Skip to comments.Hill reacts to Hobby Lobby ruling
Posted on 06/30/2014 8:53:04 AM PDT by Biggirl
The Supreme Courts ruling that employers with religious objections dont have to comply with Obamacare requirements to provide contraception coverage sparked swift reaction on Capitol Hill.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
“Democrats, meanwhile, were defiant. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said that if the Supreme Court will not protect womens access to health care, then Democrats will.”
Oh great, more hot air to add to the hummity down there.
When did not wanting to pay for someone else’s (whatever) turn into “denying [them] access”? If I don’t want to pay for your lunch, am I guilty of trying to starve you?
Only a DemonRAT could deconstruct prenatal infanticide as “health care”.
this is exactly right--and having your boss pay for your birth control does just that--brings him into your bedroom... how can liberals not see this???????????????
I love hpow Libs twist langauge. A woman can still get “health care” ummm I mean contraceptives —not a soul is denying her access to anything. She will just have to take her little ole self down to the pharmacy and pay for it herself.
>> A womans personal health decisions about choosing to use contraception and when to start a family should stay strictly between her and her doctor not her boss, said Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.)
Such abject foolishness. No one is interfering with a woman’s decision.
“If I dont want to pay for your lunch, am I guilty of trying to starve you?”
Only if you are a conservative.
Or.... a woman can work for a company that provides this type of contraception. Women have a myriad of choices. Its called freedom.
They can see it, it just doean’t suit their purpose to acknowledge it. Just like the sodomites wanted “government out of our bedrooms” until they acquired the power to force their nasty bedroom business into everyone’s, including childrens’, faces.
Good! Now sluts will have to be a little more responsible for their behavior!
Since when is "We're not paying for your indiscretions" a denial of care?
And if the person not wanting to pay for their lunch is black.... then you’re a racist conservative.
Obama did that to get a few prolife Democrats to vote for Obamacare.
IOW, when it comes to the left, I never ascribe stupidity or incompetence to what can be attributed to evil. That’s what I think of them, and I believe that I’m correct.
Ever since Obama got elected, my view of the United States has changed. Now, whenever I look at a map of the U.S., I envision it as a skinned animal without arms - with Florida representing an outstretched leg and Maine representing the other.......that vision accurately depicts Washington D.C.’s role in the U.S. carcass.
"Have you ever *seen* a conniption?"
Well, Orwell warned us.
Discrimination/Quotas = “Affirmative action” and “Diversity”
Abortion = “Choice” or a “Woman’s Right” or “healthcare”
“Global warming” = “climate change” = gimme your money
They use language to change everything. Whenever a lib says “pro-choice” to me, I say “you mean pro-abortion?” and it really makes them angry.
The left is going to say is that this is a very narrow decision that only affects a tiny fraction of closely-held businesses, and thus will only be a minor speedbump for Obamacare.
However, most people being “low information types” as they are, with luck we may be able to get them to remember one simple message - that is, “The Supreme Court voted that (some) companies don’t have to supply birth control”.
Fa fa fa freedom? The King’s men will be coming for you, American dog.
The absolute hypocrisy and duplicity of the American statist left defies logical explanation!
Putting aside for the moment that statist left and logical should NEVER APPEAR in the same rant, the just announced Hobby Lobby decision by the Supremes displayed it for all to see. All, that is, except the looney 47% who are receiving all the free chit and other goodies dispensed by the left to keep them voting for Democrat hacks who promise more and more of the free chit.
At the time the left rammed through the (Un)Affordable Care Act, there were loud protests from the few million or so sane citizens still living here that it would interpose fedzilla into the formerly sacred relationship between patient and doctor. The equally looney We have to pass it to find out what’s in it left quickly waved a collective imperious hand and uttered a royal Tsk, tsk, dismissed the objectors and returned to destroying the fabric of the country.
Comes now the favorable Hobby Lobby decision and comes now two pro-abortion radical feminazis to where else MSNBC to decry and lament over the decision. One was Rep. Nita Lowey from NYC (aka Gomorrah on the Hudson) and another woman representing one of the several Margaret Sanger eugenics inspired pro-abortion groups still murdering babies in the former safety of their mothers’ wombs.
Their first and only opposition argument? Though I suspect you have figured this out, better brace yourself: It would interfere with the sanctity of the relationship between a woman and her doctor.
And before you hit the reply button with What about the hypocrisy of the pro-life right in celebrating Hobby Lobby?
You may have overlooked the third and silent party in the discussion: The unborn baby!
The pro-aborts maintain that a fetus is NOT a human being either until birth or the third trimester. (I’ll believe that when a human female delivers a chicken or a cow.) And a number of courts here and in other nations regularly rule in support of that erroneous notion.
And while we’re discussing hypocrisy, can you explain this to me? How is it that those same courts correctly rule in cases involving intentional or accidental serious injury to or death of a pregnant woman that if her unborn baby is injured or dies, her baby constitutes a SECOND victim of the trauma or crime and the jury/judge nearly always factors that into the civil judgment or criminal sentence?
That concept comes down to us from the over 2,000 year old law found in the Bible.
And here’s one final piece of law from that Good Book: A double-minded man (or woman) is UNSTABLE in ALL his (or her) ways.
What does that say about 21st century America?
6 30 2014
The fascists will be screaming for days. The party that will kill millions of unborn children are going nuts.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
We already pay for 3 squares, cell phones, and anything else wanted, not needed.
Hey, that’s great. Democrats are the party of death and republicans of life.
I’m really having a hard time listening to anyone saying it’s a God given right to have the goverment pay for abortions.
What is the real issue here? I mean if you want an abortion, and you have the money... then you get your abortion... why do I have to pay for it?
Grinch Harry reserves his most dirtiest works just before the eve of Christmas. Slithering, old contemptible cretin that he is.
That is exactly what I tell liberals when they say the far right is trying to take away their right to abortion and go back to “the hanger on a back street”. I tell them people that believe it is murder shouldn’t have to pay for it, they are free to do it and pay for it themselves.
They do not realize that the payment is an issue.
I’m sure everyone has encountered a young person, pregnant working at a minimum wage who does not want to have children finding themselves pregnant and wanting an abortion ASAP.
When it first happened to me, I naively thought that someone unemployed or working and barely getting by would have no problem finding some gov’t or private agency to “pay” for their abortion.
I was surprised, at least here in Georgia, to learn that such was not the case. You want an abortion, we’ll direct you to where you can have it, but it will cost you $800.
In the first instance the person scraped up the money, (not from the father), in the second she had the child and later adopted it out.
Consider if the gov’t paid for all abortions, no questions asked, same as they would pay for normal deliveries abortions would sky rocket.
If the gov’t is going to pay for abortions, why not cosmetic surgery also, or any other “elective” precedure. I find it odd almost surreal to consider pregnancy as a disease.
Yes, it comes down to who is paying for it. The left thinks that the SCOUS ruling is a ruling against abortions.It’s not. It’s on who must pay for them.
And they are?
*Harry Reid said that if the Supreme Court will not protect womens access to health care, then Democrats will.*
Why is Reai ALWAYS against freedom and what is right?
I wonder if he has the same demons that Legion had...
... maybe even a few more.
From Mark 5:
“5 They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes.[a] 2 When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an impure spirit came from the tombs to meet him. 3 This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain. 4 For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. 5 Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones.
6 When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. 7 He shouted at the top of his voice, What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? In Gods name dont torture me! 8 For Jesus had said to him, Come out of this man, you impure spirit!
9 Then Jesus asked him, What is your name?
My name is Legion, he replied, for we are many. 10 And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.
11 A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. 12 The demons begged Jesus, Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them. 13 He gave them permission, and the impure spirits came out and went into the pigs. “
Indeed they have a 40 year long list to prove it.
Being truly pro-life means that you understand that all life is in the design of God and no one has the "difficult choice........"
That choice is purely up to God.
It would be real nice if some constitutional conservatives in the HOR articulated that this ruling deprives NO ONE of birth control covered by insurance. It doesn't even stop women who choose to terminate the life of their pre-born child from doing so; it's just that it won't be covered by insurance.
Anyone who says this ruling is about birth control should be corrected before they go any further.
I know in some States insurance also has to pay for sex-change operations also.
They claimed to be pro-life because they wanted to be reelected.
Now those same voters, will believe pro-life folks want women to "suffer" the pangs of childbirth simply because they now no longer have to pay for their abortion-producing drugs!