Catholic universities required to provide birth control? (merged)

#76
#76
Panthro said:
I thought he wanted evolution completely taken out. The catholic church's stance is that God created evolution.
Click to expand...

Well, at least the Catholics have the good sense to adjust their stance to jive with the facts. Stuff like the creationist museum is just another reason why the terrorists hate America.
 
#77
#77
Panthro said:
I thought he wanted evolution completely taken out. The catholic church's stance is that God created evolution.
Click to expand...

In 2001, Scientific and educational groups urged the conference committee to strike his amendment from the final bill.

In 2002, Santorum called intelligent design a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes

In 2005 Santorum stated he was not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom. Instead they should be teaching the problems and holes in the theory of evolution.

In 2011 Santorum's stance is he believes that evolution occurred on a tiny micro level.

He has not been consistent on this issue.
 
#78
#78
Gramps said:
In 2001, Scientific and educational groups urged the conference committee to strike his amendment from the final bill.

In 2002, Santorum called intelligent design a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes

In 2005 Santorum stated he was not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom. Instead they should be teaching the problems and holes in the theory of evolution.

In 2011 Santorum's stance is he believes that evolution occurred on a tiny micro level.

He has not been consistent on this issue.
Click to expand...

lawl
 
#79
#79
milohimself said:
I keep hearing this, but the provision was basically set up to mirror the existing language in over half the states, and as far as I'm aware there have been no quibbles with it until it became part of Obamacare, except in New York where the SCOTUS sided with the state.

The White House is going to cave on it because they don't have any choice politically, but I'm curious as to why it wasn't a big deal until it became part of the ACA.
Click to expand...


It is 100% political.
 
#80
#80
lawgator1 said:
I heard over and over again this morning that the administration is signalling that it is very much willing to compromise on this, so expect that to happen.
Click to expand...

Why Obama desperately wants a HUDNA (Muslim fake truce) with the Catholic Church « « Coach is RightCoach is Right

Barack Hussain Obama, a man brought up in a Muslim tradition is trying to use a weapon against the Catholic Church as old as Islam itself. A Hudna is a tactical cease-fire designed to trick an enemy into dropping his guard so you can kill him while he sleeps.
-------------------------

He was hoping the heretofore supine Catholic bishops would remain silent as they historically have when Democrats have assaulted religious liberties.

He was expecting the non-existent “outrage” over forcing Catholic pharmacists to sell RU486 pills. Why would he think otherwise? He has no genuine Catholics in his inner circle and in fact is taking advice on this crisis from a Protestant Minister who believes this is “so fixable” – if only the Catholics would just cave.
------------------------------

In 2008 Obama won the Catholic vote by an impressive 54/45 margin. There was much rejoicing by the Left over the return of Catholic “sanity” after they had voted 52/47 for Bush in 2004.

A closer look at the 14 point swing shows why Obama and his CINOs (Catholics in Name Only) desperately want a hudna.
----------------------

A successful hudna will “calm” Catholics into believing that anything this Muslim trained president says will be honored once he is reelected.

“Muslims have every right to lie and to deceive their adversaries, and a promise made to a non-Muslim can be broken whenever necessary.”
Click to expand...

The party of expediency will cut any deal but keep none.

Remember BHO promising no government funding of abortion would be in Obamacare in order to get enough votes?

Just one more damned lie from the greatest liar of all time, and I'm not forgetting Slick Willy when I say that.
 
#81
#81
Saw today that Georgia has a similar law for Catholic run hospitals here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Georgia has been a Republican stronghold for years, which explains why this is a non-issue here.
 
#82
#82
It's been interesting watching the fallout coming from liberal Catholics (except Nancy Pelosi) who once supported Obama and Obamacare. What did they think was going to happen when they climbed into bed with a man with a history of throwing supporters under the bus when it suits him?
 
#83
#83
Weezy said:
Saw today that Georgia has a similar law for Catholic run hospitals here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Georgia has been a Republican stronghold for years, which explains why this is a non-issue here.
Click to expand...

Apparently the language in the aca is similar to existing law in 28 states, which includes both romneys law and that of at least a handful of republican states. Not to mention the catholic church has been quiet on the issue until now, aside from the previously mentioned lawsuit against new york.

What the aca did was basically adopt a seemingly agreeable position on the issue and specifically leave it open for debate and alteration. The only reason this is being brought up now is to help the republican platform.
 
#84
#84
Weezy said:
Saw today that Georgia has a similar law for Catholic run hospitals here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Georgia has been a Republican stronghold for years, which explains why this is a non-issue here.
Click to expand...

A non-issue?

Not sure what you mean.
 
#85
#85
I haven't heard anything about "prosecuting religion" here in Georgia over their own laws because it doesn't serve the Republican agenda when they are behind it.

edit: Anyways, this is just a tool regardless. Young catholic women are enjoying their BC.
 
Last edited:
#86
#86
milohimself said:
Apparently the language in the aca is similar to existing law in 28 states, which includes both romneys law and that of at least a handful of republican states. Not to mention the catholic church has been quiet on the issue until now, aside from the previously mentioned lawsuit against new york.

What the aca did was basically adopt a seemingly agreeable position on the issue and specifically leave it open for debate and alteration. The only reason this is being brought up now is to help the republican platform.
Click to expand...

Actually, the Church had avoided complying with the various state laws by offering their plans under a federal exemption. I assume they still disagree with the state laws, but felt it was easier/cheaper to structure their plans under the federal exemption rather than suing 28 different states. Now they have no choice but to start fighting because they won't have the exemption anymore.
 
#88
#88
Weezy said:
Saw today that Georgia has a similar law for Catholic run hospitals here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Georgia has been a Republican stronghold for years, which explains why this is a non-issue here.
Click to expand...

Georgia has really only been Republican statewide for about 10 years.
 
#90
#90
GAVol said:
Sort of.
Click to expand...

He's not requiring the Church to pay for services that they are opposed to. One can argue about whether or not the insurance companies should be required to provide it, but at least it's not a First Amendment debate.
 
#92
#92
Gramps said:
In 2001, Scientific and educational groups urged the conference committee to strike his amendment from the final bill.

In 2002, Santorum called intelligent design a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes

In 2005 Santorum stated he was not comfortable with intelligent design being taught in the science classroom. Instead they should be teaching the problems and holes in the theory of evolution.

In 2011 Santorum's stance is he believes that evolution occurred on a tiny micro level.

He has not been consistent on this issue.
Click to expand...

so, I guess you could say that Santorum's stance has "evolved"
 
#94
#94
bamawriter said:
Actually, the Church had avoided complying with the various state laws by offering their plans under a federal exemption. I assume they still disagree with the state laws, but felt it was easier/cheaper to structure their plans under the federal exemption rather than suing 28 different states. Now they have no choice but to start fighting because they won't have the exemption anymore.
Click to expand...
Most of these state laws have existed for over a decade, though, and moreover, most of them complied without issue.

GAVol said:
Georgia has really only been Republican statewide for about 10 years.
Click to expand...
Still, Georgia's state law provided no religious exemption whatsoever (even less religious freedom than the ACA) and, correct me if I'm wrong, the Republican party has simultaneously held both the upper, lower house and the governor's office at least once in the last ten years. This should have been every bit as much of a constitutional violation as the ACA, and the GOP had plenty of time and space in which to bring down a law they're fervently opposing now.
 
#99
#99
Some random guy just gave me a talk for fifteen minutes trying to use string theory as proof for the existence of god.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top