Check out some similar questions!

speechlesstx · Aug 8, 2012, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

No????? So, you think it SLIPPED by. You think these religious organizations were covering the dreaded birth control pills and abortion services WITHOUT knowing it. Really???

Ok, that COULD be true... But, if they had such a VISCERAL and RELIGIOUS objection to covering those kinds of services, you'd think they would have done some of this "self-examination" BEFORE they wrote the check...

In fact, after a bit more deliberation, and given the abhorrence that the church displays over contraceptives, I CANNOT believe they didn't have 10 religious people POURING over their insurance coverages to make absolutely CERTAIN that they weren't buying these ANTI religious services...

But, you believe it just SLIPPED through, huh??? I'm having a very hard time believing that..

excon

You have a hard time believing a religious institution can't make a mistake? I don't buy that for a minute either.

excon · Aug 8, 2012, 07:35 AM

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

You have a hard time believing a religious institution can't make a mistake? I don't buy that for a minute either.

Hello again, Steve:

IF one of the MAIN tenets of my religion is to AVOID contraception AT ALL COSTS, and they're not a rinky dink corner church, YOU BETCHA I don't believe they made a mistake...

This is the one that we KNOW about too. For SURE there are others...

I SUPPORT religious freedom too. You should KNOW that... My reaction stems from the fact that church's, like Wheaton College, have been under a STATE requirement that mirrors the FEDERAL one, for YEARS and nobody made a peep until the ACA..

That's why I think the outrage is manufactured...

excon

speechlesstx · Aug 8, 2012, 08:01 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

IF one of the MAIN tenets of my religion is to AVOID contraception AT ALL COSTS,

.

Wheaton isn't Catholic, I doubt they avoid contraception at all cost. I know of no objection in my own church to contraception. The objection to Wheaton is forcing them to buy abortifacients, did you read your source? I fail to see it as much of a stretch, especially since insurance companies change their covered drug lists on a regular basis, for this oversight.

I SUPPORT religious freedom too. You should KNOW that... My reaction stems from the fact that church's, like Wheaton College, have been under a STATE requirement that mirrors the FEDERAL one, for YEARS and nobody made a peep until the ACA..

You guys keep saying this but what states mandate an employer buy abortifacients?

talaniman · Aug 8, 2012, 11:20 AM

Insurance Coverage for Contraception State Laws

In August 2011, HHS accepted the IOM's recommendations and will require new health plans to include these services without cost sharing for insurance policies with plan years beginning on or after August 1, 2012. HHS also released a proposed amendment, open to public comment, to the regulation to allow religious institutions that offer insurance to their employees the choice of whether to cover contraception services. After a number of objections related to religious concerns, in February 2012, President Obama announced a final policy to exempt churches and similar organizations from covering contraception on the basis of their religious objections and instead, requiring employers' insurance companies to offer contraception coverage to women directly and free of charge.

Now what's your problem? Oh that's right, private for profit businesses should have the rights to make their employees follow THEIR religion right?

Why can't Muslims practice SHARIA law then? Oh yeah that's right Christians are the only ones with rights, right?

speechlesstx · Aug 8, 2012, 01:46 PM

[QUOTE=talaniman;3228243]Insurance Coverage for Contraception State Laws

Did you even bother to see how many of those offer exclusions on religious beliefs and/or do not mandate emergency contraception, i.e. abortifacients? Apparently not.

n February 2012, President Obama announced a final policy to exempt churches and similar organizations from covering contraception on the basis of their religious objections and instead, requiring employers’ insurance companies to offer contraception coverage to women directly and free of charge.

Same straw man you've been using, an exemption that isn't an exemption and no exemptions for employer funded plans. You still think the money for this is going to come out of the insurer's pockets? Get real. The costs will still be passed onto the customers and it still forces religious organizations to both fund and facilitate access to drugs and services that violate their morals and their constitutional right to free exercise of religion. The 'accommodation' changes nothing.

Now what's your problem? Oh that's right, private for profit businesses should have the rights to make their employees follow THEIR religion right?

Wrong, you'll not find me saying or supporting any such thing.

Why can't Muslims practice SHARIA law then? Oh yeah that's right Christians are the only ones with rights, right?

Wrong again, we already have the same judicial system for both Muslims and Christians, and everyone else.

excon · Aug 11, 2012, 07:03 AM

Hello again, Steve:

Religious freedom, Texas style..

DeWitt R. Thomas, who has a Hawkins address, filed a federal lawsuit against Two Rivers Grocery Store & Market in Big Sandy because he believes his civil rights and religious freedom were violated when an African American sacker touched his groceries against his wishes.

“DeWitt R. Thomas said: “Wait a minute, don’t touch my groceries. I can’t have someone negroidal touch my food, it’s against my creed!”

Bwa, ha ha ha.

excon