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

Skip to comments.

Boxer: Insurance rights trumps religious rights
Washington Examiner ^ | 2/15/12 | W Charlie Spiering

Posted on 02/15/2012 7:58:13 AM PST by Nachum

Senator Boxer warned yesterday that if the HHS contraception mandate was repealed it would set a dangerous precedence of religious rights trumping the right to be insured. On MSNBC's Politics Nation with Al Sharpton last night, Boxer affirmed that under the proposed amendment proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt, an employer would not be forced by the government to pay for medical practices against his religion. "I mean, are they serious? Sharpton exclaimed, "How do you make a law where an employer can decide his own religious beliefs violate your right to be insured?" "Oh Absolutely," Boxer said,

(Excerpt) Read more at campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: boxer; insurance; religious; rights; worstsenatorever
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 next last
Our village idiot
1 posted on 02/15/2012 7:58:17 AM PST by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Hey Babs!

Did those “insurance rights” originate in the Bible or the Constitution?


2 posted on 02/15/2012 8:00:05 AM PST by G Larry (We are NOT obliged to carry the snake in our pocket and then dismiss the bites as natural behavior.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
She's right.

I distinctly remember an insurance clause, right before the establishment clause.

</sarcasm>

3 posted on 02/15/2012 8:00:30 AM PST by Joe the Pimpernel (Too many lawmakers, too many laws, too many lawyers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

All you need to know about the mentality of leftists: Positive “Rights” > Negative Rights.


4 posted on 02/15/2012 8:00:49 AM PST by C19fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Not so much, Nachum ... she's adding to the confusion that will play against us.

I hate these enemies.

5 posted on 02/15/2012 8:00:58 AM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

What a conversation that must have been. Sorry I missed it...........

Two liberals expressing their outrage over this birth control issue.

What channel is MSNBC again? I seem to miss the important liberal oratory on the issues of day, time after time.....................


6 posted on 02/15/2012 8:01:10 AM PST by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Enemy within.


7 posted on 02/15/2012 8:02:25 AM PST by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This is one very deeply confused woman.


8 posted on 02/15/2012 8:03:17 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Beware the Sweater Vest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Sharpton's statement had an edge of sarcasm in it ~ just bet his bosses didn't recognize it ~ Boxer, though, in contrast, was cutting edge Fascism.

Reminds me of those "men's magazines" from years ago at the barbershop that featured Nazi Sex Slaves on the covers, and then you opened up the mag to read about some ol'gal in a rest home who used to model, but she had her memories.

Boxer doesn't even have her memories.

9 posted on 02/15/2012 8:04:41 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Boxer has lost her tiny little mind. The “right” to insurance trumps religious rights?! She needs to list the martyrs to insurance rights throughout the ages.


10 posted on 02/15/2012 8:04:53 AM PST by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

(sound of flipping pages)

Lessee, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, right to keep and bear arms, right to be secure in my personal effects, Constitution is the supreme law of the land...

Nope, nothing in my copy of the Constitution about any right to be insured.


11 posted on 02/15/2012 8:05:48 AM PST by Old Sarge (RIP FReeper Skyraider (1930-2011) - You Are Missed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

She should hang for treason for all that she has done.

LLS


12 posted on 02/15/2012 8:06:30 AM PST by LibLieSlayer (Hey repubic elite scumbags... jam mitt up your collective arses!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

A man made right over a natural or are we allowed to say as our founders said a God given right. The difference being that you can stop a man made right but you can’t stop a God given right.


13 posted on 02/15/2012 8:07:39 AM PST by fella ("As it was before Noah, so shall it be again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

“How do you make a law where an employer can decide his own religious beliefs violate your right to be insured?”

Everyone can be insured. Buy a policy. Go ahead. No on is stopping you. Not even the Catholic Church.

Why can the Rev’m Al, on the other hand, violate my religious freedom and conscience by making me pay for his b*tch’s abortion?


14 posted on 02/15/2012 8:07:46 AM PST by FerociousRabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FerociousRabbit

The trouble with Darwinism is that it doesn’t work fast enough...for some.


