraception in spite of their religious befiefs. Catholic or not- it seems to be a dangerous precedent."

Half the population live in a state that has a similar law. The is an equal protection rule. Religiously affiliated organizations (not churches themselves) are prevented from hiring people based on a persons religous beliefs, so they should not then block a health benefit based on a religious belief. Many of these same catholic affiliated organizations already provide paid birth control, because it reduces health care costs to the organization.

It should also be noted that some birth control is prescribed for medical reasons beyond preventing pregnancy. This is a health and labor law issue.

"Whats next regulating when a church can hold service."

Churches are exempt from this provision in the law. It only applies to affiliated organizations, like hospitals, clinics, etc.

http://gazettextra.com/photos/2012/feb/0...

RhetoricAndFalderal said, "As soon as your classes are over perhaps there are some more mayors for you to call..."

Raffy, with you as my student, I have a lifetime teaching job. Now quit eating the chalk, sit up straight and pay attention!

No2 your idiotic babble continues. If you took the time to read instead of blather you could easily see I asked a question to a poster on their position based on their comment. I never said any organization should or shouldn't participate in the political process. Yet once again the liberal jester has no clue of what is going on. As soon as your classes are over perhaps there are some more mayors for you to call...

I am having trouble with this government instrusion also and I am not opposed to the use of birth control contraceptives. People of any faith should be free to choose if they use birth control. I do not believe the government has the right to force a religious organization to spend money for insurance to cover something contrary to its belief. Have seen comments on other articles that the people can simply not use the service. Fine. But that still does not stop the organization from paying for the insurance coverage. I try to keep an open mind on issues but seperation of church and state should work both ways. BTW, I think the health care bill has some good in it also but do not believe the federal government has the right to dictate that people buy insurance and fine them if they don't (cleverly does not take effect until 2014 after the 2012 and 2014 elections .... smart move). So those applauding being able to keep children on insurance up till age 26 and coverage for pre-existing conditions may not be so happy when those same children or themselves are getting fined (Income tax refunds withheld or wages garnished) in a few years. I know my children could not afford to pay for their own healthcare if forced.

Whats next regulating when a church can hold service. Sorry Sundays are a day of rest therefore clergy should have the day off and all services must be held on Saturdays

@Sarah- I agree with you on this issue. I am having trouble with it. The trouble I'm having is that the Fed. Government is telling Catholic Employers what they must cover contraception in spite of their religious befiefs. Catholic or not- it seems to be a dangerous precedent.

Let the free market system dictate, if a insurance company doesn't cover this (Catholic paid, religious paid employer paid insurance),fine go out and purchase insurance that does. Simple as that!

zdog
Feb 8, 2012 at 8:06 p.m.
Suggest removal

This really is very dumb. Do you have any idea how many people that call themselves catholic, read bibles and go to church have used birth control or even had abortions? and this is for health insurance, if employees don't want to use it they won't."

I hear on the radio the other day- thought they said 80 or 90%.
I have insurance and I have to pay a portion of it. Why would it be free?
This is a weird debate but if they want to take the pill let them. I can see why they wouldn't cover it since it is against their religion.
Cant you just ask to be forgivin each week if you take the pill??

poobah
Feb 9, 2012 at 7:41 a.m. Labor unions are very much allowed to involve themselves in politics as I showed you. Churches are not.

Another good point by poobah as to why our tax dollars being used to pay public workers should have a right to choice if they want to join a union or not.

Thank you poobah.

RhetoricAndFalderal said, "carlito I think all groups should at the very least follow the law. Your perception of the tax exempt status of labor unions needs some research; you will find your remark opposite of the truth."

Actually, your perception is the one that needs some research, RAF. I pointed out to you that labor unions and churches are two distinct types of tax entities under law. This goes directly to your attempt to equate their involvement in politics, which can not be done. Labor unions are very much allowed to involve themselves in politics as I showed you. Churches are not.

I realize you don't like being schooled in front of others, but you can't deny the law.

RAF, at this point I would have to say yes, I do. The whole system is broke. Super PACS, unions, bishops, ... bottom line is nothing gets changed and the puppets line their pockets. Pathetic!

The President's lowest by far attack on religion.

Right Zoom, who took the poll? FACT: liberals - who did they ask? liberals
Look at Biden, Pelosi - liberals first - Good

Christians, maybe 4th or 5th.

carlito I think all groups should at the very least follow the law. Your perception of the tax exempt status of labor unions needs some research; you will find your remark opposite of the truth. I agree with you that becoming a parent is a choice that should not involve the government as I also believe coverage’s for medical insurance are also no business of the government. For the record a political party doesn’t pass laws, as you implied of the GOP and abortion. I agree on your comment that some people are ignorant, some even on things they think they know about as No2 has shown on more than one occasion.

Again No2 you obviously have no idea what the comments were before you tossed you nonsense into the ring. Asking a poster if their idea that tax exempt organizations should or shouldn’t do something is consistent hardly required your input that is unless you are one of the many that think they need more than one account to make their points and it was your other account I asked the question of. As the local liberal loon jester you have indeed led the ideological parade to nowhere again, pat yourself on the back.

