Active Users:107 Time:25/02/2017 04:29:22 AM
The affiliation is the sticking point. Joel Send a noteboard - 11/02/2012 03:41:33 AM
The situation of Catholic Charities of Sacramento Inc. v. Superior Court was identical to this controversy (prior to the "obama compromise".)

Religious churches were not forced to buy contraception as part of their insurance plan, under Obama's original plan.
Organization not directly affiliated with Religious churches as part of the tax code but were still religious in nature (such as catholic charities, hospitals, etc) were required to have contraception for free as part of their insurance plan.

It is hard to see how an organization operated by the church, or exclusively by its organs if not a part of it.

For example, the below linked group of hospitals: The Wikipedia article claims they changed their name just this year "to better reflect their ministry and the ending of their affiliation with the Catholic Church," but also notes its top executives all come from its seven co-sponors—all of which are orders of nuns. Calling that a mere private corporation that just coincidentally happens to be run exclusively by Catholic Church leaders badly misrepresents the situation. Not only is it impossible to get on the board of directors without being a nun, it is impossible to be one of the executives who SELECTS the board. If that is just a private corporation someone needs to call the EEOC on them. I certainly think the nuns running it have a valid objection to paying for their employees contraception.

Hopefully all this backslapping over Obama scoring a minor "victory" in alarming Americas religious voters (which is the vast majority of them) does not end with churches abandoning non-profit healthcare to preserve their religious convictions. That would hardly be a big triumph for US healthcare, and certainly not for the people to afford to purchase it out of pocket, supposedly the people who benefit most from Obamas healthcare "reform." Since we do not HAVE the public healthcare that would have avoided controversies like this one, that would be less a "triumph" than "disaster that kills millions."
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
Democrats bailing on Obama - War against the Catholic Church heats up - 09/02/2012 04:03:35 AM 1014 Views
This is not a war on Catholics, it is Obama being an idiot again. - 09/02/2012 04:52:01 AM 257 Views
For someone who used to be a Con Law professor - 10/02/2012 08:23:34 PM 180 Views
Also, kudos for linking to a source, and a fairly non-partisan one as well. - 09/02/2012 01:33:07 PM 379 Views
I am a non-partisan guy, so I only use unbiased sources! *NM* - 09/02/2012 04:02:50 PM 261 Views
Is there really such a thing? *NM* - 09/02/2012 04:11:30 PM 191 Views
You lost all credibility in the first line of your post. - 09/02/2012 04:49:23 PM 328 Views
The subject line didn't help. *NM* - 09/02/2012 06:04:11 PM 202 Views
But it added some flair to the discussion! *NM* - 09/02/2012 07:46:47 PM 188 Views
You actually think any of us has 'credibility' anymore in regards to neutrality? *NM* - 09/02/2012 06:46:13 PM 186 Views
It's one thing to have a bias. - 09/02/2012 07:28:51 PM 299 Views
Some would say putting a spotlight on it is more honest. *NM* - 09/02/2012 09:34:17 PM 166 Views
Ah, the Rupert Murdoch School of Objectivity. - 09/02/2012 10:15:57 PM 240 Views
Wow, talk about making a supernova out of a couple hydrogen atoms. - 09/02/2012 08:41:44 PM 203 Views
I'm somewhat suprised that Obama blundered this badly. - 10/02/2012 01:40:14 AM 1142 Views
Why? Have you not been paying attention? - 10/02/2012 02:03:43 AM 1487 Views
If I am not satisfied with Romney then my Plan B is to not vote. - 10/02/2012 10:58:34 PM 1430 Views
How does that help anything? Except Romneys election chances, of course. - 11/02/2012 01:08:22 AM 1375 Views
Bullshit. - 11/02/2012 04:29:31 AM 1466 Views
A vote for no one is a vote for more BS. - 11/02/2012 05:55:11 AM 1459 Views
Obama doing this actually impresses me to no end. - 10/02/2012 02:21:10 AM 1590 Views
He is already preparing to cave. - 10/02/2012 02:42:32 AM 1506 Views
Why are you even replying to me? What you said has little meaning to what I said. - 10/02/2012 03:33:27 AM 1410 Views
"And here I thought he was just another politician." - 10/02/2012 01:29:36 PM 1414 Views
Aaaaand you can put your hat back on now: Obama has already caved. - 10/02/2012 04:04:30 PM 1478 Views
So Jehovah Witness employers should not have to pay for blood transfusions? - 10/02/2012 03:57:47 AM 271 Views
Not if it conflicts with their religious beliefs. - 10/02/2012 04:20:32 PM 314 Views
Money is not the same as speech! - 10/02/2012 07:20:56 PM 205 Views
No it isn't Joel, empirically you are dead wrong - 10/02/2012 11:24:19 PM 294 Views
I do not see how requiring private entities do it instead of the feds is "least restrictive way." - 11/02/2012 12:53:22 AM 292 Views
Catholic Charities of Sacramento Inc. v. Superior Court - 11/02/2012 01:21:46 AM 269 Views
"the Court found that it wasn't a religious organization, it was just a non-profit corporation." - 11/02/2012 01:36:33 AM 197 Views
The situation was identical to the pre obama controversy - 11/02/2012 02:42:57 AM 140 Views
The affiliation is the sticking point. - 11/02/2012 03:41:33 AM 272 Views
One last point - 10/02/2012 11:35:25 PM 287 Views
The federal government forcing private groups to facilitate without committing sin also infringes. - 11/02/2012 01:03:30 AM 208 Views
You argument does not make sense - 11/02/2012 01:26:57 AM 258 Views
It was an analogy, not an equivalency. - 11/02/2012 01:48:14 AM 222 Views
Lets enhance your analogy making it closer to reality - 11/02/2012 02:19:41 AM 287 Views
Why could I not buy it with my own money? - 11/02/2012 03:46:33 AM 282 Views
Re: Why could I not buy it with my own money? - 11/02/2012 04:17:17 AM 223 Views
In other words, I could. - 11/02/2012 04:21:05 AM 139 Views
Some more points - 11/02/2012 02:30:27 AM 313 Views
Sex is not a necessity either. - 11/02/2012 03:56:51 AM 269 Views
I can't believe you just said that - 11/02/2012 04:30:12 AM 177 Views
The widespread inability to believe that is deeply worrisome. - 11/02/2012 06:33:01 AM 307 Views
LMAO due to Obama's compromise (the word compromise should have a in it ) - 11/02/2012 12:12:57 AM 309 Views
Obama just got two weeks of being portrayed as "anti-church" to the point even Dems complained. - 11/02/2012 02:00:28 AM 257 Views
The polls disagree with you. - 11/02/2012 02:32:59 AM 222 Views
It is an interesting article, but not for the polls. - 11/02/2012 04:18:17 AM 282 Views
I wouldn't put too much into that poll anyway - 11/02/2012 05:37:05 AM 389 Views
I don't think it's quite the laughing matter you think it is - 11/02/2012 12:31:23 PM 293 Views
Nossy that was not Joel, that was me - 11/02/2012 01:56:39 PM 348 Views
I know that. - 11/02/2012 03:23:32 PM 341 Views
Understood. - 11/02/2012 07:51:14 PM 294 Views
mmm... - 11/02/2012 08:20:26 PM 272 Views

Reply to Message