Posted on 02/10/2012 10:28:01 AM PST by unique1
WASHINGTON, February 10, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The White House announced today that, instead of forcing religious employers to pay for birth control, it will force insurance companies to offer the drugs free of charge to all women, no matter where they work.
The plan, touted as a concession to freedom of religion and conscience, was immediately denounced by pro-life Rep. Chris Smith. “The so-called new policy is the discredited old policy, dressed up to look like something else,. said Smith. .It remains a serious violation of religious freedom. Only the most naï or gullible would accept this as a change in policy.”
“The White House Fact Sheet is riddled with doublespeak and contradiction,” Smith continued. “It states, for example, that religious employers ‘will not’ have to pay for abortion pills, sterilization and contraception, but their ‘insurance companies’ will. Who pays for the insurance policy? The religious employer.”
Thank you. I needed to read that. I have to start doing the same thing - standing up for what is right instead of being silent.
Good question. First we have to defeat Barack Hussein Obama this fall. I am ready to put myself into this effort once we get a candidate. Santorum is the only one I could get real excited about, but Newt would do. Romney is just a little too robotic and moderate for my tastes. But I suppose I will have to support him if he ends up being the nominee.
The 99% contracepting figure is supposedly women who have used birth control any time in their lives, not those who are currently using at any one given moment. Somewhere I saw the real figures. I will see if I can find it. The Catholic women currently using is more in the 60-80% range. I have seen different figures in different places, and it depends on if you are talking about Christmas/Easter Catholics or practicing Catholics. But the 98% and 99% figures are just mislesding and false.
The “Accommodation” is nothing but arrogance and radical ideology combined.
It’s an insult to Catholics and Christians.
Husband comes out and says, kind of snarkily, that Obamer’s “concession” was accepted and beloved by the Catholic powers that be.
I asked him who. He said “some Bishop”.
Is this true?
Cause making the insurance company pay for this is naught but semantics.
It’s positively insulting.
I wonder if “professor” Obama knows the meaning of the phrase “distinction without a difference”.
He probably does; he’s just counting on the electorate not knowing.
Anyway, if women have a right to “free” contraception, what is this “right” based on? The usual liberal “it’s my right because I want it”?
“Does Obama not fear the Lord??? Does he not realize that he will burn in hell???”
Better question, Who does he serve? When you know the answer to this question you will have an answer to your questions by default.
Several of us have been writing them for several years now.
http://tiftareateaparty.wordpress.com/
Anything to get people to think, educate themselves and to return to God. I do not know how much it has helped if any but I do get many more questions at work about whats going on around us. So maybe a couple people have woken up that would not have been. I can only pray more will.
God bless
L’Etat etre moi!
Here is a good article...
“Bishops Concerned... others slam...”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2845084/posts
Dumbo is trying to Bart Stupak everyone.
“The White House Fact Sheet is riddled with doublespeak and contradiction,” Smith continued. “It states, for example, that religious employers ‘will not’ have to pay for abortion pills, sterilization and contraception, but their ‘insurance companies’ will. Who pays for the insurance policy? The religious employer.”
Incredibly deceptive maneuver, plus he thinks we are that stupid.
Condoms are not purchased by prescription. It is referring to pills, including Plan B, which is the day after pill. I’m not sure the details involving the insurance covering abortions.
It would be like forcing an atheist to tithe.
Boehner’s promise can’t come soon enough. But even if Rubio’s bill happens to be introduced by someone in the House, it’ll hit a brick wall in the Senate. Something bigger needs to happen, but I can’t imagine what that will be. It’s tax-time, soon. Is it time for a real tea party?
He he. I have that book.
When was the last time anyone here phoned their representatives in Congress and demanded the full and immediate repeal of Obamacare?
Might want to try that.
Organizing a large crowd of protesters would be nice, too. Of course it would take time. You’d have to miss work. And it is cold outside.
I think that the insurance companies agreed to this because it costs a lot less to provide free contraception than it does to pay for maternity care, delivery, and family medical care after a child is born. I have a serious problem with any man/religion that says I cannot plan when I will bear children, whether I will be allowed to use contraception, and wants to get rid of WIC programs and other aid to poor women who have children.
The question is who is Peter and who is Paul. Insurance companies charge a certain amount for family plans. If they provide free contraception, then they save money on maternity care, childbirth, and pediatrician visits. So whose Ponzi scheme is it??
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.