Jan 23, 2012
Christian leaders are considering their legal options after the Obama administration announced that many religious-affiliated institutions will have to provide free birth control for employees.
CLICK HERE TO PRE-ORDER TODD’S NEW BOOK – “DISPATCHES FROM BITTER AMERICA.”
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius offered a single concession – saying that nonprofit institutions like church-affiliated hospitals and colleges will have an additional year to comply with the requirement.
“I believe this proposal strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services,” Sebelius said in a statement.
However, the decision has infuriated Christians who called the decision an outright attack on religious liberty.
“Generally, Christian colleges and organizations find the ruling to be outrageous,” said David Dockery, president of Union University, a school affiliated with the Tennessee Baptist Convention. “It puts us in a position of having to support something that we fundamentally oppose.”
Dockery said Obama’s decision poses “a real question about the administration’s commitment to religious freedom.”
Mark Foley, the president of the University of Mobile, said he had ”a great deal of concern about it.”
“It’s another illustration of the intent of this administration to ignore the rights of the citizens,” Foley told Fox News & Commentary. “It will mean that when our health care plan provider approaches us with the adjustments that are now mandated, the university will be forced to cover employees with provisions that are contrary to our purpose and our underlying philosophical and theological position.”
Congressman Randy Forbes (R-VA) told Fox News & Commentary that it is time for Christians to speak out.
“People of faith are going to have to stand up,” he said. “People are frightened and they are angry because they feel their freedoms are being taken away.”
The Obama administration reached out to New York Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan and personally informed him of the decision. It did not go over well.
“Never before has the federal government forced individuals and organizations to go out into the marketplace and buy a product that violates their conscience,” Dolan told the Associated Press. “This shouldn’t happen in a land where free exercise of religion ranks first in the Bill of Rights.”
Forbes accused Obama of hitting the “fundamental core of the Bill of Rights.”
“At best you could characterize it as an aloofness and a non-caring factor to people of faith,” Forbes said. “At worst, I think there is some evidence out there that the administration is social engineering. People of faith are realizing that this is an aggressive approach – to take away religious freedom and religious liberty and we are seeing it in so many facets now that it can’t be accidental.”
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said Obama’s decision to delay implementation for a year is a political calculation.
“He understands the potency of this issue and how deeply this touches a very fundamental understanding of our freedom in this country,” Perkins said. “I think the president knows this could be his undoing if he has to stand and give an account for this.”
So what should Christians do?
“This is the time to draw a line and take a stand,” Perkins said. “This is about the ability to live out your faith in public according to the teachings of your faith.”
The decision also sparked outrage among Christian college students.
“The fact that this administration wants to “force” my school to do anything is troublesome,” said Curtis Johnson, a student at Clearwater Christian College. “In no way is President Obama our dictator. If a Christian institution requires its students to abstain from sex, then the government should not interfere with that decision. Since my school has strictly enforced a “no sex before marriage policy”, requiring my school to give us the option of a birth control pill in our healthcare care coverage doesn’t even make sense.”
“It’s a personal choice,” said Emily Baxter, a freshman at Eastern University in St. Davids, PA. “Obama shouldn’t be interfering with private Christian colleges.”
Should the time come for Christians to stand up and defy the government in an act of civil disobedience, Baxter said she would consider her options.
“I would probably protest because it’s just another example of Obama forcing his agenda down our throats,” she told Fox News & Commentary. “It is not right and should be condemned. It is a personal choice – and being Christians, we shouldn’t be having sex outside of marriage anyways.”
Foley said the best course of action is through the courts.
“For now, the greatest opportunity is through the courts – to find remedy and to exercise my vote and to urge other to exercise their vote,” he said. “Civil disobedience takes you to a plain of action for which I am not yet ready personally – but I wouldn’t rule it out.”
Dockery, too, said the ruling would give Christians cause for contemplation.
“I’m sure it would be a time for us to think very carefully – to realize that our Christian convictions have come in conflict with the ruling of the country – which would cause a huge issue for us and many others as well,” Dockery said.
“It’s overwhelming to think about this,” he said.
