 |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 |
 |
ObamaCare in the Supreme
Court
Today the Supreme Court
heard two highly anticipated cases including Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby. The sticking point is whether or not the
government can force a business like Hobby Lobby to offer emergency contraception
under its health plan, which goes against the religious beliefs of the company
owners. The real issue at stake is the
nature of our religious freedoms in America. There are over 500 Hobby Lobby
stores throughout America. They are
based out of Oklahoma and employ some 13,000 people. The owners, the Green family, are Christians
who believe that emergency contraception is a form of abortion. While they as
individuals hold this belief, the question is whether or not their corporation
can thusly operate in a manner which upholds these beliefs. It will all come down to whether or not a
for-profit corporation can be viewed as a "person" under the eyes of the law,
specifically the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
How Can Hobby Lobby Win?
According to the Wall Street Journal, here's what they need to prove in order for the
court to rule in Hobby Lobby's favor: "For the corporations to win, the court
must find that including such contraceptives in company-sponsored insurance
would 'substantially burden' their owners' religious exercise, unjustified by a
'compelling government interest.'" The left is quick to make this an issue of
women's rights. Such is the case with an
op-ed penned by Sandra Fluke
in the Washington Post. Fluke argues, "Depending on the court's
rulings, the cases' outcomes could deny millions of women coverage of
any or
all forms of birth control, limiting women's ability to control their
reproductive health, plan their pregnancies and manage their lives."
But what we are really talking about here is
our constitutionally protected right to religious liberty. The bottom
line here is that protecting our religious liberties in the face of a
coercive government is a core American value worth fighting for.
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Outrageous: Rangel
I'm getting really tired of Democrats playing the
race card against conservatives. It's a
powerful weapon and they use it without any basis in truth. The latest example
is Democratic Congressman Charlie Rangel. At a recent appearance, he referred
to the tea party as "mean and racist."
He went on to explain that "in those red states. They're the same
slave-holding states. They had the confederate flag. They became Dixiecrats.
They still had the conference flag. They're now Tea Party. They've got the
confederate flag. I don't think that's a coincidence." This doesn't explain tea
parties like Mike Lee from places like Utah, which aren't in the South, but
Democrats aren't too concerned about facts. They would also like you to believe
that conservatives are anti-women and anti-gay, they want dirty air and
water. I'm getting tired of trying to
fend off these ridiculous assertions. Does real racism still exist in
America? Unfortunately, yes. But let's reserve that label for when it is
appropriate so it doesn't lose its value.
Pinning the label on people who genuinely aren't isn't going to help
your argument or your cause.
Today's "Hot Topic" From the Hannity Forums:
Rumsfeld, While Making A Valid Point, Sticks His Foot In HIs Mouth - Posted by Safiel
Sometimes, there is a point when you really need to stop talking! Rumsfeld exceeded that point when he made the comment,
"A trained ape can get a status of forces agreement."And yes, the
comment was in reference to Obama.
While Rumsfeld was making a valid point overall, it is generally not
considered very bright to refer to a black man as an "ape" or any other
non human member of the Primate family.
I DON'T think he deliberately intended to be racist, but he really chose
a ******* stupid way of phrasing the comment.
I hate to see this blow up into a major ******* contest over racism,
though it likely will.
But in the future, Rumsfeld, THINK a bit longer before you open your
mouth.
>>TV Tonight (10pm ET on Fox News) Former Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney on Obama's declining influence. |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment