ObamaCare Violates Far More Than Just Catholic Rights

Investor's Business Daily ^ | 02/10/2012 | IBD Staff

[IBD editorial writer]

The president's phony contraception compromise might be enough to convince Catholics their rights aren't being trampled. But what about the rest of us, who face more rights violations in the name of ObamaCare?... Until ObamaCare is pulled out root and branch, however, there will be no end to the rights-wrecking mischief out of Washington.

[Jerrybob]

Until ObamaCare is pulled out root and branch, however, there will be no end to the rights-wrecking mischief out of Washington.

Until Obama is pulled out root and branch, there will be no end to the stupidity and anti-Americanism out of Washington.

[the invisib1e hand]

Idiotic premise. OMG, idiotic premise of the millennium award. "Catholics rights" are your rights, you dolt.

If you insist upon it being "us and them", then you can think of Catholics as the canaries in your coal mine. If you can grasp it, that is.

***whoever came up with the notion of "divide and conquer" must be feeling pretty full himself these days.

[The Sons of Liberty]

ObamaCare Violates Far More Than Just Catholic Rights

Basically it is a dictator, Hussein 0bama, imposing his will of a free people - It Will Not Stand!

[ETL]

Nazi Party

The National Socialist German Workers' Party (German: Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, abbreviated NSDAP), commonly known in English as the Nazi Party (from the German Nazi, abbreviated from the pronunciation of Nationalsozialist[5]), was a political party in Germany between 1919 and 1945. It was known as the German Workers' Party (DAP) prior to a change of name in 1920.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party
________________________________________________________

National Health Care: Medicine in Germany 1918-1945 [Nazi health care]
Does the Modern Bureaucratization of Medicine Risk a Return to the Horrors of National Socialist Medicine?

by Marc S. Micozzi M.D.

Today we are concerned about issues such as doctor-assisted suicide, abortion, the use of fetal tissue, genetic screening, birth control and sterilization, health-care rationing and the ethics of medical research on animals and humans. These subjects are major challenges in both ethics and economics at the end of the twentieth century. But at the beginning of the twentieth century the desire to create a more scientific medical practice and research had already raised the issues of euthanasia, eugenics, and medical experimentation on human subjects. In addition, the increasing involvement of the German government in medical care and funding medical research established the government-medical complex that the National Socialists later used to execute their extermination policies. ..."

http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/national-health-care-medicine-in-germany-1918-1945/

[Notwithstanding]

1. Obamacare violates several constitutional provisions, including religious freedom.

2. The bishops themselves have highlighted the violation of conscience that even people of no faith would experience if forced to pay for “reproductive rights” of other citizens. Interestingly, in doing so the bishops highlight the OTHER non-1st Amendment grounds for objecting to Obamacare: it mandates specific commerce and expenditures. This begs the question of whether the bishops now see that this big government power grab is a nightmare that violates all manner of Catholic teachings.

[Rudder]

...Obama has dictated that insurance plans must cover HIV screening, breast-feeding support, mammograms, colonoscopies and so on, without charging patients a dime for the service.

Since insurers can't print money, the only way they'll be able to afford this new "free" benefit will be to raise premiums on their customers...

In short, all Taxpayers, including Catholics, are ordered by Obama to pay for a plethora of medical procedures, including contraception and, in a roundabout way, abortions.

[GeronL]

This is a violation of everyone’s rights, all of the articles and speeches focusing on just Catholics is a very dumb strategy. Why divide your side like that?

[do the dhue]

off of factcheck.org:

Q: Was Barack Obama really a constitutional law professor?

A: His formal title was "senior lecturer," but the University of Chicago Law School says he "served as a professor" and was "regarded as" a professor.

FULL QUESTION

When I was in law school, I addressed all of my course instructors as "professors," regardless of their rank or formal position in the school academic hierarchy (tenured professor, assistant professor, adjunct professor, lecturer, etc.). Was Obama exaggerating or factually wrong in referring to himself as a "constitutional law professor" at the University of Chicago Law School even though his official title was lecturer?

FULL ANSWER

Sen. Obama, who has taught courses in constitutional law at the University of Chicago, has regularly referred to himself as "a constitutional law professor," most famously at a March 30, 2007, fundraiser when he said, "I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution." A spokesman for the Republican National Committee immediately took exception to Obama’s remarks, pointing out that Obama’s title at the University of Chicago was "senior lecturer" and not "professor."

I wonder what kind of nonsense the Jackwagon spewed to young minds while he was a Constitutional law professor?

[GeronL]

This wasn’t just an attack on one church. It was idiot strategy to phrase it that way.

[Mr. K]

But it was such a GREAT compromise!
No longer do you have to ask your employer to come with you to the drug store and hand over his credit card to buy your contraceptives. (And just who is he to tell you what brand you can buy, huh? huh?)

No..

Now it is the Health Insurance he buys for you that has to Cover it, and from now on it will be free because Obama said so and it is your health anyway.

[do the dhue]

[wayoverontheright]

In imposing the contraceptive/abortion mandate on the Catholic Church, Obama may have created the conditions for a major backfire.

The constitutionality of the Obamacare insurance mandate will be before the Supreme Court soon.

One of the arguments that will be put before the Supreme Court by the plaintiffs will be that the health insurance mandate is a slippery slope. Here we have real world proof that this argument is valid.

Also, insurance still cannot be sold across state lines, so the states have been up to now the ultimate arbiters of what coverages would be required. The Commerce Clause, then, cannot be used to argue the constitutionality of this particular mandate.

By overreaching, Obama has made both his arguments for upholding the mandate decidedly weaker, IMHO.

[jyro]

I bet the next EO won’t be that muslims have to allow gays in their religion.

[TheOldLady]

Click the Pelts

Support Our Viking Kitties
Donate to Free Republic

Sign up to donate monthly
Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly donor