5 Reasons the Obama Admin May Be Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle
- Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:43pm by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
The Obama administration clearly underestimated the response it would receive from Catholics and non-Catholics, alike, after implementing a universal mandate on health plans that requires coverage of contraceptives, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs.
As the Blaze has extensively documented, the response has been swift and hard-hitting. Many liberals who traditionally support these options for women have been jumping ship to side with Catholic leadership in agreement that the administration has overstepped its bounds — an event that so rarely happens in theological and political circles.
But it’s important to note that, despite very boisterous outcries, Obama does have support from some liberals on this issue; many of them are pointing to the fact that nearly all Catholic women use contraceptives as a defense. Using this argument, those who favor the mandate claim that the Church is out of touch and not accurately speaking for its followers on this important women’s health issue.
But is this the proper lens through which to view the issue? Free and religious speech advocates would argue that usage has little to do with views on government intervention in church affairs. In the end, it’s a complicated scenario with political capital for whichever side wins the public over. At the moment, the situation may not be as favorable for Obama as he would like. In an article published on Wednesday, Religion News Service’s David Gibson provides five reasons that the president may be losing the battle.
First, the debate, despite what the mandate’s supporters say, is about religious freedom — not contraception. Regardless of where one stands, the main issue at hand is whether the government has the right to interfere in church affairs and dictate what will be covered in health care plans. Gibson writes:
The bishops don’t have as much credibility with the laity as they used to, thanks to the clergy sex abuse scandal, among other things. But Catholics are still a potent tribe, and if outsiders are seen as attacking the church, Catholics can get defensive – and they can get even.
Then there’s the fact, as mentioned, that some liberal Catholics have abandoned the president on the issue. Regardless of where these individuals stand on use of these health care options, forcing Catholic institutions (among other faith-based groups) to violate their conscience just isn’t sitting right.
Now, let’s talk about those other faith groups. Many times, people of different religious traditions have a tough time coalescing, but on this issue, individuals with varying theological ideals are coming together. After all, it’s one thing to sit back and watch an attack on a rival faith group unfold, but when considering what could happen, should this mandate go unchecked, many religious people are fearful: “What’s next?,” they’re wondering. Gibson continues:
Even though evangelicals and other conservative Protestants generally don’t have religious objections to contraception, they do have a big problem with “big government” and with perceived infringements on religious freedom. Evangelicals – both their leaders and their troops – have never been big Barack Obama supporters anyway, so they were happy to provide any electoral and rhetorical muscle the Catholic hierarchy could not muster.
The fourth reason Gibson highlights is the fact that the “attack on religion” frame the issue is being explored through is an appealing one for Republicans. While many conservatives are wondering why Obama would approach this subject in an election year to begin with, others are noticing just how effective religious freedom rhetoric will be for the GOP nominee.
The rhetoric is already ratcheting up. “This attack by the federal government on religious freedom in our country cannot stand, and will not stand,” House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said earlier this week.
And, of course, there’s the overwhelming fact that the president will need to secure the Catholic vote to ensure re-election. “While Obama won the overall Catholic vote 54 percent to 46 percent in 2008, he lost the white Catholic vote, 47 percent to 53 percent,” Gibson writes. It‘s hard to imagine the president won’t lose a portion of this important cohort as a result of his refusal, thus far, to compromise.
Sure, he’s shown “openness” to the ideal of coming up with a viable solution that appeases both sides, but to those so staunchly opposed, such a notion isn’t good enough. The president will need to admit wrongdoing and back away from the mandate, should he wish to appease many of those individuals who feel wronged by the government’s newfound regulations. So far, there’s no evidence that he will take such a course.
Click here to read Gibson’s RNS article.
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 678 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 632 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 523 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 360 Comments
Have You Seen the Giant ‘Sand Obama’ Sculpture in Charlotte? 311 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 130 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 180 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 146 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Scathing New Ad Capitalizes on Rep. Ryan‘s ’Fading Obama Posters’ Remark 124 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 130 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (243)
Micmac
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:14pmPutting on my logical Krauthammer hat:
So NoBama says that the church is “out of touch” with it’s followers? Is this his decision to make? If the followers decide to commit a sin, does that mean that the church needs to change (or forced to change by the government) its policies to follow the sinners? This is NoBama’s argument, plain and simple.
Another illogical Progressive triste into propaganda. Sadly, the young folks “educated” in the progressive public schools have been indoctrinated to this logic and will buy it hook and sinker, and carry this “logic” through their lives.
NoBama has some radically wrong ideas and all he wants to do is make you follow what he knows is best for you. In an Utopian society it’s the intellectuals and educated that tell the mass what to do, because they don‘t know what’s best for themselves. NoBama does not believe in individual rights…you can fill in the blanks.
NoBama 2012
Report Post »ishka4me
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:32pma line from my one of best movies, “ he went a bridge too far”. This is great news for us. No matter what your faith or stance on birth control, The majority of voters will not stand with The government, republicans, democrats or communists entering and mandating the churches. This is so big and it has only just begun. My Congressman has changed his opinion 3 times in 2 days. The pressure is on. Call your Congressman and Sernators. Let them know what you think.
Report Post »byehlik
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:50pmUM? #1 Should be treason as this regulation IE: Law directly violates the Constitution as does Obamacare, NDAA2012, and numerous other laws past by this TRAITOR! Obama is going to be toast come election time. Why would he do this now? Look for a war in a city Near you this summer. That’s this Marxists plan.
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:06pmObama’s war on Christians and Jews continues. About the only ones he hasn’t offended yet are Muslims…I’m not expecting him to either. Look…let’s not mince words here. Obama couldn‘t give a tinker’s cuss about Jews or Christians. He’s a leftist and a liberal. Just like the constitution, they’re obstacles for him and he has to bully or finesse his way around them. His twenty years asleep in the pews with his “sounding board for his conscience” Jerry Wright don’t make him a Christian. You can’t be a Christian with that race baiter. Obama’s lip service at being a Christian is purely political. I’m convinced without a shred of doubt that Obama is an agnostic at the very best but more likely an atheist. He plays at being a Christian to get the votes of “the folks” as he likes to call everyone that lives between Manhattan and Malibu. Still doubt me? During the campaign to get the votes of “the folks” he was against homosexual marriage, since getting office his “opinion on homosexual marriage is elvoving”. You know what that means? He still needs the votes of “the folks” for a second term so until then he’ll never admit he supports homosexual marriage while he gives homosexuals the “wink”. I‘m tired of Obama’s games, I really am. Enough already…show the b@stard (in every sense of the word) the door in November, he’s utter trash and his contempt for the American people is vulgar in the extreme.
Report Post »TheObamanation
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:22pmSantorum is all the sudden kickin’ butt … Obama … here’s your sign
Report Post »GETLIFE
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:35pmAnyone who needs her employer to pay for a “morning after” pill should be using a condoms. What ever happened to aids? Why is the govt now more worried about free birth control for all than aids prevention?
Report Post »SpeckChaser
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:39pmToo often this site portrays Mr. Obama negatively. I would like to counter that agenda for a moment and highlight the top 5 legislative accomplishments Mr. Obama has proposed with the approval of a majority of the country.
1.
Report Post »2.
3.
4.
5.
db321
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:40pm5 Reasons the Obama Admin May Be Losing the Contraceptive Mandate Battle
1. Obama
2. Obama
3. Obama
4. Obama
5. Obama
I have 100 more, but I think you get the point.
