It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Supreme Court on Monday avoided issuing a major ruling on a challenge brought by religiously affiliated non-profit groups to the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive mandate.
The justices, in a unanimous decision, wrote that they were not deciding the case on the merits but instead sent the case back down to the lower courts for opposing parties to work out a compromise.
"The court expresses no view on the merits of the cases," the justices wrote, adding that "given the gravity of the dispute" and the fact that the parties have clarified their positions during the course of the litigation the parties should be able to "arrive at an approach."
And contraceptives shouldn't be covered under health insurance.
why, it's a medically valid health need for women!! and, unless you can show me proof that having six or seven kids, often times less than two years apart does I not wear down a women's body and cause physical problems.. (I can do a simple search and prove that it does!!!) then yes, it's just as worthy to be covered in health insurance than any other care that is covered!!!
originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: dawnstar
what part of
"or there are whole lot of other ways to have sex without getting pregnant."
you don't understand.
And, the "Little Sister" approve of those ways?
So, what does the various sex positions in your imagination have to do with SCOTUS passing this ruling back down for "compromise'?
for those that can't keep up, my imagination doesn't have squat to do with it.