Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Admin Decides to Require Religious Institutions to Cover Free Contraception
CatholicVote.org ^ | 01/20/2012 | Thomas Peters

Posted on 01/20/2012 10:14:36 AM PST by Pyro7480

Liberals are crowing about what they see as a huge victory for them — and they are right — because this victory comes at the expense of religious liberty.

Welcome to the Obama 2012 reelection plan: ignore and marginalize people of faith, pander to the far-left’s sexual-political priorities.

This via the far-left site ThinkProgress

Today, in a huge victory for women’s health, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that most employers will be required to cover contraception in their health plans, along with other preventive services, with no cost-sharing such as co-pays or deductibles. This means that after years of trying to get birth control covered to the same extent that health plans cover Viagra, our country will finally have nearly universal coverage of contraception.

Opponents of contraception had lobbied hard for a broad exemption that would have allowed any religiously-affiliated employer to opt out of providing such coverage. Fortunately, the Obama administration rejected that push and decided to maintain the narrow religious exemption that it initially proposed. Only houses of worship and other religious nonprofits that primarily employ and serve people of the same faith will be exempt. Religiously-affiliated employers who do not qualify for the exemption and are not currently offering contraceptive coverage may apply for transitional relief for a one-year period to give them time to determine how to comply with the rule.


(Excerpt) Read more at catholicvote.org ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bhofascism; catholic; constitution; contraception; corruption; democrats; donttreadonme; fraud; govtabuse; liberalfascism; liberals; lping; moralabsolutes; nobama2012; obama; progressives; prolife; tyranny; waronliberty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-137 next last
They really are trying to shred the First Amendment. Bunch of commies...
1 posted on 01/20/2012 10:14:47 AM PST by Pyro7480
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

An old tagline comes to mind....

“God is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.”


2 posted on 01/20/2012 10:19:52 AM PST by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (Some men just want to watch the world burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

So now womens health = consequence free recreational sex?


3 posted on 01/20/2012 10:23:29 AM PST by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Follow Barack’s example and ignore the rule.

Simply categorize abstinence as “free contraception”.


4 posted on 01/20/2012 10:26:35 AM PST by G Larry ("I dream of a day when a man is judged by the content of his Character.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
FUBO!!!

Forgive me Father, for I have sinned ......

5 posted on 01/20/2012 10:32:51 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

40 years plus of abortion isn’t enough for the left.

Those who laugh at the zero population growth folks .. keep laughing.

If you loved Mao you’ll go ape for Obama..


6 posted on 01/20/2012 10:33:26 AM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard .. Obama: Epic Fail or Bust!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

When PP says “Contraception” they mean anything that destroys an embryo up to implantation in the uterine wall. They deliberately distort the term to cover what they hope will be millions of abortions annually.

But because of the wedge between Protestants/Orthodox and Catholics on contraception, by using “contraception” this way they are able to divide the pro-life movement. Some prolifers at least are going to think, “contraception,” shoot, that’s a Catholic hobby horse, no concern of mine.

Canary in the coal mine, folks.


7 posted on 01/20/2012 10:38:06 AM PST by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.
"When PP says “Contraception” they mean anything that destroys an embryo up to implantation in the uterine wall."

Yes, that's correct.

Typical liberal misrepresentation of terms which used to be known as "lying".

8 posted on 01/20/2012 10:40:22 AM PST by GourmetDan (Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Separation of Church and State much?

Let me know when he declares Sharia law will not be allowed in the U.S.


9 posted on 01/20/2012 10:42:11 AM PST by SueRae (I can see November from my HOUSE!!!!!!!! 11.06.2012, the Tower of Sauron falls,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

The Benito Obamalini regime never ceases to amaze me... So free contraception is some sort of right that healthcare providers must bear the cost of (well, those paying premiums). Suppose all presecriptions here in nirvana should be free then? Perhaps they should also sign into law that rainbows and unicorns to appear when you pick up your meds....

Go back to Chicago Barry.


10 posted on 01/20/2012 10:42:41 AM PST by Made In The USA (This post may be recorded for quality purposes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

And the odds that waivers would be granted if the “religious institution” were Islamic, or anything but Christian?

100%


11 posted on 01/20/2012 10:42:53 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge
If you loved Mao you’ll go ape for Obama..

Of course,

12 posted on 01/20/2012 10:50:38 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Man I can’t wait to see this jerk booted out in 2013!!


13 posted on 01/20/2012 10:57:19 AM PST by LibsRJerks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LibsRJerks; All

I would have no problem requiring contraception coverage and am pro-life. However, I ONLY AM OKAY WITH IT if the company already has a policy covering male stuff like viagra.

And I am appalled that this will only exempt a select number of religious groups. Anybody who in conscious morally objects to this should be allowed to not offer coverage for it.


14 posted on 01/20/2012 11:05:02 AM PST by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

Indeed, in this case ignoring the lawless Federal Goverment is the only lawful & morally acceptable approach.

Tell the lawless Federal “court” that abstinence contraception is indeed without copay under their plan.


15 posted on 01/20/2012 11:11:30 AM PST by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

I sure hope the “Christians” that voted for Obama are proud.


16 posted on 01/20/2012 11:12:55 AM PST by Grunthor (I am a conservative, neither half of the one party represents my views.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Let this oppression inspire you to more procreation.

"The disruptive powers of excessive national fecundity may have played a greater part in bursting the bonds of convention than either the power of ideas or the errors of autocracy." - John Maynard Keynes


Don't just be prolife be prolific!

17 posted on 01/20/2012 11:13:05 AM PST by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
I would have no problem requiring contraception coverage

Why do you think the federal government should mandate the coverages provided in private health plans, and do you think your stance is socialist/statist, and if not, why not?

18 posted on 01/20/2012 11:14:55 AM PST by Crichton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

This is on a fast track to the Supreme Court. Churches aren’t going to roll over for this. At least real churches won’t.

Anyone who doesn’t like the medical plan offered by churches, can opt to work somewhere else.

End of story.

Churches should not be victim to the whims of a child like Obama.


19 posted on 01/20/2012 11:24:20 AM PST by DoughtyOne (Listen up RNC. If we wind up with Mitt Romney, you're not getting my vote in November.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Didn’t Myth do this in Massachusetts by requiring Catholic hospitals to dispense abortion pills to rape victims?


20 posted on 01/20/2012 11:26:09 AM PST by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-137 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson