Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    Last Friday, the White House announced that it would revise the controversial ObamaCare birth-control mandate to address religious-liberty concerns. Its proposed modifications are a farce.

    The Department of Health and Human Services would still require employers with religious objections to select an insurance company to provide contraceptives and drugs that induce abortions to its employees. The employers would pay for the drugs through higher premiums. For those employers that self-insure, like the Archdiocese of Washington, the farce is even more blatant.

    The birth-control coverage mandate violates the First Amendment's bar against the "free exercise" of religion. But it also violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. That statute, passed unanimously by the House of Representatives and by a 97-3 vote in the Senate, was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. It was enacted in response to a 1990 Supreme Court opinion, Employment Division v. Smith.

    That case limited the protections available under the First Amendment's guarantee of free exercise of religion to those government actions that explicitly targeted religious practices, by subjecting them to difficult-to-satisfy strict judicial scrutiny. Other governmental actions, even if burdening religious activities, were held subject to a more deferential test.

    The 1993 law restored the same protections of religious freedom that had been understood to exist pre-Smith. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act states that the federal government may "substantially burden" a person's "exercise of religion" only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person "is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest" and "is the least restrictive means of furthering" that interest.

    The law also provides that any later statutory override of its protections must be explicit. But there is nothing in the ObamaCare legislation that explicitly or even implicitly overrides the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The birth-control mandate proposed by Health and Human Services is thus illegal.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204795304577223003824714664.html

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]Might be a real good way to push SCOTUS into ruling that the government mandating ANY insurance is illegal
    Posted by GreginMeffa[/QUOTE]

    I agree!
     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]No, it's not. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act states that the federal government may "substantially burden" a person's "exercise of religion" It's not a substantial burden as the church isn't paying for it, the benefactor needs to request it and not all employees are members of that religion. only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person "is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest" Not really applicable, see above. But the 'gov't interest' would be less unwanted pregnancies, pregnancies out of wedlock and fewer abortions. and "is the least restrictive means of furthering" that interest. Contraception is a private matter. Get the gov't out of the bedroom.
    Posted by airborne-rgr[/QUOTE]

    Does it create a substantial burden to people?  Seeing that contraceptives is already paid for poor people through places like Planned Parenthood, schools, and other institutions, and that there is not a ban in terms of acquiring birth control,  there is no burden on the individual.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    I am ambivalent about the mandate to purchase health insurance myself..and no religion will have nothing to do with the HCR mandate to purchase.
    BTW..one of the reasons we have this whole controversy is somewhat because of the mandate. Since the government is now going to mandate that people purchase health insurance ( something that benefits private insurance companies) the government is requiring that those same private health insurance companies comply with certain levels of preventative and other health care. After all..it makes little sense to mandate that a consumer purchase a health care plan that provided inadequate coverage..wouldn't everyone agree with that?

    No..my issue is whether or not the government should be able to mandate that a consumer purchase a product from a private corporation. To me..if the government is going to mandate that people purchase health insurance, then they need to offer a public option as well. I am all for getting health insurance away from employers and understand the only way to keep costs managable is the mandate..but...
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]I am ambivalent about the mandate to purchase health insurance myself..and no religion will have nothing to do with the HCR mandate to purchase. BTW..one of the reasons we have this whole controversy is somewhat because of the mandate. Since the government is now going to mandate that people purchase health insurance ( something that benefits private insurance companies) the government is requiring that those same private health insurance companies comply with certain levels of preventative and other health care. After all..it makes little sense to mandate that a consumer purchase a health care plan that provided inadequate coverage..wouldn't everyone agree with that? No..my issue is whether or not the government should be able to mandate that a consumer purchase a product from a private corporation. To me..if the government is going to mandate that people purchase health insurance, then they need to offer a public option as well. I am all for getting health insurance away from employers and understand the only way to keep costs managable is the mandate..but...
    Posted by miscricket[/QUOTE]

    Not sure I agree, at least in part.

    Health insurance via employers is better than health care via government, but not as good as health care sold to the individual.  All have their strengths and weaknesses.  For example, if you have a serious chronic condition, employer provided insurance is probably your best solution.  Individual is likely too expensive, and government care too restrictive.

