New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Is Birth Control Mandate a Womens' Rights Issue or a Religious Liberty Issue?

Is Birth Control Mandate a Women's Rights Issue or a Religious Liberty Issue?

  • Women's Rights Issue

    Votes: 23 44.2%
  • Religious Liberty Issue

    Votes: 8 15.4%
  • Both

    Votes: 11 21.2%
  • Neither

    Votes: 10 19.2%

  • Total voters
    52

Bruce

Council Member
Oh, but it is. You see it does not matter if an employer does not believe in providing health care insurance, does not believe in coverage of certain parts of policy coverage or can not afford to cover its employees, it all come down in the end that the employee and not the company is responsible for their medical health needs and should plan for it, anything else is just folly.
That's too funny Ridge. In other word's, unlike a car tire or refrigerator when the slave is damaged or worn out just throw them away and get another free one. You don't mind paying 300,000.oo for a new sportscar or 5 million for your yahct and repairs but if your worker that made you those riches breaks an arm while working for you just send them home with their pinkslip and deny responsibility. Now that's funny. And folks wonder why there's rioting in the street's.
 
That's too funny Ridge. In other word's, unlike a car tire or refrigerator when the slave is damaged or worn out just throw them away and get another free one. You don't mind paying 300,000.oo for a new sportscar or 5 million for your yahct and repairs but if your worker that made you those riches breaks an arm while working for you just send them home with their pinkslip and deny responsibility. Now that's funny. And folks wonder why there's rioting in the street's.
Bruce,

There is rioting in the streets because people (especailly on the left) feel that some company owes them something. The company paid the employee for his/her work. Of the companies I know of, if an employee is hurt on the job, the company has insurance in place to take care of the injured employee. However, that is not what we are talking about here, is it? As far as your sportscar and yacht comment goes, how many people do you know that have a car of boat worth that kind of money? I don't know one.

Let's get back on topic, what Obama did was a violation of the Constitution, plain and simple. It is funny how the left alway cry seperation of church and state when it suits their case but wants to ignore that so called seperation when it suits them.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
Violation of the constitution? Where in the constitution is there protection against insurance requirements?
 
Violation of the constitution? Where in the constitution is there protection against insurance requirements?
Article 1: Section 1:
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives
Article 1: section 8:
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
http://www.constitution.org/constit_.htm


The first two are references to Congressional power. These powers were not given to the President, and nowhere in the Constitution does the President have the power to regulate the citizens of the United States. That is a function of the Congress, so therefore the President is in violation of the Constitution in his mandate to the first, Church and secondly the insurance companies.
 
The affordable care act was signed into law in 2010. It was the interpretation of that bill that was in dispute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act
The Affordable Care Act is what determined what will be done in the way of what insurance will have to cover, not Obama. Also, with the Affordable Care Act coming up in the Supreme Court this summer, it will be possibabilly be placed on hold until the court determines wherther it is Constitutional or not. So in effect, Obama has overstepped his bounds according to the Constitution and it is that disregarding, the ignoring of the Constitution which you do not address.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
amazing....contraception is mentioned in the Affordable Care Act.

Whether or not the supreme court will "possibly" find the act unconstitutional is related to the current conversation in what way? Where in the constitution does it say "do not implement the laws passed by congress if there is a legal challenge"?

In effect....you are creating a problem where one doesn't exist.....carry on.
 
amazing....contraception is mentioned in the Affordable Care Act.

Whether or not the supreme court will "possibly" find the act unconstitutional is related to the current conversation in what way? Where in the constitution does it say "do not implement the laws passed by congress if there is a legal challenge"?

In effect....you are creating a problem where one doesn't exist.....carry on.
I am not creating any problem, the USSC could place a temperary hold on the implementation of the act until a decision on the whole program is decided. That is what I was speaking to, nothing more.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
I am not creating any problem, the USSC could place a temperary hold on the implementation of the act until a decision on the whole program is decided. That is what I was speaking to, nothing more.
You claimed Obama was violating the Consitution....clearly you forgot.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
"Genocidal war"? Birth Control is equal to genocide? Take your meds and lay off the moonshine.
 
"Genocidal war"? Birth Control is equal to genocide? Take your meds and lay off the moonshine.
Look at the facts. Who are birth control and abortions aimed at? Women, women in which monitary class in this nation? The poor women. Need I say more?

Besides moonshine good, especially with the meds.
 
Top