He will do anything to start a civil war. Obama's face on American Flag

[Jamie6.5]

Right now I think the Republicans are crazy, or purposefully trying to lose the election, condemning contraception. ABortion I can admit is controversial, but contraception is not, atleast it should not be. I for one like to have sex without condoms, and without my woman bearing a child. Definitely not going to get my vote if thats the issue they're running on, because I like women more than I like guns.

Right off the bat, Obama will have atleast 60% or more of women voting for him this election just because of Republicans making an issue out of reproductive health issues that only focus on the woman, and not the male in the equation of what it takes to make a baby.

I see you have bought into the media's defense of obama's health care law, and it's trampling of the Bill of Rights.

The debate, when properly framed, isn't about ANYONE "condemning contraception." It is about government dictating a health care insurance provision that requires a religious organization to pay insurance premiums for contraception and abortion, when that religious organization is fundamentally opposed to those practices.
IOW, it's a first amendment - religious freedom issue.
The only aspect of contraception Republican candidates are "condemning," is why obamacare insists Catholics for example, are required to pay for something their doctrine forbids.

Essentially, obamacare is breaching the "wall of separation between church and state" that Jefferson proposed.

Particularly in the area of $10.00/mo birth control pills. No political party is saying you can't or shouldn't buy/use them. They are saying that church organizations that run soup kitchens, hospitals etc., shouldn't be forced to pay for them.

It's been said repeatedly by myself and others that the mainstream media is protecting this president and his misguided policies.
Your explanation of your proposed vote is proof positive that what the media does, works in some cases. Furthermore, that for Americans to get to the truth of the matter, we'll all have to be a little more diligent, and listen closer to ALL sides of the argument, especially if it's not a topic we are already familiar with.

I'll bet if participating insurance companies required you to pay higher healthcare premiums because you owned guns, you'd recognize the hypocrisy when the media lied about it, and tried to promote the hysteria of "gun nuts" and their objections.

 

[U201494]

He will do anything to start a civil war. Obama's face on American Flag
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


American flag with President Obama's image sparks outrage at Florida Democrats

An American flag with President Obama's image in place of the stars flew over a Florida county's Democrat headquarters long enough to enrage local veterans who called the altered banner "a disgrace."
Lake County Democratic Party officials took down the flag, which flew just below a standard Old Glory on the flagpole outside headquarters in Tavares following complaints by local veterans. But merely taking it down wasn't enough for several local veterans, who said they fought for the flag Betsy Ross made famous, not one with a politician on it.
"It's absolutely disrespectful," Jim Bradford, a 71-year-old veteran who participated in the Bay of Pigs Invasion told FoxNews.com. "It's totally ridiculous. To put somebody's picture there, to me, it's a disgrace to do that."

Read more: <broken link removed>

Read more: <broken link removed>
Read more: <broken link removed>

The Troll strides in, drops his drawers, defecates a clump the size of his head, and leaves. Good job.

 

[U201494]

I see you have bought into the media's defense of obama's health care law, and it's trampling of the Bill of Rights.

The debate, when properly framed, isn't about ANYONE "condemning contraception." It is about government dictating a health care insurance provision that requires a religious organization to pay insurance premiums for contraception and abortion, when that religious organization is fundamentally opposed to those practices.
IOW, it's a first amendment - religious freedom issue.
The only aspect of contraception Republican candidates are "condemning," is why obamacare insists Catholics for example, are required to pay for something their doctrine forbids.

Essentially, obamacare is breaching the "wall of separation between church and state" that Jefferson proposed.

It's been said repeatedly by myself and others that the mainstream media is protecting this president and his misguided policies.

Particularly in the area of $10.00/mo birth control pills. No political party is saying you can't or shouldn't buy/use them. They are saying that church organizations that run soup kitchens, hospitals etc., shouldn't be forced to pay for them.