    I'll tell you this:  you eliminate the need for me to work for health insurance, and you just eliminated me from the workforce.  Not saying I'm happy with Obama care, but you just de-motivated me to work in a major way.  I am sure there are lots of older folks inn a similar boat.

    As far as the contraceptives, with Stefanopolous pre-seeding the issue via the debates, this is looking like a callous attempt by Obama to divide people along yet another line.  For such a uniter, he seems to spend much of his time dividing us.


     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional?? : Not sure I agree, at least in part. Health insurance via employers is better than health care via government, but not as good as health care sold to the individual.  All have their strengths and weaknesses.  For example, if you have a serious chronic condition, employer provided insurance is probably your best solution.  Individual is likely too expensive, and government care too restrictive. I'll tell you this:  you eliminate the need for me to work for health insurance, and you just eliminated me from the workforce.  Not saying I'm happy with Obama care, but you just de-motivated me to work in a major way.  I am sure there are lots of older folks inn a similar boat. As far as the contraceptives, with Stefanopolous pre-seeding the issue via the debates, this is looking like a callous attempt by Obama to divide people along yet another line.  For such a uniter, he seems to spend much of his time dividing us.
    Posted by skeeter20[/QUOTE]
    How do you figure that Skeeter? People work for reasons other than the healthcare coverage offered by employers..in fact..if you don't work at all and have no income..then you still have health insurance..it's just that the government provides it. People work because you need to have an income to have any kind of quality of life.
    Does it surprise you to know that we are the only industrialized country in the world who has this employer based model? Does it also surprise you that of all the industrialized countries in the world that we rank something like 26th or 27th in health care? That tells me the current model is just not working.
    Also..how is Obama dividing the country over the contraception issue? Seems it's more like the right wingnut males making an issue out of it. Even the Catholic church can't agree on it..lol.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional?? : How do you figure that Skeeter? People work for reasons other than the healthcare coverage offered by employers..in fact..if you don't work at all and have no income..then you still have health insurance..it's just that the government provides it. People work because you need to have an income to have any kind of quality of life. Does it surprise you to know that we are the only industrialized country in the world who has this employer based model? Does it also surprise you that of all the industrialized countries in the world that we rank something like 26th or 27th in health care? That tells me the current model is just not working. Also..how is Obama dividing the country over the contraception issue? Seems it's more like the right wingnut males making an issue out of it. Even the Catholic church can't agree on it..lol.
    Posted by miscricket[/QUOTE]

    Health Ranking:

    That health care ranking is bogus. I have looked into it.  Basically, there are a handful of non-medial issues which skew the data, like a heavy weighting towards government provided medical care, ie. you can't be considered to be delivering quality care unless it is is "fair", where fair simply means controlled by the government.  Berwick established these measurements throughout Europe, hardly a middle of the road guy, seeing he has made his living promoting socialized medicine.

    Obamacare:

    You are misrepresenting Obama care. Everyone ends up in the government pool i.e. the government health plan after 5 or 7 years. It is in the bill. 

    Consider the financial aspect as well.  Your company  pays @$12,000 to provide you insurance, untaxed compensation.  The government fine for not providing health insurance is $8,000. How long before companies begin to see that paying the fine is more cost effective than providing the insurance?

    Now, take it one step further.  When the company drops the insurance, you have lost $12,000 of compensation, paid in health insurance.  You now need to go buy this health care from the government, with taxed dollars.  Keeping the math simple, lets say you need to earn $12,000 to pay the government $8,000 for insurance.  You personal compensation package just had a negative swing of $24,000, and best case, you have the same insurance.

    This is a killer to the middle class that Obama so holds dearly(sic).

    Contraception:

    Obama is clearly dividing the country over contraception, the "new abortion". The mandate serves no actual purpose. Let me ask you this:
     
    Is contraception legal?  Yes
    Is it widely available?  Yes.  Every pharmacy, every school, every Planned parenthood and like organization.

    Is contraception cheap?  Yes.  $4 per month at Walmart.

    So tell me.  With these facts, what purpose does this contraception mandate serve, other than to tick off the catholic church, encroach on freedom of choice and religion, and whip up the base?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rockyracoon. Show rockyracoon's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    The issue isn't about contraception, it's really about where that line is that seperates church from state.  Once the church enters into the public domain the laws of the land out wiegh the laws of the church. No one wants the government telling the church what to do but it works both ways. We certainly don't want the church telling us what we can do. The way I see it,  Obama has actually protected our freedom of choice while really doing nothing to impinge on ones freedom to practice their own religous beliefs. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]The issue isn't about contraception, it's really about where that line is that seperates church from state.  Once the church enters into the public domain the laws of the land out wiegh the laws of the church. No one wants the government telling the church what to do but it works both ways. We certainly don't want the church telling us what we can do. The way I see it,  Obama has actually protected our freedom of choice while really doing nothing to impinge on ones freedom to practice their own religous beliefs. 
    Posted by rockyracoon[/QUOTE]

    How long before churches are mandated that they must marry gay couples?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    Once the church enters into the public domain the laws of the land out wiegh the laws of the church.

    Good idea. The church should go back to the catacombs and hold their services in secret like they did in the old Roman days because once they started holding public services they were out in the public domain, right?

    Hey, maybe we can throw some of them to the lions too! Y'know, at long as we charge admission (that's commerce subject to the commerce clause, right?) we'd be on perfectly safe constitutional grounds.

    Don't worry about the first amendment saying that the government shall make no laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. That part of the constitution is clearly inferior to the bits that I like. Yay commerce clause!


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]Once the church enters into the public domain the laws of the land out wiegh the laws of the church. Good idea. The church should go back to the catacombs and hold their services in secret like they did in the old Roman days because once they started holding public services they were out in the public domain, right? Hey, maybe we can throw some of them to the lions too! Y'know, at long as we charge admission (that's commerce subject to the commerce clause, right?) we'd be on perfectly safe constitutional grounds. Don't worry about the first amendment saying that the government shall make no laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. That part of the constitution is clearly inferior to the bits that I like. Yay commerce clause!
    Posted by StalkingButler[/QUOTE]


    Trying to talk religion with these lefties is like being in the lions den:  No attempt to understand, or live and let live, just attack with poorly understood concepts and ideas.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Firewind. Show Firewind's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]Once the church enters into the public domain the laws of the land out wiegh the laws of the church. Good idea. The church should go back to the catacombs and hold their services in secret like they did in the old Roman days because once they started holding public services they were out in the public domain, right? Hey, maybe we can throw some of them to the lions too! Y'know, at long as we charge admission (that's commerce subject to the commerce clause, right?) we'd be on perfectly safe constitutional grounds. Don't worry about the first amendment saying that the government shall make no laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. That part of the constitution is clearly inferior to the bits that I like. Yay commerce clause!
    Posted by StalkingButler[/QUOTE]

    The Church as victim: Not this round.  The faithful/commoners/electorate get it.
     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional?? : Ya, that's exactly what he's saying...<sigh /> The separation clause works both ways. Religions are free to exercise their cannons as long as they don't impose themselves into the political arena. It has been upheld that religious dogma does not trump the law. That is why Rastifarians can't smoke dope. Feedom of religion stops at the point where you infringe on the rights of others.
    Posted by airborne-rgr[/QUOTE]

    How does the catholic stance on contraceptives impact anyone forcefully and the mandate does?  Show me how anyone is prevented form acquiring contraceptives should they desire them.

    How is this an imposition onto the political arena?  If it was an imposition into the political arena, contraceptives would be outlawed, would they not?
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhichOnesPink. Show WhichOnesPink's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    Next up airborne will make more sweeping generalization...oops...too late...
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??

    In Response to Re: Is the new Birth Control mandate illegal and Unconstitutional??:
    [QUOTE]Next up, the whacko wingnuts will be arguing that no one has to work on Sunday because it's against their religion.
    Posted by airborne-rgr[/QUOTE]

    That's already law.  It is covered by reasonable accommodation.  I bet you want to repeal it.
     

Share