Obamacare Violates The Separation Of Church & State?

Yes... 28 states already have it...and 11 of those have NO carved-out exception for "Religious Organizations", i.e., churches and NOT "church-sponsored organizations"... Amazing how the selective "outrage-of-the-day" only kicks in if it can be used as a bash-Obama-talking-point. It's a good thing they have the cable shows and talking-heads to tell them what to be outraged about...and when....

LadyJazzer wrote: Yes... 28 states already have it...and 11 of those have NO carved-out exception for "Religious Organizations", i.e., churches and NOT "church-sponsored organizations"... Amazing how the selective "outrage-of-the-day" only kicks in if it can be used as a bash-Obama-talking-point. It's a good thing they have the cable shows and talking-heads to tell them what to be outraged about...and when....

Sounds like Obama is backing down. Will state goverments do the same thing now that Catholic leadership is angry?

Catholic leadership supported Obamacare, but looks like the Dems misplayed it.

LadyJazzer wrote: Yes... 28 states already have it...and 11 of those have NO carved-out exception for "Religious Organizations", i.e., churches and NOT "church-sponsored organizations"... Amazing how the selective "outrage-of-the-day" only kicks in if it can be used as a bash-Obama-talking-point. It's a good thing they have the cable shows and talking-heads to tell them what to be outraged about...and when....

Gee... I wonder if Chris Matthews "outrage" was fostered upon him by the right-wing cable shows and talking-heads. If you viewed that video you will see that YOU are parroting the WHite House talking points. Watch the video that I posted up thread and then take the advice of Chris Matthews and see what you come up with.

Something the Dog Said wrote: Interesting that the conservatives have no issue with the majority of individual states, including Colorado, already have the same or stricter requirements for birth control to be provided even by religious institutions, but when the present administration applies across the board, it is an "outrage".

More lies from the Obama administration, serially repeated over and over and over again by syncophants in the hopes that the lie will somehow be fundamentally transformed into something you can believe in.

While true that there are state laws that require insurance companies to cover FDA approved contraceptive prescriptions the same as they do other FDA approved prescriptions; none, repeat none, of them specifically require them to be covered with no out-of-pocket expenses for the insured as this unconstitutional decree from the Obama administration does. Despite being serially repeated in the "progressive" echo chamber that 28 states already have this requirement, it is still a bald faced lie.

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Interesting that the conservatives have no issue with the majority of individual states, including Colorado, already have the same or stricter requirements for birth control to be provided even by religious institutions, but when the present administration applies across the board, it is an "outrage".

More lies from the Obama administration, serially repeated over and over and over again by syncophants in the hopes that the lie will somehow be fundamentally transformed into something you can believe in.

While true that there are state laws that require insurance companies to cover FDA approved contraceptive prescriptions the same as they do other FDA approved prescriptions; none, repeat none, of them specifically require them to be covered with no out-of-pocket expenses for the insured as this unconstitutional decree from the Obama administration does. Despite being serially repeated in the "progressive" echo chamber that 28 states already have this requirement, it is still a bald faced lie.

And that is the SAME requirements that Chris Matthews was talking about in the video I posted up thread. He was interviewing someone who was spouting the same Obama administrations talking points and Matthews stopped him dead. I'm glad you went into the detail. Maybe the information you posted will stop us from hearing the same talking points over and over.

(Fill in the blank) The Obama administration said ______________________________ so it must be true.

archer wrote: How times have changed
When JFK was running for president people worried that the Catholic church would have too much influence on US policy
Now it appears some are asking for the Catholic church to do just that...shape US policy.

I think you have that exactly bassackwards archer - the US is now attempting to shape Catholic policy, something it is specifically prohibited from doing by the Constitution.

PrintSmith wrote:

archer wrote: How times have changed
When JFK was running for president people worried that the Catholic church would have too much influence on US policy
Now it appears some are asking for the Catholic church to do just that...shape US policy.

I think you have that exactly bassackwards archer - the US is now attempting to shape Catholic policy, something it is specifically prohibited from doing by the Constitution.

As per usual PS.....you see what you want to see, not what is actually there.

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: Interesting that the conservatives have no issue with the majority of individual states, including Colorado, already have the same or stricter requirements for birth control to be provided even by religious institutions, but when the present administration applies across the board, it is an "outrage".

More lies from the Obama administration, serially repeated over and over and over again by syncophants in the hopes that the lie will somehow be fundamentally transformed into something you can believe in.

While true that there are state laws that require insurance companies to cover FDA approved contraceptive prescriptions the same as they do other FDA approved prescriptions; none, repeat none, of them specifically require them to be covered with no out-of-pocket expenses for the insured as this unconstitutional decree from the Obama administration does. Despite being serially repeated in the "progressive" echo chamber that 28 states already have this requirement, it is still a bald faced lie.

So your outrage is only directed at the fact that the poorest females should be able to get birth control at no cost rather than the business arm of religious institutions that provide insurance are required to ensure that those women have access to birth control?

Meanwhile....unlike the usual way Republicans do business (or govern) Obama is looking for a compromise with the Catholic Church because he is actually listening to their concerns. There are several options he is looking at. Of course I expect to see the conservatives here bash him for compromising......

Compromise is not in his vocabulary. He backed down due to election year pressure.