With reporting from the Associated Press
Other Posts
- Do Crosses at Catholic University Violate “Human Rights” of Muslims? (3043)
- Obama Leaves God Out of Thanksgiving Address (2327)
- Air Force Removes ‘God’ From Logo (2319)
- School Removes “God” From Lee Greenwood Song (2308)
- Anti-Bullying Speaker Curses Christian Teens (2046)
- Church-Burning Video Used to Promote Atheist Event at Ft. Bragg (1580)
- Christian Teens Say Gay Activist Made Girls Cry (1535)
I don't understand the problem. Wouldn't more birth control mean less abortions? Isn't that something we can all appreciate?
Yes, you would think that. But you're expecting logic from a church that worships a God who put forth the Second Commandment.
Disgusting is what this is…….one week approve a ruling in Oklahoma for Muslims to not be tried for crimes committed in this state under US Laws but, under Sharia Law and now this?
Wow, you don't understand that Oklahoma ruling at all. Not at all. First off, no religious law from any religion holds dominion over our laws. None. Congress can't make laws establishing a religion. As such, neither can they single out a religion for any extra laws. But here was Oklahoma doing just that, enacting a law that said Sharia Law cannot be followed in our courts. It was a law that singled out one religion. This is unconstitutional. It was a law that was needless, too, because, as I said above, no religious law can overrule civil laws in this fine country. That's all it was.
The first amendment guarantees that Sharia Law won't be applied under US Law. This was just the "christian" right wing in Oklahoma using a bill to vilify a particular religion. Trust me, no court can apply any religious dogma to US law, so we are safe there.
are you stupid? A federal appeals court has upheld a ruling that blocked the implementation of an Oklahoma law barring judges from considering international or Islamic law in their decisions. This serves as a reminder that these anti-sharia laws are unconstitutional and that if politicians use fear-mongering and bigotry, the courts won't allow it to last for long.
Oh, and no one said they would not be tried of crimes under US law – only that the judge can take into account international law and other cultural perspectives. The problem was that the measure mentioned Sharia law twice – and no other religion. It was bigotry. It was wrong.
Nick Wright Don't be living in a bubble. There ARE cases where Sharia Law is working it's way into OUR Country. ALL of our Constitutional RIGHTS are guaranteed if WE FIGHT FOR THEM!! And as far as "no court can apply…" just think of the "Roe v. Wade" Decision. IT'S NOT THE COURTS JOB OR AUTHORITY TO MAKE LAWS — IT'S CONGRESS. That has changed our country forever.
Scott N Virginia Walsh dude you are soooo wrong. Courts are there to define the constitution – to define the law and uphold it. Roe vs Wade disallowed many state and federal restrictions on abortion in the United States – which is correct because I have never met a non-christian that was not pro-choice. NO religion has any place in law. a person has a right to abortion up until viability. The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid." Yes, it changed it because Christians seem to think they own this country and they found out they DONT.
news flash, Christian affiliated instituions already support free birth control for its employees. It is called abstinence or no sex before marriage!
just because you work for an institution that does not like it, it does not mean that institution should be able to say that if you work for them – you follow everything they believe. Institutions have no right to limit an individuals options just because they do not agree with it. It should be up to the individual – not the institution – as to whether or not they use it.
James Lott Actually, institutions have every right, if you disagree with them, you don't have too attend the school.
Jason David Anderson wrong – this is not just talking about schools, this is talking about WORKPLACES. You are talking about places that are covering health care options for people who can not afford to just go out and buy their own healthcare plan. They have NO right to limit it just because they do not like it something about it. They are taking away the individuals right to choose. This is just preventing them from being able to take away their rights.
Jason David Anderson wrong – this is not just talking about schools, this is talking about WORKPLACES. You are talking about places that are covering health care options for people who can not afford to just go out and buy their own healthcare plan. They have NO right to limit it just because they do not like it something about it. They are taking away the individuals right to choose. This is just preventing them from being able to take away their rights.
James Lott it is also the right of the corporation or company to choose what they want. No one is making people work at these places.
James Lott it is also the right of the corporation or company to choose what they want. No one is making people work at these places.
Jason David Anderson No, it is not the right of the corporation to refuse to provide healthcare plans on a religious basis. They do not have the right to refuse the individuals a choice that has no bearing on the workplace! Have you seen the economy lately? There are not exactly a lot of choices out there at the moment.
James Lott It is the corporations right to refuse the job to someone who does not agree with the companies standards or policies.
