My home town was carved out of swampland.
Can we officially call the Romney Jeep Ad a disaster when Fox News bashes it?
Brutal compilation from this weekend.
Last edited by Duckus; November-5th-2012 at 10:21 AM.
Good questions. Would like to see the tap-dancing responses, especially from Cantor.
A primary objection comes from Catholics, given the mandate that religiously affiliated employers are forced to pay for contraception, even if it's against that employer's religion to do so. Some feel that this mandate is no different from forcing a Quaker to go to war, a Mormon to drink wine, or an Amish to drive a car.
I don't have the time or the inclination to get into a debate about this HHS mandate, but to make a long story short-- the religious liberty concern--not just among Catholics--goes something like, 'hey, if they can force Catholics to pay for contraception, then they can force me to ____________," and doing ____________ is against my religion."
I do not like the idea of giving religions a way to avoid following our laws. Legislature passes laws. These laws must be followed. If laws are unconstitutional, they should be challenged in court.
We should not be telling religions that it is OK not to follow a law they do not like. Holding religions above the law is an act of endorsement. It is unconstitutional.
Last edited by alexey; November-5th-2012 at 11:00 AM.
---------- Post added November-5th-2012 at 05:17 PM ----------
By all means, be concerned for civil liberties. All I ask is that the solution does not risk lives.
I always find it interesting to see a hardcore disciple of Ayn Rand talk about Judeo-Christian values.
"The Internet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea: massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind-boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it" - I wish I had said this.
"Captain, it's a viewpoint--not one of ours! We're under attack!"
"I see it, ensign! Engage amygdala! Transfer all power from frontal lobes!
Suspend critical thinking field! Go to course heading of reflexive response 101 at full bias!
Now!'Enter' at will!"
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so."
The HHS mandate struck me as a case of the Administration stirring up a hornet's nest unnecessarily. They could have gone forward with 99.99% of the Obamacare plan without throwing this wrinkle into the mix. To me it was a case of 'solving' a problem that didn't exist. Granting a wide, inclusive religious exemption to the mandate would have made Catholics happy, while the vast majority of non-Catholics wouldn't have even noticed or cared that the exemption was granted.
The Bishops tried to meet with the Administration on several occasions, but the Administration would only agree to meet with the Bishops under the understanding that nothing would change. Essentially, the Administration said, "we'd be happy to sit down and have lunch with you, but it would be a waste of our time and yours because we're not going to listen to your concerns. So with that in mind, please let us know if you'd still like to meet."
I promised myself I wouldn't get deep into an HHS mandate debate here, so I'm going to leave you with the blog post below from the USCCB. Again, as a citizen you don't have to agree with this argument. I just think it was completely unnecessary for the Administration to stir up this hornet's nest, and Obama could have enjoyed wide Catholic support for Obamacare if he hadn't gone down this particular road.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)