First gay adoption, now contraception and abortion benefits in healthcare plans.

And here I though conservatives were the ones who didn't respect seperation of church and state.

Former Obama admin official may not back Obama because of health insurance mandate for Catholic institutions.

This could end up being a bigger issue for Obama than he realizes. He's getting hit from dems and republicans on it.

(02-06-2012 11:10 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  First gay adoption, now contraception and abortion benefits in healthcare plans.

And here I though conservatives were the ones who didn't respect seperation of church and state.

Former Obama admin official may not back Obama because of health insurance mandate for Catholic institutions.

This could end up being a bigger issue for Obama than he realizes. He's getting hit from dems and republicans on it.

The GOP has been so busy making Obama look unbeatable that he might end up accidentally being himself often enough for the American people to take note.

(02-06-2012 11:38 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(02-06-2012 11:10 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  First gay adoption, now contraception and abortion benefits in healthcare plans.

And here I though conservatives were the ones who didn't respect seperation of church and state.

Former Obama admin official may not back Obama because of health insurance mandate for Catholic institutions.

This could end up being a bigger issue for Obama than he realizes. He's getting hit from dems and republicans on it.

The GOP has been so busy making Obama look unbeatable that he might end up accidentally being himself often enough for the American people to take note.

I do not think it will make a difference to the average voter. The majority of Catholics have been using birth control for years, choosing to live in sin anyway.

The requirement is not for direct employees of the church, only public businesses like Hospitals. If all other businesses are going to be required to offer them there is no reason to give a competitive advantage to Catholic hospitals who may be able to pocket some cost savings on their health plans due to this. It is up to the plan participant to decide if they want the birth control pills anyway.

And people deny there is a war on religion from the left ...

Liberals don't understand that, as Americans, we have freedom OF religion and not freedom FROM religion.

(02-06-2012 07:48 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  And people deny there is a war on religion from the left ...

Liberals don't understand that, as Americans, we have freedom OF religion and not freedom FROM religion.

Which part of my comments do you consider a war on religion?

Even many liberal/pro-choice Catholics are objecting to this.

In a 55-45-type election, something like that wouldn't matter.

In a 51-49-type election, it just might.

dcCid Wrote:  The requirement is not for direct employees of the church, only public businesses like Hospitals. If all other businesses are going to be required to offer them there is no reason to give a competitive advantage to Catholic hospitals who may be able to pocket some cost savings on their health plans due to this. It is up to the plan participant to decide if they want the birth control pills anyway.

Catholic universities and charities too. I guess those are called "businesses" by liberals.

(02-06-2012 07:53 PM)dcCid Wrote:  

(02-06-2012 07:48 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  And people deny there is a war on religion from the left ...

Liberals don't understand that, as Americans, we have freedom OF religion and not freedom FROM religion.

Which part of my comments do you consider a war on religion?

I was speaking in general terms, not against you.

By doing things like closing Catholic adoption services, the left is doing everything it can to drive religion out of the public square and behind closed doors. The founders did not ever foresee things like that happening. Their only goal was to make sure we did not have an official state religion like the Church of England, or the Lutheran Church in Sweden. They would be shocked and disgusted to learn that we ban things like a prayer at high school graduations.

Americans today are just politically correct wusses.

(02-06-2012 07:48 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  And people deny there is a war on religion from the left ...

Liberals don't understand that, as Americans, we have freedom OF religion and not freedom FROM religion.

And we're supposed to have in this country a separation of church and State, yet imbecile "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote.

(02-06-2012 11:41 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-06-2012 07:48 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  And people deny there is a war on religion from the left ...

Liberals don't understand that, as Americans, we have freedom OF religion and not freedom FROM religion.

And we're supposed to have in this country a separation of church and State, yet imbecile "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote.

There was not supposed to be an ironclad "separation of church and state" as currently understood by liberals. The founders only wanted to be sure that membership in a state religion was not required and no particular religion was adopted as the "official" religion of the United States. Prayer in the public schools would have been ok with Washington, Adams, et al.

(02-06-2012 09:15 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  Even many liberal/pro-choice Catholics are objecting to this.

In a 55-45-type election, something like that wouldn't matter.

In a 51-49-type election, it just might.

I wouldn't underestimate the power of priests across the nation speaking against Obama.

(02-06-2012 11:41 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  imbecile "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote.

It's always fascinating when liberals let their hair down and say what's really on their mind. Non-liberals, take note: ideas like this will become law if liberals ever take full control.

(02-07-2012 07:54 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(02-06-2012 11:41 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-06-2012 07:48 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  And people deny there is a war on religion from the left ...

Liberals don't understand that, as Americans, we have freedom OF religion and not freedom FROM religion.

And we're supposed to have in this country a separation of church and State, yet imbecile "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote.

There was not supposed to be an ironclad "separation of church and state" as currently understood by liberals. The founders only wanted to be sure that membership in a state religion was not required and no particular religion was adopted as the "official" religion of the United States. Prayer in the public schools would have been ok with Washington, Adams, et al.

As was slavery, etc...your point?

(02-07-2012 09:13 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(02-06-2012 11:41 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  imbecile "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote.

It's always fascinating when liberals let their hair down and say what's really on their mind. Non-liberals, take note: ideas like this will become law if liberals ever take full control.

Don't label me a liberal, you imbecile.

(02-07-2012 10:17 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 09:13 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(02-06-2012 11:41 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  imbecile "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote.

It's always fascinating when liberals let their hair down and say what's really on their mind. Non-liberals, take note: ideas like this will become law if liberals ever take full control.

Don't label me a liberal, you imbecile.

Believing conservative evangelicals shouldn't be allowed to vote DOES label you as a LIBERAL. You labeled yourself.

(02-07-2012 10:19 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:17 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 09:13 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(02-06-2012 11:41 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  imbecile "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote.

It's always fascinating when liberals let their hair down and say what's really on their mind. Non-liberals, take note: ideas like this will become law if liberals ever take full control.

Don't label me a liberal, you imbecile.

Believing conservative evangelicals shouldn't be allowed to vote DOES label you as a LIBERAL. You labeled yourself.

Where do you see me referring to "conservative evangelicals" in my post?

(02-07-2012 10:21 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:19 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:17 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 09:13 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(02-06-2012 11:41 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  imbecile "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote.

It's always fascinating when liberals let their hair down and say what's really on their mind. Non-liberals, take note: ideas like this will become law if liberals ever take full control.

Don't label me a liberal, you imbecile.

Believing conservative evangelicals shouldn't be allowed to vote DOES label you as a LIBERAL. You labeled yourself.

Where do you see me referring to "conservative evangelicals" in my post?

Maybe I read it incorrectly when you referred to "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote."

Who were you referring to?

(02-07-2012 10:26 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:21 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:19 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:17 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 09:13 AM)Native Georgian Wrote:  It's always fascinating when liberals let their hair down and say what's really on their mind. Non-liberals, take note: ideas like this will become law if liberals ever take full control.

Don't label me a liberal, you imbecile.

Believing conservative evangelicals shouldn't be allowed to vote DOES label you as a LIBERAL. You labeled yourself.

Where do you see me referring to "conservative evangelicals" in my post?

Maybe I read it incorrectly when you referred to "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote."

Who were you referring to?

The stupid.

(02-06-2012 11:41 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  And we're supposed to have in this country a separation of church and State,

And yet the federal government if forcing a church to directly fund something against the tenets of their faith. This is not taxing catholics and giving the money to planned parenthood... No this is government with the force of law telling the church *F* you're religious liberty we want this so you will do this.

(02-07-2012 10:28 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:26 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:21 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:19 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(02-07-2012 10:17 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  Don't label me a liberal, you imbecile.

Believing conservative evangelicals shouldn't be allowed to vote DOES label you as a LIBERAL. You labeled yourself.

Where do you see me referring to "conservative evangelicals" in my post?

Maybe I read it incorrectly when you referred to "conservative" politicians continue to inject religion into the political discussion to distract from the issues and appeal to a part of the electorate that in reality should not have the right to vote."

Who were you referring to?

The stupid.

Just the generally stupid or the conservative Christian? The two aren't interchangeable.

Though I would agree that people should have a basic understanding of government and how policy impacts them before they vote. Voting for someone simply because they're brown is as bad as voting for someone simply because they're white.