Surprise, Surprise: Most Catholics Support Obama's Birth Control Mandate! As do national voters.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 12:42 AM GMT
    http://blogcritics.org/politics/article/surprise-surprise-most-catholics-support-obamas/

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/07/146527962/poll-majority-of-voters-support-obamas-contraception-benefit-rule


    and what was that you were saying?icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif

    Both numbers today were @ 61%
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 15, 2012 1:00 AM GMT
    TropicalMark saidhttp://blogcritics.org/politics/article/surprise-surprise-most-catholics-support-obamas/

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/07/146527962/poll-majority-of-voters-support-obamas-contraception-benefit-rule


    and what was that you were saying?icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif

    Both numbers today were @ 61%


    Really what does that have to do with the Churches decision on the matter?

    Catholics should address that with the church hierarchy. Which is none of Obama's or my business.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Feb 15, 2012 1:05 AM GMT
    Aww TropicalMark... you're ruining southbeach's narrative icon_biggrin.gif

    Something else that has been pointed out is that the some state officials who are making a fuss over President Obama and this mandata actually have similar existing mandates in their own state. Though the never made a fuss about birth control mandate until President Obama signed the national mandate into law.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 15, 2012 1:09 AM GMT
    creature saidAww TropicalMark... you're ruining southbeach's narrative icon_biggrin.gif

    Something else that has been pointed out is that the some state officials who are making a fuss over President Obama and this mandata actually have similar existing mandates in their own state. Though the never made a fuss about birth control mandate until President Obama signed the national mandate into law.


    I do not think that is an argument of whether something is constitutional or not. Alot of bad law gets by without challenge until someone makes a fuss.

    For the same reason one can FORCE a employer to pay for birth control, one can also FORCE them to not cover things.

    Screen Actors Guild dropped mental health coverage after the federal mental health parity provision went into effect. The net result. They dropped all mental health coverage.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 1:10 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark saidhttp://blogcritics.org/politics/article/surprise-surprise-most-catholics-support-obamas/

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/07/146527962/poll-majority-of-voters-support-obamas-contraception-benefit-rule


    and what was that you were saying?icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif

    Both numbers today were @ 61%


    Really what does that have to do with the Churches decision on the matter?

    Catholics should address that with the church hierarchy. Which is none of Obama's or my business.
    The 'church' has no say in secular matters of the state. ..

    I myself and the majority of the public doesnt give a shit as to what the 'church' has to say outside of the rectory.icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 1:12 AM GMT
    creature saidAww TropicalMark... you're ruining southbeach's narrative icon_biggrin.gif

    Something else that has been pointed out is that the some state officials who are making a fuss over President Obama and this mandata actually have similar existing mandates in their own state. Though the never made a fuss about birth control mandate until President Obama signed the national mandate into law.
    Funny how the Presidents numbers went UP this week after that 'flap'.............including that of 'catholics'. Go figure.icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 15, 2012 1:13 AM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark saidhttp://blogcritics.org/politics/article/surprise-surprise-most-catholics-support-obamas/

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/07/146527962/poll-majority-of-voters-support-obamas-contraception-benefit-rule


    and what was that you were saying?icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif

    Both numbers today were @ 61%


    Really what does that have to do with the Churches decision on the matter?

    Catholics should address that with the church hierarchy. Which is none of Obama's or my business.
    The 'church' has no say in secular matters of the state. ..

    I myself and the majority of the public doesnt give a shit as to what the 'church' has to say outside of the rectory.icon_wink.gif


    1)How is the church or its organization paying for insurance for its employees a SECULAR MATTER? It is not sending a edict or sermon to everyone, it simply doesn't want to pay for contraception because its against it. If you want contraception paid for work for someone other than the Catholic Church.

    2)The Federal government is constrained in this area. There is no constitutional basis to require anyone to pay for anything like this. Therefore it simply is an empty argument.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 1:15 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    creature saidAww TropicalMark... you're ruining southbeach's narrative icon_biggrin.gif

    Something else that has been pointed out is that the some state officials who are making a fuss over President Obama and this mandata actually have similar existing mandates in their own state. Though the never made a fuss about birth control mandate until President Obama signed the national mandate into law.


    I do not think that is an argument of whether something is constitutional or not. Alot of bad law gets by without challenge until someone makes a fuss.

    For the same reason one can FORCE a employer to pay for birth control, one can also FORCE them to not cover things.

    Screen Actors Guild dropped mental health coverage after the federal mental health parity provision went into effect. The net result. They dropped all mental health coverage.
    LMAO..
    4 percent of SAG members actually have 'healthcare coverage' provided by SAG/AFTRA............

    Try again!icon_wink.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 15, 2012 1:18 AM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    creature saidAww TropicalMark... you're ruining southbeach's narrative icon_biggrin.gif


    I do not think that is an argument of whether something is constitutional or not. Alot of bad law gets by without challenge until someone makes a fuss.

    For the same reason one can FORCE a employer to pay for birth control, one can also FORCE them to not cover things.

    Screen Actors Guild dropped mental health coverage after the federal mental health parity provision went into effect. The net result. They dropped all mental health coverage.
    LMAO..
    4 percent of SAG members actually have 'healthcare coverage' provided by SAG/AFTRA............

    Try again!icon_wink.gif


    I will try, because I know quite a bit on the topic. Considering I take care alot of these patients. SAG 2 members lost there mental health coverage.

    Google isnt your friend Tropical Mark, you missed the nuance that those that had mental coverage suddenly lost it by "Mandate".

    not all Sag Members but the ones who qualify for health insurance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 1:19 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark saidhttp://blogcritics.org/politics/article/surprise-surprise-most-catholics-support-obamas/

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/07/146527962/poll-majority-of-voters-support-obamas-contraception-benefit-rule


    and what was that you were saying?icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif

    Both numbers today were @ 61%


    Really what does that have to do with the Churches decision on the matter?

    Catholics should address that with the church hierarchy. Which is none of Obama's or my business.
    The 'church' has no say in secular matters of the state. ..

    I myself and the majority of the public doesnt give a shit as to what the 'church' has to say outside of the rectory.icon_wink.gif


    1)How is the church or its organization paying for insurance for its employees a SECULAR MATTER?

    2)The Federal government is constrained in this area. There is no constitutional basis to require anyone to pay for anything like this. Therefore it simply is an empty argument.
    How about this.. the OVERWHELMING majority of 'catholic' and secular/nonreligious EMPLOYEES WANT this coverage. Just like the employees "catholic" and otherwise at Costco/GM/American Airlines etc etc etc.

    They aren't "parishoners" nor clergy of a church.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Feb 15, 2012 1:21 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    creature saidAww TropicalMark... you're ruining southbeach's narrative icon_biggrin.gif

    Something else that has been pointed out is that the some state officials who are making a fuss over President Obama and this mandata actually have similar existing mandates in their own state. Though the never made a fuss about birth control mandate until President Obama signed the national mandate into law.


    I do not think that is an argument of whether something is constitutional or not. Alot of bad law gets by without challenge until someone makes a fuss.

    For the same reason one can FORCE a employer to pay for birth control, one can also FORCE them to not cover things.

    Screen Actors Guild dropped mental health coverage after the federal mental health parity provision went into effect. The net result. They dropped all mental health coverage.


    The point I am raising is that the current GOP officials never made it their mission to target the mandates that exist in their own states. These mandates passed with bipartisanship in the 90s in the state legislature.

    But when President Obama signs the mandate into law, suddenly the GOP is impassioned about the issue icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 1:22 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    I will try, because I know quite a bit on the topic. Considering I take care alot of these patients. SAG 2 members lost there mental health coverage.

    Google isnt your friend Tropical Mark, you missed the nuance that those that had mental coverage suddenly lost it by "Mandate".

    not all Sag Members but the ones who qualify for health insurance.
    Here's where you get your ass handed to you.
    I am a member of BOTH SAG and the DGA.. Dont pull that bullshit with me!

    27 yrs in that industry is almost as long as you've been alive.
    I told you FOUR fucking percent of SAG even uses the SAG healthcare plan.

    PERIOD.

    GAWD I hate pompous asses!
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 15, 2012 1:25 AM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark saidhttp://blogcritics.org/politics/article/surprise-surprise-most-catholics-support-obamas/

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/07/146527962/poll-majority-of-voters-support-obamas-contraception-benefit-rule


    and what was that you were saying?icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif

    Both numbers today were @ 61%


    Really what does that have to do with the Churches decision on the matter?

    Catholics should address that with the church hierarchy. Which is none of Obama's or my business.
    The 'church' has no say in secular matters of the state. ..

    I myself and the majority of the public doesnt give a shit as to what the 'church' has to say outside of the rectory.icon_wink.gif


    1)How is the church or its organization paying for insurance for its employees a SECULAR MATTER?

    2)The Federal government is constrained in this area. There is no constitutional basis to require anyone to pay for anything like this. Therefore it simply is an empty argument.
    How about this.. the OVERWHELMING majority of 'catholic' and secular/nonreligious EMPLOYEES WANT this coverage. Just like the employees "catholic" and otherwise at Costco/GM/American Airlines etc etc etc.

    They aren't "parishoners" nor clergy of a church.


    You miss the point on what is "popular" or what people want. And what is LEGAL.
    For the federal government to force an employer to cover and pay for something is quite a leap.

    I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Personally, I do not get it, most birth control is low cost anyway. That doesn't mean we have a right to trample over others rights just because we like the idea, or its "good public policy"

    Those employees have the right to go elsewhere, so I do not see any of there rights violated.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 1:27 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark saidhttp://blogcritics.org/politics/article/surprise-surprise-most-catholics-support-obamas/

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/07/146527962/poll-majority-of-voters-support-obamas-contraception-benefit-rule


    and what was that you were saying?icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif

    Both numbers today were @ 61%


    Really what does that have to do with the Churches decision on the matter?

    Catholics should address that with the church hierarchy. Which is none of Obama's or my business.
    The 'church' has no say in secular matters of the state. ..

    I myself and the majority of the public doesnt give a shit as to what the 'church' has to say outside of the rectory.icon_wink.gif


    1)How is the church or its organization paying for insurance for its employees a SECULAR MATTER?

    2)The Federal government is constrained in this area. There is no constitutional basis to require anyone to pay for anything like this. Therefore it simply is an empty argument.
    How about this.. the OVERWHELMING majority of 'catholic' and secular/nonreligious EMPLOYEES WANT this coverage. Just like the employees "catholic" and otherwise at Costco/GM/American Airlines etc etc etc.

    They aren't "parishoners" nor clergy of a church.


    You miss the point on what is "popular" or what people want. And what is LEGAL.
    For the federal government to force an employer to cover and pay for something is quite a leap.

    I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Personally, I do not get it, most birth control is low cost anyway. That doesn't mean we have a right to trample over others rights just because we like the idea, or its "good public policy"

    Those employees have the right to go elsewhere, so I do not see any of there rights violated.
    Actually I couldn't care less.. YOU pay every penny of my healthcare.icon_wink.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 15, 2012 1:29 AM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    I will try, because I know quite a bit on the topic. Considering I take care alot of these patients. SAG 2 members lost there mental health coverage.

    Google isnt your friend Tropical Mark, you missed the nuance that those that had mental coverage suddenly lost it by "Mandate".

    not all Sag Members but the ones who qualify for health insurance.
    Here's where you get your ass handed to you.
    I am a member of BOTH SAG and the DGA.. Dont pull that bullshit with me!

    27 yrs in that industry is almost as long as you've been alive.
    I told you FOUR fucking percent of SAG even uses the SAG healthcare plan.

    PERIOD.

    GAWD I hate pompous asses!


    really? the description fits? pompous?
    Its A 100% fact that SAG 2 lost its mental health coverage.
    Why does 4% mean anything.?

    If you do not know what SAG1 or SAG2 insurance is, then of course it doesn't apply to you. But it doesn't change the fact.

    quite a resume.

    And why did you have to curse?

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703395904576025410628499574.html?KEYWORDS=SAG+mental+health+benefits

    I pay your health insurance ? you meant the V.A?

    glad for ya, you need it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 1:32 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    Why does 4% mean anything.?

    icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif Talk about DENSE!

    It means 96 percent of the SAG membership has OTHER insurance plans OUTSIDE of the Guild's Health and Pension plan!
    DUH!icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 15, 2012 1:36 AM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    Why does 4% mean anything.?

    icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif Talk about DENSE!

    It means 96 percent of the SAG membership has OTHER insurance plans OUTSIDE of the Guild!
    DUH!icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif


    Well then try to imagine the ones that do. You know maybe the people in Los Angele's and some from NYC.

    They are a small in number about 2000 or so in our organization but they have SAG2 , and they lost the Mental Health Coverage.

    The fact others who have SAG and are just members and do very little union work and have other insurance doesn't change the fact.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 1:40 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    Why does 4% mean anything.?

    icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif Talk about DENSE!

    It means 96 percent of the SAG membership has OTHER insurance plans OUTSIDE of the Guild!
    DUH!icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif


    Well then try to imagine the ones that do. You know maybe the people in Los Angele's and some from NYC.

    They are a small in number about 2000 or so in our organization but they have SAG2 , and they lost the Mental Health Coverage.

    The fact others who have SAG and are just members and do very little union work and have other insurance doesn't change the fact.
    Do you have the slightest idea as to the qualifications to obtain SAG health coverage?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 1:42 AM GMT
    musclmed said

    And why did you have to curse?



    Because its my natural way in the lines of work I do dealing with knuckleheads.icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 2:17 AM GMT
    I think musclmed is not understanding that employees of a church owned business cannot be forced to be Catholic.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 2:31 AM GMT
    creature said
    musclmed said
    creature saidAww TropicalMark... you're ruining southbeach's narrative icon_biggrin.gif

    Something else that has been pointed out is that the some state officials who are making a fuss over President Obama and this mandata actually have similar existing mandates in their own state. Though the never made a fuss about birth control mandate until President Obama signed the national mandate into law.


    I do not think that is an argument of whether something is constitutional or not. Alot of bad law gets by without challenge until someone makes a fuss.

    For the same reason one can FORCE a employer to pay for birth control, one can also FORCE them to not cover things.

    Screen Actors Guild dropped mental health coverage after the federal mental health parity provision went into effect. The net result. They dropped all mental health coverage.


    The point I am raising is that the current GOP officials never made it their mission to target the mandates that exist in their own states. These mandates passed with bipartisanship in the 90s in the state legislature.

    But when President Obama signs the mandate into law, suddenly the GOP is impassioned about the issue icon_rolleyes.gif


    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Back in the 90's the mandate for a national health program was originally a Republican Idea when it was being discussed under the Clintons. Their Idea was in part a gift to insurance company's to help their buddies out by giving them a windfall of insurance customers. (check me out on that)

    But now the problem is this 'black' man in the Christian Fundi's white house and this is just another way bring about Obama's 'waterloo' to make him a one term president. Its quite easy to see through the repubs.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 15, 2012 2:53 AM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark said


    Well then try to imagine the ones that do. You know maybe the people in Los Angele's and some from NYC.

    They are a small in number about 2000 or so in our organization but they have SAG2 , and they lost the Mental Health Coverage.

    The fact others who have SAG and are just members and do very little union work and have other insurance doesn't change the fact.
    Do you have the slightest idea as to the qualifications to obtain SAG health coverage?


    Yes I do, and also MPI, DGA and WGA. Considering i can throw a rock from one of our offices and hit the SAG administration building.

    But that has nothing to do with the point, mandates end up hurting people. And in this small case it meant about 1000 or so lost mental health coverage locally.

    Employers have a right not to even offer health insurance.

    Again I personally don't believe one can tease out "contraception" from healthcare. But I see the lack of constitutional right of the President / Congress to force anyone to buy anything for anyone.

    The Catholic issue doesn't matter.

    The "force to be Catholic" is an empty argument. It assumes one has a Constitutional right to a job.



  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 3:07 AM GMT
    musclmed said, "The "force to be Catholic" is an empty argument. It assumes one has a Constitutional right to a job."

    No it means people have a right not to be discriminated against by their employer.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Feb 15, 2012 3:17 AM GMT
    meninlove said musclmed said, "The "force to be Catholic" is an empty argument. It assumes one has a Constitutional right to a job."

    No it means people have a right not to be discriminated against by their employer.


    explain how discrimination relates to paying a benefit? When we know that by a quick decision they can simply not offer ANY health coverage.

    Simply some health insurances do not cover all sorts of things, like fertility treatment, outpatient anesthesia the list goes on and on.

    It depends on what coverage the employer buys.

    What about sexual re-assignment surgery? Not too many plans cover that either.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 15, 2012 3:17 AM GMT
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark said
    musclmed said
    TropicalMark said


    Well then try to imagine the ones that do. You know maybe the people in Los Angele's and some from NYC.

    They are a small in number about 2000 or so in our organization but they have SAG2 , and they lost the Mental Health Coverage.

    The fact others who have SAG and are just members and do very little union work and have other insurance doesn't change the fact.
    Do you have the slightest idea as to the qualifications to obtain SAG health coverage?


    Yes I do, and also MPI, DGA and WGA. Considering i can throw a rock from one of our offices and hit the SAG administration building.

    But that has nothing to do with the point, mandates end up hurting people. And in this small case it meant about 1000 or so lost mental health coverage locally.

    Employers have a right not to even offer health insurance.

    Again I personally don't believe one can tease out "contraception" from healthcare. But I see the lack of constitutional right of the President / Congress to force anyone to buy anything for anyone.

    The Catholic issue doesn't matter.

    The "force to be Catholic" is an empty argument. It assumes one has a Constitutional right to a job.






    "constitutional right to a job", no muscle med, we don't have that right, but we do have a right under the constitution that when we do get a job that some damn religion isn't going to interfere with insurance under standard employment practices. Are you one of those Bible thumpers ? This whole thing is nothing more than just one more way for the far right repubs to make yet another social wedge issue to get that 'black' man out of the christian fundi's white house.