Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama to announce religious "accommodation" for religious organizations
700 WLW ^ | Friday, February 10, 2012

Posted on 02/10/2012 7:45:50 AM PST by xzins

The Obama administration will attempt to accommodate religious groups that are unhappy with a new mandate that forces them to offer health insurance that covers contraceptive methods.

With the White House under fire for its new rule requiring employers including religious organizations to offer health insurance that fully covers birth control coverage, ABC News has learned that later today the White House — possibly President Obama himself — will likely announce an attempt to accommodate these religious groups.

The move, based on state models, will almost certainly not satisfy bishops and other religious leaders since it will preserve the goal of women employees having their birth control fully covered by health insurance.

Read more: http://www.700wlw.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=104707&article=9741902#ixzz1lzdiipHz


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bhofascism; catholic; contraception; contraceptionmandate; corruption; democrats; elections; expiresnov72012; fraud; nobama2012; obama; obamacampaign; obamacare; religion; waronreligion; youlie
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last
To: xzins

Zero stepped in it big time. He has already offended the Jews, and maybe he only loses 5% of them-—and now the Catholics and maybe he only loses %5 of them. Da yuts gonna stay home, and it all adds up to a single term for Zero.


41 posted on 02/10/2012 8:32:54 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“Obama’s fraudulent abortion mandate “accommodation”:

“...With its unconstitutional, coercive, discriminatory Obamacare abortion mandate under fire, the White House announced…nothing today. A supposed “accommodation” to the policy will result in no compromise in the impact of the HHS edict forcing religiously affiliated health care providers and employers to provide insurance coverage for contraceptives, abortifacients, and related services that violate the religious principles and freedom of the mandate’s targets.

In fact, close observers say today’s announcement will make things worse...”

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/02/10/obamas-fraudulent-abortion-mandate-accomodation/


42 posted on 02/10/2012 8:33:17 AM PST by Qbert ("The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry" - William F. Buckley, Jr.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Cardinal Wuerl explained that this compromise is unacceptable.

We’re negotiating for half of our Freedom and Liberty.


43 posted on 02/10/2012 8:34:44 AM PST by onyx (SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC, DONATE MONTHLY. If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, let me know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservaterian; wagglebee; P-Marlowe; Alamo-Girl; betty boop; wmfights; narses; Salvation; ...

You go to the heart of the manner.

Catholic Ministries is part of the Catholic church. A hospital is one way the CAtholic church practices the instruction of Jesus that Christians should be Good Samaritans.

Catholic Church is not just the cathedral, the candles, the Mass. The Catholic Church IS it’s schools, hospitals, colleges, counseling agencies, adoption agencies, etc. These MINISTRIES are not “separate employers”. They ARE The Church.

Should the Obama Administration enter the cathedral on Sunday morning and tell the priest how to conduct the service. Should they tell the Church which classes to offer a seminarian? Should they tell the Church that priests should marry?

In the same way, they should not be telling the Catholic Church what to pay for when it buys insurance for people who work in Catholic Ministries.

(And as an aside: does your car insurance pay for oil changes, new wipers, etc? No, it doesn’t. Nor should a health plan pay for EVERYTHING you could possibly use to promote your own health. It shouldn’t pay for your aspirin, your nose spray, your vitamins, or your foot soak. These are not “emergencies”. Nor is a condom or a birth control pill an enormously expensive emergency. If someone wants an oil change, let them pay for their OWN. Same with condoms.)

Now, to answer your Muslim question. If the Muslims own the hospital and they don’t use a pig valve, then that’s their choice. Don’t go there, if you want a pig valve.

If it’s a public hospital paid for on the taxpayer dime, then the patient and the doctor can agree on the type of valve they get.


44 posted on 02/10/2012 8:34:44 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: OnlyTurkeysHaveLeftWings
If you've got religious convictions against using birth control, then just don't get it if/when it's offered. Just because it's free doesn't mean you have to take them up on it.

Not everyone is a worker / employee. Some are owners.

The exemption is for religious organizations, not individuals. It's possible that a religious business owner doesn't want to follow this law, but they must because the business is not a religious organization.

I'm hoping that the religious organizations don't ignore the plight of the religious individual.

Further, I'm hoping that people use their heads and ask what kind of law requires a religious exemption? How about personal liberty and less federal mandates?

If you see a problem that needs addressed, find like minded people to help you address the problem through personal action and charity rather than using the force of government to make others institute your version of nirvana.

45 posted on 02/10/2012 8:36:23 AM PST by Tao Yin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins

You don’t “accommodate” rights, you Marxist.


46 posted on 02/10/2012 8:36:41 AM PST by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Bring it on, commie!


47 posted on 02/10/2012 8:41:48 AM PST by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservaterian; xzins
Heretofore, “healthcare” has always meant treatment of illness disease, prevention of the two etc.

obama and the liberals have changed it to include pregnancy as an anomaly. It doesn't matter whether 75% of Catholics use birth control. When push comes to shove, those Catholics will not want the government dictating to their Church.

48 posted on 02/10/2012 8:42:48 AM PST by onyx (SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC, DONATE MONTHLY. If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, let me know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

What sucks is that the religious leaders will be satisfied with this and heap praise on Obama for his sensitivity to people of faith.

The bishops and other faith’s clergy will likely not say another thing so as to avoid any possibility that their precious tax exemption will be threatened.

Sorry for my cynicism...


49 posted on 02/10/2012 8:45:14 AM PST by Never on my watch (As a matter of fact, IT IS something worth getting angry over!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: onyx

buying a condom or a pill is not an emergency. Nor is it expensive. A standard policy shouldn’t be carrying this in any case. Why not let me turn in my receipt for Icy-Hot when my muscles ache?

This is corny. Insurance is for emergencies.


50 posted on 02/10/2012 8:50:14 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Right. Cardinal Wuerl was great on PSMNBC this morning.

He well versed on the issue. He said we will not negotiate for half our Freedom.

Obama’s compromise is DOA.

51 posted on 02/10/2012 8:53:13 AM PST by onyx (SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC, DONATE MONTHLY. If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, let me know.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Never on my watch
Not all of them. Obama is just trying to mitigate the damage to himself but in the process he will ultimately divide religious organization which will not help himself in the long run because religious Libs will now feel Obama will just sell them out if church leaders speak up and religious Moderates are now realizing that Obama will interfere with their organization at will.
52 posted on 02/10/2012 8:54:25 AM PST by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: OnlyTurkeysHaveLeftWings

My point is Obama’s attack is not an attack on institutions, it is an attack on individual religious liberty and conviction and that no “accommodation” will be made for individuals who will be forced to implement Obama’s Satanic laws. Individuals wil have to perform abortions, individuals will be FORCED to dispense birth control or “morning after” abortion pills, in direct opposition to their religious convictions to the contrary.


53 posted on 02/10/2012 8:55:47 AM PST by Jmouse007 (Lord deliver us from evil, in Jesus name, amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Keep stepping in it, Barry. We want you out in front of the cameras on this right up until election day. The economy still needs to be Issue 1 for Republicans but attacking overreaching government mandates that take away freedom and deny conscience should be shoulder to shoulder with it.


54 posted on 02/10/2012 8:58:14 AM PST by OrangeHoof (Obama: The Dr. Kevorkian of the American economy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onyx

I am 100% convinced that Obama’s intention is to separate the Catholic Church from Catholic Ministries, as if the ministries of a Christian are not part of his/her religion.

He wants the hospitals, colleges, schools, adoption agencies, counseling centers, recreational programs, etc. ALL to be sliced off. His intent is to declare “religion” to be the act of worship and nothing further.

That enables him to narrow the 1st amendment protection to the absolute minimum of actually disrupting a worship service.