Report Post »dogday
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:04pmSpeckchaser: I love it!
Report Post »AOL_REFUGEE
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:34pmAnd here are the 5 reasons:
1. Obama is an arsewipe.
2. Obama is an arsewipe.
3. Obama is an arsewipe.
4. Obama is an arsewipe.
5. Obama is an arsewipe.
Is it any wonder?
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:42pmIt does not matter if we have a democratic or republican C.E.O. running the Corporation.
The Corporation is owned by the IMF. They tell the C.E.O how to run their Company.
THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT LINK YOU WILL EVER CLICK ON !!!!!!
http://www.manta.com/c/mm4qj5k/senate-united-states
MYHEROISRON
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:14pmThe federal government has truly become the enemy of the American people …
Report Post »What_Did_I_Miss
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:16pm@MICMAC
“So NoBama says that the church is “out of touch” with it’s followers? Is this his decision to make? If the followers decide to commit a sin, does that mean that the church needs to change (or forced to change by the government) its policies to follow the sinners? This is NoBama’s argument, plain and simple.”
He is not only President and King, he is now the Pope two. At least he’s not trying to be a dictator.
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:42pmIn 1871 The United States became a Corporation.
In 1912 the Corp. U.S. went to the Global Elite (banksters) for a bailout.
The Banksters created the Federal Reserve, which is no more federal than FEDERAL EXPRESS !
In 1913 the “federal reserve act” was passed. Income tax became law in ALL states and Gold could NOT be Redeemed at banks for currency, or vice-versa.
In 1933 the “Corp U.S.” defaulted on the loan and declared bankruptcy.
The “Gov’t” gave the PRIVATE federal reserve bank all of it’s gold to absolve the debt.
It was not enough.
Under emergency powers and martial law, demanded citizens turn in their gold.
It was not enough.
The “Corp U.S.” Pledged it’s GOVERNMENT Branches and Agencies, IT’S LAND, and IT PEOPLE as COLLATERAL to the PRIVATE BANK for that bankruptcy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlCs7u1ihws
Birth certificates became law in all states in 1933 and Social Security in 1936.
These are Security bonds for the receivers of the bankruptcy to hold under a International lien.
They told the banksters you would pay a percentage of your LIFE EARNINGS (Income tax) towards the debt of 1933.
In 1944, the Lien was transfered to the IMF which created the United Nations the next year.
They have been holding the lien ever since, and began foreclosure in 1992.
That was the year AGENDA 21 and Executive Order 12803 – The INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATIZATION ACT was signed.
AMERICA is FOR SALE and Has been, since 1
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:32pm*since 1992.
The Corporation is not concerned with religion.
Here Allen west tells you the United States is a Corporation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN0PlOXCJLc
Think it was just a metaphor ?
http://www.teamlaw.net/history.htm
Think that is no proof ?
WELL HERE IS PROOF POSITIVE THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LIED TO FOR OVER 140 YEARS !
TELLING US THEY ARE “REPRESENTATIVES” of the PEOPLE !!!!!
I guess it was our own ignorance not to ask WHAT PEOPLE ????????
HERE YOU ARE. SIT DOWN FIRST
Report Post »Notice the “is a Private company”
Notice the vice president of the company.
http://www.manta.com/c/mm4qj5k/senate-united-states
jzs
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:48pmMICMAK, thanks for putting on your “logical Krauthammer hat” rather than your normal tin foil hat. So your “logical” first few statements are, “So NoBama says that the church is “out of touch” with it’s followers? Is this his decision to make?” Perhaps you should reread the lede to this thread but Obama never said that. You state as fact that he said that, but even this website doesn’t say he did, only saying that some people who presumably support President Obama have that opinion. You are just making stuff up. Or maybe you’re lying? How can anyone take you seriously when the very first statement you make with “logical Krauthammer hat” is false? Get your logical act together man!
AVENJERK, I know you copied and pasted your post from somewhere else. Okay, that’s fine. But you say, “About the only ones he hasn’t offended yet are Muslims.” No, President Obama just kills Muslim terrorists. Week after week. The US is going after and killing the bad guys like we never had before, regardless of what country’s sovereignty we violate in the process. You don’t read the news do you? This is from six months ago: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/09/the-terrorist-notches-on-obamas-belt/
Lots have been killed since. But you’re right. Most Muslims aren’t offended by killing terrorists.
Report Post »NancyBee
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:18pmSpeckchaser….that was a good one!
Report Post »SpeckChaser
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:36pm@DOGDAY/NANCYBEE
Glad I could give yall a laugh.
Report Post »NancyBee
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:51pmI do not want to pay for anyone’s birth control, morning after or abortion…period…they can pay for their own….
Report Post »carbonyes
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 1:41amThe Muslim-in-Chief, Barack Hussein Obama, is profoundly a Muslim of the worse kind, worse than a radical one, if that is possible. He has some on the Blaze here duped. He is a most vile and despicable creature. Nearly every thing that he comes in touch with he destroys with purpose, particularly those things which the Koran despises, meaning the Christians and Jews and the nation which protects and supports them, the United States of America.
There is literally nothing in the personhood of Barack Hussein Obama that has anything to do with America whether Obama was born here or not, except the inbred vendetta and malignant cancer that is bent on the complete destruction of this nation and everything it stands for along with the American people. This man is evil personified with a smile from ear to ear. This is not Democrat versus Republican, and not really liberal versus Conservative, although those elements are present, but it is evil versus good, and within that Hell spun evil is Islamic Jihad of which Barack Hussein Obama is one of the primary propagators.
If you fail to miss and not understand what is being promoted with such ferocious intensity and perseverance, and further to neglect to engage and destroy this evil, the lives of your family, relatives, neighbors and friends and the country you have so loved will be annihilated, in other words no longer existent.
Report Post »GETLIFE
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 6:38amMaybe he was just trying to get our minds off the economy, and onto something Valerie figured would please at least half of the population– the idea that women’s employers or the government should pay for their birth control. Right! How idiotic! What was supposed to be smoke and mirrors has actually brought many more around to see what they are really up to.
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 7:31amThe article said “Then there’s the fact, as mentioned, that some liberal Catholics have abandoned the president on the issue.”
Report Post »And those same liberals will pull the lever for Obama this november. They would pull the lever for Obama if he denouced God and urinated on a bible. Thier outrage is only based on their religious voting base. Like liberal progressive women groups liberal progressive catholic are liberal first and everything else second
4truth2all
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 8:03amYo Speck:
Report Post »In light of your post, and Obama’s unequaled “record”, I just hope that the majority can come to an agreement of his removal come election time.
BernieKittyCat
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 8:21amObama is causing all this outrage on behalf of Catholics so he can turn around and say,”You win. I will not allow this mandate to go into effect.“ The liberal Catholics will see his ”compassion” for their faith and come out in droves to vote for their new savior. His next term will be a disaster for them but it‘s too difficult for them to extrapolate his actions of the last three years into the future when he’ll be a lame duck and have little resistance against him. (No, I do NOT believe the House or Senate will have the cojones to stop him regardless of majority.)
I have an Obama accomplishment. Until he came onto the scene in 2008 I was a dyed in the wool liberal. Today I can‘t even watch Fox News because they’re too liberal for me. (To Fox News: I lived the liberal lie for two decades. Why would I want to listen to all your liberal pundants anymore?)
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 8:23amany solution obama may come up could be considered taqiyya.
