The Obama administration strikes again:
Most healthcare plans will be required to cover birth control without charging co-pays or deductibles starting Aug. 1, the Obama administration announced Friday…
…Congressional Republicans slammed the decision as an assault on religious freedom.
“This ruling forces religious organizations to violate the fundamental tenets of their faith, or stop offering health insurance coverage to their employees,” said the Republican Policy Committee. “Time will tell whether those institutions choose the former or the latter course — but neither option should be necessary, if the administration had not taken such an unbending approach to appease its liberal base.”
Do you feel appeased? Or do you feel like you’ve been protected from attack?
The horrors of not curtailing the Palin family’s breeding rate!
Equity in coverage for contraception is a BFD. It’s been a major goal of women’s rights and heath care reform activists at least since the 1990s, and now (thanks to the ACA) we’ve got it. No more “We cover Viagra, but you can pay for your girly pills yourself.”
Pissing off the religious right and Republicans is a nice cherry on top, but let’s not lose sight of the big story here.
It’s also the difference between the two contemporary ideologies: the cons doing shit for the sake of pissing off liberals and for no other reason; for us, it’s a side note, but still worth mentioning.
And on a side note, interview with Rolls Royce in an hour…uber nervous.
Good luck seabe! You’ll be fine – you’re a smart kid.
Aw, who am I kidding? I love me some salty wingnut tears.
Rolls Royce needs rocket scientists? Dang, I need to make more money, get me one of those cars…
I’m just glad we can all safely get back to our hedonistic f*cking.
translation of Suppressional Republicans –“This ruling violates our fundamental right to violate the reproductive rights of women! Yargle bargle gargle…”
OK.
Funny thing…I see nothing in the statement posted that says Religious organizations are required to provide birth control.
Oh well…trust conservatards to react in a paranoid fashion when their irrational ‘beliefs’ are exposed (I won’t say ‘threatened’ b/c they’re always threatened, no?)
if they provide health insurance, that insurance will cover it.
I’m cool with that…
I’d be interested to se if they Religious organizations begin to push back, citing ‘ministerial exemption’…anything to get out of having to pay form something they disapprove of
Actual churches are already exempt.
This decision is about entities like church-affiliated hospitals or other operations that offer health insurance policies.
what does this mean for the Penisylvania DPW’s “semen as anti-depressant” policy?
you gotta fill me in.
http://articles.philly.com/2012-01-18/news/30639594_1_journal-corbett-administration-corbett-aide
what seabe said. I’ve been having fun with tom corbett’s twitter feed as a result.
My heart just bleeds for those poor religious organizations, being forced to violate the fundamental tenets of their faith by allowing women control over their lives that includes when (and if) they want to have children.
Not. Way to go, Obama administration.
This radical religious crap is wrecking our world. I get crazed arguments about how only god can affect the planet so we don’t need to do anything about global warming because its not our dance. Everywhere you go there is some other religious roadblock to enlightenment.
Radical christians and radical muslims should embrace each other they are both working toward enslaving women and killing our planet. Scary thing is its becoming more and more mainstream to be a zealot.
It only requires the insurance plan to offer coverage. It doesn’t require employees of religious organizations to use that coverage. Or are religious organizations going to start policing their employees’ health care usage for particular items?
Methinks that is it a political wedge issue that has gotten a bit out of hand. And the GOP keeps doubling down.
That is the point – if someone follows a certain religion, then it’s up to the dictates of that person’s conscience to follow its tenets. The law isn’t FORCING the employee to use contraception.
Contraception exists, always has always will.
As for having their “taxes support” contraception, my taxes support blowing up people in foreign countries. I’m religiously opposed to this, but I can’t get anything like a Hyde Amendment to avoid paying for it.
I rather think most major religions are more opposed to blowing up people than they are opposed to contraception.