Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholic Family Wins Against HHS Mandate
Creative Minority Report ^ | July 22, 2015 | Matthew Archbold

Posted on 07/25/2015 2:47:13 PM PDT by NYer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-28 last
To: Jim Robinson

Good news!


21 posted on 07/25/2015 3:35:16 PM PDT by MEG33 (God Bless America And Our Troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Time for folks to start using the precedent, where possible.


22 posted on 07/25/2015 4:52:57 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer

Alternatives to Obamacare
http://tamarawilhite.hubpages.com/hub/Alternatives-to-Obamacare

This list includes a Catholic health sharing ministry, acting under the insurance exemption the Amish and Mennonites use, while having rather standard coverage and copays for doctors’ visits and medical emergencies.


23 posted on 07/25/2015 5:37:06 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

The pendulum is moving!

Hallelujah!


24 posted on 07/25/2015 5:54:44 PM PDT by MeshugeMikey ("Never, Never, Never, Give Up," Winston Churchill ><>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
This is certainly a victory, but the fight does not seem to be over yet:
The Eighth Circuit's ruling held that the Wielands had "standing to sue" given their claims...
And I see on another thread that preachers can't preach against homosexuality in KY!
25 posted on 07/25/2015 7:28:56 PM PDT by Syncro (Jesus Christ, the same today, yesterday, and forever!--Holy Bible Quote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Win one for the good guys.

Some good news, for a change.

Effective on a personal level, right?

This means -- not everyone has to be a religious "organization" to escape being forced to directly fund things which are against their conscience? Or so I hope...

I hope this helps the Little Sisters of the Poor, too, although I have not followed that closely enough to know if there has been the expected appeal to the (so-called) Supreme Court.

26 posted on 07/25/2015 8:56:22 PM PDT by BlueDragon ("Another d-mn'd thick, square book! Always, scribble, scribble, scribble! Eh! Mr. Gibbon?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlueDragon
I hope this helps the Little Sisters of the Poor, too, although I have not followed that closely enough to know if there has been the expected appeal to the (so-called) Supreme Court.

Yes, they have appealed to SCOTUS:

Nuns ask Supreme Court for protection from complying with HHS mandate, fines (National Catholic Register)

27 posted on 07/26/2015 4:07:51 AM PDT by BlessedBeGod (Democrats are Cruz'n for a Bruisin' in 2016!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod
Thank you for the link.

Recently I read the 133 page pdf of the last judgment which went against them.

It's a painful read, with some relief (not enough, one dissenter, out of three judges) beginning at page 109 of the pdf supplied by Beckett Fund. http://www.becketfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/LSP-Op.pdf

The goobermint's arguments would still leave the Little Sisters having to sign what could potentially become death warrant for the yet-to-be born.

IMO, it doesn't matter that the third-party insurance provider presently has an exemption from the law, and is not required to provide the so-called 'reproductive health' coverage which the Little Sisters would be forced into requesting -- but that request called "opting out" by the government.

Did I get that right? The government's argument is terribly convoluted, so trying to cut through the blarney there, I may have not sliced & diced it correctly.

If you or I signed paperwork authorizing the taking of a human life --- it would not matter one whit that the party to whom we gave that writing had no intention of following through on the request, we could still be charged with the crime of contracting for murder.

And so in this, the "law" (laws of this nation most generally and of long standing, and those in comparison to the more recent ACA) are inconsistent.

28 posted on 07/26/2015 6:52:32 AM PDT by BlueDragon ("Another d-mn'd thick, square book! Always, scribble, scribble, scribble! Eh! Mr. Gibbon?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-28 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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