reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
i understand the 1st just fine, you however, need a few lessons.
you said ... "i think the constitution DOES require the opt-out"
i asked you to show me don't tell me.
still waiting for any "opt-out requirement" or any phrasing similar.
Congress is not establishing any religion or prohibiting the free exercise of said religions.
please, show us otherwise.
don't see anything about legislating an obstacle to an "individual mandate" either.
matter of fact, it is the whole "individual mandate" concept that the USSC struck down as unconstitutional.
yes, the amendment protects the free exercise of religion, but i don't follow how you think it applies to health care or health insurance.
most, if not all, religious folk partake in one or the other.
if you are suggesting that those groups who claim
an exemption will not use the public/private hospitals, will not use any form of insurance,
will not employ the services of drs who serve the public at large, will not burden the pharmaceutical supply chain, then, perhaps maybe, they should
however, if those who claim to be exempt, also expect to benefit from the services provided to the public at large, then they should contribute
healthcare in general is not a religious practice, neither is insurance.
there is no mention anywhere
in the entirety of the Constituion about separation of church and state. it does not exist. what that concept
is, is political folly.
since it wouldn't be Congress erecting or legislating the Buddah in a town square, there would be no Constitutional conflict.
kinda like the school banners with biblical phrases.
it was not sponsored by the public school, hence there is no conflict.
[it is an expression of the students freely exercising their religion]
~~ if the school had sponsored the banners, it would be a conflict ~~
contrary to most interpretations, so long as your religious exercise does not infringe upon
my right to ignore you, there is no conflict.
you can practice and parade your religion all you want, but, you cannot take from others (non-participants) to support your religious activities.
[especially if that religious activity
(ie. healthcare) is provided by the public of non-participants]
This means that government CAN NOT pass laws which prohibit a religious group from practicing their religion in the manner they want to
(provided that practice does not go against other provisions of the Constitution, of course)
BS, BS and more BS ... ask the Druids for confirmation.
ask those who practice Naturalism, Wicca, Santaria, Voodoo and a plethora of others.
yeah, yeah, blah, blah ... you still have not indicated what or how healthcare or health insurance is a "religious practice" in any form.
you're confused ... the purpose of the RCE is to exempt Churches not members of them.
show me any religious follower who is exempt from Fed taxes specifically due to their religion.
even the Mennonites and Amish file tax returns with the IRS. linky
then the government CAN NOT force that assistance on those people
what ??? the government does not and cannot Force government assistance upon anyone.
where in the world did you get that idea ?
ummm, the government cannot force
anyone to pay into or collect from SS.
that, along with the persistent pilfering over the years is exactly how we got here.
you keep saying that but it just isn't true or they wouldn't be developing HCMs to avert the requirement.
don't get me wrong, i am not in support of Obamacare and would prefer it be de-funded and dismissed. however, as it currently stands, this field
is changing every moment.
and no, they are not complaining that Obamacare itself is against their religious principles, rather, paying for it
is against their religious
principles. that's a huge difference in "theory", don't ya think ??
ETA: since i won't be voluntarily participating and am not a member of any organized religion, what is my punishment ??
since i don't pay taxes, i don't have a "refund" for them to abscond.
they will not receive a "voluntary" payment from me or anyone in my neighborhood.
so, what's changed ??
edit on 6-10-2012 by Honor93 because: ETA