Obamacare Mandate: Sterilize 15-Year-Old Girls for Free--Without Parental Consent

cnsnews.com ^ | 8/10/12 | Sabrina Gladstone

[ColdOne]

(CNSNews.com) - Thanks to an Obamacare regulation that took effect on Aug. 1, health care plans in Oregon will now be required to provide free sterilizations to 15- year-old girls even if the parents of those girls do not consent to the procedure.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius finalized the regulation earlier this year.

It says that all health care plans in the United States--except those provided by actual houses of worship organized under the section of the Internal Revenue Code reserved for churches per se--must provide coverage, without cost-sharing, for sterilizations and all Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptives to “all women with reproductive capacity.”

[maine-iac7]

This from an apostate catholic named Sebelius.I wouldn’t want to be standing next to her when she gets to the Pearly Gates.

And people are forgetting that, in the wording of obumer care - the secretary can add anything into it at whim, with any input or 'passing' - it's totally open ended.

[Steamburg]

I hear they bring a better price in the Kenyan slave market.

[Pearls Before Swine]

Help me out here. Why would any 15 year old girl want or consent to sterilization?

[maine-iac7]

This from an apostate catholic named Sebelius.I wouldn’t want to be standing next to her when she gets to the Pearly Gates.

It's via vaccinations - for other things - but included with knowledge.

It's part of Agenda 21. Bill Gates is carrying out the tests in Africa, it seems

[GoldwaterChick]

I can’t believe this could happen in the United States of America!

[wagglebee]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

[pistolpackinpapa]

Surely the Romney/Ryan Ticket and the RNC will make political hay out of this. This is a big deal.

[pistolpackinpapa]

Surely the Romney/Ryan Ticket and the RNC will make political hay out of this. This is a big deal.

[goodnesswins]

Seen this????

[Rapscallion]

I seem to recall that Nazi Germany had a similar program.

[TN4Liberty]

Why would any 15 year old girl want or consent to sterilization?

The desire for unlimited sex without consequences? A demanding boyfriend? To get back at mom? I don't understand why kids want piercing or tattoos either, but they sure go after them. I'm sure some kids can find a reason to do this.

[Venturer]

When Pelosi said we have to pass it to see what was in it she was lying.

It’s been passed for almost a year now and we still don’t know what will end up being in it.

What we do know ,we don’t like, At least no one on the paying end likes it.I guess John Roberts likes it, he sold his integrity for it.

[MissEdie]

If only libtards had a moral compass...

[deedeedog]

next you’ll this will taught in our school system

[zot]

Not surprising that this atrocity is in ObamaCare.

[Tanniker Smith]

next you’ll this will taught in our school system

I think your autocorrect messed up a word.

[MonicaG]

yes, in the classroom. Along with “Beef is Bad” and all the other earth-worshipping Only We Have the Power to Save the Planet” messages.

[Mrs. Don-o]

• Because she is told by her 9th grade Health and Wellness teacher that fertility is "problem" requiring lifetime management by injectable or implantable endocrine disruptors, or drugs. Surgery just eliminates the recurring hassle.
• Because she is a serious-minded, caring girl who's been taught that her generation must Save the Earth via not reproducing: a little laparoscopic "band-aid" surgery is the responsible thing to do (and don't tell Mom and Dad.)
• Because she is influenced at a young age by feminists who think normal female physiology is the problem, and chop-chop is the solution.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Better: teach girls and women to respect, and demand respect for, their bodies and souls.

[John Leland 1789]

Why does the article begin by saying that this applies to the state of Oregon, when later it says that it applies across the nation?

And notice how Obamacare will force the federal government to define what a "house of worship" is (!)

"provided by actual houses of worship organized under the section of the Internal Revenue Code reserved for churches per se . . . "

What it appears to be referring to is a "registered" church under IRS code 501(C)(3)

There has never been any law, federal or state, requiring a church, a house of worship, to apply for 501(C)(3) status with the IRS.

Obamacare will now be used to state that churches must be an "actual" house of worship under IRS rules, something that the First Amendment doesn't give the Congress power to define.