Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 5  Next >

Freedom is fighting back:

Posted: 6/30/2014 2:49 PM

Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (3 votes)


WASHINGTON, June 30 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that owners of private companies can object on religious grounds to a provision of President Barack Obama's healthcare law that requires employers to provide insurance covering birth control for women.

The decision, which applies only to a small number of family or other closely-held companies, means an estimated several thousand women whose health insurance comes via such companies may have to obtain certain forms of birth control coverage elsewhere.

In a 5-4 vote along ideological lines, the justices said the companies can seek an exemption from the so-called birth control mandate of the law known as Obamacare. The companies in the case said they did not object to all birth control but certain methods they said were tantamount to abortion, which they oppose for religious reasons.

In their last decision of the nine-month term, the justices ruled for the first time that for-profit companies can make claims under a 1993 federal law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that was enacted to protect religious liberty.

In the majority opinion, conservative Justice Samuel Alito said it was difficult to distinguish between closely held corporations and the people who own them. The religious liberty law was not intended to discriminate "against men and women who wish to run their businesses as for-profit corporations in the manner required by their religious beliefs," he wrote.

In reaching its conclusion, the court touched on questions of corporate rights four years after the justices, in a case called Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, endorsed broad free-speech rights for companies in the campaign finance context.

One of the two cases was brought by arts-and-crafts retailer Hobby Lobby Stores Ltd, which is owned and operated by David and Barbara Green and their children, who are evangelical Christians. The other case was brought by Norman and Elizabeth Hahn, Mennonites who own Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp in Pennsylvania. None of the companies that have objected are publicly traded. Hobby Lobby has around 13,000 full-time employees while Conestoga Wood has 950.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the court's decision

"jeopardizes the health of women who are employed by these companies." [ID:nL2N0PB19Q]


WOMEN'S RIGHTS ASSERTED

Women's rights groups criticized the ruling, saying that it gave employers too much of a say over private decisions.

"Bosses should stick to what they know best - the board room and the bottom line - and stay out of the bedroom and doctors' offices," said Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women's Law Center.

Hundreds of demonstrators on both sides of one of the most contentious cases of the Supreme Court term converged on the courthouse, wearing costumes, chanting and carrying signs. Some demonstrators chanted, "Keep your boardroom out of my bedroom" and "Separate church and state, women must decide their fate."

Kristina Arriaga, executive director of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented Hobby Lobby, said outside the building that the justices had "recognized that American families do not lose their fundamental rights when they own a family business."

Alito wrote that the ruling applied only to the birth control mandate and did not mean companies would necessarily succeed if they made similar claims to other insurance requirements, such as vaccinations and blood transfusions.

Alito indicated that employees could still be able to obtain birth control coverage via an expansion of an accommodation to the mandate that the Obama administration has already introduced for religious-affiliated nonprofits. The accommodation allows health insurance companies to provide the coverage without the employer being involved in the process.

Under the accommodation, eligible non-profits must provide a

"self certification", described by one lower court judge as a

"permission slip" authorizing insurance companies to provide the coverage. The accommodation, as it applies to religiously-affiliated nonprofit groups, is the subject of a separate legal challenge that is currently being litigated in lower courts.

The government’s accommodation is “less restrictive than requiring employers to fund contraceptive methods that violate their religious beliefs," Alito wrote.


CAUSTIC DISSENT

In her dissent Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the liberal wing of the court, cautioned that the decision opened the door to companies opting out of laws.

"In a decision of startling breadth, the court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law ... they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs," she wrote.

The case was the second time that the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which extended healthcare insurance coverage to millions, had been before the court. In a landmark 2012 case, the justices upheld by a 5-4 vote the constitutionality of Obamacare's core feature that requires people to get health insurance.

The case has no bearing on the broader fate of the healthcare law and does not affect the vast majority of what the government estimates to be 29.7 million women who currently receive birth control coverage as a result of the law.

The decision will affect similar cases brought by employers around the country. There are 49 cases in total, according to the Becket Fund. Religious institutions are already exempt from the requirement. There are fewer than 20,000 employees in total, including men and women, who work for companies that object to the mandate, according to the Reproductive Research Audit, a group that backs the objecting companies. The group concluded that of that 20,000, around 5,600 are likely to be women of child-bearing age.