Jason David Anderson yes, but guess what – they can not refuse a person on the basis or race or religious affiliation.
Jason David Anderson my thought also. If you work for a christian company, hopefully you know that ahead of time, and what they believe. Since you work for THEM, they make the rules. If you dont like their rules get another job. If someone came to my church and felt if a member was caught stealing and believe their hand should be cut off, doesn't mean we will cut it off. On the other hand, no pun, if I am in their church and that happens and I don't agree, then I will find another church to attend. Since I believe in the Bible, it really doesn't matter what any of us believe, God's word can change us, we can't change His thinking, and I truly believe that is what is wrong with America. My America was founded on Godly thinking. If some one doesn't like it, what is stopping them from moving to another country? THE OTHER COUNTRY!
I speak and write this in love that all will repent and move towards cross. God Bless ALL of you!
Bill Sexton actually our most influential founders were deists, not Christians. it is not YOUR america. Christians don't own it.
James Lott I would love to sit sit and talk with you, but honestly, neither of us are going to persuade we other, we both have our beliefs and won't change from them. Thanks for your time, it was most beneficial to me. Trust you have a great evening. God Bless
Jason David Anderson here is the thing – your beliefs should not effect others. You are entitled to your beliefs, but nothing gives you the right to force your beliefs on others, oh, and you can keep your blessing. I have no need of it.
Jason David Anderson Wrong dude. there is a difference between individual beliefs, and pushing those beliefs on others. It is the right of the individual to make a choice. I am advocating that choice. My commenting on this is not hypocritical – and dont try to twist my words or meanings to suit your needs.
Jason David Anderson I didnt get upset. I'm not angry. I'm allowed to retort. this is a public forum, if you comment, and I dont agree with your comment, I am allowed to formulate a response and post that response. If you dont like it, dont post – then you wont have to deal with people having opinions that differ from your own.
Abstinence doesn't work Bill, look what happened to Mary. Actually, she would have benefited from a program like this.
You're retarded. Not everyone is christian.
James Lott You are right. God owns it. I respectfully disagree with you. Try having this conversation anywhere else in the world!
Steve Smith Mary conceived a virgin birth. not sure i follow you on this one
Bill Sexton, No she didn't, it isn't physically possible.
Mason Cudlitz Thanks for the persecution Mason. Jesus said this would happen!
Bill Sexton god does not own anything because god does not exist.
Bill Sexton , I'm not persecuting anything. I think that religions have a great force for good, but you are acting quite silly.
James Lott Guys you are the ones attacking me. I am not forcing you to believe anything. It's funny that you can disagree with me but I am not allowed to disagree with you. If you are right and I am wrong, what do I stand to lose? NOTHING. But if I am right, and you are wrong what do you stand to lose? EVERYTHING.
Bill Sexton You're allowed to disagree with us. You can do that by NOT taking advantage of this service. It should be legally required to be provided, so those who want to can take advantage of it.
Bill Sexton So you live life in fear of the unknown. You are covering your bases "just in case". At least you admit you are a coward. Just because someone tells you something, it does not mean you should prepare for that eventuality when it is based on nothing but myth with no reliable source or information.
Bill Sexton No, I went after you because you think abstinence and no sex before marriage should be forced onto people through healthcare plans. You think it is ok to force your beliefs on others. That is why I went after you.
James Lott , Now now, it is his personal right to believe what he wants. Personal attacks don't really help us in any way, and make atheists look like assholes.
The real issue here is people that DO practice faiths trying to limit the abilities of others.
James Lott wrong James. I live in hope of the known. We all have choices. we can choose to drink gasoline or water. we can choose to eat glass or a steak. my choice may different from yours, but it is still my choice. there are consequences for making bad choices and i have made my share. i have overcome alcohol and drug addiction, no one forced me to drink or used drugs, i made a bad choice. i put my faith in God for healing me and now i am clean. I HAVE THAT RIGHT JAMES TO BELIEVE THAT. you have the right to believe what you want. i do not believe abstinence should be forced on anyone, it is a choice. i do not believe God should be forced on anyone, it is a choice. you are totally wrong if you believe otherwise. also i don't feel i am a coward for standing up for Jesus Christ, our Savior and My Lord. honestly i feel right the opposite. i am proud of what i believe in. i would be a coward if i was not having this conversation.