Your explanation of your proposed vote is proof positive that what the media does works in some cases, and that for Americans to get to the truth of the matter, we'll all have to be a little more diligent, and listen closer to ALL sides of the argument, especially if it's not a topic we are already familiar with.

I'll bet if participating insurance companies required you to pay higher healthcare premiums because you owned guns, you'd recognize the hypocrisy when the media lied about it, and tried to promote the hysteria of "gun nuts" and their objections.

The first one got in and gave the go ahead, so a turd is dispatched to do recon.

 

[Spray-n-pray]

The first one got in and gave the go ahead, so a turd is dispatched to do recon.

The Troll strides in, drops his drawers, defecates a clump the size of his head, and leaves. Good job.

Wow, you really got 'em good there!


I normally don't care to get involved in the back and forth of threads like this, but I fail to see the point in making hateful and deprecatory comments aimed at others. If you don't agree, fine, but at the very least you should indicate where you feel they have gone wrong in their post, rather than haphazardly slinging ad hominem fecal references.

Good day to you, sir.

 

[Jamie6.5]

The first one got in and gave the go ahead, so a turd is dispatched to do recon.

So puhleeze impart your wisdom on the rest of us good sir!
Explain to us all the wisdom of the media and their "rightful" defense of the obama regime's overreach!

You may be an atheist, and detest the teachings of any and all churches, and that is YOUR right.
But as an American, and a gun owner that should value the 2nd Amendment, you surely must recognize the value of the 1st Amendment, and it's promise that our government shall stay out of religious decisions that hurt no one.

You know, the one that also recognizes your right to spew the ridiculous crap I quoted above, even though it's inflammatory and does nothing to promote civil discourse on the matter.
And as such, exposes your shortcomings regarding critical thought, and your inability to defend your political position, following the corrupt media's efforts to obfuscate the REAL issue.

We're waiting,...

 

[JimmyS1985]

The law Roy Blunt of MO wrote, made it so if you worked at a 7/11 and your manager was catholic, and you had a corporate health insurance policy, the manager could mark off the insurance company from funding contraception. That seems like an overreach of Church, if people of power merely affiliated with church can tell you what they approve of and don't approve of in your health insurance plans.

It essentially gave bosses and employers huge powers over the reproductive health services of their employees even if their establishment wasn't associated with the catholic church.

 

[Jamie6.5]

The "amendment to another bill" (not a law) Mr. Blunt wrote was in response to the part of the affordable care act requiring churches to pay premiums for contraception and abortion insurance coverage. That amendment to a bill was tabled.

The contraception/abortion mandate in the healthcare bill is still under debate based on it's own (lack of) merits, and will likely end up before the SCOTUS.

But to claim that Republicans are against contraception, as you did in your post above, is the perfect example of how the issue has been misrepresented and obfuscated by the media, and as a result, isn't being presented to the public in the proper context.

The issue is purely a 1st Amendment one, that the democrats and their pals in the media continue to ignore.

 

[Spray-n-pray]

I prefer to eschew obfuscation.

 

[Bob D]

IF we are going to require employers to provide affordable healthcare to their employees, then birth control medication should be on the list of things they're required to cover. Two reasons: It saves an assload of taxpayer money in the long run, and it's prescribed for a lot of medical conditions unrelated to pregnancy. The effectiveness and validity of those usages are undisputed.

That issue aside, I don't believe Obama is the antichrist, or has any intentions of starting a civil war. I have no affinity for either main party. I believe they're both being equally used by the organizations which command the actual power in this country. I'd be a republican if it wasn't for their inability to keep their religious hokey out of their policy, and I'd be a democrat if it wasn't for the outrageous entitlements and gun control. Basically, the stupid base-voter issues on both sides sicken and disgust me. As is, they can all piss up a rope. I'm registered as "Other" and fill out my ballot every four years. I vote on important state and local issues, but haven't voted for a president since G.W. in 2000. That turned out to be a huge bubbleguming mistake, and I haven't been back since. The idealist in me refuses to vote for someone I don't think will do a good job, and the realist in me refuses to write in a candidate.