Some of the company owners involved in litigation around the country, including Hobby Lobby and Conestoga, object to contraceptive methods such as Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd's Plan B morning-after pill, and ella, made by the Watson Pharma unit of Actavis PLC . Drug industry analysts said they expected the ruling’s impact on birth control manufacturers would be minimal. Shares in Teva and Actavis were little changed on Monday. A Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll before the ruling found a majority of Americans oppose letting employers, based on their religious views, exclude certain contraceptives from workers’ insurance coverage. [ ID:nL2N0P817B ] The poll of 10,693 people asked whether employers should be able to choose what forms of contraceptives their health plans provide based on their religious beliefs. Of those responding, 53 percent disagreed and 35 percent agreed. Of those surveyed, 12 percent said they did not know. The cases are Burwell v. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood v. Burwell, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 13-354, 13-356.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:02 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (1 vote)


While I strongly disagree with this ruling that follows to the horrendously insane ruling that "Corporations have constitutional rights", the words "closely held corporations" apparently is limited to a holding family of 5 members or less.  The concept is still completly dead wrong, God cannot and does not give "rights" to corporations, but at least its impact is substantially limited. 

What may be an inadvertant twist to this ruling is that the barrier between owners assets and corporate assets may have just been breached, so that suits against "closely held" corporations will now expose those owners to be sued personally for protected issues suxh as discrimination or harassment that occurs at the place of employment..

Let the lawyering begin!!
 photo HowdyMcConnell2.jpg
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:07 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (3 votes)



valcom2 wrote: While I strongly disagree with this ruling that follows to the horrendously insane ruling that "Corporations have constitutional rights", the words "closely held corporations" apparently is limited to a holding family of 5 members or less.  The concept is still completly dead wrong, God cannot and does not give "rights" to corporations, but at least its impact is substantially limited. 

What may be an inadvertant twist to this ruling is that the barrier between owners assets and corporate assets may have just been breached, so that suits against "closely held" corporations will now expose those owners to be sued personally for protected issues suxh as discrimination or harassment that occurs at the place of employment..

Let the lawyering begin!!
Go back to accounting class

Another Supreme smackdown  for the child King!

Last edited 6/30/2014 3:09 PM by TeddyBridge5

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:11 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (1 vote)


What is the difference is Sharia Law and Christian law in theory?  If one can enforce Christian law legally why should we deny another to force Sharia Law legally?

This is not me trying to be an ars with this comment.  I actually want to know, in theory, why we should allow one and not the other.  Thanks
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:13 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (4 votes)


I'll probably not do business with business owners that bring their religion to work.



THEY WILL RESPECT THE D!


Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:20 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (2 votes)


There was no distinction made as to what owners religious beliefs must be.  Leave it to the weak minded to assume this means only Christian beliefs can now be forced on employees.  This has now become a religious war.  The Waltons can now join the Hare Krishnas and force their Walmart employees to shave their heads and dance in airports with tamboreens.  Seriously.  There are less than five of them and they are the majority stakeholders.  All Americans have just been ruled as puppets to corporations.  Congratulations conservatives, you just gave away your freedom.

The analysts will be coming out of the woodwork shortly to provide all the potential consequences from this debacle.  The time has come for some judicial impeachments.  Although, once all the potential  ramifications are out, I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't a few 2nd amendment attempts to solve the issue.

And "child King"???

Who is the "child" and only you nutjobs are declaring him King.  Read the article I posted in "Say what?" thread about who is the "imperial president".  Better yet, read some of that halftwits "royal declarations".

Dumb asses.
 photo HowdyMcConnell2.jpg

Last edited 6/30/2014 3:27 PM by valcom2

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:28 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: 



JtownCard wrote: I'll probably not do business with business owners that bring their religion to work.

Exactly.  5 stars and business suicide for zealous religious owners.  Let them experience the freedom to fail.
 photo HowdyMcConnell2.jpg

Last edited 6/30/2014 3:29 PM by valcom2

Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:41 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (3 votes)



valcom2 wrote: There was no distinction made as to what owners religious beliefs must be.  Leave it to the weak minded to assume this means only Christian beliefs can now be forced on employees.  This has now become a religious war.  The Waltons can now join the Hare Krishnas and force their Walmart employees to shave their heads and dance in airports with tamboreens.  Seriously.  There are less than five of them and they are the majority stakeholders.  All Americans have just been ruled as puppets to corporations.  Congratulations conservatives, you just gave away your freedom.

The analysts will be coming out of the woodwork shortly to provide all the potential consequences from this debacle.  The time has come for some judicial impeachments.  Although, once all the potential  ramifications are out, I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't a few 2nd amendment attempts to solve the issue.

And "child King"???

Who is the "child" and only you nutjobs are declaring him King.  Read the article I posted in "Say what?" thread about who is the "imperial president".  Better yet, read some of that halftwits "royal declarations".

