Page 6 of 26 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 257

Thread: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

  1. #51
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,158

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    People should be able to gather in their house and read nearly any book they want. Want to study the torrah? Great. Anyway, you said no such case existed and now we have learned of at least one - and it was just one that I recall.. That the law was later changed doesn't negate the point that they were being discrimated against..
    I think the problematic part is that I wouldn't care what they do but I would be aggravated with 50 people parked in a residential area every Sunday. Just like I'm sure if I decided to have some film night and invited 30-50 people over my neighbors would get aggravated.

    In this case...only one of us would actually have their fine stick. So who would be discriminated against here?
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  2. #52
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    YOU made a statement (paraphrase) "Obamacare is trying to make the Little Sisters of the Poor pay for contraception services"
    yep.

    I posted a link
    Congratulations.

    You refused to accept a factual statement and then turn my followup into a personal attack on you.
    Factual is your opinion. And your follow is what it is...

    One more time "Another example of just why political conversations so often turn into circle spinning. I post, "Do a bit of non-biased reading to find the true story." and the response seemingly says I don't care what I read or hear that contradicts my beliefs because I KNOW THE TRUTH!"

    Why is pointing out that a statement made was untrue seen as "arrogance"?
    See the bold part there...Nothing after that is what I said, that is you putting words in my mouth, and what's funny is you complain about spinning, yet you can't address my words honestly...What a joke....

    also - Alexis de Tocqueville never wrote your sig.
    Been through this all before...I don't know why the quote bugs you socialists so much, but I find it funny that it does...
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  3. #53
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:21 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,561

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    the constitution already protect religious beliefs and practices. the problem is that judges are not upholding the constitution in fact they are ignoring it.

  4. #54
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,774

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    yep.



    Congratulations.



    Factual is your opinion. And your follow is what it is...

    Factual is not an opinion, it is a statement of reality.

    I provided a link that showed your statement to be incorrect. You show us a link that your statement is correct. If you can't, I must think that your claim "the Little Sisters of the Poor are being forced to pay for contraception" is not factual.
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  5. #55
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    Factual is not an opinion, it is a statement of reality.

    I provided a link that showed your statement to be incorrect. You show us a link that your statement is correct. If you can't, I must think that your claim "the Little Sisters of the Poor are being forced to pay for contraception" is not factual.
    Yeah? Well your "link" is bull ****....I give you the LATimes....

    The sisters had two options: Provide coverage for contraception to their employees, in violation of their Roman Catholic beliefs, or pay hefty tax fines for failing to comply with the law.

    The Obama administration offered church-related organizations, including the Little Sisters, an accommodation, allowing them to opt out of the mandate if they signed a self-certification form.

    The compromise would mean the sisters would not have to provide contraceptive coverage themselves, but in many cases their workers would be able to get birth control from their insurance carriers.

    Some Catholic groups accepted that compromise, but many, including the Little Sisters, did not.

    "The mandate violates our religious freedoms," said Mother Loraine Marie Clare Maguire, provincial superior of the congregation's Baltimore province.


    Obamacare lawsuit forces order of nuns into the public eye - latimes.com
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  6. #56
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,774

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Yeah? Well your "link" is bull ****....I give you the LATimes....

    The sisters had two options: Provide coverage for contraception to their employees, in violation of their Roman Catholic beliefs, or pay hefty tax fines for failing to comply with the law.

    The Obama administration offered church-related organizations, including the Little Sisters, an accommodation, allowing them to opt out of the mandate if they signed a self-certification form.

    The compromise would mean the sisters would not have to provide contraceptive coverage themselves, but in many cases their workers would be able to get birth control from their insurance carriers.

    Some Catholic groups accepted that compromise, but many, including the Little Sisters, did not.

    "The mandate violates our religious freedoms," said Mother Loraine Marie Clare Maguire, provincial superior of the congregation's Baltimore province.


    Obamacare lawsuit forces order of nuns into the public eye - latimes.com

    See that bolded phrase - The Little Sisters ARE NOT PAYING FOR CONTRACEPTION They, as are many other religious groups which claim discrimination, are attempting to impose their RELIGIOUS beliefs on others who don't hold the same religious beliefs.
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  7. #57
    Guru
    scatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    02-09-17 @ 10:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,721

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    See that bolded phrase - The Little Sisters ARE NOT PAYING FOR CONTRACEPTION They, as are many other religious groups which claim discrimination, are attempting to impose their RELIGIOUS beliefs on others who don't hold the same religious beliefs.
    They would get it through the company paid for provider, which is literally paying for it. And if the workers do not have the same beliefs they can be fired, especially by religious institutions since the unanimous decision in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

  8. #58
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,774

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    They would get it through the company paid for provider, which is literally paying for it. And if the workers do not have the same beliefs they can be fired, especially by religious institutions since the unanimous decision in Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

    WRONG! Try again. The case you cite has one provision that still allows some employees of religious organisations to sue the group. I'm sure you know the qualification but ...
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  9. #59
    Guru
    scatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    02-09-17 @ 10:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,721

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    The case you cite has one provision that still allows some employees of religious organisations to sue the group.
    Sue what group?

  10. #60
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,774

    Re: Controversial bill to expand religious protections advances

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    WRONG! Try again. The case you cite has one provision that still allows some employees of religious organisations to sue the group. I'm sure you know the qualification but ...
    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Sue what group?
    The religious organisation which is the employer of the aggrieved employee
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

Page 6 of 26 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •