Ken
There is already an option in place called adoptions. There is no real reason to have a abortion. Keep two things in mind. First and foremost an abrotion takes the life not only of one child but generations of people that could have been from that aborted child's issue. Item two is that you will never get over the fact that you aborted a child I can guarantee that to you and anyone else. And let me go one step further, you will never forget a child, your son, daughter, brother, sister, cousin, who died from a disease or something else and not an abortion.

I'm an arthritic Republican, and I support abortion, because, in most cases, it's helping to limit the number of future democrats and people who will be dependent on government for their livelihood. By far, more Democrats have abortions than Republicans. It has to do with personal responsibility, almost always better demonstrated by Republicans and conservatives. Just facts many won't like to hear.

Thank you Lee for your very astute observations. There was a time when you listened to your parents who in one way or another told you to not have sex outside of marriage because there were consequences to you actions.There was a time when young ladies said no and young men listened because to do otherwise would be rape something that was at that time a very serious crime. Then we got rid of prayer in school, no one at home when the kids got there and finally parents who purchased contraception for their daughters and sons. The schools, of course, got in on the game providing contraception and nurseries for the moms who had erred and continued to go to school, Of course Planned Parenthood, founded by the evil Margaret Sanger who was a social darwinist got into the game and now collects over $330 million in federal funds. During all of this time we hid our morals under a blanket and walked away from religion, thus eliminating a huge chunk of our national foundation. And now we stand around saying alout. WHAT HAPPENED HERE.

Wilfred:

If your "faith" doesn't "mess with your decisions", it is worthless.

"I still say this is every individual's dilemna to reckon with." That would be wonderful Wilfredo with the exception that all sorts of tax payer money is going to places like Planned Parenthood an evil organization. As noted above this year PP got over $300M of tax payers money. If I have to pay taxes to the government I want it to go to those who are truly needed not to those who engage in perform abortions that kill children

Beyond the controversy here about abortion and/or women's health, and no matter what these two organizations really do, it's even more shocking to me that one non-profit can donate to another. They're basically doubling the administrative overhead on the same money. Nice shell game. I wonder how many other groups do the same!

United Way, at least, exists to presumably reduce overhead.

Native population is in decline, but immigrating Muslim reproduction is on the rise. I know this is another issue entirely, but it is how many feel Islam will take over the world
Some interesting info. Not sure of its accuracy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHsn_aUmuKE

Birth control is only an issue for some churches. Abortion is an issue for most Christians. To compare an abortion to diabetes or heart disease shows a total contempt for life.

A religious organization should not be compelled to fund behaviors it apposes. Nothing stops the individual from purchasing those products or services themselves, though if they feel the need to do so, they should probably find another employer and or Church.

The issue is not contraception, the issue is the Government telling religious organizations what the MUST do even if it is against their principles. It is nothing more then a power play by the State. The issue is FREEDOM, and it is being attacked and abused by the Government officials who swore an oath to protect it.

Sorry Kara its a silly premise. Of course it's the church's place to give us or interpret our morality. If you want you can get your's from the popular culture, TV or the street. It's a free country let your conscience be your guide as my Grandma used to say. Unfortunately aptly formed consciences are rare in our culture these days.

Bucs-A medical decision between a patient and their doctor is a silly premise???? Unfortunately the opinion of "the church" is not a universal truth, nor is it the same across all protestant denominations, let alone catholic v protestant, and then throw in all the other "christian" based groups like mormons and jehovahs witness - mix in some judaisim and islam to round out the Abrahamic religious trifecta and there is no continuity of morality. So no, I don't use the church for my morality, and I would never use popular culture either. It's called secular ethics. Read about it.

Kara, "secular ethics" really means no ethics at all. True morality must be measured against a standard, otherwise it is subjective. If it is subjective, it is subject to people's "feelings" and "situations". Humans have an innate capability to justify even the most reprehensible behavior. That is why we need a Savior, and a standard that is not subject to our selfish whims. Go read "Lord of the flies".

Lee - doesn't look there is anywhere for you and I to go in a debate. I don't need a made up savior to know how to be a good person. The bible has value as a framework of morality, but it is not infallible, and it is not the only place to go to understand morality, and it is to often cherry-picked for convenience. So, I guess we part ways feeling just as we did before we started this conversation. Have a great day!

Kara: We may not agree, but let me ask you a question... You say you don't need a made up savior to know if you are a good person.... So, how do you know if you are behaving in a "good" way or a "bad" way?

Lee - was there morality before Jesus lived and died? There has always been right and wrong. And yes, the definition of that has evolved over time, and I believe that most of us are very glad for that evolution.

Kara, you didn't answer the question. How do YOU know when you are behaving like a "good" person vs. a "bad" person?

So you believe that "separation of church and state" (which is not in our Constitution, FWIW), is a one way street. The Government can interfere in religion all it wants, but religion better keep it's nose out of the public square.

I can assure you if this is allowed to stand, the day will come when the Government has the right to FORCE YOU to do something you will not want to do. The individual has a right to an abortion or contraception, not to make someone else pay for it.

I feel as you do except I draw the line at robbery and murder. I expect that my moral views seem to be publicly accepted as we have laws to handle such outrage. I often wonder what the future opinion of out great society will be offered when in this country alone we kill 1.4 MILLION children......As far as forcing religious organization to follow any regulation that is expressly forbiden by thier practiced beliefs will never happen in this country because of our first Constitutional Amendment. Read it and you will understand....

Secular ethic, uhhh ET, Oprah, MSNBC, Kardashians, Plannedbarrenhood. Now i get it.

Sherifchris, "As far as forcing religious organization to follow any regulation that is expressly forbiden by thier practiced beliefs will never happen in this country because of our first Constitutional Amendment. Read it and you will understand...."
I wish it were true, but that is exactly what this Administration is trying to do with the new Health care law and it's recent "compromise".

Kara, while I understand your views accessibility to contraception, I think the larger point is being missed here. First, certain religions have their views on the use of contraceptions, and hold that followers of the faith should adhere to those views. The religious organization sees an inherent contradiction in preaching the view that contraception is morally wrong (and I am not looking to engage in a discussion whether that view is valid) but then providing its resources to use those contraceptives.
In this larger discussion, the issue is not whether a religious organization should cover the cost of contraceptives, contra to its moral beliefs, but rather whether the government can force a religious organization to act against its own expressed beliefs. We are not discussing whether employees of such an organization can use contraceptives...that is their own individual choice....the issue is whether the religious group must be required to cover it.

Kara
I would disagree with you on what the Founders and Framers would comprehend. These men were extremely intelligent with intellignet spouses such as Abigal Adam and Martha Washington. If you have read their works or the works about them you would know that they were extremely good at looking into the future. I believe, however, that like me they would object to being forced to pay for someone else's contraception. if you want to play you have to pay.

Chris-
I graduated with a bachelor's degree in history, so yes I have spent a great deal of time studying the constitution and the framers. They also owned slaves and didn't believe women had the right to vote, so I don't think they or their beliefs were infallible. I believe in a living constitution. And I think it is unwise to project that they would agree with you. Not so sure why conservatives think they have the inside track on constitutional law, but, whatev. We are all products of our times - it is impossible to know how they would feel about where we are today.

This isn't about the GOVERNEMENT spending money on something you don't believe in. This is about the GOVERNMENT MANDATING that a religious organization spends IT'S MONEY on something it does not believe in. Like a typical history major liberal, you think everybodies money is the governments money. As to Insulin, that saves a life. Abortion ends one. Not even remotely the same. In 99% of abortions, the mothers life was not at risk. Logic is not a strong suit I see.

But you are free to be a member of that church, or work for a religious organziation, and base that decision on whether the fact they do not cover contraceptives matters enough to you...you get to exercise your free choice....the government forcing coverage by a religious group whose own teachings say their use is prohibited is the issue.

Employers choose all the time what coverage they will pay for...not everyone gets dental coverage, or vision, or others....but at no point is a person denied access...it's just who pays...why do you believe it is right to force a group which expressly sees contraception as killing an unborn life to then pay for medicine that is intended for that use?

Which is exactly why I believe in universal health care. Your health and your ability to get treatment should not be on the whim of your employer or the risk-analyses of insurers. And it solves the problem for the religiously affiliated tax exempt employers. Neither they or their non-payment of taxes would go to medical procedures they don't agree with.

The Church is not making medical decisions FOR employees, it's choosing NOT to PAY for procedures and supplies that are in opposition to their beliefs. The employee is still free to go purchase these items at their own cost, and these are not expensive items. I would almost bet that there are other groups out there that would give them their supplies for FREE (maybe even Planned Parenthood).

Religious based health care organizations have been around for decades and often offer health care to the indigent and poor at no or reduced costs. It is part of their ministry. To imply that they should be forced to do something against the very faith that inspired their creation is cutting off your nose to spite your face. I don't think anyone believes they would stop covering the things you mention, like diabetes drugs, etc. But even if they did, SO WHAT! It's a free country. It's their CHOICE. And it's your choice to go elsewhere.

"Which is exactly why I believe in universal health care. Your health and your ability to get treatment should not be on the whim of your employer or the risk-analyses of insurers." Kara

So much better that our medical decisions be in the hands of the GOVERNMENT? Be very careful what you wish for, dear.

Kate, and what was the context of that letter? It was a letter to a Church. The words "separation of Church and State" are not in the Constitution. He was letting the Church know that the Government would not be forcing it's will on the Church, and vice versa. Any reasonable study of this topic would show that the Founders were not attempting to kick God and Religion out of the Government. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights has its authority and power vested in God. It declares that our rights are given by GOD, not people. The purpose of the First Amendment was to prevent the forming of a Government run and mandated CHURCH (ala the Church of England).

You continue to demean God's word with sanctimony. So I ask you the same question as Karen... How do you know when you are behaving "Good" vs. behaving "Bad"?

Incapable of knowing right from wrong without a bible? Really? Considering I don't belong to any religion I suppose I have no moral compass to guide me As I stated earlier, this is not about whether it is right or wrong for a religious organization to object to being the use of contraceptives. It is about whether the government has the right to require a religious organization to violate its own beliefs. This is not a discussion of the morality of contraceptives....it is a constitutional matter plain and simple.
But let's see your side briefly...you believe contraceptives should be covered no matter what and too bad if it offends others moral beliefs. Then I say medicinal marijauna ought to be covered, as should all other illegal drugs (that is, all illegal drugs should not only be legalized but also my insurance should cover them so I may benefit from their effects). Would you have a problem with that?

Ha, Kate, I agree with you. Sin is as old as mankind, (actually older). The Bible is replete with examples of those who chose to disobey God's word. It also shows (as does life today) that ignoring God's word leads to pain and suffering. I'm sure there were abortions 2000 and 6000 years ago too. It was murder then, as it is murder now, and the consequences are the same. With all the technology, medicine and "enlightenment" under our belt, we are still too foolish to recognize the God who created us, gives us His Word to protect us, not to punish us or stop us from having "fun".

Kate
If I remember correctly the words you cite were Jefferson's words to the Danberry congregation assuring them that there was a "wall" that existed between the church and state. Well the state he was referring to was the Federal State. Jefferson feared a national religion and did not want that. He was quite in favor of various religions within the colonies or as they would become, the states. He notes. and I forget exactly where, that where he lived the various religious groups used the local town hall, can you imagine that today, for their Sunday meetings. They were of various denominations. He even noted the beauty of their hymning.Jefferson was in favor of religions within the states but no Federal Government could propose a national religion. It wasn't until 1948 in the Emerson case that the US supreme court came up with their stupid interpretation of the Jefferson letter to Danbury congregation and look where that has taken us.

Kate, you prove the point you attempt to condemn. The Government should keep their policies out of the Church. But, for the last time, "the separation of church and state" is not in our Constitution.

Kate
if you take the time to investigate you will find that the comment on seperation of church and state was made by Jefferson to the Danbury congregation. That statement came to light in the Emerson v. New Jersey Case of 1948. You sound and look foolish when you state that the clause is within the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Take a look it is not there. You might also keep in mind that there are other religious groups including Jews and Muslims who are standing with the Catholic Church. Jefferson himself lauded the various denominations in his community. Read The 5000 Year Leap.

And every young whipper-snapper thinks they "know better", until the damage is done and it's too late to fix the inevitable self-implosion of society. If your a history major, surely you know the greatest nations have almost all fallen from within.

Kara
Master degree was in Education. I received it from the Commonwealth of PA due to the fact that I was at East Stroudsburg Graduate School. Of the 33 credit hours I took 27 were in history or government courses. Was also in the first class of Graduate Assistants. Went there from 1966-1967. Your referral to the slaves and Founding Fathers is typical of one who has not done a lot of research on them. On top of that your comments on how they felt about women is just plain ridiculous. I am sure that Abigail Adams would have a few words with you on that matter. Your comments on the Constitution also shows a lack of knowledge. Today we have judges who base decisions on the so called decisions in cases. By doing this they water down the most important document the world has ever seen. Now we have the likes of Ruth Ginsburg who tells the world not to pay attention to the American Constitution but to the Constitution of South Africa. Judge Ginsburg should be fired as should all those judges on the 9th Circuit Court. South Africa is a basket case as is the better part of the Continent of Africa. Lastly let me note that your coarse comments and your remark on those of us who believe in the 2nd coming of Christ are uncalled for. Again, it shows your lack of understanding.

