Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (126708)	3/18/2012 8:24:08 AM
From: lorne	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224718

St. Pat's Day massacre of religious liberty Obama expands contraception insurance mandate to Catholic university students by Drew Zahn wnd.com While much of the nation was focused on the St. Patrick’s Day weekend, the White House quietly released news that has nonetheless caught the attention of – and outraged – many Catholics and defenders of religious liberty. In a late-week news release, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Resources announced it was taking “the next step” in implementing the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – commonly called Obamacare – by finalizing a rule that requires universities offering insurance to students to add contraception coverage, regardless of the school’s moral or religious stance on the issue. In other words, if a Catholic university like Notre Dame offers students insurance plans, those plans must also, after a one-year transition period, include birth control coverage, despite Catholic doctrine to the contrary. Jeanne Monahan, director of the Center for Human Dignity at the Family Research Council, blasted the news as a “profound violation of religious liberty.” “The reality is that the HHS mandate forces women like me to violate our consciences by paying a premium to an insurer who will then provide free coverage of drugs and devices that can cause abortions,” Monahan said in a statement. “At the end of the day … the mandate forces religious organizations to pay health insurance companies for coverage to their employees with drugs and services that simply violates their religious convictions. “You may not agree with such religious beliefs,” she continued, “but freedom to exercise one’s religion is a constitutional right and should be protected by the president under the First Amendment.” The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has yet to file a formal response, but conference spokeswoman Sister Mary Ann Walsh took exception to the White House “dumping” the announcement at the end of the week, when far fewer people are paying attention to the news. “I am surprised,” Walsh told the National Catholic Register, “that such important information would be announced late Friday of St. Patrick’s Day weekend and as we prepare for the fourth Sunday of Lent.” “Under the final rule, students will gain the same consumer protections other people with individual market insurance have, like a prohibition on lifetime limits and coverage of preventive services without cost sharing,” the White House announcement asserts. “In the same way that religious colleges and universities will not have to pay, arrange or refer for contraceptive coverage for their employees, they will not have to do so for their students who will get such coverage directly and separately from their insurer.” “The President’s policy respects religious liberty and makes free preventive services available to women,” added HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “Today’s announcement is the next step toward fulfilling that commitment.” But opponents of the rule contend the administration’s reasoning – that it’s not the universities, but the insurers who pay for contraceptives and potentially abortifacient birth control medications – is nothing more than an “accounting gimmick.” “Religious groups aren’t following that distorted logic,” writes Sarah Torre of The Heritage Foundation. “Among many others, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has made clear that such accounting gimmicks are wholly inadequate to deal with the serious moral problem the mandate has forced upon religious groups. “It is the expectation of HHS that an insurance company will simply ‘pool’ resources from all employers who purchase plans and use those funds to cover the cost of contraceptives,” she continues. “By the administration’s own admission, there’s no guarantee that the funds collected by insurance companies from a religious employer’s premium payments won’t then be used to cover abortion-inducing drugs and contraception. “The administration’s ‘accommodation’ [of religious liberty] is nothing but an accounting gimmick that still leaves employers with objections to abortion drugs and contraception footing the bill for those services,” Torre concludes. “Those employers are now forced to wait on the process of unelected bureaucrats to know whether the administration intends to respect their First Amendment rights.” The White House has established a 90-day comment period for seeking the public’s input on the new contraception insurance mandates for religious employers and universities. A very specific set of guidelines governs how the comments must be formatted and delivered. Hannah Smith, senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is representing five clients who have filed suit against the mandate, does not discourage comments, but insists the White House should know better than to implement the new HHS rule in the first place. “We do not need any more rule making. We do not need any more comment periods,” she stated. “We already settled this with that one original rule: The First Amendment.”

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (126708)	3/18/2012 8:36:50 AM
From: TideGlider	4 Recommendations Respond to of 224718

His post on refers people to another post. That post said it made no comment on the content. I got an email from a long time liberal this morning. I was very confused because of this friends over the top left wing leanings. Not sure it copies well, but here it is. Is this guy a racist also or has he just had it with the BS? It is easy to call someone a racist: Finally ............ It is Said Publicly. I have never seen the white side explained better! Pat Buchanan had the guts to say it. It is about time. BUCHANAN TO OBAMA By Patrick J. Buchanan Letter to Obama (did he ever need to hear it) Posted by alaska644 Posted: February 19, 2009 - 9:18 pm I couldn't find this on snopes to validate so I did a search and found it validates on a democrat blog of all places! Of course, they hated it. Here's the validation: http://buchanan.org/blog/2008/03/pjb-a-brief-for-whitey/ -------Original Message------- Subject: MESSAGE FROM BUCHANAN BUCHANAN TO OBAMA BY:Patrick J. Buchanan Barack says we need to have a conversation about race in America . Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to. This time, the Silent Majority needs to have its convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these: First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American. Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans. Untold trillions have been spent since the ' 60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream. Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against white folks -- with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance black applicants over white applicants. Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individ uals all over America have donated their time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for blacks. We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude?? Barack talks about new 'ladders of opportunity' for blacks. Let him go to Altoona ? And Johnstown , and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for 'deserving ' white kids.? Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America ? Is it really white America 's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent? Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself? As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Is Barack Obama aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time? Is Barack aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse? We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing. Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago. This needs to be passed around because, this is a message everyone needs to hear!!! Will you pass it on? YES. I did but will you? 15 Because I'm for a better America Honor our Veterans - it's the right thing to do. I am Not racist, Not violent, Just not silent anymore

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (126708)	3/18/2012 9:12:46 AM
From: locogringo	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224718

Are you saying that this person is a racist? We finally agree then that Black women can be racist too, since she wrote the article. Written by Abena Agyeman-Fisher on March 15, 2012 4:01 pm Are you just spitting out ANOTHER filthy accusation BECAUSE one word upsets you? Do you know how many words out of the LYING mouth of Obama upset me? Watch how fast the TROLL will disappear now. HOOK, LINE, and SINKER..................THANKS, Burp-Up