Bill Sexton I totally support you on your views here. I think that james is overstepping his point, and being kind of an asshole. Everyone has the right to believe what they want- that's all I was personally saying.
I respect your views, and I truly wish that all religious people could see the world as you do.
Agreed, Bill…and the point these folks are missing is that no one is forcing these people to work or attend school at a Christian organization. Heck, I hate wearing ties to work, but I ain't asking the feds to mandate jeans day while expecting my employer to pay for my clothes.
Jerry Camp thanks and my point too.
Amazing how Fox News and Todd Starnes always seems to leave out the important information. They are requiring workplace and college healthcare plans to provide preventative medicine to women, to include contraceptives. Christian affiliated institution's health care plans generally do not include contraceptives. Now they must. This SHOULD be the law – just because you work for an institution that does not like it, it does not mean that institution should be able to say that if you work for them – you follow everything they believe. Institutions have no right to limit an individuals options just because they do not agree with it. It should be up to the individual – not the institution – as to whether or not they use it.
I agree
And these folks are not free to seek employment or enrollment elsewhere? Oops, that was the sound of 'choice' decimating your flimsy argument.
yeah Jerry, because as we all know workers in the US have a lot of 'choice' as to where they work at the moment.
yeah Jerry, because as we all know workers in the US have a lot of 'choice' as to where they work at the moment.
I didn't really expect any of you frothing lefties to even attempt to counter my argument. Ah, well…hope springs eternal.
Wait, the institutions are religious institutions, thereby, exempt from certain laws and regulations under the 1st Amendment. The Supreme Court has upheld this line of thought in several rulings concerning Employment and the like. The Idea that a private institution (Religious) would be forced to offer certain procedures or coverage for those procedures would place the institutional integrity in jeapordy. Its like saying that an AA Group is mandated to have a mental Health professional as the director.
Wait, the institutions are religious institutions, thereby, exempt from certain laws and regulations under the 1st Amendment. The Supreme Court has upheld this line of thought in several rulings concerning Employment and the like. The Idea that a private institution (Religious) would be forced to offer certain procedures or coverage for those procedures would place the institutional integrity in jeapordy. Its like saying that an AA Group is mandated to have a mental Health professional as the director.
Jerry Camp Hey, you try finding a good job in this economy.
You christians don't get it – you have your faith, no one is stopping you from having your faith. The difference is that now you do not get to force your faith on others.
Those who work at Christian institutions are not forced to be Christian, nor are they forced to abstain from premarital relations, they simply choose to do so. However, if our government passes this bill, it WILL be UNCONSTITUTIONALLY forcing the institution to provide a convenience that it doesn't have to provide. Think of it this way; what if the government required Wal-Mart to provide its employees with birth control. How stupid does that sound?
Those who work at Christian institutions are not forced to be Christian, nor are they forced to abstain from premarital relations, they simply choose to do so. However, if our government passes this bill, it WILL be UNCONSTITUTIONALLY forcing the institution to provide a convenience that it doesn't have to provide. Think of it this way; what if the government required Wal-Mart to provide its employees with birth control. How stupid does that sound?
wow, you really dont understand what is going on, do you? they are not forcing the institution to provide contraceptives. hey are requiring workplace and college healthcare plans to provide preventative medicine to women, to include contraceptives in their health care plans when the only reason they are omitting it is because they do not "believe" in it.
wow, you really dont understand what is going on, do you? they are not forcing the institution to provide contraceptives. hey are requiring workplace and college healthcare plans to provide preventative medicine to women, to include contraceptives in their health care plans when the only reason they are omitting it is because they do not "believe" in it.
What they "believe" is that its none of the governments business as to whether they provide that or not. They "believe" that they possess the willpower to abstain from sex through their God. Does it matter if they choose not to? BTW, what you said when you corrected me is simply an elegantly rephrased version of what I already said.
Caleb Hunter Davis are you stupid? Look at my comment below. Actually what I did was copy and paste the point I already made over 2 hours ago. Caleb – just because they believe they can abstain from sex, it does not mean that everyone else in the company should be forced to because of their beliefs. It does matter if they choose not to, it is a choice, and they should be allowed to choose to have sex and be on birth control. Not everyone is dictated by those backwards superstitious beliefs.
