It always amazes me how the Liberal Left trumpets the “Bill of Rights” only to point. That point usually comes when there is a challenge to one of their arguments. Then the ACLU usually gets involved and forces the issue by way of lawsuits and the financial discouragement which usually accompanies them. It truly says something when our Judicial system can be manipulated in this fashion.
I only bring this up because it looks as if we may be gearing up for another legal brawl having to do with religion and the Presidents push to have “all” employers pay for “contraception”. This is one of the problems with government controlled healthcare. There are just so many roads untraveled that will come up time and again, leaving our leaders to literally “go where no man has gone before”… Over reaching eventually morphs into a bureaucratic firestorm of allowances, exemptions, lawsuits and very red ink. This type of “family planning” Washington style, also tends to make folks on both side of the political aisle a little squeamish. For this reason, many Democrats appear to be parting ways with the POTUS on this one.
For my part, I think there is something fundamentally wrong with allowing Uncle Sam into our bedrooms. Moreover, the aforementioned conflict with companies which may hold or espouse religious views as protected under the first amendment, is valid and sure to be costly as our President appears to be digging in his ideological heels.
One thing is for certain, and that is there are sure to be a number of these face-offs as the election cycle heats up and both sides seek to push their government healthcare agendas, one to implement, and one to repeal…
The whole issue is a joke. Most church-affiliated employers were already providing health insurance that includes contraception. So you want big government out of peoples’ personal lives? Terrific! I agree. Let’s allow adults to decide who they will marry……same sex or opposite sex.
Ok Scott. But I reject a redefinition of the term. Even if that means referring to all unions as civil unions for the purposes of legality… I do believe folks can “marry” who they wish to, but not that the government must sanction or endorse a particular lifestyle. “Slippery slope”.. I must sound a bit Libertarian on this one , no?
I tend to think that Fred’s analysis of important facts of any issue of the day are right most of the time, but we all should remember that in most instances politicians; being the sleazy animals they are, just uses such issues as birth control to insight personal passions of the general public for their own gain more than anything ells.
The real issue here is more of who is forced to pay for such things, and not to override a woman’s personal choice. We need to end the self righteous, sloppy Agape and see the biggest problem here is Obama’s socialistic; if not outright communistic agenda.
It is essential for all of us to have compassion for both the ethical arguments in this birth control issue except that of the administration’s communistic grab for power.