I would rather keep Obama than have Mitt or Santorum thinking God told them to invade Iran looking for WMDs. I never trust fanatics of any cause, be it Religion, Gun Control, Abortion, or any other. If a man bases all his decisions on one or two issues, he's a fool.

If Ron Paul is on the ballot in November, I'll vote for him. Otherwise I'll scowl in disgust, sign my name, and mail the sucker in blank.

(For the record: I am 100% entitled to complain, whether I vote or not. This is the United States of America. For now at least, my right to complain is constitutionally protected, as is my right to abstain.)

 

[Jamie6.5]

IF we are going to require employers to provide affordable healthcare to their employees, then birth control medication should be on the list of things they're required to cover. Two reasons: It saves an assload of taxpayer money in the long run, and it's prescribed for a lot of medical conditions unrelated to pregnancy. The effectiveness and validity of those usages are undisputed.

First off, if you are out to save "an assload of taxpayer money" then obamacare is not the policy you should choose. And just to be clear, I consider $1.7TRILLION to be "an assload of taxpayer money."
CBO | CBO Releases Updated Estimates for the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act

Estimates Through Fiscal Year 2022

This report also presents estimates through fiscal year 2022, because the baseline projection period now extends through that additional year. The ACA's provisions related to insurance coverage are now projected to have a net cost of $1,252 billion over the 2012-2022 period; that amount represents a gross cost to the federal government of $1,762 billion,

Secondly, anyone that advocates for religious freedoms to be trampled must have more than dislike for churches at issue.
You must have a general disdain for those parts of the Bill of Rights you disagree with.

Thirdly, there are other meds capable of treating the poly-cystic ovarian condition Ms fluke spoke of. But even so, a birth-control hormone prescribed for that purpose wouldn't be expressly for contraceptive purposes, and by definition would be exempt.

Meanwhile, we'll hope (and some will pray) that even though we have the 2nd Amendment, that the government run healthcare insurance doesn't require a permit to own a gun, and proof that one has "adequately secure storage" for it before issuing the permit.
Or decide to impose an outrageous tax schedule on firearms and ammunition as a premium surcharge for gun owner's health care policies.

That is precisely what you are advocating for, when you state that trampling the first amendment protections is okay.
Because the 2nd Amendment is no safer or more sacred than the first.
And when one gets abrogated, the rest can't be far behind.

(For the record: I am 100% entitled to complain, whether I vote or not. This is the United States of America. For now at least, my right to complain is constitutionally protected, as is my right to abstain.)

Yes, you are, for now.
I would never dispute that.

Just as it is my right to point out publicly, just how misguided your thoughts on these issues are.

 

[Bob D]

First off, if you are out to save "an assload of taxpayer money" then obamacare is not the policy you should choose.

I didn't even mention that. Notice the bold/italics/capitalization emphasis on "IF" in my post. Dispute mandated health care all you want, and I won't disagree with you. Assuming Obamacare as a foregone conclusion however, birth control should be covered, as should Rush Limbaugh's Oxycontin.

Secondly, anyone that advocates for religious freedoms to be trampled must have more than dislike for churches at issue.
You must have a general disdain for those parts of the Bill of Rights you disagree with.

I have no problem with religious freedoms. I'm extremely in favor of religious freedom. For that very reason, I am extremely wary of any religious group trying to enact policies that are only applicable because of their religion.

Thirdly, there are other meds capable of treating the poly-cystic ovarian condition Ms fluke spoke of.

There are a lot of other medical symptoms and conditions that are also easily treated with various forms of "Birth Control." I never even mentioned Ms. Fluke the adulterous harlot.

Just as it is my right to point out publicly, just how misguided your thoughts on these issues are.