I already said that they aren't forcing anyone to abstain from sex! It's illegal and nigh impossible! I'm not going to sink to your level by calling names and mudslinging, because quite frankly, the ridiculousness of a grown man arguing with a highschool student over morals and government speaks for itself. There is absolutely no reason for you to get so up in arms about this! You are getting your way! The law was passed! I applaud you and your stoic defense! Your logic is foolproof!(Caleb Hunter Davis are you stupid?) Yeah man, sorry. I'm an idiot for defending my beliefs and views. *sarcasm* Sheesh! step back and take a deep breath! there are lots of more important things to get worked up about than this!
I already said that they aren't forcing anyone to abstain from sex! It's illegal and nigh impossible! I'm not going to sink to your level by calling names and mudslinging, because quite frankly, the ridiculousness of a grown man arguing with a highschool student over morals and government speaks for itself. There is absolutely no reason for you to get so up in arms about this! You are getting your way! The law was passed! I applaud you and your stoic defense! Your logic is foolproof!(Caleb Hunter Davis are you stupid?) Yeah man, sorry. I'm an idiot for defending my beliefs and views. *sarcasm* Sheesh! step back and take a deep breath! there are lots of more important things to get worked up about than this!
Caleb Hunter Davis no, actually this is exactly the kinda thing more people should get worked up over – people trying to dictate what others do because of their own personal beliefs and religion, rather than allowing people to make their OWN choices. actually I called you stupid because you attempted to say I stole your comment and rephrased it when all I did was copy and paste from my own comment from two hours before hand. The fact that you are a high school student is all the more reason to be up in arms about it – because in high school you should be being taught about individual rights, and obviously you arent.
Caleb Hunter Davis no, actually this is exactly the kinda thing more people should get worked up over – people trying to dictate what others do because of their own personal beliefs and religion, rather than allowing people to make their OWN choices. actually I called you stupid because you attempted to say I stole your comment and rephrased it when all I did was copy and paste from my own comment from two hours before hand. The fact that you are a high school student is all the more reason to be up in arms about it – because in high school you should be being taught about individual rights, and obviously you arent.
Oh, I see. Because our entire discussion on individual rights and government control is OBVIOUSLY evidence that I know NOTHING about personal rights and liberties! And how many times do I have to say it: Christian institutions can not force their employees to abstain from sex! It is simply under their code of ethics. If you break the rules in the army, you get disciplined, if you break the rules at a workplace you risk losing your job. If they didn't want to work at a place that has a code of conduct that includes abstinence, they should WORK SOMEWHERE ELSE! Maybe at McDonalds with you! The government has as much right to force workplaces to provide for birth control in their health plan as they do telling me what to where in the morning!
I may have resorted to name calling and mudslinging in that last comment, but hey man, I'm getting on your level.
Caleb Hunter Davis hey douche – fuck you. I dont work at fucking mcdonalds. what part of this dont you get? They can not force their beliefs on others. their code of conduct can not force abstinence. this has nothing to do with a companies code of ethics you stupid little shit. This has to do with a company forcing their religious beliefs on others. a company can say "if you steal – you will be fired". It can not say – "we do not agree with premarital sex – so to stop you from having premarital sex – we will not give you a healthcare plan that will give you contraceptives". The government has EVERY RIGHT to force workplaces that provide healthcare to provide a certain level of care. They are not saying that the fucking workplace has to give out condoms! They are saying if they are going to provide healthcare – a minimum level of care is required.
James Lott, Preventive medicine is a stretch. I think that term is typically reserved for the prevention of disease. I'm more interested in the idea that employers have to take on the responsibility of their employees' promiscuous behavior. We can argue the church`s position on this forever (I`d rather not), but what happens to personal responsibility by forcing an employer to foot the bill? This is setting up the employer to be responsible for covering the cost of drug and alcohol rehabilitations (some already do) and eliminating the personal responsibility. We have become a Nation of entitlements instead of a Nation of responsible citizens. All of these corporate mandates can`t possibly strengthen the job market, but only continue to put more stress on them. Small business is taking a big hit with the Obama Health care plan and this adds more to it. Ultimately, unemployment will continue to rise as long as the government continues to mandate new requirements.
