let the big spending libs use THEIR money to pay for this.
Sad that the dems resort to lies and half-truths to try win an election. The HL
ruling did not prevent women from obtaining abortion inducing drugs. It did not
say employers could opt out of covering all contraceptives in their health
plans.The SCOTUS, in the HL ruling, indicated the method under which
women could obtain these drugs at no charge, but rather than enact the required
legislation, the dems are playing politics with women’s health. Dems are
admittedly attacking religious freedoms (shows how much they really care about
the first amendment) and politicking under the guise of “women’s
rights”. What they are really doing is making noise about a phony war on
women. Dem actions constitute the real war on women.No
employer’s faith is preventing women from obtaining abortion inducing
drugs – that decision IS left to the woman, her doctor, her family, and
her faith. To say otherwise is completely false.
"Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Democrats "think
they can score political points and create divisions where there aren't any
by distorting the facts.""--- Oh thou hypocrite.
Thanks to those who are pushing ahead to make sure that women's basic
preventative health care is covered by their insurance.
No suprise here. Politics are a dirty, slimy business and the Democrats sense
they have more ammo to keep the woman vote in their camp. The GOP lost in 2012
because they overwhelming lost the woman and minority vote. They've done
nothing to improve their case with either group sense then. The GOP will
continue to pass legislation that favors rich, white upper income American. Not
going to be a lot of those left in 20 years.
@lost in DC"The HL ruling did not prevent women from obtaining
abortion inducing drugs."Nobody claims it does."
It did not say employers could opt out of covering all contraceptives in their
health plans."Actually a couple days after the Supreme court
clarified its' ruling and gave Wheaton College the ability to, while their
case is going through the system, not have to cover any contraception at all in
their health plans. "indicated the method under which women
could obtain these drugs at no charge"Wheaton's lawsuit
(among others like the Little Sisters of the Poor) challenges that method. While
the men on the Supreme Court pointed towards that alternate method, the women on
the supreme court blasted the Wheaton decision by the Supreme Court because it
goes against that very same method.
@lost in DCThe Supreme Court also decided against reviewing 3 cases that
were won by plaintiffs who objected to covering all forms of birth control, but
with regard to 3 cases that were lost by plaintiffs who objected to covering all
forms of birth control, they sent those cases back to the lower courts for
further review. The court sent a strong message in their subsequent actions to
the ruling and it's this...this statement"It did not say
employers could opt out of covering all contraceptives in their health
plans."is not meant to be taken as true when it comes to smaller
businesses held by a few individuals.
The statement buy the Centers for Disease control and prevention is as telling
as any thing. "National statistics from the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention show that more than 99 percent of women ages 15 to 44 who
have had sexual intercourse have used at least one form of
contraception."How is it that a 15 year old girl is considered a
woman capable of making such important choices as sexual intercourse and
contraception? The same question can be asked about 15 year old boys. According to law, both are considered children. We live in a mixed up world.
Paying for another persons behavior is un-American.
Schnee,“no one claims it does.”Look at all the
headlines; the empty, real “war on women” rhetoric coming from the
dems, then try again.The SCOTUS DID provide a means, whether others