55 posted on 02/10/2012 8:58:23 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“The insurance company will reach out on its own to the women employees. This is better for both sides, the source says, since the religious organizations do not have to deal with medical care to which they object, and women employees will not have to be dependent upon an organization strongly opposed to that care in order to obtain it.”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/white-house-to-announce-accommodation-for-religious-organizations-on-contraception-rule/


“Uh, so the administration response will be tell insurers for religious organizations to take on the costs themselves without passing it along to the religious organizations that pay for the policies? I’m not sure that even Chris Matthews will buy that as a “compromise.” Religious organizations whose doctrines oppose birth control are not going to buy insurance policies that cover it — nor should the government be forcing them to do so.”
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/10/matthews-dont-bring-out-that-false-white-house-spin-on-the-mandate/


56 posted on 02/10/2012 8:59:04 AM PST by chessplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
"accommodation for religious ORGANIZATIONS" NOT INDIVIDUALS!

Imama Obamessiah will try to pull a fast one. There will be no "accommodation" for INDIVIDUALS who have religious convictions regarding his forced Satanic abortion/reproductive laws. The man is pure evil, nefarious and not to be trusted.

57 posted on 02/10/2012 9:00:53 AM PST by Jmouse007 (Lord deliver us from evil, in Jesus name, amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: chessplayer

There is no company in its right mind that’s going to take on an additional expense and not want to cover that price from someone.

That’s like my life insurance letting me add an additional million dollar death benefit for zero cost. Nice of them, but they’ll also go broke.


58 posted on 02/10/2012 9:04:28 AM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Pray Continued Victory for our Troops Still in Afghan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: LibertyRocks

I agree with you 100%.

They just don’t get it.

What irritates me to no end is liberal schlubs like Fox’s Juan Williams, who smirked on some show the other day that this was a trumped up outrage, that most Catholics use birth control.

IT’S NOT ABOUT WHO USES BIRTH CONTROL!

Whether or not a Catholic uses birth control has exactly ZERO to do with this assault on the first ammendment. THE FIRST AMMENDMENT I EMPHASIZE. Obama goes right to the heart.

However just to get a bit more detailed about this, there is a problem with contraceptives that kill fertilized eggs. Fertilized eggs are, by Catholic dogma, human beings and it should be no surprise that the Catholic church considers, and has considered since it’s beginning, that life begins at conception. It’s not like should be a surprise to anyone is what I’m saying here.

And for dolts like Williams and the MSNBC jerks to get all snarky about Catholics using birth control just shows how damn stupid these people are.

This is not to say that the church wouldn’t be against being forced to provide contraceptives even without the day after pill but I point this out that the church’s stand on this not be belittled.

It doesn’t matter whether Catholics use birth control. What matters is that the church has always had this dogma and the gubmint is attacking it. THAT’S what has the church all upset, not to mention MOST of the American people.

what the hell is this all about anyway? Some girl can get birth control pills paid for by health insurance with no co-pay? When I was young I had to pay the ENTIRE cost of my birth control pills, sheesh, this is such a political expediency issue they must think we were born at night, LAST night, to not see through this.

Just so liberals can get votes from females who must pay some bucks for their birth control is NO REASON to trample all over this country’s constitution and our rights.

Obamer might be gonna back down on this but I must thank him heart and soul cause he roused the distrust of the people. Going forward he and his minions will be watched carefully.


59 posted on 02/10/2012 9:04:28 AM PST by Fishtalk (http://patfish.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Republican1795.
This is so ironic as it violats the much touted “separation of church & state’ principle of the First Amendment. They cry about the “separation of church & state” when someone prays on government property but have no problem with government dictating to religious organizations. The Founders are once again rolling in their graves.

There is no separation of Church and State principle in the constitution. It does say that Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of a religion.

60 posted on 02/10/2012 9:05:18 AM PST by ProudGOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-99 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson