To: GIdget2004
"Judge Nina Pillard wrote in the decision that the compromise helps the plaintiffs wash "their hands of any involvement in providing insurance for contraceptive services."
Clearly, the "compromise" was a ruse to fool the "stupid" public into thinking they weren't paying for contraception/abortion when they really were paying for those "services."
To: Steve_Seattle
Clearly, the "compromise" was a ruse to fool the "stupid" public into thinking they weren't paying for contraception/abortion
Or at least fool stupid judges
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson