The Constitution Separates Church And State,except For Healthcare

[add]

The Obama administration on Friday, settled the dispute

 

The myth of  a Compromise On Birth Control Health Coverage in this “compromise” lie(s) n the phrase “with insurers picking up the tab”.

Is there anyone on the planet who actually believes that private insurance companies will bear the cost of this coverage increment?

It will almost certainly be borne indirectly either by the employer or by the U.S. taxpayer.

 

 

Edited February 2, 2013 by add

[4588686]

The Obama administration on Friday, settled the dispute

 

The myth of  a Compromise On Birth Control Health Coverage in this “compromise” lie(s) n the phrase “with insurers picking up the tab”.

Is there anyone on the planet who actually believes that private insurance companies will bear the cost of this coverage increment?

It will almost certainly be borne indirectly either by the employer or by the U.S. taxpayer.

I'm glad that you are admitting that the church and state should be kept separate.  That being said, the mandate does not target churches.  It just doesn't give them an exception.     

[add]

Semantics this compromise is. He (Obama) is trying to avoid the embarassment of a Supreme Court ruling in June declaring this portion of his law to be unconstitutional.
Besides Church and state is separate but equal, smartypants.

[Groo the Wanderer]

I do not see a separation of Church and state in the Constitution.  I do however see an amendment in the Bill of Rights telling the government it may not meddle in the affairs of the Church. Nothing noted for the inverse, however.

[add]

I do not see a separation of Church and state in the Constitution. I do however see an amendment in the Bill of Rights telling the government it may not meddle in the affairs of the Church. Nothing noted for the inverse, however.

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights.
The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion.

[Papist]

Is not the pretense of separation of Church and state is to protect the Church from the state?

[Groo the Wanderer]

The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights.
The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion.

 

 

that is not a separation.   says nothing about separation.   it says two thing and two things only:

 

1.  the state cannot establish a state religion (ex. church of england)

2. the state cannot impede worship as they do so much now

 

that whole separation cwap was a flawed court ruling/judicial activism by a bunch of masons

[add]

“Congress shall make no law … prohibiting the free exercise (of religion)” is called the free-exercise clause of the First Amendment. The free-exercise clause pertains to the right to freely exercise one’s religion. It states that the government shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

[Fidei Defensor]

that is not a separation.   says nothing about separation.   it says two thing and two things only:

 

1.  the state cannot establish a state religion (ex. church of england)

2. the state cannot impede worship as they do so much now

 

that whole separation cwap was a flawed court ruling/judicial activism by a bunch of masons

 

However, the moment the state favors one religious belief over others, this establishes a religion insomuch as it puts one set of beliefs over the others.

 

Insisting on equal coverage and including contraceptives does not impede worship in any way.  Don't like them, don't use them. They aren't making you buy them.  And if a religious group is so concerned about that, they ought to be looking at their employees who want to use contraceptives and stop putting the blame on equal coverage under law.

Edited February 3, 2013 by tardis ad astra

[Groo the Wanderer]

However, the moment the state favors one religious belief over others, this establishes a religion insomuch as it puts one set of beliefs over the others.

 

no it does not.  thats silly poppycock.

 

 

henry VIII established a religion

martin luther established a religion

Jesus established a religion

 

favoring traditional marriage (one Catholic religious belief) over human sacrifice (one Aztec religious belief) does not a religion establish

[add]

Religious freedom is freedom. And it is the Government that is attempting to take away freedom, not the other way around. Individuals still have the right to buy birth control and get abortions. And employers have the right not to pay for them in violation of their conscience.

[Groo the Wanderer]

buying abortefacients and killing the unborn is not a right, regardless if its legal or not.  life is a right. freedom to follow one's properly formed conscience is a right. doing whatever the floopy you feel like doing is not freedom, it is license.

 

 

 

please do some research on the true definitions of freedom, license, and right and we can resume

[Luigi]

Is not the pretense of separation of Church and state is to protect the Church from the state?

I agree with you, but you mean "the premise," not the pretense. 

[Groo the Wanderer]

that is pretentious

 

 

lorf!

[r2Dtoo]

Is not the pretense of separation of Church and state is to protect the Church from the state?

Separation of Church and State exists to protect the Church and the State from each other.  Sure, there are plenty of cases of Christians being persecuted by the State, but there's plenty instances of the Church using the State to persecute as well.   Keep 'em separate, and everybody's happy.  Unless your SSPX, or some nutjob branch of Christianity.

 

As for birth control...I dunno.  I know several women who were denied birth control after having babies in Catholic hospitals.  This isn't just about abortion, there are serious health concerns as to why a women might need BCP...cases when the Catholic Church fully supports their usage, and yet they can be such a pain to get at Catholic hospitals, why?