It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Republican likens contraceptive mandate to Pearl Harbor, 9/11

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   

A House Republican lawmaker likened the implementation of a new mandate that insurers offer coverage for contraceptive services to Pearl Harbor and the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks against the United States.

Pennsylvania Rep. Mike Kelly (R), an ardent opponent of abortion rights, said that today's date would live in infamy alongside those two other historic occasions. Wednesday marked the day on which a controversial new requirement by the Department of Health and Human Services, which requires health insurance companies to cover contraceptive services for women, goes into effect.

"I know in your mind you can think of times when America was attacked. One is December 7th, that's Pearl Harbor day. The other is September 11th, and that's the day of the terrorist attack," Kelly said at a press conference on Capitol Hill. "I want you to remember August the 1st, 2012, the attack on our religious freedom. That is a day that will live in infamy, along with those other dates."


link

I don't agree with this congressmen s assertions that this equals Pearl Harbor or 9/11. The rhetoric is a bit much IMO. This is just one of many reasons women are not supporting the gop. I think its absurd that he compares this to physical attacks against America.

This is pure political madness for sure!
edit on 1-8-2012 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 

Oh, it isn't morally or spiritually as some might take it.

Business wise though? Oh yikes.... Their waiver pen better be a blur in writing or this is a potential issue to split the nation in a true and serious way. The Catholic Church isn't suing the man because they don't like his accent or he pissed off the Pope. Diocese from that Church Pelosi claims to be in are suing over this mandate....and that doesn't even touch stories like the company which threads have covered here recently.

They're self insured. How does that work? For them..apparently, it doesn't. The first trucking company I worked for has over 1,000 drivers now. Still here in town. I know the owners are very spiritual. When I worked there, they were self insured as well. This is far more meaningful than the MSM fluff would indicate and far more deeply hurting to individual business than the moral aspects ever would be taken alone. It's just right and wrong to people...and Obama is forcing them to choose. This is wrong on too many levels to quantify in America. I don't give a hoot how it might be right in other places. This is America.


.Or it used to be.



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Its idiotic to compare this issue with Pearl Harbor and 9/11. How many American deaths is this going to cause?



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Well, that all depends on who's answering that question.



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 

How far does the unrest and polarization of the public go?

I don't know where this ends but talk right here on ATS at times, coupled with shows like Prep'ers showing the extreme radical edge does suggest....splitting the nation as hard as this does isn't the direction anything done right now needs to go. Regardless of the good someone might see in it.

I'll let ya know my opinion, for all it's worth, in a few months when we know the fall out from this and how many waivers have actually been issued. This White House can pour on waivers like ticker tape at a victory parade. Look at Health Care in other areas. Everyone they like seems to have gotten one somewhere. A lot depends on that. However, the Catholic Church alone represents far more of the population than I believe he ever appreciated or...still does. Or he really believes most Catholics are as 'In Name Only' as his buddy, Pelosi.



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:42 PM
link   
How is offering to cover contraceptive services an "attack on religious freedom"?

How come every time someone invokes the concept of "religious freedom", it involves stripping rights away from other individuals?

What happened to the idea of live and let live. Wasn't Jesus all about that or something?



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by drwizardphd
How is offering to cover contraceptive services an "attack on religious freedom"?

How come every time someone invokes the concept of "religious freedom", it involves stripping rights away from other individuals?

What happened to the idea of live and let live. Wasn't Jesus all about that or something?

When the business owners are religious and have chosen to run their business in line with their Faith as is the right of every American as outlined in the Constitution, it becomes an attack on religious freedom and a VERY direct one at that.

This story may have little meaning or be a very gray area for how much the above applies when it's a contracted insurance company, entirely secular in nature, and a business is talking about A 'la Carte denial of this service from an overall package. It's ENTIRELY different when that business and it's owners are SELF Insured. That changes everything and that is where this IS as critical as some are suggesting. Some people are seeing the end of their business right now, today, if they don't buckle to the moral directive of this President. That's WRONG.



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Agreed. This guy is a moron.

If he had taken the SANE angle of explaining to the American people that the government forcing the Catholic church run hospitals to provide contraception, something against their church doctrine, violates the First Amendment, then it probably would have received a better response.

I am not against contraception. But like I posted in the gay marriage thread, the government forcing religious institutions to change their doctrine by law is simply unconstitutional and is an abridgment of the freedom of religion.



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


It's not forcing religious institutions to change their doctrine. BUT, if those religious institutions happen to run a public for-profit hospital that receives government assistance (medicare, medicaid, etc.), as is the case with the Catholic hospitals, then they should be made to meet all requirements every public institution has to meet. Otherwise these hospitals can get off the public dole.



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by projectvxn
 


It's not forcing religious institutions to change their doctrine. BUT, if those religious institutions happen to run a public for-profit hospital that receives government assistance (medicare, medicaid, etc.), as is the case with the Catholic hospitals, then they should be made to meet all requirements every public institution has to meet. Otherwise these hospitals can get off the public dole.


This is the kicker right here.

