At Least 51 People Dead After Monstrous Oklahoma Tornado, 120+ Injured

Watch Live Local Coverage of Tornado Aftermath

Faith

MO Judge Strikes Down Religious Birth Control Exemption: ‘A Radical Departure From America’s Tradition of Religious Freedom’

Mar. 19, 2013 9:48am Billy Hallowell

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (TheBlaze/AP) — President Barack Obama’s health care law continues to spark debate about conscience and contraception. In the latest development, a federal judge has struck down a Missouri law exempting moral objectors from mandatory birth control coverage because it conflicts with an insurance requirement under the health care law.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge Audrey Fleissig cites a provision in the U.S. Constitution declaring that federal laws take precedence over contradictory state laws. But Fleissig emphasized that she was taking no position on the merits of the Obama administration policy, which requires insurers to cover contraception at no additional cost to women.

Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster did not say on Monday whether he would appeal the ruling, which was dated Thursday but not publicized.

Missouri Judge Rules Against Law Protecting Against Mandatory Birth Control Coverage

Photo Credit: AP

The anti-abortion group Campaign Life Missouri distributed an email Monday denouncing the ruling as “a radical departure from America’s tradition of religious freedom” and imploring people to contact Koster’s office in support of an appeal. Some backers of Missouri’s law said the court ruling could result in churches and other religious organizations having to accept insurance policies that include contraception coverage.

The Missouri law requires insurers to issue policies without contraception coverage if individuals or employers assert that the use of birth control violates their “moral, ethical or religious beliefs.” The state’s Republican-led Legislature overrode the veto of Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon last September to enact the law, which appeared to be the first in the nation to directly rebut the Obama administration’s contraception policy.

Fleissig had issued a temporary restraining order against Missouri’s law last December. The law had been challenged by insurance providers, who feared they could be caught in legal quagmire by the differing federal and state requirements.

In her ruling, Fleissig wrote that the state law “is in conflict with, and pre-empted by, existing federal law” and “could force health insurers to risk fines and penalties by choosing between compliance with state or federal law.”

The judge noted that the federal law includes penalties of $100 per day per employee and an annual tax surcharge of $2,000 per employee for violations of its provisions. The state insurance department already issued orders seeking civil penalties against two insurers for not offering plans excluding contraception coverage as required by the Missouri law.

The ruling “clears up what law they have to write the policies under, and that’s all we were asking,” said Brent Butler, the government affairs director for the Missouri Insurance Coalition, an industry trade group that was one of the plaintiffs.

FILE – In this Feb. 7, 2013 file photo, President Barack Obama speaks at the House Democratic Issues Conference in Lansdowne, Va. For all of his liberal positions on the environment, taxes and health care, Obama is a hawk when it comes to the war on terror. Credit: AP

Although she struck it down, Fleissig did not issue a permanent injunction against Missouri’s law because she said the state insurance department had agreed not to enforce it and to withdraw its administrative complaints against the health insurers.

Among those supporting the Missouri law was Our Lady’s Inn, a St. Louis area nonprofit that provides homes and counseling for pregnant women. The organization had filed a court document saying it wanted to use the Missouri law to opt out of contraception coverage for its employees’ insurance policies.

“The point of the law was to tell health insurance companies that they’re supposed to honor the wishes – pro or con – of people who have religious or ethical objections to what’s in the policy,” said Timothy Belz, a St. Louis attorney who represented Our Lady’s Inn.

Under the Obama administration policy, churches are exempt from the contraception coverage requirement, but it would extend to insurers who provide policies to religiously affiliated nonprofits such as hospitals, colleges or charities.

Before last year’s legislation, Missouri had been operating under a 2001 law that required birth control prescriptions to be covered under policies that include pharmaceutical benefits at the same co-payment as other medications. That law also had allowed insurers to offer policies without contraception coverage to people or employers who say it violated their moral or religious beliefs. Fleissig’s ruling left in place in the wording requiring contraception to be included in pharmaceutical coverage but struck down the section containing the opt-out provisions.

“Now you’ve got a situation where the Missouri law requires more in the way of contraceptive coverage than Obamacare does,” Belz said.

Peter Brownlie, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Kansas and Mid-Missouri, praised the ruling for ensuring “that all Missouri women -no matter who their boss is – have access to basic preventive health care without a co-pay, including birth control.”

–

Other Must-Read Stories:

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (119)

Nevermind
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:35pm
welldoneson
tell us all about these districts where Romney had 100% turnout and Obama had 0. sounds like leftist parroting to me. You lot accuse your opponents of doing exactly what you yourselves are doing… that’s how we know you cheat.

*****

Ask and you shall receive princess. Millard County Flowell district, Garrison precinct , sanpete county mount pleasant district just to name a few. Anything else you want pumpkin?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- JRook
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 4:12pm
  At the risk of stating the obvious it is the employees who hold the religious rights that would be violated, not the organization. While organizations hold a status in law, they are not an individual as it relates to constitutional and civil rights. So the organization should not be permitted to impose religious views on the members of the organization, particularly employees who are protected by labor laws.
- pissantno.10
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 4:19pm
  jrook if they don’t like the people they work for then they should go work some place else
  
  Report this comment
- termyt
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 6:04pm
  So when you own a corporation, you cede your rights? That’s devastating. I’m not sure many entrepreneurs would blaze those trails if they knew they no longer had their rights intact.
  
  In fact, it is employees that agree to limitations on their rights as a condition of employment. For example, they give up free association rights (you don’t get to choose your co-workers) and a significant amount of personal Liberty (you can’t go where you want and do what you want) to just show up to work for the day.
  
  Compelling anyone to provide anything to anyone is not a right granted to government by the Constitution, nor should we give it
  
  Report this comment
welldoneson
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:15pm
What the heck have Americans done to their country? This Obama is dismantling what you’ve spent the better part of 300 years to build… and he had no part in building it… and his mother had no part in building it… and his mother’s parents started down the road to dismantle what they, in their turn, had no part in building… he’s a cheating, lying, extremist, with a heart of darkness and a past just as murky

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- michael48
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:38pm
  typical jiveAzz LUSH…at best…52 year walking disaster…..community disorganizer , dismantling the country….
  
  Report this comment
cassandra
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:53am
they need to call it what it REALLY is , this is NOT about birth control pills it’s about women using ABORTION as Contraception

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- LEFT_NY_4_GOOD
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:33pm
  Amen. The only Death Penalty approved by liberals is known as Roe Vs Wade. Their battle cry is a women’s right to choose is correct but incomplete . It should end with the added words ” right to chose murder “. A fetus is a life no matter what some left wing liberal believes
  
  Report this comment
- searcher619
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:58pm
  That’s really none of your business and this is not about abortion. You are making the wrong argument here. What IS your business is them asking everyone else to pay for something they should be paying for out of their own pockets. Having sex is a personal choice and as such should be your own personal responsibility.
  
  Report this comment
- by faith
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 6:23pm
  Protestant views on birth control are markedly more pluralistic than the views expressed by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
  
  However, ALL Christian religions condemned birth control as a violation of God’s procreative purpose for marriage…until 1930.
  
  In 1930, at the Seventh Lambeth Conference, the Anglican Communion, issued the first statement permitting birth control “when there is a clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood and where there is a morally sound reason for avoiding complete abstinence.”
  
  It took a little over 40 years to get to abortion on demand.
  
  Acceptance of birth control steadily increased. By 2005 acceptance had increased such that a Harris Interactive poll conducted online among 2,242 U.S. adults – Birth control/contraception is supported by 93 percent of all adults.
  
  The law of unintended consequences or maybe you would call it the Overton window.
  
  Report this comment
Nevermind
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:26am
GhostOfJefferson
I’ll take whatever attitude I wish. Second, I posted a fact. They said my district, the one I live in, had abysmal turnout. You couldn’t GET into a voting booth at any location without an hour wait, the entire friggin’ day. That has NEVER happened before.

But no, we’ll pretend that Chicago politics doesn’t apply here. Ok, whatever.

****

Spoken like a true sore loser, rather sad to be honest. There were districts where Romeny had over 100% turnout as well and Obama had 0% but you dont see the left up in arms do you? If you have a case of voter fraud by all means report it, if not you are just ******* and moaning while wearing a tin foil hat. I thought much better of you but it appears i was wrong

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- welldoneson
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:17pm
  tell us all about these districts where Romney had 100% turnout and Obama had 0. sounds like leftist parroting to me. You lot accuse your opponents of doing exactly what you yourselves are doing… that’s how we know you cheat.
  
  Report this comment
iamsaved
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:25am
“..have access to basic preventive health care without a co-pay, including birth control.”

Birth control is not “preventive health care”. It has nothing to do with the health of an average female. It has everything to do with avoiding the consequences of engaging in sexual intercourse. In those cases where birth control pills actually treats a health problem, maybe there’s a case for it. It should not be provided free of cost to the user nor should it be a requirement to provide them by anyone who chooses not to.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TheIggies
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:37pm
  Family planning is the most important staple of any modern civilization. We already have a population problem.
  
  You people don’t want welfare but you don’t want to pay for the people not willing to get abortions. You don’t get it both ways.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 1:57pm
  @Iamsaved
  
  “Birth control is not “preventive health care”.”
  
  While I like your name, you’re quite wrong. Unless you think there are no health issues involved with pregnancy? In which case you are both wrong, and delusional. As a Christian conservative who wishes to see less abortions, I am entirely in favor of making birth control easier to access… as long as the women in question are still paying for their insurance overall, of course (that’s the conservative part).
  
  Report this comment
- 12AngryWoMen
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 3:19pm
  @TheIggies- “Family planning is the most important staple of any modern civilization. We already have a population problem.”
  
  We DO have have a population problem- a declining one. You have heard of the demographic winter, have you not? Unless you are with the eugenicist propaganda machine, or an anarchist, why would you want human capital to decline?
  
  As for welfare- no here is against caring for their neighbors. However, I know that most people are opposed to the legal plunder/ entitlement plantation which is our government welfare system.
  
  Report this comment
- 12AngryWoMen
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 3:33pm
  @Locked- “I am entirely in favor of making birth control easier to access…”
  
  Poof! Wish granted. Birth control is cheap and easy for every CONSUMER that cares to purchase it.
  
  The actual argument here is whether the government has the right to either A) Take $200 from me to allow you to buy a $15 product for only $10, or B) If they can force me to pay the insurance company to do the same for an employee.
  
  What if I claimed that breast implants were a preventative health need since they will improve my self esteem and emotional health? Should my boss have to buy an insurance plan that covers that?
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 5:01pm
  @12 Angry Women
  
  A) Doesn’t happen, at least not directly, so it’s a non-starter for an argument
  B) If it’s basic healthcare (and a lot less costly long-term than paying for pregnancy), I think that’s fine.
  
  That also refutes your breast enlargement argument, by the way; there are plenty of other ways to improve your self-esteem that are less expensive and have better results. Therapy, for example.
  
  Report this comment
- 12AngryWoMen
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 6:01pm
  @Locked
  A) I think the fact that it DOES happen, directly or not, IS the ENTIRE starter for the argument. Government has NO business in the health industry.
  
  B) Be careful, your trollish motives are showing:
  “If it’s basic healthcare (and a lot less costly long-term than paying for pregnancy, I think that’s fine.”
  
  Oops- you do realize that pregnancy is not a disease, right? If you were making the argument that insurance companies should offer to pay for vegetables in order prevent cancer, then I could see your logic. Under your assumptions here, I can conclude that death panels funded by legal plunder are also fine with you since Someone Else determines what is “basic health care.” I think contraceptives should go in the “optional personal items” department along with **** dyes and tooth whiteners.
  
  You: “your breast enlargement argument, by the way; there are plenty of other ways to improve your self-esteem that are less expensive and have better results. Therapy, for example.”
  Yes, thank you for demonstrating my point exactly. Perhaps you would like to advise the government on how it should go about forcing employers to offer plans that cover abstinence?
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 8:43pm
  @12
  
  Sorry, I didn’t realize you were a troll and took you seriously. My mistake.
  
  “Oops- you do realize that pregnancy is not a disease, right?”
  
  Oops: No, but it comes with MANY health issues. This is like saying “Oh, I didn’t realize being female was a disease, but hey! Why cover breast cancer?” Women may, and often do (during a certain age range) get pregnant. If you ignore that you’re an idiot.
  
  “I think contraceptives should go in the “optional personal items” department along with **** dyes and tooth whiteners.”
  
  Because when a woman is raped, she should have dyed her ****, or let her teeth be yellow? Or when she has medical issues such as crippling periods? Right… as said, troll.
  
  “Perhaps you would like to advise the government on how it should go about forcing employers to offer plans that cover abstinence?”
  
  Already cover it in advocating for comprehensive (including abstinence) sex education in school. Welcome to reality.
  
  Come now. Eventually you need to admit that your primary motive is to punish women for sex. Because if you wanted to lower abortions due to lowering unwanted pregnancies, you’d be all on board with offering contraceptives as basic preventative healthcare.
  
  I have an issue with Obamacare forcing employers to offer health insurance in the first place- but I have no issue with that insurance being, y’know, actually useful.
  
  Report this comment
Micmac
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:22am
All of this because of John Roberts.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- happ77
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 3:52pm
  Right on the money.
  Chief Puss of the Supremes.
  
  Report this comment
p2pnic
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:18am
A secular member of the “chosen” people wants to take away my religious freedom….

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
p2pnic
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:15am
Add your comments

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
GoodCook
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:11am
Liberals scream seperation of church and state until they want something that goes against religious teachings then they simply forget about their seperation arguement. Total hippocracy! If you admit to being a liberal you admit to being an idiot……

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
SGinNC
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:06am
Do you really have religious freedom, when you can’t practice your religion outside of church doors?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Lloyd Drako
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:01am
When all is said and done, contraception is still the best, most morally defensible and cost-effective way to reduce the number of abortions. We do want to reduce the number of abortions, don’t we?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:07am
  So your take is, it’s better to violate religious liberty via plan A than via plan B.
  
  You know, Christianity doesn’t approve of either. It’s not a false either-or choice as you’re setting it up to be.
  
  Report this comment
- Calm Voice of Reason
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:20am
  I would also like to see the costs of health care go down and contraception is a big part of making this happen. I’m slightly bothered by the fact that many health care plans offer holistic and alternative “medicine” with no co-pay, but I am also aware that sugar pills reduce ER visits so I accept it as a benefit.
  
  Report this comment
- Sargeking
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:33am
  LLOYD: So can you explain to me why I should pay for someone’s contraception? Oops! I already know the answer. You Libs love to spend “someone’s” money and not your own. Some say that Liberals spend money like drunken sailors but I must take umbrage with that. Sailors spend their own money. The bottom line with Libs is always the same. They only want to be judged on the intent of their programs and never on the results. How’s that 55 year “War on Poverty” working out? LOL!
  
  Report this comment
- Lloyd Drako
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:37am
  I don’t know about your Christianity. Mine has no problem with contraception.
  
  Report this comment
- EvlDrZork
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:44am
  Actually, abstention is, but you really can’t expect a reasonable human to have any control over their own body’s physiology, now, can you? Contraception (including abortion) is merely the easiest way to control the speard of “undesirable races”, or at least it was when eugenecist Margaret Sanger founded Planed Parenthood, today’s 2nd largest provider of contraceptives (currently behind the Federal gov’t)…
  
  Report this comment
- Lloyd Drako
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:04pm
  SargeKing:
  You should pay for someone else’s contraception for the same reason that pacifists help support the purchase of aircraft carriers and drones, for the same reason that vegans help pay for dairy subsidies and meat inspection, for the same reason that racists help pay for civil rights enforcement, for the same reason that polygamous Mormons pay to support the government that prosecutes them. Jerry Seinfeld said it best: “We’re trying to have a civilization here.” If you wish not to take part, you are welcome to leave.
  
  EvilDrZork:
  Agreed about abstention! Contraception per se is neutral with regard to race. It is simply a matter of individuals choosing to have or not to have offspring. If it is to be covered by insurance provided at the place of employment, the employer should help bear the cost, and not hide behind the “freedom of religion” dodge.
  
  Report this comment
- LEFT_NY_4_GOOD
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:39pm
  Lloyd ……. You are entitled to your own opinion not your own imaginary facts.
  Christianity does not allow any form of birth controle.
  
  Report this comment
- LEFT_NY_4_GOOD
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:51pm
  Lloyd . One final opine. Why the hell do you liberal voters believe you can mandate anything for free.
  Nothing is free , someone with a job has to pay for it, and while I am being taxed to support the life style of a sloth, I think I earn the right to complain about it. Keep a close eye on Cyprus
  
  Report this comment
- searcher619
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 1:14pm
  No we want to keep people accountable for their own personal choices. Whether or not someone has an abortion is none of our business. Expecting someone to pay for their own contraception if they wish to engage in sex is not unreasonable. If you can’t afford contraception then you really have no business engaging in sex.
  
  Report this comment
Mandors
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:58am
In her ruling, Fleissig wrote that the state law “is in conflict with, and pre-empted by, existing federal law” and “could force health insurers to risk fines and penalties by choosing between compliance with state or federal law.”

Um, the judge gets an F. Should have transferred to divinity school like Al Gore. There is a another preexisting federal law called the Bill of Rights. In it there’s this little provision called the First Amendment which trumps OMORONcare. Leave it to Barry the Boy King to appoint another idiot to the federal judiciary.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- JacquesChirac
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:20am
  States rights vs. Federal rights…methinks we are starting to see how the final battle lines are being drawn…
  
  How dare ANY state think they can actually set its own laws…
  
  Report this comment
Nevermind
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:55am
GhostOfJefferson
I’m calling bullcrap on “we voted for this a second time”. No we didn’t. I had an hour+ wait to vote, the first time ever since I’ve lived here during a Presidential election (usually it’s a 5 minute wait tops), and they tell me that voter turnout was lower than normal in my district. There are 110% All Obama districts. The military ballots were discounted and discarded.

He didn’t win this. I’m sorry, it’s just too close to exactly like what happens in Chicago and other mob towns. We don’t deserve this, because we didn’t vote for this.
*****

While ” you ” didnt vote for this many others did and that is the way voting works. Many on the left were saying the same thing when Bush was president and they were being sent off to war in Iraq for no good reason . In the end it seems you have a ” sore loser ” mentality and it isnt very fitting.

As far as voter fraud it seems the only real cases have been on the GOP side and they are being prosecuted, if you have any proof of voting fraud you shoudl report it. If not again you should stop with the ” sore loser ” attitude.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:08am
  I’ll take whatever attitude I wish. Second, I posted a fact. They said my district, the one I live in, had abysmal turnout. You couldn’t GET into a voting booth at any location without an hour wait, the entire friggin’ day. That has NEVER happened before.
  
  But no, we’ll pretend that Chicago politics doesn’t apply here. Ok, whatever.
  
  Report this comment
Carlinpa
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:55am
Are there ANY “states rights” anymore? Is so, what? The Constitution is pretty clear. What is left to states to decide for themselves, naming streets, raising taxes? What?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Sargeking
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:40am
The lifetime appointment of radical federal judges is one of the biggest threats facing our Representative Republic. The simple answer to this latest outrage from the Left is TERM LIMITS! I would also extend “term limits” to Congress. That being said, please be advised that only into the first week of the re-elected Obama Regime, the Dems were pushing for a “lifetime presidency” for the current guy who regrets that he isn’t an “Emperor because he could get so much more done”!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Lloyd Drako
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:00am
  Really? Which Dems were pushing for Obama to be president for life?
  
  Report this comment
- Sargeking
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:22am
  LLOYD: The DNC promoted the lifetime, unlimited term for president and they didn’t even try to walk it back. Don’t put anything past these people. Now the nation is facing his “no holds barred” attacks on our most basic and fundamental human rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Please don’t ell me that you didn’t know that. Thanks.
  
  Report this comment
- Lloyd Drako
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:39am
  The DNC? When, and in what statement, declaration or pronouncement? I’d like a citation, a source, anything to show me that you are not completely delusional.
  
  Report this comment
- kathy@49
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:43pm
  Drako, Rep Jose Serrano of New York is purposing a bill to do away with term limits for the Presidency. Don’t know about any lifetime intentions but just proposing the bill is scary enough. No President should serve more then eight years and that should be the maximum number of years any Congressman or Congresswoman can serve. If any admendment should be passed that is surely the one.
  
  Report this comment
RaydocX
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:31am
Birth Control is NOT a ‘right’… it is not an ‘entitlement.’
If YOU cannot afford the measure, whatever it is… if your PARTNER cannot afford the measure, whatever it is, quite simply, you should be working or looking for work, rather than having sex.

Get a job that will let you afford the economy $12.95 box of condoms first…

Frankly, a government that wants to offer ‘free’ birth control to women instead of encouraging them to be independent and financially secure is who is ‘waging war’ on women… another class to subjugate, offer hand outs to, and for the majority keep down and dependent.

Our populace wants the easy answer, the free hand out, the reassuring lie rather than the unpleasant truth. We’ll reap the harvest of such short sighted thinking eventually… or our children will.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- encinom
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:59am
  Birth Control is an issue for the patient and employee, not for over religious, zealot employers. Its a matter of the right of privacy and the right for a patient to decide what medical procedure they should receive.
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:10am
  Enicom, you idiot, if you want it to only be between the patient and doctor, that’s fine. What you don’t get to do is force a person whose beliefs it violates to finance this transaction.
  
  God, you have to be a facetious plant here, nobody can be as consistently stupid as you are day in and day out.
  
  Report this comment
- Clownzilla
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:14am
  @Encinom
  
  It’s between the doctor & employee when you want it to be. It’s between the employee and patient when it comes to paying for the employee’s healthcare. The hypocrisy is mind numbing.
  
  Report this comment
- Clownzilla
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:18am
  Correction to my last post. Employer & patient (not employee and patient).
  
  Report this comment
- encinom
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:31am
  Finance? Really Ghost, most American workers pay a large share of their own health insurance. Its my insurance, I paid for it, my employer should not be able to say anything about what medical choices I make. My employer pays my salary for my work, I do not ask him to make moral decisions for me.
- termyt
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 6:10pm
  If your employer doesn’t pay into it, why are we talking about employer funded insurance, E? So terribly, terribly dense. Really, does everyone in your world just shift to your ever changing definitions of words and ideas?
  
  Report this comment
TheGrtDcptn
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:30am
If an individual is so pathetic that they can’t take responsibilty for their own birth control, perhaps they shouldn’t be having SEX…!!

And you surely do NOT deserve the GIFT of a child…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- IndyGuy
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:56am
  Obama and the rest of the commies consider a child to be a punishment…
  
  Report this comment
- searcher619
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 1:25pm
  If they can’t afford to pay for their own contraception then they really shouldn’t be having sex. That’s common sense. Paying for their contraception would only increase the number of unwanted pregnancies.
  
  Report this comment
bharris0
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:26am
The solution for this is for states to stop sending any money to Washington. Starve the evil beast and it will surely die.
Federal law only overrides state law when it deals with enumerated powers. Health care is NOT a power given to the federal government by the states.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- 1FreeVoice
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:40am
  Think how people would react if there was a news report of someone’s uncle taking a limited power of attorney and treating it as an unlimited power of attorney… He used it to take out loans and leave his niece and nephew obligated to pay the principle and interest over however many years it took to pay it off, then donated the money to his favorite charities. He no longer has the money to pay them back with. He claims that a judge said it was legal for him to do this, and he plans to do it again every month. How would you feel if you discovered that the one responsible is none other than… your Uncle Sam? The constitution is not an unlimited power of attorney.
  
  Report this comment
Cavallo
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:15am
If you don’t think they will start forcing Catholic hospitals to start performing abortions with this line of thinking, you’re an ignorant naive moron. Then again, Catholics voted for this. This is what Catholics want. The State over their God. Remember to thank a vet for the freedom they fought for that you pi$$ed away.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Marine25
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:25am
  No freedoms have been pi$$ed away. Don’t want to use contraception, fine. Don’t want to follow the rules every other American business follows because your faith disagrees, not fine. If I said my faith taught me that children are best raised working 16 hour days in a factory, should I be exempt from child-labor law? If my faith teaches that women are subservient to the will of men and therefore female employees that vote will be fired, should I be allowed to do that as well?
  
  Report this comment
- NHwinter
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:28am
  I find it insulting to be lumped in with the Catholics who voted for Obama. They are not true Catholics if they voted for anyone who endorses and promotes abortion! I am one Catholic who DID NOT vote for Obama!!!!! There are plenty of Protestants, Jews, and muslims who voted for the fraud also. Shame on all of them. They have cooperated in the destruction of our freedoms and of our country.
  
  Report this comment
- TheGrtDcptn
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:35am
  What a pathetic argument Marine25…Are you people so lazy that you can’t afford to PAY 20.00 $’s or LESS for monthly birth control…?!?! It’s called PERSONAL responsibility, a FOREIGN concept to those like you…
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:37am
  Religious freedom is a right. Putting your kid in a factory for 16 hours, is not. It’s not like Christianity is some new fake religion invented to get around Nazicare, they’ve been very clear on abortion and birth control for thousands of years.
  
  Go pound sand, faux marine.
  
  Report this comment
- NHwinter
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:38am
  Marine25 – Our freedoms are being taken from us and as a Marine I would think you, of all people, would fight to retain our freedoms. Your examples leaves me cold. We have already fought for many of the things you mentioned.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:56am
  Religious freedom is a right. And so if a business is classified as a church, it should be exempt. I could also see an argument for those classified as non-profits.
  
  If you’re a for-profit, you’re a business first and foremost, not a religious institution, and are bound by the same rules as all other businesses. Even if some of those rules are BS (in my view).
  
  The entire thing strikes me as a red herring though. What difference is there between an employee taking their paycheck and buying birth control, or using their insurance and getting birth control? Functionally none. The issue is that insurance coverage should NOT be mandatory… but that battle’s already been lost, so now folks are trying to hide behind this (even weaker) issue.
  
  Report this comment
- encinom
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:02am
  A hospital is a business, regardless of whether its for profit or not, the one thing a hospital is not is a church.
  
  Keep religion behind church doors and out of politics and medicine.
- dublinthewagons
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:22am
  Encinom you are truly a full blown, certifyed, card carrying union idiot.
  Hope you never have any offsprings other than an occasional turd
  
  Report this comment
- chelieintx
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:24am
  Locked,
  
  The difference is that I am forced to contribute to the insurance plan, whereas using your own paycheck to buy your own contraception is not.
  
  Report this comment
- NHwinter
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:28am
  encinom – you are pathetic and with your attitude, you live in the wrong country if you live in America. Government’s main purpose is to protect us from all enemies, foreign and domestic. It has no business being in health care. Catholic hospitals have a right to perform or not perform according to their religious values. The Constitution protects the right to express faith, it does not prohit that expression.
  
  Report this comment
- Locked
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 12:17pm
  @Chel
  
  “The difference is that I am forced to contribute to the insurance plan”
  
  “You” as in who? As an employer? As a taxpayer? The first is ridiculous – you’re contributing to the employee’s pay already. The second is incorrect, as we’re talking about the private insurance providers who are providing the insurance… not taxpayers. I’m really not sure what you meant.
  
  Report this comment
Joisey
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:08am
Federal Judges also swear to uphold the Constitution. The intellectual dishonesty of the Judiciary we have today was not anticipated by the Founders, except in vague fears of “factionalism”. The Judiciary was designed to be the fail safe protection from Executive and Legislative abuses, and it has utterly failed.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:07am
One more blow against religious freedom has been struck; soon enough we will be directed to worship Obama as the god-king of the land or pay for our refusal in blood and steel.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
SpankDaMonkey
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:04am
.
I know this is off topic but a friend of mine just sent me a picture of a bumper sticker it read…..

HILLARY CLINTON/MICHELLE OBAMA 2016

I think I’m gonna be SICK………….

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Popp40
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:20am
  Thanks. You just ruined my day with that thought!
  
  Report this comment
NewLife56
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:04am
America 1776-2008 R.I.P

It was a dream that could have succeeded, what a shame it repeated history of great countries or empires that died from within.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- progressiveslayer
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:20am
  We’re just like Rome,it was once a great republic and it died out just like we’re doing right now.
  
  Report this comment
- Marine25
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:20am
  Reactionaries also called time-of-death on America after slavery was abolished, women got the vote, platoons, schools and facilities were desegregated. Every time those idiots wanted to protect their traditional bigotry, America kept moving forward. You’ll be left behind as well.
  
  Report this comment
- dublinthewagons
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:38am
  25 GRUNT: what is your definition of forward. same as the Communist.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:39am
  How interesting that you correlate denying long held religious liberty with “moving ahead”, faux Marine.
  Go take a pill, Enicom, nobody is buying your most recent incarnation.
  
  Also, wtf is it with you people that you fear being identified so much anyway?
  
  Report this comment
- TheGrtDcptn
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:43am
  ‘You’ll be left behind as well.’
  
  …says the foolish one…
  
  Report this comment
MDECKER
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:02am
U.S. District Judge Audrey Fleissig’s position on ObamaCare is clear. Progressives’ ultimate defense, is in the Courts.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Gonzo
Posted on March 19, 2013 at 9:58am
This is what America voted for…a second time. I still find it hard to believe.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RightUnite
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:05am
  Join the group…
  
  Report this comment
- booger71
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:08am
  She was appointed by Barry in 2010, of course she will uphold anything out of this whithouse.
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:16am
  Booger, the American people had 1 chance to rid ourselves of this monstrosity and instead we reaffirmed it. We are getting what we (as a people) asked for. Don’t blame a judge, we have nobody to blame but ourselves.
  
  Report this comment
- Popp40
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:16am
  Well when you are being Santa Claus and giving free stuff to voters, control the media, control polling stations, having people vote several times, dead people voting for you and are connected to the company that provides the voting machines. Then it is easy to see why he won for the second time.
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:30am
  I don’t think it’s that easy Popp. Our culture is sick. We have abandoned God and put government in His place. Not many cultures survive that. Without a great revival, I don’t think ours will either.
  
  Report this comment
- GhostOfJefferson
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:41am
  I’m calling bullcrap on “we voted for this a second time”. No we didn’t. I had an hour+ wait to vote, the first time ever since I’ve lived here during a Presidential election (usually it’s a 5 minute wait tops), and they tell me that voter turnout was lower than normal in my district. There are 110% All Obama districts. The military ballots were discounted and discarded.
  
  He didn’t win this. I’m sorry, it’s just too close to exactly like what happens in Chicago and other mob towns. We don’t deserve this, because we didn’t vote for this.
  
  Report this comment
- Popp40
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:50am
  Good point Gonzo. Despite what atheists want to say America was founded on God and Christian values. We as a country have replaced God with government. Sad thing it seems like more and more people accept and actually like this. I know I am losing a lot of “friends/associates” because I am turning to God and trying to strengthen my relationship with him because I see what is coming. Whereas they say it isn’t and I’m stupid.
  
  Report this comment
- dublinthewagons
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:53am
  Ghost: does seem odd that not one swing state was lost by the communist regime. Even the non Indian Indians won. The election ws a crooked as a dogs hind leg.
  
  Report this comment
- Gonzo
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:56am
  I hope you are right and I am wrong Ghost, I honestly do. I live in area that Romney won in a landslide, but when I look at many other states, I think this is exactly what they wanted.
  
  Report this comment
- dublinthewagons
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 10:59am
  Gonzo: this culture no longer looks to Christ, born a vigin, as its savior.
  To the contrary Obama, born a wh°®e is their dark knight.
  
  Report this comment
- TheGrtDcptn
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 11:32am
  ‘I know I am losing a lot of “friends/associates” because I am turning to God and trying to strengthen my relationship with him because I see what is coming. Whereas they say it isn’t and I’m stupid.’
  
  Popp40…It may not be any consolation, but you are not alone, others like you are out here having the same experience. Stand Strong, you are on the right path…God Bless…
  
  Report this comment
- TheCalmOne
  Posted on March 19, 2013 at 6:50pm
  GONZO – Perhaps you would be happier living in a theocracy.
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.