Actually constitutionally speaking, Catholics shouldn't be excluded because of their (well ok, the Vatican and hard liners) beliefs. Shouldn't they trust their flock not to use said birth control? Because if somebody not of the Catholic faith is employed by a Catholic hospital, that infringes on their rights if their employer does not offer certain medications that the Vatican doesn't like.

It happens on a weekly basis at my moms doctors office.

I have personally been inline at walmart and seen someone pay cash for a tv and use a link card for their food purchases. My wife works retails and says it happens everyday.

_________________

My work will not pay for fertility treatments. They are exempt because they are a religious organization. I don't agree with it but I signed up for it when I took the job.

_________________

That's a welfare recipient having "alternate" sources of unreported income. Happens all the time with carpenters/electricians etc. Get on unemployment but continue to work for cash jobs.

What bothers me is when I see the stacks of 20's pissed away on scratch off tickets then they pay for their "food" (snacks and junk) with the Link card.

The crocodile tears that you shed for the Catholics had nothing to do with the subject at hand either.

Nowhere in any of my previous posts did I claim to loathe this person.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

I was being sarcastic.

The excuse that "religious beliefs" mean you don't have to pay for things is stupid. If a company decided that cancer treatment was against the "religious beliefs" of the company they could deny them too.

In reality, the "separation of church and state" requires that the government doesn't use religious thinking in policy making. That is what Seacrest doesn't seem to understand. His old fashioned church doesn't have the right to deny accepted medical coverage. The person who is receiving it has the right to not have things denied because of religious reasons.

I don't know if they are exempt. I don't know how standard fertility treatments are for insurance.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I have no crocodile tears. The repeated attempts to change the subject are puzzling.

Your word was hypocrite. My mistake and I stand corrected. After your most recent rant about the hypocritical nature of certain posters here, I thought that this might be something you would want to avoid.

_________________

?

Do you believe welfare cheats are a significant portion of our financial woes in this country?

Hey man its rough out there. At least he's working! That kind of fraud is not as vilified

Seacrest honest question. If you truly believe in the separation of Church and State, then why should Catholics be excluded from stuff they don't like? Where do you draw the line?

Here is another case where the administration tried and failed to step across the line of church of state.

The case is Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

It's not front page news. I'm aware of that.

To say that constitutional lines and rights of citizens of all sorts haven't been crossed by the present folks in power is just plain mistaken.

_________________

If you believe in a separation of church and state and understand the legal principle, why are we even having having this discussion?

_________________

The only person to change the subject was you. I went out of my way to NOT make this any type of religious discussion, as evidenced by my discussion with Dr. Ken. You inserted Catholics and their rights being stripped away, as if it had anything to do with the discussion.

What rant, and what posters? Stop being so cryptic, and just say what you are trying to say.

Hypocrite was the word I used. People who bitch about the perception that their freedoms are being taken, while supporting the actual stripping of rights of others, are hypocrites of the highest order.

Again, the whole idea that the rights of Catholics being stripped away is your cross to bear, not mine. Just because I am not addressing such nonsense, when it had nothing to do with the discussion at hand, does not make me a hypocrite.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

Because you are greatly blurring the line for your own personal beliefs (that and it seems just a good old dose of Obama hatred thrown in, but I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here)

If an individual is Jewish, and works for a Catholic hospital, shouldn't their right as an individual to receive any type of medication available to them supersede the Catholic Church's position (and c'mon, let's be honest. It's the Vatican's position. A majority of Catholics use and have no problem with birth control) that birth control is evil?

Did anyone happen to see what's in the spending bill that Quinn just signed? There are millions of dollars going to churches for "infrastructure improvements." How in the world is it constitutional for the state to provide direct grants to churches? (And many of those "churches" are dubious...) As taxpayers we should all be enraged, even if in the grand budget scheme it's not a huge percentage.

_________________

Because churches have a big belief in separation of Church and State. Unless it involves them getting huge grants and massive tax breaks from the State. Then they are fine with the two intermingling.

I've gone from being outraged at the first few Link card abusers I witnessed to absolutley amused at their bravado.

Even IF for some reason you don't think this abuse adds up to much it's a gateway habit for all parties involved.
I'm a big fan of "fixing broken windows"

_________________
Kenny Williams fell for the banana in the tailpipe

I'm sure it's a cross that I will not directly bear.

You ranted about chas being hypocrite in another thread we had a discussion in during the last week.

And you also refrenced Muslims during a response earlier in this thread. And you use the term "perception" of rights being violated so i pointed out the perception is a reality. And the Supreme Court, including Sotomayor and Kagan, justices that Obama appointed, agree that it is a reality.

_________________

Many Jews are currently employed in hospitals run by Catholics and no one is restricting there access to birth control. My internist is one of them.

_________________

That's why I chose Jewish.

So where then do you see the line?

The line for what exactly.

The government has no right to tell me to violate my conscience. I have happily paid for health insurance in the past for my employees. If they want birth control, they can come up with the 4.00 per month to get it.

_________________

But violating your conscience is your call. Denying an employee the right to make that decision for themselves based on your personal beliefs IMO is not your call.

FYI - if it's only 4.00 then your policy covers it. Cause even a generic costs more than that without insurance.

It's not my call when the government forces me to provide it. And pay for it.

And your second part is pretty important too. You can get generics for 4-9.00 at Walmart.

_________________

K but it is still your call. It's your call whether or not your and Mrs Seacrest violate your beliefs by using it or not using it. You feel just because you run the business that you have the right to force your beliefs upon your employees and make the call for them as well? What if you were Christian Scientist and didn't believe in medical care at all. Then what?

I'm paying for the health care.

The constitution guarantees me the right not to have to violate my conscience by engaging in activities that violate said conscience. Paying for abortions and birth control in this case.

In the past, I had numerous employees pay a co pay for their birth control. What they did on their time was between them and God, not me and the government.

And btw, there are exemptions for other religious organizations. The Amish for sure. So what we have is a violation of my rights and a fair level of hypocrisy.

_________________

I'm with you on the exceptions for other groups. I'm not in favor of ANY group wanting to be treated as special.

RPB's initial post and my response had nothing to do with the Catholic church, and how Barry is taking away their rights. You just inserted that for some reason, so it's a fair charge that I have leveled against you. I was talking about one specific person, and I cited a specific example about another specific person's first amendment rights being challenged.



Chas is a documented hypocrite. I have provided countless examples of this simply by quoting his words. You are calling me a hypocrite because you claim that Barry is taking away the rights of Catholics, with which I had no involvement, nor have I taken a stance either way.



Only after Dr. Ken brought up the Christian angle, which wasn't my point at all.



Saying perception is reality, isn't really saying anything at all. Whose perception? Whose reality? My reality is a far different one than that of the aforementioned Chas, CGS, or Jimmy Reardon. If the Supreme Court agrees with you, then what is the problem?

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way

I'm just asking that you don't tell me how I have to practice my religion.

It's one of the fundamental principles on which this country was founded.

_________________

What a load of garbage. You aren't paying for health insurance. You are providing compensation. Should you be able to tell employees what they spend their paychecks on too?

You still have yet to explain why your rights trump the rights of the worker. If we establish that birth control should be available to all because it is medically the correct thing to do why should they be denied? Now, no one is forcing you to hand them out monthly so all your female employees can work on going to hell by taking them. However, you as an employer do not have some Constitutional right to decide what fits in your moral code. You misunderstand the separation of church and state. It's not about giving you complete rights based on whatever your religion has deemed correct. It's about not making decisions based on religion. It actually violates the rights of your employee if the government is allowing the teachings of the Catholic church to dictate policy.

That really is what you fail to comprehend. The Constitution does not put your rights above the employee. If a medical judgement is made that birth control is a valid medical method that should be covered universally then your employee has just as much of a right to get it as you do.

Let's just make one thing clear. The war on birth control in this is simply a way for old, stupid, and outdated policies of the church to be pushed on others by making it much more difficult to get it. Your life won't change at all if your employee uses insurance to get it just like your life doesn't change if an employee of yours uses the money for other "sins".

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!