Dumb asses.
Forcing their beliefs - just because they don't want to pay for your abortion is a far cry from forcing their beliefs on you --- or is that what they told you to say when you got your copy of talking points from MSNBC rolleyes
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:42 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (5 votes)



JtownCard wrote: I'll probably not do business with business owners that bring their religion to work.
Ever eat Chick Fil A?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:46 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (1 vote)



TeddyBridge5 wrote:
JtownCard wrote: I'll probably not do business with business owners that bring their religion to work.
Ever eat Chick Fil A?
No.  Not since the stupid comments.

PS:  I have no issue with them being closed on Sundays and I applaud them for this since it does take off their bottom line.  The difference is one choice is how they go to market (closed on Sundays) and the other is sidestepping the law because they claim religion. 

Sharia Law is about to be implemented and I cant wait tongue
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:48 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: 



TeddyBridge5 wrote:
valcom2 wrote: There was no distinction made as to what owners religious beliefs must be.  Leave it to the weak minded to assume this means only Christian beliefs can now be forced on employees.  This has now become a religious war.  The Waltons can now join the Hare Krishnas and force their Walmart employees to shave their heads and dance in airports with tamboreens.  Seriously.  There are less than five of them and they are the majority stakeholders.  All Americans have just been ruled as puppets to corporations.  Congratulations conservatives, you just gave away your freedom.

The analysts will be coming out of the woodwork shortly to provide all the potential consequences from this debacle.  The time has come for some judicial impeachments.  Although, once all the potential  ramifications are out, I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't a few 2nd amendment attempts to solve the issue.

And "child King"???

Who is the "child" and only you nutjobs are declaring him King.  Read the article I posted in "Say what?" thread about who is the "imperial president".  Better yet, read some of that halftwits "royal declarations".

Dumb asses.
Forcing their beliefs - just because they don't want to pay for your abortion is a far cry from forcing their beliefs on you --- or is that what they told you to say when you got your copy of talking points from MSNBC rolleyes
Birth control, dilbert.  It has nothing to do with abortion.  The healthcare bill does NOT cover abortifacients.  Yet another ******** story from Fox that the braindead idiots swallow whole.  I hope you get to be forced to pray to Mecca 7 times a day in your job.  You deserve it.
 photo HowdyMcConnell2.jpg
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:49 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (2 votes)


I'm shocked you types aren't screaming about "activist judges".
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:50 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (3 votes)



valcom2 wrote:
TeddyBridge5 wrote:
valcom2 wrote: There was no distinction made as to what owners religious beliefs must be.  Leave it to the weak minded to assume this means only Christian beliefs can now be forced on employees.  This has now become a religious war.  The Waltons can now join the Hare Krishnas and force their Walmart employees to shave their heads and dance in airports with tamboreens.  Seriously.  There are less than five of them and they are the majority stakeholders.  All Americans have just been ruled as puppets to corporations.  Congratulations conservatives, you just gave away your freedom.

The analysts will be coming out of the woodwork shortly to provide all the potential consequences from this debacle.  The time has come for some judicial impeachments.  Although, once all the potential  ramifications are out, I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't a few 2nd amendment attempts to solve the issue.

And "child King"???

Who is the "child" and only you nutjobs are declaring him King.  Read the article I posted in "Say what?" thread about who is the "imperial president".  Better yet, read some of that halftwits "royal declarations".

Dumb asses.
Forcing their beliefs - just because they don't want to pay for your abortion is a far cry from forcing their beliefs on you --- or is that what they told you to say when you got your copy of talking points from MSNBC rolleyes
Birth control, dilbert.  It has nothing to do with abortion.  The healthcare bill does NOT cover abortifacients.  Yet another ******** story from Fox that the braindead idiots swallow whole.  I hope you get to be forced to pray to Mecca 7 times a day in your job.  You deserve it.
Some of the drugs - it's my understanding, kills the baby after conception.

Even so , Where in the Constitution does it say you have a right to birth control.

Last edited 6/30/2014 3:52 PM by TeddyBridge5

Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 3:59 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (4 votes)


Love the fetus, hate the child, eh?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 4:05 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: 



TeddyBridge5 wrote:
valcom2 wrote:
TeddyBridge5 wrote:
valcom2 wrote: There was no distinction made as to what owners religious beliefs must be.  Leave it to the weak minded to assume this means only Christian beliefs can now be forced on employees.  This has now become a religious war.  The Waltons can now join the Hare Krishnas and force their Walmart employees to shave their heads and dance in airports with tamboreens.  Seriously.  There are less than five of them and they are the majority stakeholders.  All Americans have just been ruled as puppets to corporations.  Congratulations conservatives, you just gave away your freedom.