RAF/ Just wondering if you think the same for all tax exempt groups that influence elections? Labor Unions are not tax exempt. Now that would include a majority of the right wing supporters and for once you posted and admitted they should be held accountable like the rest Thank you...It is up to the person whether or not they want to have children NOT THE CHURCH OR GOVERNMENT. The GOP has not right to pass a law against abortion , as it is a private matter with the person it affects and they bitch that to many poor children are in this world well do this and see what happens. Some people are so ignorant as to the reality of a persons RIGHT in this country. Oh that's not reality anymore as the GOP SAYS SO >>>>>> Obama 2012

RhetoricAndFalderal said, "No2 instead of pretending your google search to wiki provided you with information others don’t know, I suggest you should pull your head out of the darkness and read words provided instead of trying to inject your 1 cent on more useless information."

Oh my, Raffy. Looks like I hit a nerve. This was information you obviously did not know or you wouldn't have asked the question. Continue on with your balderdash.

No2 instead of pretending your google search to wiki provided you with information others don’t know, I suggest you should pull your head out of the darkness and read words provided instead of trying to inject your 1 cent on more useless information. Another fun aspect to parsing left wing retorts, besides identifying hypocrisy, is identifying those that defend it.

The only one I see is Olympia Snow, she votes liberal more than she does conservative. Why the GOP will ever fund one of her campaigns is beyond me

beagcub reread those names who sponsored the bill, All of them, how many GOP names do you see?

Spot on, Zoom.

The vast majority of the public...yes, even catholics...don't care about this issue. Many catholic and other religious affiliated organizations already offer coverage that provides free birth control, because not all of their employees are catholic, and are not hired on a religious basis. About 50% of the population already lives in a state that requires the same benefit. Only a very small portion of the population would even see a change, yet Republicans think this will be a wedge issue they can win with. It may have been 15 or 20 years ago, but not anymore.

RhetoricAndFalderal said, "If you do I wonder why you havn't stated some labor unions should lose their tax exempt status as well?"

Churches are organized as 501(C)3 entities and all 501(C)3 entities "are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity."

Labor organizations are established as 501(C)(5) entities and "IRC 501(c)(4), (c)(5), and (c)(6) organizations may engage in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to candidates for public office provided that such intervention does not constitute the organization's primary activity."

This should answer your question, RAF. Do your own research next time.

4bears stated "if the Bishops want to tell people how they should vote than maybe they should start shelling out some taxes. If they want to start influencing elections.. bye bye tax exempt!!"
-
Just wondering if you think the same for all tax exempt groups that influence elections? If you do I wonder why you havn't stated some labor unions should lose their tax exempt status as well?

this is not about religion, but about access to contraception...and witaxman, there is no constitutional guarantee of separation of church and state...review 1st amendment here

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/First_ame...

zdog is correct, if you don't want to use it for religious reasons than don't! I am sick of this right wing abortion, birth control election push. So old, if the Bishops want to tell people how they should vote than maybe they should start shelling out some taxes. If they want to start influencing elections.. bye bye tax exempt!!

Wis_Family, they are wrong. That was my point. On what other organization would you waste so much time and energy, without believing in the basic tenents?! Somehow people think nothing of it when it's a religion, even though there are 20 others which are basically the same, to choose from. I honestly think this could be a dividing line which would make things go one way or the other.

Jvl Born - does that make them wrong or the church? I think they're wrong and not the church...the Catholic faith isnt a buffet....we need to adhere or not to it and support it....I now many Catholics who practice what the church preaches....

bleh typo...2001

heck, I just reread that link. It was proposed by the GOP...I saw Clinton name and got distracted,

"’Absolutely firm,’ but willing to talk" is a way to open intelligent discussion. (For you fanatical extremists that could possibly lead to compromise, but you don’t seem to understand that concept.)

amusing. This birth control legislation was supported by Republicans back in 2991. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext...
Includes many GOP Senators.

Agreed, zdog. I don't know a single "catholic" who abides by even 50% of the church's rules. Those rules are supposed to be sacred, yet generations are being raised to believe they are above the law, so to speak. As if there is wiggle room at the Vatican.

To which I say, why bother?! Maybe this will make people wonder why they are continuing the charade, and find a religion that better suits their beliefs.

This really is very dumb. Do you have any idea how many people that call themselves catholic, read bibles and go to church have used birth control or even had abortions? and this is for health insurance, if employees don't want to use it they won't.

this isn't the dark ages, and if women want to have access to birth control it should be their right to choose to or not to use it...maybe it's time for certain christian groups to talk about how the population is OUT OF CONTROL and how we need to do something about it right here in America...this is ridiculous...

Right on, MadCityDad. Obama has lost my support, largely because he has thrown many of his constituencies under the bus depending on which way the political winds are blowing. Now, of course, he is talking the talk again trying to recapture their support. His signing of the NDAA, and indefinite detention of American citizens specifically, was the last straw for me.

This is NOT mandatory birth control. The only way this affects individuals is to assure their employer-provided health insurance policy covers contraceptives should they CHOOSE to use them.

Absloutely firm but willing to talk is like being against gay marrriage even though your thoughts are evolvoing on the issue.
.
Why not just say, "For now I am on this side of the issue but I retain my right to flip-flop depending on which way the wind is blowing."

It's the parents roll to provide such items to the minors in their responsibility. Parents are held accountable for all of their kids actions, so leave the mandatory birth control out of it. jmo Peace