Hey, there's shithead! About time you got back here!

Why stop at medical care? Why is government involved in medical care? You say to help people protect themselves. Well, you can apply the same false reasoning to force people to buy firearms.

Because we are a country that believes in religious liberty. We were founded on it. It is noted in the first amendment you love to forget about.

THEN GET A DIFFERENT JOB!

If you are so unhappy with us why do you hang around?

Wedge issues like this we have been tired of since they told us to wear seat belts. They have better things to do. But its no wonder, that the only industrialized nation with for profit insurance is rated 37th in the world. It doesn't operate out of any common sense.

Its cheaper to provide birth control than to end up paying for an abortion.

Last I heard abortions were legal, though we wonder much when so many still bring up that they are murder.

Back room abortions use to cost a lot of lives.

An 18-year-old woman who was 21 weeks pregnant suffered a ruptured uterus and an injured bowel, according to documents filed in a previous investigation by medical regulators. Rather than call 911, Riley drove her to a nearby hospital, where both she and Brigham were uncooperative and Brigham refused to give his name, documents show.

A search of the clinic after the botched abortion revealed a freezer containing 35 late-term fetuses, including one believed to have been aborted at 36 weeks, the documents show.

Brigham, 55, is charged with five counts of first-degree murder, five counts of second-degree murder and one count of conspiracy. Riley, 46, faces one count each of first- and second-degree murder and one conspiracy count.

At this clinic in west Philadelphia, likened by lawyers to a ‘house of horrors’ as babies born alive were killed by having their spinal cords severed with scissors.

According to a grand jury report released almost a year ago, Kermit’s wife Pearl Gosnell was a cosmetologist who helped her husband perform 'extremely late-term' abortions on Sundays and other days the clinic was closed. Authorities said neither was qualified to perform the procedures.

And hell, even if the religious right get their way and outlaw them, the rich could still afford a way to get a safe one. All these wedge issues do, is keep the public's eyes off of the issues, whose fruits, produce the bs. Which to me, is mainly from the greed of the few who bought our Govt.

Jafo,

Medical care is treated differently when it comes to taxes and reimbursements! The whole financial structure of the industry is based on how taxes are applied and reimbursements allocated! You have to have clear definitions!

By the way, why aren't you protecting the Pharmaceutical Industries rights. Isn't that more up your alley!

I never once said Catholics can't practice their religion or Muslims can't practice their religion. I do say anybody practicing a religion has no right to impinge on the rights of others or be treated differently under the law. That is what the first amendment means to me when it comes to separation of church and state! We are not a Catholic country! We are not a Jewish Country! We are not a Muslim country. We are not a Protestant country. We are a country that allows religious and individual freedoms to all its people. I said people of religion can not pick and choose laws or line items out of laws they will or will not abide in the name of their religion. If a woman works for a Muslim that does mean she is subject to execution for flirting in the break room? What kind if logic is that? It is village idiot logic!

Certainly a resolution to the issue! A village idiot resolution but a resolution none the less!

The Nuclear Bomb is Constitutional. Does that make it moral?

$100 million a day for upkeep of a weapon, any sane person knows must never fall again, would be worth while to hear mentioned on Corporate owned TV. I say, ''WOE to the stumbling blocks, who cause little minds like Jafo, to start telling the little people to focus on the little people."

Oh now you defend the Bomb. That's enough. You are insane. You pretend to speak out against a Govt telling people what to do. But in the next breath you defend the Govt, that has forced the world to live under the fear of total destruction. That my friends is not moral.

Ya Vietnam was raped, pillaged set on fire killing a million. Sanctions on Iraq did wonders for the 400 million children it killed. We can't even get the full count of Vets who died from their wounds, in Iraq, for they couldn't live with their crimes.
How many Democratically Elected Govts. has the CIA overthrown? Oh I forget, we are America and can do no wrong.

The law (EDIT BY JAFO - referring to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act signed by Bill Clinton in 1993 - END EDIT) also provides that any later statutory override of its protections must be explicit. But there is nothing in the ObamaCare legislation that explicitly or even implicitly overrides the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The birth-control mandate proposed by Health and Human Services is thus illegal.

The refusal, for religious reasons, to provide birth-control coverage is clearly an exercise of religious freedom under the Constitution. The "exercise of religion" extends to performing, or refusing to perform, actions on religious grounds—and it is definitely not confined to religious institutions or acts of worship. Leading Supreme Court cases in this area, for example, involve a worker who refused to work on the Sabbath (Sherbert v. Verner, 1963) and parents who refused to send their teenage children to a public high school (Wisconsin v. Yoder, 1972).

In the high-school case, the Supreme Court found that even a $5 fine on the parents substantially burdened the free exercise of their religion. Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, employers who fail to comply with the birth-control mandate will incur an annual penalty of roughly $2,000 per employee. So it is clearly a substantial burden.

Objecting employers could, of course, avoid the fine by choosing to go out of business. But as the Supreme Court noted in Sherbert v. Verner, "governmental imposition of such a choice puts the same kind of burden upon the free exercise of religion as would a fine imposed against" noncompliant parties.

The birth-control mandate also fails the Religious Freedom Restoration Act's "compelling governmental interest" and "least restrictive means" tests.

Does the mandate further the governmental interest in increasing cost-free access to contraceptives by means that are least restrictive of the employer's religious freedom? Plainly, the answer is no. There are plenty of other ways to increase access to contraceptives that intrude far less on the free exercise of religion.

Health and Human Services itself touts community health centers, public clinics and hospitals as some of the available alternatives; doctors and pharmacies are others. Many of the entities, with Planned Parenthood being the most prominent, already furnish free contraceptives. The government could have the rest of these providers make contraceptive services available free and then compensate them directly. A mandate on employers who object for religious reasons is among the most restrictive means the government could have chosen to increase access.