This is patently ridiculous. It shows how warped our mentality in this country has become. NO ONE OWES YOU ANYTHING! You work for a company AT WILL in this country and you can leave AT WILL in this country. If you have a good job with otherwise great health-care, are you really going to beat up your employer for not giving you $50 a month worth of medication that you can probably get free elsewhere?!

FREE HEALTHCARE is not a God given right! And if you think ANYONE (including Uncle Sam) can GIVE you FREE Healthcare, your nuts! It is part of your pay, and you are paying for every nickle of coverage you get. This entire business of mandating what Employers can and can not provide is what has us in this mess in the first place.

Come on people, THINK for freaking minute. An organization like the Catholic Church operates and survives on the tenants of it's faith and principles. Are we really going to demand that people and organizations violate their core principles so you can THINK you are getting your birth control pills for FREE!

They are NOT imposing their views on employees and students. But YOU and UNCLE SAM don't have the right to force YOUR views on these organizations. This issue is SO MUCH bigger, and you liberal drones are too blind to see it! This is about FREEDOM in the United States of America. And your willing to sell it for "free" birth control and abortions! May the Lord have mercy on us!

Genevieve
Knowing what you know through your personal experience, why would you even go to a Catholic hospital for your abortion. There are a lot of institutions outside of the Catholic ones that would be only to happy to assist you. The big question here is how will you feel after you have had the procedure.

I beg to differ Kara. You are expanding this argument into areas that are non-sense. We are talking about the difference between a Government forcing an organization to TAKE a life and you use the example of a religion doing the same?! What we have is the exact opposite of your ludicrous scenario. NO ONE is PREVENTING ACCESS to this "basic medical necessity". You are FREE to go get it ON YOUR OWN. You can live any way you want within the bounds of the law, but you DO NOT have the right to tell others how to live! No misinformation or fear, just plain facts.

This is a strawman argument...of course religious expression dose not include the right to murder someone....how ironic that you would use this as your example where government has a right to intrude on religious practices, because what is occurring in this HHS mandate case is exactly the opposite...the government is ordering a religious institution to pay for medicines that kill a human life. So where the government has the right to forbid practices which kill, where does it have the right to order practices that kill?

Kara
You are really okay with the government telling hospitals that "they must provide the basic services that the federal government deems necessary". That is one heck of a slippery slope you just put us on. Keep in mind that you have a man in office who constantly bemoans the fact that a pesky Congress stops him from getting things done. WOW WOW

Matt, you are living in lala land. The break down of the traditional family in this country is the NUMBER ONE cause of poverty and poverty is one of the leading contributors to Crime, not to mention a host of other societal problems. Do you want to avoid poverty? The best way to do it, is to wait until your married to engage in sex and then stay married to your spouse. What nutzo source are you using to correlate crime with abortion? It's like saying the road is black and the sun rises every day, so obviously roads are black because the sun rises every day.

Matt
Tell me what are these social benefits. Some moronic bean counter has come up with this so now we are suppose to believe that abortion will cut down on crimes. Allow me to suggest that the crime rate goes down when the police do their job. That is not just my opinion that is the statement made to me by lots of friends who happen to be policemen

Matt H, let me start with your comment about how "adoption more likely than not results in children with severe emotional disconnect." Do you have any idea how insensitive that is? And just wrong.
Regarding Freakonomics, I read it. It may be true that abortion led to lower crime in the '90's, but even the authors weren't advocating for abortion or making any kind of a judgement on it. They were just stating facts and leaving it to the readers' supposed intelligence and judgement to form their own opinions. If you believe in the humanity of the fetus, it's still murder. So maybe it does reduce crime. Is murder then justifiable? It's an argument, but it's not the final word by any means.

Religious leaders are free to enforce the teachings of their faith...followers are expected to adhere....if they disagree, then they have options....they can simply ignore their church's teachings and do what they want, they can leave that church and find another that agrees with them...the point is, and once again, the only point that matters in this whole discussion, is that the government cannot force a religious organization to violate its own tenets....this is not about the morality of contraceptives or abortion....

Wilfredo
When one walks into a church I would expect them to know the policies of said church. If you do not like what the church stand for I would suggest that you do not join that church and if you do I would have to ask, what is your agenda. I started my religious life as a Lutheran, the denomination of my father. Lutherans were a pretty conservative group at that time. I also spent some time as an Episcopalian the religion of my wife but it went to a more liberal position so we left. Then I spent some time with AA and my higher power. That lead to my joining the Catholic Church. I have had my problems there but I love the Church and have found my home. It has, due to the realization that there are those among us who want to get rid of religion and they are starting with my church. Point is if you do not like where you are find another church.

The "right" to contraception? Where is that written? Is this the same place liberals find the "right" to housing, the "right" to a cell phone, the "right" to get more money from the government fo every child they have out of wedlock, the "right" to 99 weeks unemployment, the "right" to illegally enter our country and be allowed to stay?

@I AM, yep, you have a right to contraception. It's called keeping you pants on and your skirt down. lol. Such a foreign concept these days.

Kara, you are wrong. I don't believe that birth control is murder either. But the mandate also covers the "morning after pill", which many would consider to be murder. In any case, you are right, the issue is not about contraception or abortion, the issue is whether the Government has a legal right to compel an Religious organization to provide products or services that are in direct opposition to it's belief system.

Let me ask another question, do you believe people should be relieved from serving in the military under a draft, if they are a conscientious objector?

The Catholic Church opposes the use of any contraceptive...the issue for them is not just abortion, but anything that prevents a birth from happening....you may disagree with their view (as I do)...but regardless, the government has no right to make them act against their own views. That's what this is about. Religious organizations are free to impose their own rules, followers are free to adhere to those rules or not...government has no right to impose its beliefs on a religious institution.

They need money from Koman to just perform a quick breast cancer exam, while a person is already there for other services? You kidding? The Koman money is clearly funding all their other efforts.

Again, most conservatives should understand that most abortions are performed on women who would raise future criminals, crackheads and unemployable burdens on society. If we didn't have abortion, things would be much worse. We already have tens of millions of unproductive citizens who soak off those who work. Without abortion, it would be far far worse.

And anybody who things the Washington Post has anything worth reading is sadly misinformed. Was Sanger wrong about eugenics? If she got the abortion part right, why is she wrong about this? Because it's politically incorrect?

If you a referring to my comment about the misleading statistics, I did give a source for my info in the post, but here is another one...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/223livny.asp?page=3
Bottom line, Planned Parenthood plays with the numbers to get to that 3% figure you cite

@ IAM, you are funny. NOT!

Why don't we just kill all the poor and all the gang bangers, deviants, physically impaired, mentally impaired, etc? Would surely be less problems for society. Remind you of another "socialist" group/country that offered utopia for it's citizens? This is exactly how the Nazi party came to be. All good intentions to rid the world of unnecessary people who are just a burden on society. They even had their own version of the "99%", they were called the Brown shirts. Haven't we learned anything about evil?

@Lee... I didn't bring any of the things up you mentioned in your post. None. And the Black Shirts did most of the damage in WWII, even killing off the Brown Shirts. I was merely pointing out that EFFECTIVELY, Margaret Sanger's dream IS ALIVE AND WELL. Again, how do you extrapolate from a truthful statement about abortion being used far more by the poor and dependent, who statistics show ARE FAR MORE LIKELY to raise a criminal, or future dependent on society, into the Brown Shirts. You're just one of these politically correct types who can't deal with a fact, and has to attack anybody who brings one up if it doesn't fit your mind set. So where is the evil here? It's the FUTURE MOTHER who is making the decision to abort the baby, NOT ME? But in your calculus, I am "The Evil" for stating FACTS about the demographic who most frequently gets abortions at Planned Parenthood? Wow.. you are twisted.

@I AM, it is the SAME mentality. No value for life. It's a slippery slope. I'm pointing out that is exactly how things started to go awry in Nazi. You don't think Hitler announced one day, "Hey we're going to gas all the cripples and Jews!" do you? Yes, eventually the "Black shirts" let the "Brown Shirts" have it. Like many of the union thugs of today, they were lackeys of the politicians and didn't even know it. Eventually they outlived their usefulness to the this evil regime and met a demise of their own making.

@Lee... It's the people who support abortion clinics, and the women who make use of them who have started us "down the slippery slope"... not me. It is just amazing to me that you view a TRUE statement as more contemptable than the ACT of ending a llfe.

I Am Knowledge
Yes you are. Those pictures must have been wonderful. My wife and I are now great grandparents with a 2 year old great grandson and a 7 month old great granddaughter. Life is geat around all the grand children, four, and the greatgrands

@I AM, I'm not sure which side of the discussion you are on. I believe it IS a life, and you are right it is the people who don't think this is a life that have started us down the hill. The Government is helping them along.

Ultimately what you decide to believe does not really matter. You may believe in destroying life, my question is what if someday you do stand before God and you were wrong. God have mercy. Many people change their belief's on their death bed, thank God they were able to. Not many non-believers when the plane is going down and death is certain.

Mr. Weaver
Thank you for pointing out the obvious. Now if we were only able to get those parents to pay attention.

Wilfredo
Cite you source on your comment that many Catholic wome use contraception and cite the individual who made the comment on Rachel Maddow. Some have said that 90% of Catholic women use contraception without any source.sited. You have this nasty habit of tossing stuff up in the air and saying look at that.

Wilfredo, you need to open your mind about Republicans and all people who feel differently from you . You were very insulting above. What about Democrat bigots, or do you believe only Republicans are capable of bigotry? The name calling is really uncalled for.

And we are discussing this because our government is trying to trample on religious freedom.
‎"The question is not whether or not all Americans agree with the Church’s teaching on these matters. The real question is whether or not the Church—as well as other religious bodies—should have the freedom to proclaim her teaching and to practice it in a nation founded on the right to religious liberty."

-Bishop Lori, chairman of the USCCB's Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty

Women do not have a "right" to free or insurance covered health care. Many people want the government to provide all our needs for "free", but free is never truly free. We must be careful what we wish for.

No one is challenging a Womens right to contraception. What's being challenged if forcing a religious group to pay for something against their beliefs. Your argument on Viagra/Cialis is non-sense. No employer should be FORCED to pay for that either. Why all this hub-bub from the left on this all of a sudden? This type of forced mandate has never been the case. I have never seen women who work for religious organizations shouting that they can't get their medical needs taken care of. This is pure and simple and over-reach of the Government into private and religious rights and authority. You ARE NOT ENTITLED to free birth control, free abortions, free viagra, etc. If you want it, go buy it. The ramifications of allowing the Government to make mandates like this are HUGE and I guarantee it will bite EVERYONE in the end.

Jimmy
This is some of the best convoluted thinking I have seen in a long time. As a conservative Republican I don't want an abortion to occur because the life of a child is important. Imagine what whom we might have killed since we started aborting babies and not only the aborted child but all the future issues from that child. The killing of these children far exceeds the numbers put up by the likes of Adolf Hitler and others of his ilk. Explain to all of us why abortion is good. Explain to all of us why homosexualty is good given a condition known as AIDS. explain to me why religion is bad. Why is it wrong to pray and to have a book such as the Bible,,the Talmud, or the Koran that provides guidelines for us to live by.

Currently, all.women do have access to contraception and no government or religious group trumps that right. All a woman has to do is get a prescription and go to her pharmacy and have it filled and pay for it.I am not advocating for that to change . I am saying that the GOVERNMENT should not FORCE ANY religious organization to pay for that or to pay for insurance that covers that if it goes against their religion. If a company WANTS to cover it then it should be their CHOICE. As an individual, if I want to buy insurance that covers that it should be my CHOICE. The healthcare bill and 6his administration is taking many of our CHOICES away and that is very dangerous.

Wilfredo knows the percentages because he reads creditable reports of polls. The percentage is not important. What is important is the hypocrisy of the church. It wants to make the most profit from government programs but doesn't want to abide by the contract its companies signed. According to their dogma, contraception is a mortal sin, people who obtain communion in the state of mortal sin are automatically excommunicated. Why don't bishops announce to the congregation that more than half the women at mass are not to receive communion? They do it for far less reason to politicians. The cost of insurance is less when it have contraception provisions because the payout is less than paying for pregnancies. The Church is great when it sticks to religion. It is already down the road of evil when it condones pedophilia. Compare Cardinal Leger and Cardinal Bevilacqua lives to see how far down the road to evil the church has come.

The hypocrisy of the church is not what is important. It is the rights that we are losing every day under this administration that is important. It reminds me of the testimony given by Martin Niemoller

,First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

In this case, first they came for the religious organizations...

I, too, feel that this argument is not about contraception...It's all about politics...Republicans pick this up because it looks like a good wedge to use during this election year...Let's see how this goes...CAVEAT: Colorado and Mississippi used anti-abortion platform and lost big in the 2010 elections.

