Ask Me Help Desk - SCOTUS to revisit Obamacare

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

Totally agree Tom, a republican president and congress is a dark future for everybody except really rich guys.

Taking bets?

It could go either way . I don't think there will ever be wholesale changes or repeals of the law as long as the uber-legislator sits as Chief Justice . At this point the law is as much his creation as the Dems . I think the Repubs will nibble at the edges and change some aspects of the law. But the framework is in place for the total takeover of health care . All they need to do now is get rid of the middle men . The suckers in the Insurance industry that sold their souls for the promise of big rewards are going to feel the wrath of the masses as they get blamed for all the Obamacare failings .
So yes if you can take all the bad decisions in the last 8 years and successfully blame "the rich" ;then you'll begin Evita's reign.

Quote:

But the framework is in place for the total takeover of health care .

You mean what every industrialized country has done but yours?

you make it sound like that's a good thing.

It is.

the way I see it is that by twisting the language into a pretzel ,Roberts has allowed the Democrats to massively expand the power and reach of government in ways that make the governement even more tyranical than it was . The legacy of the emperor is preserved .

What's your solution and which candidate supports it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

It is.

Not under this administration it's not.

Quote:

BREAKING NEWS

Same Sex marriage legal nationwide

The lefties will not be happy ...they will continue their relentless persecution of religious liberty . The few cases we've seen with florists ,bakers and caterers will spread nation wide. Soon they will go after churches that refuse to sanctify their "marriage" .

Combined with yesterday’s ruling we can only conclude that Constitutional federalism is no more. America is now a centralized country, comparable to individual European states.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_9

Not under this administration it's not.

My disabled son thinks it is.

Quote:

Not under this administration it's not.

I tend to believe that under any administration in the U.S. it will not be done properly. Your political system is broken possibly beyond repair. The corporate donors and special interest groups run the show now.

Quote:

persecution of religious liberty

How does two women marrying affect your religious liberty?

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_9

Not under this administration it's not.

Republicans aren't ready for cradle to grave medicare for all. The groundwork has been laid for it by this administration, though.

Let me start by saying that none of you are in healthcare. None of you see how this impacts the care you currently receive, have received, or will receive under Slowbamacare.

I, on the other hand, see it on a daily basis.

You all can do your internet research, you can research MSNBC, FOXNEWS, etc. ad nauseum, but I am on the front lines. Nurse patient ratios have increased causing you and your loved ones to receive substandard care. Hospitals aren't being reimbursed for readmissions if a patient is non-compliant with home therapies if said patient is readmitted within a 30-day period if the diagnosis is in any way related to the original diagnosis. How do the hospitals combat that? By cutting staff.

It's not a good thing unless you don't mind waiting 30 minutes for me to answer your call light because I have 8 other patients to attend to. It's not a good thing when you, as a nurse, is told that "you all have taken the same board exam so you should be able to attend to any patient." This is what we, as nurses are being told.

Doctors took the same board exams, so it's okay for a dermatologist to do a mitral valve replacement on you mother? That dermatologist took the same boards, right?

That's the profit motive hard at work.
You also have not experienced our healthcare system which has never let me down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

I tend to believe that under any administration in the U.S. it will not be done properly. Your political system is broken possibly beyond repair. The corporate donors and special interest groups run the show now.

How does two women marrying affect your religious liberty?

When a baker is compelled to bake a cake for them against their religious convictions ;When a florist is compelled to make floral arrangements for them against their religious convictions ;when a caterer is compelled to serve them food against their religious convictions ;when a DJ gets in legal trouble for not entertaining their "wedding " reception then everyone's religious liberty is threatened . And those scenarios were already happening in states where homosexual "marriage " was legalized. It won't be long before churches face legal jeopardy for refusing to conduct the ceremony .

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_9

Hospitals aren't being reimbursed for readmissions if a patient is non-compliant with home therapies if said patient is readmitted within a 30-day period if the diagnosis is in any way related to the original diagnosis. How do the hospitals combat that? By cutting staff.

What's the percentage of non-compliant patients who are readmitted within 30 days?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

.
You also have not experienced our healthcare system which has never let me down.

Canadian Health Care We So Envy Lies In Ruins, Its Architect Admits

They use to use skin color as a reason not to serve certain people, now they use gender as an excuse not to serve certain people. It's still discrimination, no matter the excuse.

You wouldn't go for separate water fountains as a compromise would you?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

When a baker is compelled to bake a cake for them against their religious convictions

Why is a baker bringing his religion into the marketplace? I, as a Christian, actually helped a Muslim or two with resumes when I had a resume business. Their money was just as green as the Christians' money.

Quote:

They use to use skin color as a reason not to serve certain people, now they use gender as an excuse not to serve certain people. It's still discrimination, no matter the excuse.

You wouldn't go for separate water fountains as a compromise would you?

Quote:

Why is a baker bringing his religion into the marketplace? I, as a Christian, actually helped a Muslim or two with resumes when I had a resume business. Their money was just as green as the Christians' money.

Either you believe in religious liberty or you don't . The baker ,florist etc that are forced to serve a religious ceremony against their convictions is being forced to participate in the event .
This is not about skin color or serving homosexuals . If a homosexual went to the same baker and asked for a birthday cake the baker would not have a religious motive to refuse service . So tal ;your comparison to segregation is absurd. This is specifically about the ceremony they are forced to participate in against their convictions .

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

Either you believe in religious liberty or you don't . The baker ,florist etc that are forced to serve a religious ceremony against their convictions is being forced to participate in the event .
This is not about skin color or serving homosexuals . If a homosexual went to the same baker and asked for a birthday cake the baker would not have a religious motive to refuse service . So tal ;your comparison to segregation is absurd. This is specifically about the ceremony they are forced to participate in against their convictions .

The florist or baker does not participate in the ceremony. He delivers his wares BEFORE the ceremony. Don't Christian florists and bakers sell to non-Christians -- Muslims or atheists or Buddhists?

I didn't say segregation, I said discrimination.

Quote:

It's still discrimination, no matter the excuse.

I am less worried about the baker than I am the employers and hotel clerks.

Some great people down there, let's hope they keep their word:
Texas Pastor Says He Will Set Himself On Fire In Protest Over Gay Marriage : News : Headlines & Global News

Also, about Canada:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/its-l...re#.shlRq52nYy

Nice one NK, maybe they will keep running north, or better, sneak south through the fence to Mexico.

Gay marriage? Meh, state's rights no longer exist.

States have no right to discriminate, segregate, or subjugate. Neither does religion.

I hear the dogs barking again, It's happening all over, must be the election season

Quote:

States have no right to discriminate, segregate, or subjugate. Neither does religion.

No, that's the role of the federal government.

Quote:

Thispractice of constitutional revision by an unelected committeeof nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagantpraise of liberty, robs the People of the most importantliberty they asserted in the Declaration ofIndependence and won in the Revolution of 1776: thefreedom to govern themselves. Scalia

What does that mean speech you are free from the influence of foreign governments? However by treaty you are not free from the influence of the United Nations so you have lost, given up even, the right to govern yourselves

I haven't given up.

No your government did it for you, it's called democracy

Just because we engage and support other countries does not mean we have given up the responsibility to govern ourselves Clete.

That's pretty wild.

No Tal it's not, the UN charter to which you are a signatory requires that you fall in line with their edicts, so if they put forward a standard on the treatment of refugees for example you are expected to comply irrespective of your own laws, same goes for their sanctions this is why you have a veto on the security council, so you cannot be committed to war on a whim. other nations like my own don't have the same get out clause and they make lots of negative noises about a lot of things including internal issues and you have to allow undesirables into your country to attend their meetings

Yep - give billions to Israel but screw the non-rich americans.

Exactly, but you are not allowed to screw the poor either, it is just the US poor are so much richer than others. If the US wasn't such a big funder they would get much more bad comment from the UN

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

I didn't say segregation, I said discrimination.

I am less worried about the baker than I am the employers and hotel clerks.

did you not say "You wouldn't go for separate water fountains as a compromise would you? " That is right out of pre-civil rights segregation.

There will be a rash of court cases where the homosexual community will try to punish those who are unaccepting of their "marriage " .As has been shown where states already had homosexual "marriage " statutes ,they play scorched earth on people who have religious objections to participating in their rituals .Now they will have the full weight of Federal law to use as a weapon.

Refusing services to gay customers, is the same mindset as in those pre-segregation days, which are not completely gone or forgotten. They thought they had a right to discriminate back then too, and all were good christians I am sure.

The affected minority is the only difference in this case, but to many it makes no difference. Why shouldn't gays and any minorities have the full legal protection of the court to address the legal chicaneries thats has been practiced against them? Geez there are state that still ban interracial marriages, as well as different races attending the same schools.

Redlining in housing still goes on too Tom, and I remind you of the SCOTUS ruling yesterday for housing discrimination. Naw guy, religious freedom by a few is the new excuse to make yourself superior, and someone else inferior.

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

Refusing services to gay customers, is the same mindset as in those pre-segregation days, which are not completely gone or forgotten. They thought they had a right to discriminate back then too, and all were good christians I am sure.

The affected minority is the only difference in this case, but to many it makes no difference. Why shouldn't gays and any minorities have the full legal protection of the court to address the legal chicaneries thats has been practiced against them? Geez there are state that still ban interracial marriages, as well as different races attending the same schools.

Redlining in housing still goes on too Tom, and I remind you of the SCOTUS ruling yesterday for housing discrimination. Naw guy, religious freedom by a few is the new excuse to make yourself superior, and someone else inferior.

Actually Tal is isnt the same. And if you cant see that then your blind. There is a clear line for religious freedom and your side wants to destroy it by force. How come your side neglects to mention the other religions that are against gay marriage? There are after all 2 other ones out there that form a majorty status besides Christians.

Why does your side want to live in the past and reject the future until everyone is destroyed ? Doesnt make sense to me that anyone should give up their freedom so easily as to follow like sheeple to the slaughterhouse.

Do you really think the U.S. is no longer or can be a melting pot where everyone has rights and can get along.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdad

Doesnt make sense to me that anyone should give up their freedom so easily as to follow like sheeple to the slaughterhouse.

Who's giving up freedom?

Quote:

Do you really think the U.S. is no longer or can be a melting pot where everyone has rights and can get along.

So now the US ISN'T a melting pot?

Letting gays get married doesn't take away your freedom at all, if so how? Most people don't even care, and gays are AMERICANS too!!

Quote:

The affected minority is the only difference in this case, but to many it makes no difference

There is a huge difference between not serving homosexuals and not being compelled to participate in a ceremony that one has religious objections to. Stop trying to blur the distinction I already told you that there is a difference between not selling a cake to a homosexual because that person is a homosexual (which would meet your definition of discrimination ) and being forced to provide a "wedding " cake for that person's wedding . If you can compel the baker to do that then you can just as easily compel a minister to perform the service .
Tell me something . Do you think a Christian adoption service should be required to adopt a child to a homosexual couple despite their objection ?