15 posted on 02/15/2012 8:11:55 AM PST by ILS21R (Never give up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

No where does the Constitution guarantee a right to religious freedom.

Anyone who says otherwise is a racist, sexist, homophobic member of the 1% wanting to get out of paying their fair share.

Now you little people go pay your taxes - we need raises. :)


16 posted on 02/15/2012 8:12:04 AM PST by Tzimisce (Never forget that the American Revolution began when the British tried to disarm the colonists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
It's all there in the First Insurance Amendment.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of insurance, or prohibiting the selling thereof; or abridging the freedom of insurance, or of insurance agents; or the right of the people peaceably to purchase insurance, and to petition the Government to mandate that it be supplied to them for free. In all cases in which insurance rights conflict with religious rights, insurance rights shall trump religious rights."

17 posted on 02/15/2012 8:13:14 AM PST by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

Agreed. And US law schools continue to fill the heads of ill-informed students with this ridiculous nonsense each day. To hell with the history of the constitution and what its text actually says.


18 posted on 02/15/2012 8:13:14 AM PST by crusader71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: G Larry
Did those “insurance rights” originate in the Bible or the Constitution?

It's in the Constitution -- didn't you learn about "life, liberty and the pursuit of free sex without consequences" in school?

19 posted on 02/15/2012 8:13:55 AM PST by Sooth2222 ("Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But I repeat myself." M.Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

This stupid woman need to have the First Amendment tattooed under her f’ing eyelids.


20 posted on 02/15/2012 8:14:43 AM PST by jmacusa (Political correctness is cultural Marxism. I'm not a Marxist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Warning Graphic.. This is what the democrats are shooting for their way of birth control..Throw those precious babies out into the trash,,One day Barbra you and your Comrade's will be burning in the lake of fire..
21 posted on 02/15/2012 8:15:25 AM PST by PLD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Our education system stinks. Sure I learned about the 1st amendment. But they completely skipped the one providing “the right to be insured”. I had civics classes pretty frequently from elementary school through college and not a single one covered that part of the Constitution.


22 posted on 02/15/2012 8:17:07 AM PST by LostPassword
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Is that what she’s telling the muzzies too?

Oh, wait, they’re friends of BO - pun intended.


23 posted on 02/15/2012 8:18:27 AM PST by Let's Roll (Save the world's best healthcare - REPEAL, DEFUND Obamacare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FerociousRabbit

“No Medicine!” Only the government can say that.


24 posted on 02/15/2012 8:20:30 AM PST by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

A very dangerous idiot...they are poking the American People with a stick..trying to assess the potential and threshold of violent push-back....just collecting “data” they “need” to know as they continue to assemble their virtual “Berlin Wall”....


25 posted on 02/15/2012 8:20:46 AM PST by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PLD

26 posted on 02/15/2012 8:22:46 AM PST by PLD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Senator Boxer warned yesterday that if the HHS contraception mandate was repealed it would set a dangerous precedence of religious rights trumping the right to be insured.

Ummm...when ObamaCare kicks in and the Muslims start screaming because they don't "believe" in insurance...will this lying sack of poo come down on the same side of the argument and still maintain that insurance 'rights' trumps religious rights?

She'll flip-flop like a dying mackerel on the deck of a fishing boat.

27 posted on 02/15/2012 8:26:21 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (Do all He commands. Receive all He promises.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Our village idiot

She's no idiot!

She knows in the small minds of many people the ability to discriminate between requiring employers to pay for birth control (and soon abortions) is indistinguishable from the right to birth control.

This is a calculated attempt by the administration to focus this years debate away from the economy and on Republicans wanting to take away your rights.

28 posted on 02/15/2012 8:29:49 AM PST by CharacterCounts (November 4, 2008 - the day America drank the Kool-Aid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

If Obama were to order insurance companies to include coverage for oil changes as a basic part of every car insurance policy, and the insurance companies were to object, Barbara Boxer would say that the insurance companies are preventing people from getting oil changes.


29 posted on 02/15/2012 8:31:40 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

“How do you make a law where an employer can decide his own religious beliefs violate your right to be insured?”

How do you make a law where you can decide your own desire to be insured violates an employer’s religious beliefs?

More to the point:

How do you make a law where you can decide your own religious beliefs regarding insurance take precedence over an employer’s religious beliefs regarding insurance?

Because that’s what it is, religious belief against religious belief.


30 posted on 02/15/2012 8:32:04 AM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
Scary.  These left-wing fascists are infecting every level of our federal, state and local governmnets.  Unbelievable.  This is their time.  They getting bolder and bolder with their anti-Constitution statements. 

I swear, I'm almost at the point of wishing for a right-wing military coup to prevent these communists from taking over.  They're infecting every level of the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive branchs of our government.  And who put them in power?  The masses of communist/social justice stooges in our population.  The problem is NOT just with who is getting elected to positions of power, the primary problem is with the ideology of the people who are electing them. 

Joe McCarthy, where are you?

 
Communism - McCarthy Was Right
WASHINGTON -- Although Joseph McCarthy was one of the most demonized American politicians of the last century, new information -- including half-century-old FBI recordings of Soviet embassy conversations -- are showing that McCarthy was right in nearly all his accusations.
"With Joe McCarthy it was the losers who've written the history which condemns him," said Dan Flynn, director of <http://www.academia.org Accuracy in Academia's recent national conference on McCarthy, broadcast by C-SPAN.
 
Using new information obtained from studies of old Soviet files in Moscow and now the famous Vanona Intercepts -- FBI recordings of Soviet embassy communications between 1944-48 -- the record is showing that McCarthy was essentially right. He had many weaknesses, but almost every case he charged has now been proven correct. Whether it was stealing atomic secrets or influencing U.S. foreign policy, communist victories in the 1940s were fed by an incredibly vast spy and influence network.

Link - http://www.rense.com/politics6/mc.htm

 

31 posted on 02/15/2012 8:38:51 AM PST by CaptainKrunch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
".....right to be insured....."

Where is that "right" located in the U.S. Constitution????? I get I have a "right" to an abortion, a "right" for chicken nuggets but you've got me on this one, please help.

32 posted on 02/15/2012 8:43:38 AM PST by zerosix (native sunflower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Nevertheless, Sharpton, Boxer and Obama will doubtless find useful idiots who will go along with this. It's not hard to drag a hundred-dollar bill through a church-related nonprofit and find a morally challenged church-related shill (I'm talking about YOU, Sister Carol Keehan).

From Henry VIII to Elizabeth I to the Nazi German Christian Movement to the Patriotic Church in China, the strategy of tyrants at war with the Catholic Church is to create a fake nationalized church docile to the will of the tyrant and to use it as a weapon against the real Church.

Obama is now attempting precisely that.

In partibus infidelium.

33 posted on 02/15/2012 8:47:29 AM PST by Mrs. Don-o ("God bless the child who's got his own." Arthur Herzog Jr./Billie Holiday)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CaptainKrunch

Damned straight he was right!

LLS


34 posted on 02/15/2012 8:50:57 AM PST by LibLieSlayer (Hey repubic elite scumbags... jam mitt up your collective arses!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mo

Scary but true. That is exactly what they are doing over and over again.

Start with something obscure like making recess appointments while Congress is in pro forma session. A little bluster... no real objections. Good.

Move on to something a little bigger like that pesky free excercise of religion thing. Oooooh, they are stamping their feet now. No pitchforks yet though. Good.

Next, we will....???????


35 posted on 02/15/2012 8:58:19 AM PST by FerociousRabbit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Coming from a Senator, such ignorance of the provisions of the Supreme Law of the United States--the Constitution--is unthinkable!

The First Amendment's protections trump and make invalid any efforts by this so-called "progressive" Administration and its allies like Boxer to superimpose their own man-made coercively-imposed laws over "the People's" "Creator-endowed" (therefore, unalienable) rights.