Caleb Hunter Davis, you are wrong. You are so wrong it hurts.
Imagine for a second that I made a religion that claimed that repairing your teeth was immoral, and that doing it would make you go to hell. Would that make dental plans provided by companies unconstitutional? No, it wouldn't. Stop being an idiot.
Steve Holland Wrong dude. As an employer providing medical care, employers can not and should not be able to dictate that employees can not receive specific types of medical care based solely on their own personal beliefs. A female employee wanting to be on the shot or the pill IS the employee taking personal responsibility. The employee is already allowing the employer to take money from their check to cover their medical insurance – the employer has no right to force their views on the employee.
Mr. Lott thank you for giving me back faith there are some sane people on these comment chains. I had an idea back a few months ago to change the GOP elephant symbol to a hippotamus symbolizing hippocracy. Then I created a new term Hippo-Christian which are all these hateful racist white people with the nerve to say they are immataors of Christ. I don't think Jesus would make people unemployed like myself and have worked in many jobs roles since I was 14 and paid my taxes to take a drug test. I have had it with these people who are so lost they don't get they are being played by corporations and big business. I see you are from the south, from the great state who brought us Montgomery Gentry, and I was born and raised in Tennessee. I think it is sad that as a Non-Christian I know I have a better understanding of Christian teaching than so many of the white only version of Christianity. It is a fact that if you read what Jesus was preaching was socialism.
So, your idea of a sane man is a full grown man who cusses out a teenager that disagrees with him? And now dental plans are the same thing as birth control? Companies should help with dental care because it’s expensive, but if you want birth control, go buy yourself a condom! Let the record stand that Caleb Davis has left the Idiot’s Anonymous conversation.
Well, it is a choice. You can choose to not go to a Christian Church or Hospital or School. Then it's not an issue. God is Good….
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/11/supreme-court-sides-with-church-on-decision-to-fire-employee-on-religious/
You don't get it, James, if you don't agree witgh their practices, then there are other hospitals that you can go to. Freedom of Choice for health care. If the person wants a plan that coveres contraceptives, they can either purchase a plan from a private insurer OR look for a job that covers that type of plan. If I am not happy with my job, I look for another one, but I am responsable for my own actions.
You don't get it, James, if you don't agree witgh their practices, then there are other hospitals that you can go to. Freedom of Choice for health care. If the person wants a plan that coveres contraceptives, they can either purchase a plan from a private insurer OR look for a job that covers that type of plan. If I am not happy with my job, I look for another one, but I am responsable for my own actions.
Emily had posted a "tweet" regarding the subject matter and the journalist from Fox News contacted her to get a "quote". He wrote it in the article. I am so proud of the young woman she is becoming and standing up for what she believes in!
Yay, Emily!!!
Yay, Emily!!!
Problem is we are not just talking about Private Christian Colleges, and even in that case, Institutions have no right to limit an individuals options just because they do not agree with it. It should be up to the individual – not the institution – as to whether or not they use it.
Problem is we are not just talking about Private Christian Colleges, and even in that case, Institutions have no right to limit an individuals options just because they do not agree with it. It should be up to the individual – not the institution – as to whether or not they use it.
Our LORD GOD has the final say in "all that seems to matter to us".
James Lott It should be up to the institution as to whether or not they choose to provide it!
James Lott It should be up to the institution as to whether or not they choose to provide it!
Tammy Housby Carter your "lord god" does not exist, and certainly does not have an impact on everyone.
Its unclear why the christians are so upset! Everyone knows that if they pray hard enough, magic jesus will appear on a piece of toast or as a piss stain on a wall and make alllll the bad things go away. Right? Here is what christians and other believers in religion don't understand: faith in their god(s) and religion is total horseshit. This is why there are no miracles, bad things happen to good people, praying doesn't work, etc etc. Its a con game- probably the oldest there is- and gullible people who might otherwise question it, swallow it whole and ask for more.
We need to be careful that standing up for religious freedom doesn't allow religious exploitation and infatuation. For a bunch of people who are scared of sharia law, they sure seem pretty willing to take a wrecking ball to dam (US constitution) that is protecting their town…
Open the door to one religion and you might just open the door to the rest.
The founding fathers where careful to frame the constitution in a way that protected people from religion as much as it protected them to practice whatever religion they wanted.
More blatant disregard for our religious freedoms in America by President Obama. What a shame.
you have the freedom to practice how you wish – you do not however have the freedom to push your religious beliefs on others.
What freedoms are being disregarded? This story has nothing to do with disregarding religious freedoms.
"Religious freedom" isn't the freedom to be a massive fucking asshole.
This isn't affecting how you practice in any shape or form, just don't use the pills or condoms if you don't like them. Simple as that.
You have complete religious freedom, you can practice your religion in this country without any worries. That same right applies to us all and since we have freedom of religion(freedom of ALL religious beliefs or none at all), we cannot impose our beliefs on others.
James Lott Nor do you.
James Lott Nor do you.
How is that "disregard" for religious freedom? I don't recall anything in the bible about birth control…pretty sure Jesus would have no problem with it.
And you have the freedom to work somewhere else, a place that offers paid contraception, no? Of course, you do.
Jerry Camp I do work somewhere that offers free contraception – it's called the Army. Condoms and birth control – free. If you were talking to me there Jerry. And if I had a job where it wasn't "free" or "paid for" I would find a way to get it. Pretty sure condoms and birth control pills are cheaper than taking care of a child especially when people are usually unprepared for one. I am prepared financially for one though. Because I was smart about it
I find it amazing that so many people think their religion is under attack over a little packet of pills. If you are against birth control, then don't take it. Simple as that. I find it really ridiculous that the Christian Right feels the need to dictate my uterus and decide what I should do with all my eggs, yeah…I went there. Focus on your own family, and let me plan mine how I see fit.
Amen. These people are being fucking insane.
Amazing that you setup such a flimsy little strawman to attack rather than the the real issue. If you want to work for someone who pays for contraception, go work for that company. Simple as that. Don't force a religious organization to pay for something that is against that religions tenets. Pretty simple.
Uhm, quite honestly, I don't care what you do. What I care about is that a hospital that is run by and founded by a religious institution is forced to make a choice to either comply with a law that the Religion considers Heresy or close its doors, thereby forcing those patients to go to Secular hospitals which are often private for profit hospitals that charge two to three times as much.
Uhm, quite honestly, I don't care what you do. What I care about is that a hospital that is run by and founded by a religious institution is forced to make a choice to either comply with a law that the Religion considers Heresy or close its doors, thereby forcing those patients to go to Secular hospitals which are often private for profit hospitals that charge two to three times as much.
STOP Plese stop with this garbage. You crack me up because what you are saying is somehow the president, by promoting all forms of religion (which is why we were founded) but you see that as trampling religious liberty? Doesn't insisting everyone think like you, look like you, and pray like you kinda doing the actual trampling on liberty here?
I just have this to add – do many of you realize that MARRIED COUPLES also use birth control? That some women use the pill for medical reasons beyond birth control? I bet most of you are against abortion but simultaneously don't believe in making birth control accessible to people who are ALREADY having sex. When are you people going to realize that sex education and birth control access BRINGS DOWN unplanned pregnancy and STD rates and actually gives people the knowledge and freedom to decide to abstain and/or wait. This is backed by DATA as is the FACT that abstinence doesn't work. I wonder how many of you pro-abstinence people actually waited to have sex before marriage. Bet it's a lot damn lower than 100%.
Did anyone perhaps notice the political strategy in letting the Christian employers wait for 1 year? Of course the election will be over and done with. Meaning the Christian outrage will not be so much of an influence in voting.
people of faith? what people of faith? you mean the so-called Christians who have shown Obama everything BUT the love of Christ? You mean the racist tea-party that claims to be people of faith? you mean the ones that refuse to pray for the President and still claimed to be people of faith? Oh, you mean those hypocrites, those people of faith.
This Administration is not an attack on the religious organization as much as it is an attack on Jesus Christ and they will pay for that in the end****. My Lord Jesuschrist is the focus of the attacks and I have read the end of the book and WE win. Jesus is the GOD of this world and there is no Other.
jesus can suck a cock
I never did understand the opposition to birth control. Hmm…let's see unwanted pregnancies where the child ends up suffering because of parents who do not want him or her or you take a pill that doesn't even allow for it to happen until the two people are ready. Wow that's a hard one…