If the Catholic hospitals were private, then they would need not worry. But since they are not, they must abide by the same rules as everyone else. It is their own fault that they must provide contraceptive services now.


Funnily enough if this bill only provided free condoms to men, no one would be up in arms. It is only when women are empowered and get the right to choose do people start screaming bloody murder.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) has a different reason.


(CNSNews.com) – Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) today justified what the Catholic bishops of the United States have unanimously called an “unjust and illegal mandate” that forces Catholic business owners to provide coverage for free sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs because, Harkin said, some women need birth control pills to deal with menstrual pain.

“There are many women who take birth control pills, for example, because they have terrible menstrual cramps once a month, some of them almost incapacitated, can’t work,” said Harkin. “I know of young women myself who, because of this, aren’t able to work and be productive, and it’s prescribed by their doctor.”


Harkin: Free Birth Control Mandated Because Women ‘Have Terrible Menstrual Cramps’



(CNSNews.com) – Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) today justified what the Catholic bishops of the United States have unanimously called an “unjust and illegal mandate” that forces Catholic business owners to provide coverage for free sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs because, Harkin said, some women need birth control pills to deal with menstrual pain.

“There are many women who take birth control pills, for example, because they have terrible menstrual cramps once a month, some of them almost incapacitated, can’t work,” said Harkin. “I know of young women myself who, because of this, aren’t able to work and be productive, and it’s prescribed by their doctor.”

In an interview with CNSNews.com, Harkin at no time contested that the regulation required Catholics to act against their faith. Instead, he likened forcing a Catholic to purchase health insurance that covers sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs to forcing Quakers to pay taxes to cover a war.

“It’s like a Quaker who pays income taxes,” said Harkin. “They have to pay income taxes. Quakers, as you know, have unalterably been opposed to war and military spending. Yes, some of their taxes have to go to that.”

The “preventive services” regulation, issued by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as part of the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”), goes into effect on Aug. 1. It mandates that nearly all health insurance plans must offer sterilizations, contraceptives, and abortion-inducing drugs free of charge.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by xuenchen
 


That's not a fib. Birth control is used for medical purposes beyond contraception such as acne control, certain fibroids women develop and menstrual cramping among other things.
www.youngwomenshealth.org...



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Given the "raving success of planned parenthood" and the mandate that children who are under 26 be covered on mommy and daddies insurance until age 26 why are corporations being mandated to provide more corporate products?

The use to call that fascism, the merger of government and corporate but hey pat yourselves on the bat for supporting birth control(eugenics).



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 



Originally posted by drwizardphd
How come every time someone invokes the concept of "religious freedom", it involves stripping rights away from other individuals?


Because many religious folks think it's their RIGHT to strip away others' rights. They use the umbrella of "religious freedom" to discriminate against gay people, deny women their right to abortion, as well as to deny contraception coverage to employees.

Contraception is preventative medical care. It prevents abortion. You'd think religious folks would be all for that... Talk about hypocrisy!



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


this man is an idiot and should have been an abortion.

the usa is becomming the joke of the universe not just the planet.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by drwizardphd
How is offering to cover contraceptive services an "attack on religious freedom"?

How come every time someone invokes the concept of "religious freedom", it involves stripping rights away from other individuals?

What happened to the idea of live and let live. Wasn't Jesus all about that or something?


Bravo!! well said.

There is nothing like a bunch of old men (priests, preachers) gathering together to determine whether women can use birth control or not, no wonder the republicans are losing the women vote.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by SG-17
 


Every Catholic hospital operates under the letter of Canon Law. This has always been the case. Just because they accept medicare and medicaid does not mean that they should be forced to turn away those patients or change their doctrine because the government is asking them to do so. Medicare and medicaid is not a valid excuse to violate the first amendment.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by projectvxn
. Just because they accept medicare and medicaid does not mean that they should be forced to turn away those patients or change their doctrine because the government is asking them to do so.


Yes it does, that is exactly what it means.

If they take Federal funding then they must follow the same regulations as every other hospital that takes Federal funding. If the Catholic hospitals don't want to provide contraception then they need to stop taking medicare and medicaid.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SG-17
 



So in order for you to receive government funded patients, the government is allowed to violate the constitution?

Interesting.


That's a can of worms. So if the government is giving you any assistance at all they can just enter your home whenever they want, they can arrest you for no reason, they can search you for no reason, and they can tell you what you can and cannot say for any reason they choose. Also, if you're receiving government assistance, then you don't have the right to worship as you please. The government will now tell you what to believe.


You see how this precedence is dangerous?
edit on 2-8-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-8-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by SG-17
 


You have to understand that this health care law creates a government run exchange where approved insurance programs are doled out. Most people are going to have to choose from these programs. It doesn't have to be medicare and medicaid. The whole point of this law is to bottleneck insurance plans and limit the options on the market in order to drive the insurance companies out of business. So people WON'T have a choice, and neither will the Catholic hospitals.

Even if they did opt out of medicare and medicaid they would still have to comply with federal regulations on providing contraception. So either way the government is going to force the Catholic run hospitals to either violate Canon Law, or go out of business.
edit on 2-8-2012 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join