Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So now we’re fighting over birth control? John Boehner said on the floor of the House that the rule requiring insurance to cover contraception is an attack on “religious freedom.” Easy for him to say—I think John Boehner’s preferred method of birth control is alcohol-induced erectile dysfunction. Hey, if you drink as much as John Boehner, alcohol not only functions as a contraceptive, it also effectively enforces chastity... unless you consider mumbling drunken apologies naked in bed to be a form of sex.
The Republican candidates love to flaunt their large numbers of offspring. What are they—presidential candidates... or hamsters? Rick Santorum has seven kids, while both Mitt Romney and Ron Paul have five each. That doesn’t tell you who is best to be president. It tells you who is best to repopulate the earth in case of a nuclear holocaust. The guy with the fecundity deficit is Newt Gingrich. Newt actually has more marriages than he has children... 3 to 2! Uh oh. Newt’s relatively low number of offspring indicates that he may have been practicing birth control. But then just the fact that he is Newt Gingrich is a form of birth control.
Could not resist posting this. You cannot beat Progressives/Liberals for their sense of humor.
yes its fun, but the 'war on women' is true.
Many of the "red" states have had legislature to pass laws that would have redefined rape, stop women from getting an abortion, and recently TEXAS enacted a law that mandates/REQUIRES a pregnant mother to view a sonogram before getting an abortion.
Many of the "red" states have had legislature to pass laws that would have redefined rape, stop women from getting an abortion, and recently TEXAS enacted a law that mandates/REQUIRES a pregnant mother to view a sonogram before getting an abortion.
I have a real concern about a federal over step here.
Do I think its necessarily a bad idea for hospitals and schools that are paid for by the Catholic church to have to supply their employees with the option of a insurance plan that pays for birth control?
No.
Do I have realistic fears about federal overstep and the next time it may be something that I don't agree with? Yep.
The federal government should either supply everyone with health insurance, or stay the hell out of it.
The in between and the "we'll pass this stipulation" and "we'll follow this precedent" has what has allowed for dramatic over reach of federal powers that most Americans don't agree with at some point or another.
War on women.
War on drugs.
War on Terror.
War on Christmas.
War on Christianity.
War on Catholics.
War on AMERICA!
Don't you righties think you may be over-using the word "war?"
Oh, never mind. I understand. Since most of the senior leadership of the GOP has never been to war and, in fact avoided it on purpose, it's no wonder y'all don't know anything about it.
I have a real concern about a federal over step here.
Do I think its necessarily a bad idea for hospitals and schools that are paid for by the Catholic church to have to supply their employees with the option of a insurance plan that pays for birth control?
No.
Do I have realistic fears about federal overstep and the next time it may be something that I don't agree with? Yep.
The federal government should either supply everyone with health insurance, or stay the hell out of it.
The in between and the "we'll pass this stipulation" and "we'll follow this precedent" has what has allowed for dramatic over reach of federal powers that most Americans don't agree with at some point or another.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Why do you think it's government overstep to require ALL BUSINESSES (which includes businesses run by Catholics) to follow the same laws????
But I do agree that UHC would solve the problem....
Why do you think it's government overstep to require ALL BUSINESSES (which includes businesses run by Catholics) to follow the same laws????
But I do agree that UHC would solve the problem....
As I have stated numerous times, we should either go full on UHC, or none at all from the federal government.
The government mandating insurance coverage for all by private institutions is just asking for trouble.
Americans wouldn't tolerate letting people die in the streets from lack of healthcare. So, we should have a universal system, IMO. It should be passed, a constitutional amendment passed, and nationalize the healthcare industry.
Opponents would say that government programs aren't run well. Social security is a fine program, if we took the contributions out of the general funds. Medicare isn't a bad program either, its increased costs are due to the fact that other people aren't insured and get coverage anyway under the emergency medical treatment act that Reagan signed.
I would personally prefer things to be run on a state level, as I think a federal program would be bloated and have considerable waste. But that just isn't realistic.
I think its a federal government over reach anytime they mandate that private citizens provide or do something that they don't want. And yes, that goes for civil rights, access for the handicapped, etc.
Why do you think it's government overstep to require ALL BUSINESSES (which includes businesses run by Catholics) to follow the same laws????
But I do agree that UHC would solve the problem....
All businesses run by Catholics do follow the same laws.
Key word being businesses. Which Church hospitals are not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.