Actually, Wilfredo, there are people who think this is a tool used by this Administration to distract the population from the real important debates and issues this election yr, like the economy and Obama's record, and shifting it to very emotional, but in the big picture really minimal issues, like who should and should not pay for birth control. So, yes, it is all about politics. Lets hope there are smart people around who will keep voters focused on the real issues and not the trivial things the media and this administration want us focused on. Smoke and mirrors, what this administration seems to do best.

Your arguments are laughable. You still don't seem to be able to understand that the governement spending IT'S tax dollars, on military or whatever, IS NOT THE SAME as the Government telling a business or organization how it must spend IT'S dollars. It's absurd to suggest that an organization can't offer a health plan OF THEIR CHOOSING. If somebody doesn't like the health plan offered, DON'T WORK THERE. THIS IS CALLED FREEDOM. You big government liberals don't understand this. And as to Republican "anti-poor" policies, name one. Also, it's not "anti-poor" to suggest we should not have 47 million people on food stamps, or millions living for generations on public assistance, WHEN WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR THIS STUFF, AND WE ARE BORROWING 1.5 TRILLION DOLLARS EVERY YEAR. It's called "Dealing with reality". And if you don't like Republican "anti-poor" policies, then USE YOU FREEDOM TO DONATE MORE OF YOUR MONEY to charity. See, FREEDOM !

Wilfredo
And this is good for what reason? Read my reply to Limeport residnet below

Limeport
Cute. Explain it. When and why did we go after Muslims other then those who attacked us. Are you a supporter that we blew up our own towers? The same is true about the rest of your statements. I would ask where do we fine that government/taxpayer contraception/abortion is a right found in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution given to us by God. Is it life you would refer to? If you are looking to have justice for women, allow me to suggest you ask yourself what contraception/abortion has wrought. Allow me one item--due to contraception women now have the opportunity to go to work instead of rearing their children. Has anyone taken a poll on how happy women are about that and what has it meant for our children. Has anyone conducted a poll on how happy kids are to go to day care within weeks of being born. How about this one. Are men making what they would be making without contraception/abortion or are they making less because women have come into the market. Any anwers here?

Limeport, you must know some really wicked people who call themselves Republicans. I don't know anyone who feels the way you think Republicans feel. You might be watching way too much MSNBC or getting your news fro Comedy Central, perhaps?

Ya, it's pure nonsense that Koman gives them money. No more money from me. Wonder what other causes they send money too. They've become a clearing house for donations rather than focused on breast cancer.

Limeport
1. The guy behind the mosque is a hustler. NY has a ton of mosques.Their members get to pray in the streets of NY..
2. Contraception:I also referred to the Declaration of Independence.Slavery was an issue. There were numerous men from the north at the Constitutional Convention who attempted to end slavery. By that time the slaves, who had been here since 1619, had a cash value due to the trading and selling of those poor people To insure the creation of a single nation th 2/3's compromise was fashion. Think of the possible problems. The slave owners knew their days were number. Those from the Constitutional era freed slaves usually upon their imminent death The Declaration of Independence allows for LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. What perverse laws are you talking about? Those of us who are Catholic see this as a matter of religious freedom and view contraception as a sin because it stops a life from begining.
3. Women happier working. Cite your source on this. I have had the opportunity to talk to a number of ladies of various ages, and no i will not give you names, who have told me that they do not like putting the kids in day care and going to work. As to the money men make, well maybe those men will wake up and ask for more money. I really don't see them starving becauese the missus decided to stay home . As to the rest of the stuff you have to say I do not agree with you. I don't think you can produce information to prove it.

Limeport
You might want to edit what you write before you hit that button

This isn't "in the law" per say. That's part of the problem. The lawmakers bestowed regulatory power upon Health and Human Services. So B.O. along with Dear Sebelious can simply "decree" these are the rules! Of course, we have some Democratic Representatives who now claim "if I had read that I would not have voted for it!". Really, now, wasn't that what those of us in the "Tea Party" were trying to tell them all along. They are incompetents and should be removed from office.

Funny what happens when lawmakers don't read a bill before it is passed. Would love to see all who voted for Obama care voted out of office!

And, Wilfredo, according to the White House, this is as far as they are going. This President is not big on compromise. Direct quote "This is our plan".

Wilfred, you just don't get it. This is NOT about birth control. It is about the STATE telling a RELIGIOUS organization what it MUST do, in direct contradiction to the First Amendment! This is nothing more then a power play by the Federal Government, and like the Camel that get's its nose into your tent, it won't belong before the Camel is in the tent full defecating upon us all.

White house spokesman said it is a done deal.
http://sotu.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/12/w-h-chief-of-staff-no-more-negotiations-on-contraception-policy/

Wilfredo
Once again you have failed to look at what Obama is really doing. He could not get the Church to pay the bill so he passed it onto the Insurance companies. How is that any different from what he initially did? It is anything but a compromise. The Bishops are furious at his attack no matter how he does it.

I am sorry, Wilfredo, I was responding to your incorrect post "Let us wait and see what the final outcome is...It is not a done deal yet.." According to the White House it is. This is no compromise. Just an accounting gimmick. And COMPROMISE should not be a bad word for anyone.

It looks like we are veering off the topic of Planned Parenhood and delving into other political issue such as hatred for Obama's policies...This is nothing new, of course...One political party wishing pox on the other...Fair enough...I must remind you that the Bush administration got us in this abyss and Mr. Obama is trying his utmost best to turn the country around...We have been in a huge hole it is so hard to get us back to the surface, thanks to the uncompromising obstructionism of your party...The economy is improving, albeit painfully slowly (the way your party wants it) because of his policies...Your party comes first before the country...I cannot write more extensively here because this is one thread for one purpose and that is on contraception...I will not respond to anymore commentaries outside this topic...We can do this in another thread.

So sorry, but I just can't let this one go. The blame Bush thing is just so old. At some point Obama and the Democratic Congress that he had for 2 yrs must start taking responsibility for the State of the Union. I don't wish a pox on anyone. I want what is best for this country. And true, Obama did walk into a huge hole of debt, 10 trillion in 2008, It is now 2012, a mere 3 yrs into the Obama administration, and our debt is 16.4 trillion. And we have yet another budget that is not balanced. It may be your assertion that Bush and the Republicans drove the country into a ditch, but Obama is taking it over a cliff. The only thing that bugs me more than Obama are the people who blindly support and follow him as he does it.

What truth am I sweeping under the rug? I said he was handed a whole lot of debt which causes a whole lot of other troubles. His choice was to continue to make the debt situation worse and not make the tough choices to make it better. Open you mind, Wilfredo. It is not just a choice of Obama's way or Backwards! We are a country of millions of ideas. Not just two. I am all for going forward. Just not towards losses of personal freedoms, (like with this contraception issue) financial and military ruin or socialism..

Like I said, you will not open your mind to other ideas. You seem to be a "Obama's way is right and all others are wrong" type of person. I am not. I am sure their is another way other than Obama and backwards.

Yeah, because there are no doctors who are Democrats. Pfft...give me a break...

They are trying to save the lives of the unborn. Bring a woman to the realization that she is indeed killing her child. Modern science has found that Human DNA is found almost from conception. That, to me, makes it a person. You want to be pro-choice, that is fine, but at least be pro-choice embracing the truth that you are taking another human life. I don't happen to agree with this VA. legislation. I think it is a great big waste of time and money, unless it is also to confirm pregnancy. I think if a woman wants to have an abortion this will not be enough to stop her. I would be interested in seeing the stats as to whether this makes a difference or if Virginia women might just go to neighboring states where laws such as these do not exist.

And how about this one for government over reach
http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/homemade-lunch-replaced-with-cafeteria-nuggets.html

And, FYI, in order to have an abortion you almost always have to have something inserted into your vagina for what is called a D&E, dilation and evacuation, or aspiration, where the baby is sucked out.

Just putting it out there that, according to this document, the Obama Administration has again LIED.

"1. The rule that created the uproar has not changed at all, but was finalized as is. Friday evening, after a day of touting meaningful changes in the mandate, HHS issued a regulation finalizing the rule first issued in August 2011, “without change.” So religious employers dedicated to serving people of other faiths are still not exempt as “religious employers.” Indeed, the rule describes them as “non-exempt.”"

The point is, once again, should religious organizations be FORCED to pay for medical procedures and contraceptives that GO AGAINST THEIR RELIGION. Especially since their employees still will have access to these procedures and drugs. The only difference is they have to pay for them themselves. It does not matter what the insurers want. The religious organizations do not have a problem paying extra for pregnancies.

Yes, religious leaders are unrelenting in their fight against having their constitutionally protected right to religious freedom trampled upon by this administration. The day any of us just lay down and give up our rights with out a fight is the day this country will change forever.