Posted on 02/11/2012 5:28:05 AM PST by tobyhill
The Obama administration's new mandate that religious organizations pay for their workers' birth control has become a bludgeon for Republican culture warriors, as social issues have surged to the forefront in the presidential campaign.
Conservatives who believe religious freedom always trumps gender equity in the public arena are outraged. But so too are Roman Catholic and evangelical moderates who have stuck with President Barack Obama, an abortion rights supporter, because of his 2008 pledge to reduce the abortion rate and find common ground among religious and secular Americans. These backers say the administration could have easily avoided the controversy by including broader religious exemptions already in place at some federal agencies.
After two weeks of unrelenting condemnation led by the nation's Catholic bishops, the White House has responded by hinting at some compromise in how the requirement is enforced. Administration officials insist any accommodation for religious groups will leave in place contraceptive coverage, although they haven't said how. But even the suggestion of a revision, no matter how limited, has infuriated Democrats the president hoped to please with the regulation. As the debate rages, women's groups, liberal religious leaders and health advocates are rallying in favor of the broadest contraceptive coverage that would include Catholic employers.
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
These people are MENTALLY ILL. There's no compromise you can make with that crowd.
I wish obamas mother used a rubber that fwtaful day she hooked u w the Kenyan Marxist playa lova
How about these tools at See BS! They purposefully miss the outrageousness of the Government’s new ability to force people to pay for someone else’s “choice”. It reminds me of they purposefully made the Clinton impeachment all about sex, instead of about lying under oath.
How about these tools at See BS! They purposefully miss the outrageousness of the Government’s new ability to force people to pay for someone else’s “choice”. It reminds me of they purposefully made the Clinton impeachment all about sex, instead of about lying under oath.
If the compromise, or any portion of it, is accepted, liberalism wins. Only "No" stops the liberal idea.
...and when a congress is gridlocked with no "bipartisan discussion"? That is "NO" being spoken clearly.
Obama needs a late, post birth abortion
Conservatives are being played.
| It's the Economy, Stupid! |
I guess separation between the state and religion is a one way street When it comes to liberals
I guess separation between the state and religion is a one way street When it comes to liberals
I think Cafardi is clearly a "tool of the left".
It’s easy to imagine Obama’s mother thinking of condoms like others do balloons, and there she was with one pulled down over her head ~ and.....
Interesting. I hadn't seen this. So these people are furious that Obama might NOT force religious people to pay for the morning after pill and other contraceptives. So much for tolerance.
“It reminds me of they purposefully made the Clinton impeachment all about sex, instead of about lying under oath.”
You’re almost there; they made it about sex instead of a sexual harassment lawsuit (which included pulling out his penis) brought against BJ Clinton which was settled for $850,000, AND the five-year suspension of his law license for perjury. Monica Lewinsky was unwillingly dragged into the Paula Jones lawsuit; the media made her the story, instead of having people focus on the sexual assault (not “battery”, but certainly “assault” in my mind - and it would be treated as such legally if any of us did it to a woman on the street).
Paula Jones was ripped apart by the media at the time because she was the driving force in destroying the media-created image of St. William Jefferson Clinton; in fact it was all his doing. She was not a girlfriend or mistress, just some unfortunate person who had an involuntary encounter with him; I’m glad she hung on through the slings & arrows, because the leftist (exclusively female) losers that I work with always shut their stupid faces and drop their eyes to the floor when you mention the $850K settlement in his indefensiable sexual harassment suit.
No, they hang their heads out of resigned greed ~ they’d liked to have been part of the deal.
“No, they hang their heads out of resigned greed ~ they’d liked to have been part of the deal.”
That, too; these were lonely (angry) women; they’d probably support a law that would require men to date them in order to qualify for drivers’ licences or such. Besides the teachers’ union they are probably the Dems’ largest constituency (even larger than unassimilated, dependent ethnic malcontents in sheer numbers).
Essentially Obama has declared that he is nationalizing Planned Parenthood and all taxpayers are going to pay it.
Yesterday Rush Limbaugh mentioned that there is no longer a reason to have a Planned Parenthood.
It has already been said, STOP OBAMA CARE.
The People in Government and their take care of me attitude supporters are destroying this nation.
The Government has no right to be getting involved in health care.
When our founders said that the reason for the constitution was to promote the general welfare of the people, they were not talking about welfare and health programs, what they were talking about was to make sure people were free to take care of them selves.
The only possible way the government can promote the general welfare of the people is to leave them alone, quit making ridicules laws that hold people back.
People do need help, depending on their circumstances, but not from Government.
High taxes and excessive regulations keep any one from helping any one else, so in comes socialism which is just how it was planed, but not by our founders, but from the evil one and his angels whom our lord set us free from to begin with.
The government and their socialist bosses are not promoting the general welfare of the people, they are promoting socialism by trying to promote the personal welfare of individuals and in doing that they are destroying the general welfare of the people.
If we do not get Satans angels out now we may not get another chance.
Someone on TV yesterday was asking what issues the Republican nominee would have to run on if the economy seemed to be improving between now and the election.
I guess it's supposed to be like 1820 and the Era of Good Feelings--why even bother to have an opponent running against the incumbent?
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.