If that's your opinion it definitely is your right to express it, and I have sworn to risk my life defending your right to do so. I'd even go so far as to vote to protect that right for both of us.

 

[JimmyS1985]

First off, if you are out to save "an assload of taxpayer money" then obamacare is not the policy you should choose. And just to be clear, I consider $1.7TRILLION to be "an assload of taxpayer money."
CBO | CBO Releases Updated Estimates for the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act

Im not disputing what you are saying, I don't expect to change your opinion at all.

My beef with people who don't want a woman to receive contraception is it does save the tax payer an "*** ton" of money.

I went to my boss, he is a die-hard for Reagan, a true Republican, I am sure most people on the forum would get along a lot better with my boss, than me, and he honestly did do his party a favor because he made me want to be a Republican and think like he does, plus he was a really nice guy.

But I could sway him on things, if I used logic on what costs the tax payer more, and one of those things is medicaid paid for births. When Mitch Daniels cut funding to PP in his state, it shut down 7 clinics that never provided abortion, but provided cancer screenings and contraception for women. The education wing of Indiana was expecting a spike in kids over the next 10 years or so because of that policy, if women were no longer receiving contraception through medicaid or funded Planned Parenthood clinics. Plus I further pointed out that if he is against abortion, denying women contraception leads to more unwanted pregnancies, which in and of itself, the root cause of abortion, will lead to more abortions, so the policy mitch daniels was pursuing was a pro-abortion stance of that.

Finally, I told him that a Medicaid funded hospital birth, with no complications, costs the tax payer $11,000 and they were expecting a large increase if women didn't get their contraception, so even my boss could see that funding Planned Parenthood and making sure women have contraception readily available would be a good thing both for the tax payer, and for someone who is pro-life.

 

[U201494]

Wow, you really got 'em good there!


I normally don't care to get involved in the back and forth of threads like this, but I fail to see the point in making hateful and deprecatory comments aimed at others. If you don't agree, fine, but at the very least you should indicate where you feel they have gone wrong in their post, rather than haphazardly slinging ad hominem fecal references.

Good day to you, sir.

You are kidding, right? You really don't see the OP as a troll?

So puhleeze impart your wisdom on the rest of us good sir!
Explain to us all the wisdom of the media and their "rightful" defense of the obama regime's overreach!

You may be an atheist, and detest the teachings of any and all churches, and that is YOUR right.
But as an American, and a gun owner that should value the 2nd Amendment, you surely must recognize the value of the 1st Amendment, and it's promise that our government shall stay out of religious decisions that hurt no one.

You know, the one that also recognizes your right to spew the ridiculous crap I quoted above, even though it's inflammatory and does nothing to promote civil discourse on the matter.
And as such, exposes your shortcomings regarding critical thought, and your inability to defend your political position, following the corrupt media's efforts to obfuscate the REAL issue.

We're waiting,...

What the heck are you talking about?
I called a troll a troll and you come up that?

 

[Jamie6.5]

I'll bet either of you guys a beer, that if you call the County health dept. office and ask if they have birth control available, they will tell you it's free if you can't otherwise afford it.
It's not about cost, or saving tax money. It's a violation of the principle of religious freedom.
There is NO reason to ask/make/force a Catholic, Presbyterian, Jewish (etc.) organization to pay for contraception.
And for the gov't to do so is a violation of the 1st Amendment. And if the ACLU wasn't %#$**&@! left leaning they'd be up in obama and the DOJ's face with a subpoena by now. They may yet.

If, like Bob points out, the obamacare defense passes muster with the SCOTUS this spring/summer, the lawsuits over who pays will commence.

 

[Jamie6.5]

What the heck are you talking about?
I called a troll a troll and you come up that?

No I came up with that after you replied to my post:

"a turd dispatched to do recon"

 

[U201494]

No I came up with that after you replied to my post:
"a turd dispatched to do recon"

Sorry Hoss, that was meant for the post above yours. S happens.