Boxer is either ignorant of the majesty and supremacy of the Constitution's protections against persons like her who achieve positions of power in government, or she relies on what she believes to be the ignorance of the electorate.

36 posted on 02/15/2012 8:59:30 AM PST by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: loveliberty2
Boxer is either ignorant of the majesty and supremacy of the Constitution's protections against persons like her who achieve positions of power in government, or she relies on what she believes to be the ignorance of the electorate.

Boxer doesn't give a damn about the Constitution. To her, like Obama, it is nothing more than a hurdle to be overcome.

As for the ignorance of the electorate - her belief is well founded. After all, the electorate has been putting these shysters in office on a regular basis for the past 80 years.

The Democrats long ago came to understand something conservatives never seem to get: One half the population have lower than average IQ's.

37 posted on 02/15/2012 9:06:56 AM PST by CharacterCounts (November 4, 2008 - the day America drank the Kool-Aid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

No confusion at all. The left knows their voting block has no clue what is in the constitution. So when they spout this idiocy they fully expect the idiots to believe the constitution contains a right to be insured. Its by design. Or they could just be idiots themselves.


38 posted on 02/15/2012 9:07:21 AM PST by Bruinator ("For socialism is not merely the labour question, it is before all things an atheistic question")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Religion is protected by the 1st Amendment. Which amendment protects "insurance rights"? Bonehead. Resign. Waiting for you to lose your next election is too long to wait.
39 posted on 02/15/2012 9:17:38 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I’m kind of proud of Boxer...2nd place in the working group at Westminster this year!


40 posted on 02/15/2012 9:20:33 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

What about inalienable rights endowed by our Creator?


41 posted on 02/15/2012 9:32:59 AM PST by crosshairs (Liberalism is to truth, what east is to west.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CaptainKrunch

Agreed!


42 posted on 02/15/2012 9:44:50 AM PST by Frank_2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Obama could not be more clear about the role he sees in society for “bitter clingers”: prohibited from acting on their outdated views, and free even to speak about them only to the extent of their independent wealth, since right-thinkers will refuse to associate with dissenters in any economic sphere (public, business, or not-for-profit).

In a sense this is refreshing. If Obama is re-elected it will be a pretty clear signal that a strong majority of Americans agree with this view either whole-heartedly, or as the main concession of a bargain which secures them the government preferences and redistribution that it their main concern. (It’d be a strong majority since you can fairly assume that people on Obama’s side are a preponderance of non-voters.) It’s good for elections to know what’s at stake.


43 posted on 02/15/2012 9:50:00 AM PST by only1percent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Yes Babs but does Obamacare extend health insurance to gargoyles?


44 posted on 02/15/2012 10:02:47 AM PST by tflabo (Truth or tyranny)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrsmel

So! Babsie would favor cancelling the exemption that Muslims get. I think she needs to be questioned about that.


45 posted on 02/15/2012 10:05:14 AM PST by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777

Indeed and we have many of them,note Obama&Co.


46 posted on 02/15/2012 10:06:47 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

Exactly. Leftists vision of rights are rights that impose obligations on others (positive rights; the right to speak freely includes the right to have someone else pay for the printing press etc.), whereas my vision of rights (or freedoms) imposes no such obligation (negative rights). Simply put leftists are for enslaving some and “freeing” others while I am for freedom for everyone.


47 posted on 02/15/2012 10:19:18 AM PST by freemarketsfreeminds
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts

As far as I know, the Muzzies having been lying low on this. It makes me wonder if they’ve already received reassurance that there’ll be an exemption for them. Just like they get a pass on issues concerning sodomy, even though it’s Muzzies, not Christians, who stone sodomites to death.


48 posted on 02/15/2012 10:22:57 AM PST by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CaptainKrunch

Yes, they are indeed getting bolder and more blatant. I expect to see persecution of Christians become more overt in the very near future.


49 posted on 02/15/2012 10:26:15 AM PST by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: FerociousRabbit

Amd if Hussein gets a second term without the prospect of reelection slowing his roll, all bets are off.


50 posted on 02/15/2012 10:28:34 AM PST by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-55 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