The analysts will be coming out of the woodwork shortly to provide all the potential consequences from this debacle.  The time has come for some judicial impeachments.  Although, once all the potential  ramifications are out, I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't a few 2nd amendment attempts to solve the issue.

And "child King"???

Who is the "child" and only you nutjobs are declaring him King.  Read the article I posted in "Say what?" thread about who is the "imperial president".  Better yet, read some of that halftwits "royal declarations".

Dumb asses.
Forcing their beliefs - just because they don't want to pay for your abortion is a far cry from forcing their beliefs on you --- or is that what they told you to say when you got your copy of talking points from MSNBC rolleyes
Birth control, dilbert.  It has nothing to do with abortion.  The healthcare bill does NOT cover abortifacients.  Yet another ******** story from Fox that the braindead idiots swallow whole.  I hope you get to be forced to pray to Mecca 7 times a day in your job.  You deserve it.
Some of the drugs - it's my understanding, kills the baby after conception.

Even so , Where in the Constitution does it say you have a right to birth control.
Your understanding is incorrect. 

Where in the Constitution does it say you have a right to reproduce?  Where in the Bible does it say you can't practice birth control?  If it isn't in the bible, how is there a violation of "religious beliefs"???  There is no religious statement covering it. It is just more made up stuff like priests can't marry (not in the bible) or man has the authority to vote for Saints?  Not in the bible.  Not a legitimate religious belief. 

Just wait.  Everyone and their brother will be "exercising thier religious beliefs" all over your *** and you will truly regret this contrived, BS court ruling.  The Supreme Court has lost all semblence of authority.  They (the conservative members) no longer have any credibility.  They are bought and paid for.
 photo HowdyMcConnell2.jpg
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 4:14 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (2 votes)


In this case Freedom is pretty stupid and petty.  I'm assuming Hobby Lobby just won the right to not pay for contraception, because they believe a woman should wait until they're married before engaging in sex, and therefore does not need contraceptive if they are married?  So essentially Hobby Lobby believes married women have no need for contraceptive.  

Stupid and petty, but they are free to be that way. noidea
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 4:30 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (2 votes)


Time to go start my own religion!!! It requires me to hire only hot women and the Good Book proclaims a need for Topless Thursday.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 4:37 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (1 vote)


"Hobby Lobby is solely owned and operated by David and Barbara Green and their adult children, whose religious beliefs are expressed in corporate documents and practices. They object to the use of a certain class of contraceptive drugs that destroy embryos after fertilization by preventing them from implanting on the uterine wall. These drugs are known as abortifacients.

Regulations under the Affordable Care Act mandate that if companies the size of Hobby Lobby provide subsidized insurance coverage to their employees, which Hobby Lobby does, they must provide free coverage (without a required copayment) for at least four forms of birth control that are abortifacients. Failure to do so results in fines against the company. Hobby Lobby filed a lawsuit under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act arguing that this provision of the ACA should not be enforced.

Under the religious freedom act, federal legislation must show a compelling government interest if an otherwise valid law encroaches upon a person's free exercise of religion. The act provides that the government "shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion" unless that burden is the least restrictive means to further a compelling governmental interest."
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 5:07 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: 



VilleFan714 wrote: In this case Freedom is pretty stupid and petty.  I'm assuming Hobby Lobby just won the right to not pay for contraception, because they believe a woman should wait until they're married before engaging in sex, and therefore does not need contraceptive if they are married?  So essentially Hobby Lobby believes married women have no need for contraceptive.  

Stupid and petty, but they are free to be that way. noidea
But they will pay for Viagra!!!
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 5:28 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (1 vote)


If Hobby Lobby finds out an employee is having sex out of wedlock or having an affair, can they now fire them?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 5:37 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (1 vote)


So civilization is advancing now that corporations don't pay the freight on Birth Control? Corporations, really??? When did they become moralists and womb monitors?

Are we trying to make women feel second class? Indeed, how much do they pay for frigging Viagra?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 5:49 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (4 votes)



VilleFan714 wrote: In this case Freedom is pretty stupid and petty.  I'm assuming Hobby Lobby just won the right to not pay for contraception, because they believe a woman should wait until they're married before engaging in sex, and therefore does not need contraceptive if they are married?  So essentially Hobby Lobby believes married women have no need for contraceptive.  

Stupid and petty, but they are free to be that way. noidea
Yeah, I'm not certain that, unless it's for health reasons (other than pure contraception), insurance should be paying for contraception anyhow.

I don't know, but this is 2014, not 1414, can't we have some discussions and decisions made without having to defer to someone's mythological beliefs? Nobody knows what the fck god wants.....nobody...... so let's stop the charade of allowing religion to have a say in civil rights matters, education, and health care.

Go ahead and obey Jesus, Zeus, Allah, or the Cracken, but don't expect to run everyone else's lives based on it. 
https://ct.yimg.com/mr/uploads/923/1583687.png
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 5:58 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (1 vote)


Here's some interesting math:

Contraception stops abortions, lol.

Please argue this.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 5:59 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (4 votes)


How is me not paying for your contraception - trying to run your life - The only running ANYBODY was doing was the Government forcing me to pay for it the first place.


Paying for your own rubbers or pills is not being taken advantage of - Jeeez.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 6:00 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (4 votes)



senore2006 wrote: Here's some interesting math:

Contraception stops abortions, lol.

Please argue this.
The question of the table is this - should I be forced to pay for your contraception?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 6:06 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (1 vote)



TeddyBridge5 wrote:
senore2006 wrote: Here's some interesting math:

Contraception stops abortions, lol.

Please argue this.
The question of the table is this - should I be forced to pay for your contraception?
Would you rather pay for someone;'s child? This wasn't that hard to answer, was it? or how about paying for the good old coat hanger abortion triage?

Apparently, you believe women are as smart as you are if only their ideals are in order.

The other part of this which is excessively disgusting is Hobby Lobby's insane hypcrisy. It's at a level of caliparism:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ri...ious-objection/


This entire issue is so fraught with grime, lol. What a mess men make.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/30/2014 6:52 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (1 vote)



VilleFan714 wrote: In this case Freedom is pretty stupid and petty.  I'm assuming Hobby Lobby just won the right to not pay for contraception, because they believe a woman should wait until they're married before engaging in sex, and therefore does not need contraceptive if they are married?  So essentially Hobby Lobby believes married women have no need for contraceptive.  

Stupid and petty, but they are free to be that way. noidea
Hobby Lobby already covers a dozen contraceptives. They argued they didn't want to pay for 4 that terminated pregnancies.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/30/2014 6:59 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (2 votes)



valcom2 wrote:

What may be an inadvertant twist to this ruling is that the barrier between owners assets and corporate assets may have just been breached, so that suits against "closely held" corporations will now expose those owners to be sued personally for protected issues suxh as discrimination or harassment that occurs at the place of employment..
Not even close
Reply | Quote
  • RedRager
  • All-American
  • Rating: 2.5/5 this site
  • 3001 posts this site

Posted: 6/30/2014 8:36 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (4 votes)


to-may-to, to-mah-to, val.  If you believe life begins at conception, then preventing a fertilized egg from implanting is abortion.  Not claiming it is or isn't, just clarifying the position.


TeddyBridge5 wrote:
valcom2 wrote:
TeddyBridge5 wrote:
valcom2 wrote: There was no distinction made as to what owners religious beliefs must be.  Leave it to the weak minded to assume this means only Christian beliefs can now be forced on employees.  This has now become a religious war.  The Waltons can now join the Hare Krishnas and force their Walmart employees to shave their heads and dance in airports with tamboreens.  Seriously.  There are less than five of them and they are the majority stakeholders.  All Americans have just been ruled as puppets to corporations.  Congratulations conservatives, you just gave away your freedom.

The analysts will be coming out of the woodwork shortly to provide all the potential consequences from this debacle.  The time has come for some judicial impeachments.  Although, once all the potential  ramifications are out, I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't a few 2nd amendment attempts to solve the issue.

And "child King"???

Who is the "child" and only you nutjobs are declaring him King.  Read the article I posted in "Say what?" thread about who is the "imperial president".  Better yet, read some of that halftwits "royal declarations".

Dumb asses.
Forcing their beliefs - just because they don't want to pay for your abortion is a far cry from forcing their beliefs on you --- or is that what they told you to say when you got your copy of talking points from MSNBC rolleyes
Birth control, dilbert.  It has nothing to do with abortion.  The healthcare bill does NOT cover abortifacients.  Yet another ******** story from Fox that the braindead idiots swallow whole.  I hope you get to be forced to pray to Mecca 7 times a day in your job.  You deserve it.
Some of the drugs - it's my understanding, kills the baby after conception.

Even so , Where in the Constitution does it say you have a right to birth control.
Reply | Quote
  • RedRager
  • All-American
  • Rating: 2.5/5 this site
  • 3001 posts this site

Posted: 6/30/2014 8:38 PM

Re: Freedom is fighting back: Post Rating (5 votes)


Lookee at who got a new bumper sticker!  rolleyes
Ville1130 wrote: Love the fetus, hate the child, eh?
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 5  Next >