Report Post »Patoweem
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 9:10amThis openess to finding a concession is NOT good news. It is a CLEAR picture of what the government will have the power to do through ObamaCare. They put the trial balloon out to see if they could get it past us, but have decided that it’s best (particulary in a presidential election year) to look like they are listening & that they care. So they will reverse course; for now. Rest assured, this issue will come before us again in the future and they may not go for it all like they did here, but piece by piece, they will move toward the goal. At some point, if ObamaCare isn’t repealed, the government will be able to enact any rule they want and if the politicians of that time have the wearwithall to stand up to the heat, there won‘t be a thing in the world we’ll be able to do about it.
Getting a religious exemption doesn’t solve the problem, only repeal will solve the problem. If ObamaCare is left standing, this and many, many other issues will be forced upon us and we’ll end up in a place that we never thought we could be in this country. This is NOT a win, it’s a retreat and regrouping by Obama and his ilk. If we don’t stay on the offensive and push for repeal, they’ll get us in the end.
Report Post »Bum thrower
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 9:15amObama needs to say, “your rights come from the GOVERNMENT, and no where else; get over it.
Report Post »littlefish
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 9:39amObama doesn’t recognize ANY other religion except his OWN . . .whatever that may be . …
AND if he changes his mind . . . .It will not help . . . .
Report Post »You can’t take back disgust, hate and Lies . . . .and expect people to just say . . . .
“Oh . . .its OK then . . .he changed his mind . . .he didn’t mean it . . . .MSNBC sell it . . .. SELL IT BIG . . .
The only reason he isn’t KING is that we are racist . . . oh wait . . .that pesky constitution . . .
WHO the HELL IS the GUY ?????
PATTY HENRY
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 10:24amIn the past 3.5 years, has there been ONE day or even PART of one day that Obama hasn’t traumatized the people of America? Think about it. This DESTROYER, this ARROGANT HOT SHOT has one goal:
Report Post »The Take Down of America. WHY? He is the Muslim Manchurian Candidate who is also backed by the worst human being alive today: George Soros who loves money so much that he thinks destroying entire countries is funny, as long as he can make $$$. NAME ONE DAY that this evil man has not taunted Americans.
AvengerK
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 11:43amI appreciate the unconscious compliment JZS but no….I didn’t cut and paste my post at all. I suggest you don’t take up any kind of FBI profiling work as clearly your deductive skills are sorely lacking. But then again..you’re a feeble minded cretin anyway. Obama has gone out of his way to pander to Muslim sensibilties. Stating that America is one of the biggest muslim countries in the world to mulsim audiences…or how about “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” ? Terrorists are merely in Obama’s “exception” list and that’s for political expediency. Had Obama had his way we’d be out of Afghanistan already but he has to feign “responsibility” in any withdrawal. Then there are the numerous complaints from our officers and troops in Afghanistan about how the ridiculous rules of engagment imposed on them- in no small part by Obama- have hampered the effectiveness of their operations. By the way…the biggest kill of a “muslim” Obama got was the result of waterboarding KSM who through doing so, divulged the identity of OBL’s courier. In turn we then followed him for a number of years leading to the compound in Pakistan. Let me spell it out for you since you’re an idiot..Obama wouldn’t have got OBL had Bush not authorized the techniques that made KSM talk. By all means…show me a policy that‘s solely Obama’s that led to OBL‘s finding and I’ll be happy to review it. Nice try idiot.
Report Post »Faith1029
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 12:15pmThe Democrats are willing to take the life of an innocent child in order for a woman to have their “rights”. What about the rights of the unborn child? Who speaks for them? Who protects them? God will not take kindly to anyone who would vote for those who advocate the murder of children, and those who vote Democrat are going against God’s Word and will pay dearly for it. CATHOLICS, if you are truly a Catholic, if you are truly a Christian, then your conscience will tell you that you cannot vote Democrat. Even if the White House changes it’s stance on the issue of mandating Catholics have to pay, this speaks volumnes that they want to be in total control of your lives. People of faith, take a stand and unite against this evil and vote for a conservative Republican.
Genesis 4 – “And the Lord said to Cain, What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying out to Me from the ground. And now you are cursed from the ground which has opened it‘s mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand.” Do not go against your God.
Report Post »flatbroke
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:14pmGOOD! I pray that O’bummer loses every battle right up till the election, and loses the election landslide to whomever the republican canidate is. It would be a nice end to his socialist/commie endevors in the USA, and maybe he will move to Cuba.
Report Post »jlcook
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:20pmI hope thats the case. Van Jones got more powerful after he was dimissed, he will still be dangerous, but wont be able to make 25 executive orders a day, the poor next pres. will have to spend 6 months overturning them
Report Post »cosette
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:02pmFor all the contempt Obozo has displayed towards this nation and our constitution he would no sooner leave for Cuba than Michael Moore would. Even though they, and the majority of the left, hate this country enough to want to “transform” it, they know full well that there is no better place on earth to call home. Unfortunately for them they have to deal with the reality that the majority of Americans consider themselves to be conservative and we respect our constitution, traditions and values. It is imperative that we unite behind the nominee of the Republican party regardless of who he is. There can be no worse outcome in November than 4 more years of this America hating tyrant!
Report Post »AnAmerican111
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:14pmThe arrogance of OBAMA continues to shine through as he attempts to throw out the American values that have made this Country great!
Stupid is….stupid was for those that vote for this moron again!
Report Post »Bill Rowland
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 6:41amFirst he takes away your rights with the TSA/Homeland Security set up. Now he has the right to have you arrested and detained without a warrant or formal charges. Now he tells you that your religion is irrelevant and you belief system is wrong.
Coming to a city near you – OWS riots, looting and the establishment of martial law. Then he gets to suspend the elections, suspend congress and SCOTUS.
ALL HAIL KING OBUMBLER THE FIRST, Smartest man in the world and savior of the nation.
Only he is intelligent enough to solve all of our problems. Stop crime with gun control. Control the education system with Federal standards and control of student loans. Stop the obesity epidemic by regulating your diet. Establish internment/re-educartion facilities as holding areas for those who disagree with his policies.
Welcome to the Kingdom of Obama the Magnificent, the all seeing, all knowing benevolent ruler of the Muslim States of America.
OMG
Report Post »virgie morgan
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:11pmHe’s just testing the waters, trying out his new “dictator suit” to see how it’s gonna go over. Putting out more “feelers” to see how or if the public is going to react to his being a dictator. It’s just another step on the road of “Some people want me to just go around Congress and do things on my own”….he’s trying to see when the right time to spring his power grab on us. He‘s been making everything ready for that dictatorship with the new laws he’s passed and people he has appointed to rule over and control us. And now he‘s testing us to see if we’ll notice or even care when he starts revealing that he has already slapped the chains on us all and we sat back and said nothing. We lost our freedom some time back because we didn’t stop him, we didn’t get out there in the streets and be seen and heard like the OWS people…the squeaky wheel gets the grease. We‘ve sat back waiting for election day when we should have been out there marching and letting them know we weren’t going to take it anymore and now it’s too late. We let them take over without even so much as a whimper.
Report Post »GeorgieJo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:51pmVIRGIE–
You are absolutely correct. Obummer does nothing without calculating what the effects will be, WE have been TOO silent and hence we now daily surrender our rights under the guise of this socialistic community organizer.
OMG in 2012
Report Post »AvengerK
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:04pmVIRGIE….I think this is a case of Obama not reading what he signed. This is the dumb Obama we’re seeing. Oh don’t get me wrong, constantly with Obama you have to be watching the other hand. He‘s populated the white house with so many lefties and corruptocrats that it’s like having to deal with one big, slithering octopus. But I think this one is down to Obama handing Obamacare to Pelosi and Reid to put together, too much vacation on his part and not having the foresight to actually read what he signed. He was convinced that Obamacare would solidify his popularity and defeat the GOP but it’s worked out to be an albatross around his neck. He allowed idiots, corruptocats and leftists to put it together but didn’t have the inclination or the intelligence to get someone on his staff to read it and warn him of any pitfalls. In short..he couldn‘t be arsed to read the 2900 page monstrosity he inflicted on us all so he wasn’t prepared for the inevitable holes and pitfalls it contained. Lo and behold, in an election year he’s already marginalized independents, conservative jews/supporters of Israel and now Catholics/Christians and he needs them to get re-elected. And remember…he’s had an active campaign of trying to frame himself as a Christian and a friend of the jews. This is something he wasn’t expecting or wanting. This is a mess he didn’t foresee or want. Watch for the media to step in for him.
Report Post »Wormwood12
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:43pmI think he has found the water too deep on this issue. If he cannot eliminate the christians, then he cannot win re-election in November. Now he knows that for sure (he won’t get the christian vote).
Report Post »giatny
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:11pmThe administration continues its refusal to address the
Report Post »true issue. A “basic right” does not hinge on it being
“free” by federal mandate. This is a perfect example of
why Obamacare was deemed to be unconstitutional by
its opponents. If the government can force every citizen
to purchase health insurance, is there anything it can’t
force upon individuals and institutions? Obama’s true
answer is that he is entitled to mandate anything under
the aegis of the HHS and Obamacare. His disdain for the Constitution
is stunning. He routinely ignores it to effect his agenda and the sycophant press says nothing. The media actually applauded his announcement that he intended to bypass Congress. The serial stupidity of the Republican Party can’t be denied; however, I see no other way to stop Obama’s delusional vision of an America without the Constitution.
TOUGHTEXASMAMA
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:10pmOops, sorry. Hit the button twice. :-0
Report Post »paleoman
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:41pmThat line belongs to 0bama, Oops sorry.
Report Post »momrules
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:09pmObama will either do a complete turn around, get rid of this mandate and appear to be reasonable to the masses so he can get their votes or he really doesn’t care and will take the my way or the highway approach.
I vote for the my way or the highway approach. He has already proven that he doesn’t give a darn about any of us and our opinion.
Report Post »concealled9mms
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:13pmyes he will do a turn around and if relected he will revert right back a real liar
Report Post »shiftingcargo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:56pmIf this were not an election year Obama would be giving us all the one finger salute. Think of the things he will try if he is given another 4 years. And to those in the liberal media who think this is an issue of healthcare rather than a consittutional issue of Freedom of Religion, will you accept the conjured reason he gives when he begins infringing on the Freedom of the Press?
Report Post »RepubliCorp
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:41pmThis could be a strawman argument : Imagine a fight in which one of the combatants sets up a man of straw, attacks it, then proclaims victory
Report Post »TheBurningTruth
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:08pmHere’s my problem with the whole thing. The church didn’t have any problem with the bigger issue of forcing everyone to BUY health care and supported the whole diseased bill when they thought they were getting an exemption from it. Remember that Bachus‘s Butt Buddies claimed to have held out to ensure that this exact thing didn’t happen. Now that it has, the Catholics are newly against it and if they get their exemption, they’ll be back in favor of it again.
The church chose to get in bed with the devil, let them lie there. They were happy enough to sentence every successful taxpayer (of which 48% of the working population pays NO income tax) to pay for other people’s health care. I have no sympathy for them. Let them suffer the consequences of what many people warned them of but they were too greedy to believe.
Report Post »BetterInformed
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:10pm@BT
Let me get this right. You’re not about the constitution, you’re about pay back or simply how you feel ?
Report Post »Floyd ALsbach
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:13pmDear Burning Truth: The Catholic Church did not “get in bed with” BO nor were we “happy to go along with” Obama care. Many, very many of us were EXTREMELY unhappy with the ‘leaders’ who did. Many of us let our Priests and Bishops know of our displeasure, many priests and Bishops were also not happy. In a way the Catholic Church is an ancient version of a Republic, except that we vote with our feet and our tithe. Granted it is also a slow moving organization, but do you know of any other 2,000 year old organization with 1,180,000,000 members, 410,593 priests, 729,3721 nuns, 2,956 diocese, & 5,000 Bishops that isn’t a bit slow to move. But get us all going in the same direction and angry… well it ain’t gonna be pretty. How many Catholics do you think voted for Rick Santorum last Tuesday? Here in my small Missouri town, I’ve never seen so many Catholics turn out for a non-binding Republican primary, in a solidly Democratic County, especially with nothing to vote on besides that primary. And I‘ll bet all of ’em voted for Rick. SO… just keep it up Mr Pres, just keep it up.
Report Post »MCDAVE
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:30pmlast election he only got 52% of the Catholic vote…typical of the entire nation..I Am Catholic and did not vote for him..Like any large religious group there’s going to be some liberals..The good news is he just lost a lot of votes…
Report Post »JustPeachy
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 12:01pm@Floyd: :-)
Report Post »Firefighter 538
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:08pmThe Muslim-in-chief does not give a phique about what any Christians think. He doesn’t care about Americans or their values.
Report Post »Patrick Henry
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:10pmSo true chief He only thinks about his ego and his parties
Report Post »Patrick Henry
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:04pmOh he lost allright he lost as soon as it went out on the wire. I am glad the idiot made that decision across our land cause it shows the world how incompitent he is SO LONG OBAMA Weeeee!
Good stuff below guys! Ladies2
http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/dick-morris/209283-obamas-assault-on-america
http://tampa.cbslocal.com/2012/02/09/federal-judge-dismisses-peta-lawsuit-claiming-seaworld-whales-are-slaves/
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:03pmI have to wonder about this battle and the way its going; what else is Obama up to, somehow I am beginning to wonder if this is yet one more diversion for something else coming down the line while the tactic here keeps us distracted.
Something just does not add up.
Report Post »HKS
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:15pmProbably correct, this will fail because it‘s just plane wrong and only a fool would think it’s right, Obama knows that. Something else is the motivator, if nothing else a continued divider mentality. Liberals in general and Obama in particular are hell bent on that. Divide and conquer, it’s as old as the planet. Divided we will fail and that’s where they want to be, he’ll make you call on government to eat.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:45pmHSK — interesting thing just occured to me in reading part of your post.
I can see the Fed’s grabbing control of the farms, using them in a collective for ‘foreign workers’ to settle and become citizens; if the fed’s can control the food, even if its just imports from certain nations we depend on – wheat from Africa, Rice from India and Australia in certain times of the year, then this would cause immense problems.
I know a few years ago the flooding of Indias rice farms drove prices here in Phoenix through the roof, but based on the harvests in abundance from Australia I kept telling people wait about two weeks and the imports would drive prices down. They didnt listen, prices went down.
What would have happened if say a war or trade sanctions aimed at the US were in effect? or the US FEDS decided to seize such imports for ‘safety reasons’?
Report Post »NancyBee
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:29pmSnow…….I feel like something else is coming and that something else has to do with food
Report Post »littlefish
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 9:44amI think he is finding nukes for Iran . . .. just to distract from all the other idiot things he does . . .
Report Post »Look there’s a war . . . .don’t look at me . . .
BlackCrow
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:03pmWait till he gets re-elected. Then watch out!
Report Post »Patrick Henry
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:06pmlmao i dont think so! And if it is a mandate of marshall law type move he loses also PERIOD
Report Post »Locked
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:20pm@Patrick Henry
“lmao i dont think so! And if it is a mandate of marshall law type move he loses also PERIOD”
Glenn Beck has already said he thinks Obama will win 2012. I’m inclined to agree; Ron Paul is the only true fiscal conservative out there. Everyone else is Obama-lite, with a side of right-wing social policy.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:02pmObama is NOT LOSING! He is using his Power… and even if he gives a Waiver, it adds to his POWER to do so! ObamaCare is Law… until not!
Report Post »bushmanjs
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:02pmObama did not lose the election this last week. He WON it!
Report Post »If you believe that Romney is the most likely to beat Obama, then Obama’s move last week was genius. It will either cause Romney to lose the nomination, or bloody him so bad, he won’t be able to win the presidency.
This last week with the attack on religious liberties through the health care mandate, I thought the President just made a really dumb mistake. Now I am kind of geeked-out over how cleaver of a move it was on Obama’s part. Here is why http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/Romneycare-Obamacare-Catholic-birth/2012/02/07/id/428686
In the article it shares how Romney did the very same thing that everyone is furious with Obama about. So here is how it will shake down.
1. Obama will let people get even more angry, then apologize, give a waiver to religious organizations, and then look good for following the will of the people.
2. Then conservatives will transfer their anger over this matter onto Romney because he did the same thing with Romney care ONLY he didn’t give a waiver like Obama will.
So if this issue doesn’t kill Romney’s chances for the nomination, then it will wound him very badly for his chances for the presidency. The really clever thing is, this never would have come to light if Obama had not brought up the issue last week by making everyone mad at him. You really have to be impressed with the strategy!
Patrick Henry
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:08pmSantorum is God”s Choice, HE shared that with me when Santorum had 1%.
Report Post »marvlus
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:10pmIt may work, but Romney needs to be the nominee first.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:16pmI don’t think conservatives needed anything extra to dislike Romney. The rest is spot on.
Report Post »byehlik
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:16pm@ Bushman You assume that people can not see right through this clown Obama. Pretty much the country is watching and awake. The liberal media no longer controls the narrative. And if it goes down the way you say, you now have exposed it and others surely would recognize the move. This guy now has Obamacre Unconstitutional, NDAA2012 Unconstitutional, and other laws passes that are clearly the same. The cat’s out of the bag on this guy.
Report Post »rickinnyc
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:02pmThere are 2 petitions and an actual way to sign on to the lawsuit against Obama Castro Care on my blog: http://forums.christianity.com/fb.aspx?m=5404217
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:01pmI don’t think the administration underestimated anything. Their SOP has been to push the progressive agenda every bit they can. They may have been testing the water and checking Catholics level of intent. If it had been implemented without issue, great. If not, they can let Catholics feel like they listened to them and relent. In doing so, they hope to restore goodwill and garner favor (translated: votes) of non-devout Catholics. I have no doubt the issue will come back to life and not get rescinded if Obama wins a second term.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:23pmI thought that you wanted Government out of religion? Why are there Catholic hospitals taking Government money?
Why is Government in the business of defining and issuing marriage licenses?
It’s the old “Get the Government out of religion…..unless you’re giving me some money or wanting to pass legislation around what I believe….then yeah it’s all good.”
Why are people backing Santorum? Going by his statements, he clearly wants to push his religious beliefs on people through Government involvement.
It must be the “Get the Government out of religion” but “don’t get religion out of the Government” thinking.
Report Post »Micmac
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:26pmYes. “Lookie!, I caved in for you. I’m your BFF, so vote for me.”
NoBama 2012
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:43pmWhere in my comment am I taking a position on this particular topic? My comment above was discussing the administrations motive and intent. And if they relent on this topic at this point in time, it will merely be shelved until after the election.
Since I don’t happen to be Catholic and am unfamiliar with the funding sources and government participation of their hospitals, I haven’t expressed an opinion on either side of this topic. That said, it seems that Obama is more interested in pushing his agenda regardless of his expressed Christianity. Seems contrary to be fruitful and multiply.
Quite a tangent for reading something into my words that I didn’t actually say.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:07pm@COPATRIOTS
Why did you refer to it as “pushing an agenda” then? Maybe he just wants women to be able to get birth control through their employer? During the civil rights movements, would you call what they were doing “pushing an agenda?”
Would you call it “pushing an agenda” if a politician is doing something that you like or agree with? Highly doubtful.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:46pm@MOD,
Just a wee bit of a stretch there, no?
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 6:59pmQuite a stretch, indeed.
Intended it as I said…….but you obviously need clarification. Obama is pushing his agenda of all things anti-Christian. Again, I don’t have a position on this since I am not fully informed.
Report Post »SpeckChaser
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 7:17pm@Moderation
You said “Get the Government out of religion” but “don’t get religion out of the Government”
That might be the first correct statement I have seen you make. See a few examples below that support that statement.
Arkansas State Constitution, Article 19 Section 1
No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any court.
Maryland’s Declaration of Rights Article 37
“That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, other than a declaration of belief in the existence of God;”
Mississippi State Constitution Article 14, Section 265
“No person who denies the existence of a Supreme Being shall hold any office in this state.”
North Carolina’s State Constitution Article 6 Section 8
“Disqualifications of office, The following persons shall be disqualified for office: First, any person who shall deny the being of Almighty God.”
South Carolina’s State Constitution, Article VI Section 2
“No person who denies the existence of the Supreme Being shall hold any office under this Constitution.”
Tennessee’s State Constitution, Article 9 Section 2
Report Post »“No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this state.”
copatriots
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:12pmAfter I responded, I wondered how familiar you are, MOD, with the progressive movement and the Saul Alinsky training Obama taught as a Community Organizer. It was that agenda I was commenting on originally. I don’t think the government has any business mandating to any organization the requirement to cover contraception. The entire healthcare law is beyond an over-reach of the Federal governments powers. I would think that would be your argument as a fiscal conservative versus finding another reason to bash religion.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:18pmPhenomenal list, SPECK! Thanks for posting. MOD just enjoys the benefits of the culture she was born into without all the inconvenient Judeo-Christian history behind it.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 9:38pm@SPECKCHASER
By being forced to say you believe in a God, you are having a religious test.
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/church-state-battle-in-nc-should-atheists-hold-public-office
“Bothwell began his service with an affirmation of the oath of office”
Why do you think some(maybe most) courts no longer have it where you say, “to swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God”? Because they know not everyone thinks a God exists, therefore saying that would be irrelevant. Why do you think we have earthly penalties for lying on the stand? Because our founders were smart enough to realize that threats of a supernatural reward or punishment doesn’t do much when trying to compel accurate and honest testimony in this world.
Plus, I would like to see you guys when a Muslim runs for President(Yes, I know you say Obama is a Muslim, ha ha ha, it’s gotten old). It will be hilarious to see everyone say, “No way would I vote for a Muslim for President.”
@COPATRIOTS
I wonder how you came to think that I’m a woman, I really do.
Apparently I come off as a woman when typing on the internet, I will have to address that lol.
Report Post »SpeckChaser
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:56pmMOD
You believe the country wasn’t founded on Christian principles, which is provably false.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams
You dislike how the country was set up and that’s your opinion. Just know its opposed to our founders. If I decide I don’t like rules of baseball and would have them changed, thats my opinion. If I got enough people to agree, I could probably change them, against the will of those who created and support baseball in its original form.
The framers intent on separation of church and state was to keep government out of the church, not to keep the church out of government. This is evident in the quotes from the different state constitutions, which belief in God was required to be eligible for office and testify in court.
You said “By being forced to say you believe in a God, you are having a religious test.”
That is why Maryland’s Declaration of Rights Article 37 says
“That no religious test ought ever to be required as a qualification for any office of profit or trust in this State, OTHER THAN A DECLARATION OF BELIEF IN THE EXISTENCE OF GOD.
You said “Why do you think some courts no longer have it where you say… so help me God”?
That is why Arkansas State Constitution, Article 19 Section 1says
Report Post »No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office, NOR BE COMPETENT TO TESTIFY AS A WITNESS IN ANY CO
Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:01pm@SPECKCHASER
As has been said already, that is great info you posted. Hope you won’t mind if I save it for future reference. It may come in handy when I find myself being asSAULted by a cadre of lefties.
My patent and licenses are moving right along. Is your wheelchair ramp completed yet?
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:29pm@COPATRIOTS
I notice that MOD did not address this comment of yours when he replied to you.
It was a good catch on your part, and I wonder if it will ever be addressed?
?????????????
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:32pmOoooops,
Forgot the quote………..
“The entire healthcare law is beyond an over-reach of the Federal governments powers. I would think that would be your argument as a fiscal conservative versus finding another reason to bash religion.”
Report Post »SpeckChaser
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 11:33pmBilly
Of course you can save it. I hope you use it too. Keep up the good work incorporating the sauls, they crack me up.
May I make one suggestion? You should also cite the specific Rules for Radical rule #/description the Libs are using in their post. I, like you, have read and own Rules for Radicals and see their tactics unfolding right out the pages of said book that is dedicated to satan himself. It would be helpful to the fellow blazers to read a lib post slandering a Conservative personally, but failing to address the facts, then conveniently noticing the exact rules the lib is using to divert from the issue in the next post. It shouldn’t be much trouble seeing they tend to mainly use 2 or 3 of the rules.
Where you ever able to come up with a cleaver name for your detector? I am about to have to replace my ramp. It seems they don’t hold up much after pushing several million of the poor elderly over it. I guess the greedy rich capitalist who made my ramp chinched on material to save every penny they could.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 12:08am@SPECKCHASER
I never said such a thing. While there were definitely people who had Christian principles, they didn’t want to force those beliefs on others. They had just experienced that….it’s why they left.
It also doesn’t matter if you quote ONE founding father, I could quote another who say, “”Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth.”"
“Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting “Jesus Christ,“ so that it would read ”A departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by the great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mohammedan, the Hindoo and Infidel of every denomination.”
“Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law.”
All from Thomas Jefferson
There WERE some Christians, some deists and some likely atheists, but they came together and agreed that the people shouldn’t be governed by religious belief.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 12:25amI then gave you a link to an article, where a guy in NC, who is an atheist….and is holding office…..which you ignored in your response to me.
Your argument then is IRRELEVANT because there IS someone holding office who is an Atheist(specifically in a State in which you provided a snippet of their constitution from). It would not surprise me if sooner or later, they will all be declared unconstitutional. In that article there are even constitutional lawyers, who are Christian and say, “Wow, really? Yeah that’s unconstitutional.”
How does someone take the stand in Arkansas then if they refuse to swear to God? You watch too many movies and think that it’s the only way to take the stand in a trial. I think you can “affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” No mention of God, nothing at all. Therefore, unless I’m understanding your point wrong, your argument of “That is why Arkansas State Constitution, Article 19 Section 1says
No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office, NOR BE COMPETENT TO TESTIFY AS A WITNESS IN ANY COURT” is WRONG.
As atheism becomes more popular, and more atheists run for office, those laws will be declared unconstitutional and overturned.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 12:40am@COPATRIOTS
I know about the progressive movement. I studied it and use to watch Beck when he was on Fox News all the time.
I also know of the Christian movement. Both uses small nudges over time to create lasting changes. I think both are evil and want to force people into their way of thinking.
This article has to do with the contraceptive part of the mandate, not the entire mandate. If you want to talk about the mandate in its entirety, I would be happy to tell you the big problems I have on it.
In other articles talking about the contraceptive mandate, I said I would support the Catholic church and don’t think they should be forced to do it against their beliefs. I think their beliefs are STUPID and completely backwards, but if it’s against their beliefs to do it, whatever. The fact that something like 98% of catholic women use contraception, shows how little people follow their teaching(which I’m glad to hear).
The GOP will continue to alienate everyone who isn‘t a hardcore Christian and ultimately lose the battle they’re fighting. If you give me Santorum, I flat out won’t vote for him. Any of the other three and I can regrettably vote for them, but not Santorum. Give me someone I can vote for, or I will choose not to vote and live my life with whichever loon get elected between Obama and Santorum. I don’t want Obama to win, which is why I shudder when I see Santorum gaining support.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 1:00am@SPECK
Way to leave out, ““This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion in it””
and
“The government of the United States is not in any sense founded upon the Christian religion”
- John Adams
The founders did a sound job of keeping their personal beliefs out of their role in Government of the people, by the people and for the people. Wish we could say the same nowadays.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 9:31am@ Billy, thanks for your kind words.
@ Speck, hope you don’t mind that I snagged that list too.
@ MOD, ah….I’ll never tell at evaluating your writing. lol MOD, you will never find the amount of writings from the founders that even remotely support your anti-religion or anti-Christian stance. I know atheists like to quote Thomas Jefferson because he was most vocal about his faith struggle throughout his life. But, you really should take John Adams out of your one-liners “greatest hits”. If you truly study John Adams and the quotes you attribute to him, you will learn not only of his great faith but also the context behind those quotes.
In the late 1760‘s and early 1770’s, the newly-forming were not disagreeing over Sovereign God. They were dealing with differing denominations which is why the founders were keeping the freedom to worship from the Federal level and leaving it to the States to decide. I know you know this. So what I don‘t understand is why you don’t at least embrace the truth of our history? You say you pursue truth and differing views but in reality you are most argumentative and in denial of your country’s actual history. Why is that? I know your perfect world has no religion in it. I commented on another thread yesterday how ridiculous and backward that would be. You have the freedom in this country, MOD, to be an atheist thanks to our founders and…………….
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 9:48amthe fact that most Christians in this country respect your decision. That is exactly why I ceased that thread. Your decision is so firmly made that I’m not sure Jesus returning or a rapture would connect to you. Makes me sad for you but it’s your decision.
On that note, you say Christians won’t stop talking about their faith. Guess what…..it’s part of who we are just like it was the Founders. We never will. Interestingly, the more that atheists (and progressives for that matter) push their agenda, it has only served to awaken those Christians who were more moderate. So please keep pushing your anti-Christian agenda here and in real life with your friends. You actually inspire more people to step up and speak out about their faith. To that, I say Thank You!
Meanwhile, I asked before and will again…….how do you see zero value in our Judeo-Christian roots in this country? Why can’t you acknowledge the goodness and help, especially in crises, that Christian Americans have shown around the world? We accept you as an atheist and accept your decision. Most here do not continually bash you or your decision. It’s usually more defensively against your attacks. I pray for the unsaved of my acquaintances but surely don’t keep discussing faith with them. Why are your feelings against Christianity so strong that you present them as your primary identifier? You don’t have to answer these questions to me. It’s more for your reflection.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 10:15amOh and lastly, MOD, you seem to have this HUGE hang-up about Christians needing to admit that they could be wrong. You ultimately push that in every discussion I have seen you have (not that I have seen all that many but it sure seems consistent on my brief sample.) I agreed with you that Christianity IS based on faith and I, nor anyone else, will ever be able to offer “scientific” proof. My question is……why is it such a priority to you to get every Christian to admit that? Why does it make such a difference to you? Your personality seems to be one of you being right and everyone else being wrong and winning every argument. Intellectually speaking, that does not at all come across as an open-minded person and incredibly hypocritical…..especially since you present yourself as being moderate. You seem to have zero respect for anyone here until you can get them to say “as a Christian, I could be wrong”. Why are you hellbent (wording intentional) on getting a Christian say that?
On a side note, I never had proof when I believed…..it was entirely a faith decision. You don’t seem to want to believe this but I received ample “proof” when proof was no longer my priority. Take that however you want. I honestly don‘t care if you believe me but aren’t you curious why so many others have told you the same thing.
Must go for now. Wishing you and all a great day!
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 1:12pm@COPATRIOTS
I have once again said NUMEROUS times that I never said that some of our founders weren’t Christians, maybe even extremely devote Christians, and that their religion played a role in what they said and did.
My whole argument comes down to when people make sweeping generalizations that all of our founders were Christians. I have also said that they did a sound job of keeping their religious belief out of the founding of our Constitution which people refute. In the quotes I gave you, Jefferson talks about how referencing Jesus Christ was kept out of the Constitution, for protection of other religions. It is irrelevant to me if John Adams was a Christian, he probably was, who cares? I am merely saying that while maybe some of our founders were deeply religious, they didn’t scour the Bible when creating the Constitution, anything else is just a lie.
Whether or not I see value in the Judeo-Christian roots(which I do) is irrelevant to the fact that just because there are some good teachings in Christianity, it doesn’t mean your belief is true.
How can you say that I want to win every argument……yet in my arguments I admit I can be wrong? The fact that I try to encourage people to admit they might be wrong, is because I have people go around saying their religion is based on fact, which it obviously isn’t. I usually offer the challenge when I have religious believers accuse me of being so sure of myself and my arrogance.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 1:40pmHey MOD
Don’t most religious people say they base their beliefs in faith?
Which is precisely why you try to get them to “admit” that they could be wrong about their beliefs.
Because if you get them to say they could be wrong, then you will claim that they really do not have “faith” at all.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 5:55pmMOD, you use selective quotes by the Founders to discredit anytime someone gives a small sampling available as SPECK did above. If you really believe the Founders were mostly Christian, you wouldn’t use the minimal quotes even available in your repertoire. The fact is most States had Sovereign God requirements in their founding. The Federal government deferred religion to the States which is why religion is kept out of the Constitution. As such, the colonists were people of faith which certainly impacted their decisions, laws and structure in founding the government. As well-schooled in the Bible as most of them were, they certainly didn’t leave their religion at home when they met. Every convention opened in prayer. Their biggest disagreement was over who would say the prayer given the differing denominations. Faith is a part of who people are….they can‘t and assuredly didn’t check their faith at the door. Today’s culture surely could use more men like that…….except people like you wouldn’t actually vote for them today.
The Judeo-Christian history for this country is undeniable. I‘m actually sorry for you that you happened to have been born in a country whose roots you’d prefer not to have. However, many of us happen to agree with the faith of the men and women of that time and chose to restore this country by returning to our roots.
Report Post »SpeckChaser
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 5:57pmMOD
I will restate the point of our debate because, as of now, you do not know what it is about.
My point was some people, like you, dislike how the country was founded and want it changed. You then supplied a couple points that support this.
To prove me wrong you said, “Your argument is IRRELEVANT because there IS someone holding office who is an Atheist,” and, “I gave a link…where a guy…who is an atheist….is holding office…..you ignored.”
I ignored it because it supports what I said. In the beginning, atheists were not eligible to hold office… now we have an atheists holding office. So it was one way, then it was changed, now it is different.
Then you said “How does someone take the stand…if they refuse to swear to God…your “NOR BE COMPETENT TO TESTIFY AS A WITNESS” is WRONG.
Again, you support my argument. In the beginning, non-believers were not eligible to bear witness…now we have non-believers bearing witness. So it was one way, then it was changed, now it is different.
Finally you said “As atheism becomes more popular…those laws will be declared unconstitutional and overturned.”
Again, in future tense, you support my argument. Your saying as time goes on, the original intent of our founders will be overturned. So it was one way, in the future it will be changed, then it will be different.
Since you have made 3 posts since the start of this debate, of which you don’t know the topic, I will leave you be fro
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 5:58pmAnd WOW…..talking about sweeping dismissals. You use a few quotes attributed to Thomas Jefferson as your entire logic that the Founders kept Jesus out of the Constitution. You just indicated how very little you know about the men of that generation and that you are relying on your preferences and biases versus fact.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 6:21pmI nor most else are saying that because the Founders were Christians that it makes Christianity true nor that the Founder consulted every decision through the Bible. Although, I would counter that they knew the Bible very well and many prayed over their decisions. The reason we bring up their faith is because it influenced who they were as men as well as being leaders within their respective states. Many also taught at their churches. They were men of honor who deserve our recognition and respect. That is the roots of this country from the pilgrims on the Mayflower to the great men and women of the Revolutionary War to the founders who established this country. We, Christians, hold them in high regard as the legacy of this country. And THAT is why we want people of God in our represented government. We prefer people of Biblical foundation truly trying to live it out to the best of their ability because that is what served our country well at it’s founding.
Oh…..and you say that you can admit you’re wrong for your own benefit. You like to consider yourself moderate as you launch the next attack on anything your areas of disagreement. At least that is how you come across here IMHO. Perhaps you aren’t quite as confrontational in real.
See you on the next thread. And you too, BILLY. :-)
Report Post »SpeckChaser
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 6:25pm@ COPATRIOTS
Of course I don’t mind and hope you continue to spread the good and informative words, but fear you and Billy are wasting your time on mod. Good Luck.
Report Post »copatriots
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 6:35pmThanks, SPECK. And I can’t help caring about people. It’s not just for MOD but anyone else who might happen to be following the discussion. :-)
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 8:19pm@COPATRIOTS
I still can‘t believe you don’t understand what I’m saying. I’m done talking about this, I can’t describe this any clearer to you. I have tried numerous ways, and you keep getting some other meaning out of it. I don‘t know where you’re getting that from. If you care enough, re-read what I’m saying and see if you understand it better, I am done trying to find a new way to say it.
@ SPECKCHASER
What is your point? Your response to me was, “You said “Get the Government out of religion” but “don’t get religion out of the Government””
You then went on to posts links about people having to affirm the existence of a God to hold office or to take the stand. What do your links have to do with what I said?
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 10:58pm@SPECKCHASER
@COPATRIOTS
Wow I thought this thread was dead, but you both finished strong.
I learn much from you both, and many others here.
@MOD
You seem to be up to your usual tricks.
Since Speckchasers last post intimated that he might be gone for awhile, I will take the liberty of answering for him.
To make it short and sweet, here is what I believe his point to be, in a nutshell.
Things used to be different, in a good way.
Some people began fundamentally changing things, in a not so good way.
Many are unhappy with said changes and would like to change them back.
I thought he was pretty straightforward and clear. I wonder why you had to ask what his point was?
November 2010 was the beginning of CHANGE. This November will hopefully be phase 2.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 11:05pmHey JZS
Just in case you are lurking.
Don’t take the obvious cheap, and false shot that I know you are ready to pounce upon.
Report Post »TOUGHTEXASMAMA
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:01pmNot being Catholic, I don’t particularly have an issue with contraceptives being covered. Having said that, I have a BIG problem with the ‘morning after pill’ because it is clearly an abortion pill. They are demanding that the Catholics provide abortions! What were they thinking?!!!
Report Post »undrprsr
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:40pmWhy should I pay for contraceptive’s? Can I replace you window,if I’m the one that broke it? WHERE IS THE ORIGIN OF DEBT?Figure that out and you’ll be better off! ORIGIN OF DEBT? Where do I get responsible for YOUR BITRH CONTROL?
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:59pmOf course the Catholic church is against abortion and birth control….they need more young boys to molest.
Leave it to religion to take the “NO ABORTION!“ stance and the ”PROTECT THE RAPISTS IN CONFESSION!” stance.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:46pmThere’s the old MOD we all know and love.
Welcome back.
Report Post »LICENSEDTOCARRY
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:51pmYour argument his contradictory. Care to try again?
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 5:21pm@MOD
One last question. If you have already answered it, please forgive my forgetfulness.
Of all your religious friends, do any of them happen to be Catholic?
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 8:49pm@Billy
Please stop responding to me from now on. I made it clear to you that I am freeing you from this “game” you think I am “playing” and I know that you read my post because I see your responses and wonder why you keep responding to me knowing I have no interest in playing this “game” with you anymore.
The only reason I am responding to you now is to make that point and to apologize for my remarks above. You are right, they are uncalled for and will do nothing but harm and separate us on this issue even further. Instead of talking rationally about the negatives of church officials not reporting heinous actions to the police, everyone will only focus on the language I used as an attack on their beliefs.
While I think it’s despicable that anybody would knowingly not report a crime(especially a heinous one as child molestation) because it would be a violation of their beliefs, I went about it in the wrong way.
Anyways, I have made my peace. Please stop responding to me, I have no interest in responding to anything you have to say because you view this as some big “game” that I’m playing.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 10:40pm@MOD
First, I am glad that maybe you finally understand that your usual vitriol is detrimental to any constructive dialog.
Second, just like you have said, I do not really care if you respond to me or not.
If I see something you say that prompts me to either make a comment, or point out your inconsistencies, I will.
But you should never feel pressured to respond, as I would never try to impose my thoughts or beliefs on you, or anyone else, through my words or legislation.
Report Post »hypnos
Posted on February 10, 2012 at 9:57amModeration now you slipped into a very bigoted attack of a religious faith. You just revealed you prefer to ridicule redirect and now define the catholic faith with your stupid inference on child molestation. Stick to the point, liberty is at risk any time it restricts the rights of the people. It is about freedom to choose not the if certain groups uses the pill. If a religious employer does not want to provide the pill or abortion the job seeker can go to another employer that does provide these services a choice is still available. The only choice that is being denied is the religious employer’s.
Report Post »SEC777
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:58pm58 percent of Catholics support Obama’s policy, according to http://publicreligion.org/research/2012/02/january-tracking-poll-2012/
It has been shown that 98 percent of Catholics use birth control, regardless of what the Catholic leadership has said.
This is not going to win the conservatives the election. It only fires up the people who were already voting against President Obama. Keep bringing up issues like this and Obama will be sure to win re-election.
Report Post »ModerationIsBest
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:01pmThank for a logical argument. I appreciate it.
Do Republicans think they’re going to win the nomination by backing absolutely backward thinking guys like Santorum? His views on these things will scare off a lot of moderate people and some who may be religious, but don’t take it as radically serious as he does.
Give me a sane Republican candidate to vote for in the general election, I beg of you.
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:51pmHey MOD,
Leaving the current 4 out of it, since you have already voiced your lack of enthusiasm for all of them.
If you had your druthers, who would be your “ideal” consevative candidate?
Who would send a tingle up your leg? (That was just a slam Chrissy, not you Mod)
Report Post »Therightsofbilly
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:52pmEDIT: to read……….slam ON Chrissy
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:55pmI wish this had come up closer to the election. Obama will fold and give them an exemption and it will be forgotten by the time the election rolls around. The Catholic leadership has known about this for a while now. It almost makes you wonder if they wanted to get it out of the way for him before the election. He can look the hero correcting a mistake made by his underlings. A lot of them identify as Catholics first but, Democrat runs a close second.
Report Post »G man
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:08pmExactly.
Report Post »Leopold
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 7:31pmThe contraception issue will be used as: “Republicans are against contraception”.
I believe Obama gives the green light to the people in the background. They scheme and deceive the citizen on a daily basis. Making new laws and regulations.
Running THIS campaign was started the day Obama entered the White House in 2009. Every decision they have made over the last 3 years was weighed and measured on how it can also be used for his re-election.
Obama cannot do this by himself. I don’t think he is smart enough. He wants power and his minions make sure he gets it. Obama does not love this beautiful country.
Remember when Romney was asked about state controlled contraception. That was done on purpose to bring this issue into the campaign. Now with the Catholic Church fighting against the over-reach of government into religious issues, Republicans are coming out to stand with them.
The Democrats and Obama will bring a message like: “Republicans are against birth control”. That message will motivate mainly young people. So they hope anyways. Obama has lost their enthusiasm and will use this as a tool to get it back.. The young want to get all the free contraception devices they can get. Sex with no responsibility is very appealing to the young and not only the young.
Now it is not about RELIGIOUS FREEDOM anymore, but will be about; ‘Republicans are refusing birth control.” Just wait and see.
Report Post »patriot4ever
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:53pmToo bad his parents didn’t use them…
Report Post »oldguy49
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:57pmyep…………. better to have been a tingle up somebodys leg
Report Post »florida123
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:53pmHe is losing because he has no idea who his People are! When he goes after any Christian church he is actually taking on the entire Christian Community………….Catholic, Baptist, etc etc.. See he clearly doesnt understand his audience. Not good regardless of what you are selling……….Odumbo shows he is either a complete Moron, Useful Idiot or a complete Commie………..Which is it Mr. President?
Report Post »lilmacs
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:52pmDid the Obama administration clearly underestimate the response? I don’t think so. They’re playing us like a game of chess. I think they were already looking 4 moves ahead before they announced it.
Report Post »churchlady
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:06pmI completely agree, he (they) know EXACTLY what they are doing. People who just say they are dumb are being very naive.
Report Post »lilmacs
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:39pmPawn take pawn. Must be nice to be a King (or Queen).
Report Post »GeorgieJo
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 4:59pmI don’t play chess but all of this seems like a diversion and Obummer will relent,get re elected then bang–put this ruling back in.
WHO DO YOU TRUST?
I pray that Catholics see through this ruse.
OMG in 2012
Report Post »Wigglesworth
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:49pmtest
Report Post »Wigglesworth
Posted on February 9, 2012 at 3:48pmI checked Univision’s web site and only saw 1 story on this controversy 2 days ago. Their viewership is overwhelmingly Catholic so I wonder why they don’t have a story update on this every day.
Report Post »