Senate Dems stop "conscience exemption"

  • Thread starter Thread starter garn9173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

garn9173

Guest
No big surprise here.

foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/01/first-senate-vote-looms-on-obama-birth-control-policy/#ixzz1ntB74HhJ
Senate Democrats have blocked an amendment that would have let insurers opt out of providing contraceptive coverage if employers had religious or moral objections.
Click to expand...
The Respect for Rights of Conscience Act, shorthanded as “the conscience amendment” and authored by Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., was “tabled,” or set aside, on a 51-48 vote.
Click to expand...
Democrats needed 50 votes to prevail.
Click to expand...
Blunt’s amendment to a transportation bill would exempt employers from a new government mandate, soon to be put in place under the Patient’s Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Click to expand...
 
Once again RINO Snowe is the only Republican to defect.:mad:
 
Remind me again why any Catholic would vote Democrat?
 
Democrats again forcing their pro abortion agenda, trying to force Catholic and other religious institutions to violate their religious conscience, and the one RINO Snowe. While I commend Roy Blunt, with a majority Democrat senate this could not pass, this can be only sorted out in the courts with the lawsuits that are currently ongoing against the HHS mandate.
 
Instead of blaming the democrats for everything under the sun, maybe they should work more carefully on the next one so that it’s not so broad, and more specific. :rolleyes:

Yeah, let’s tag a broad bill on for vote, call it a ‘conscience protection’ amendment and not give it any limits and then complain when it gets tabled. You know, it’s not always someone else’s fault…sometimes people really do bring things on themelves.
The Blunt amendment would have established that an entity refusing coverage on religious or moral grounds is not in violation of the law. It did not mention contraception specifically
Click to expand...
An amendment worded so broadly would allow employers to not cover employees for almost anything just by citing ‘moral grounds’.

cnn.com/2012/03/01/politics/senate-health-care/index.html

Try again…
 
iamrefreshed said:
Once again RINO Snowe is the only Republican to defect.:mad:
Click to expand...
luckily the worthless excuse for a senator olympia dukakis snow is retiring so we don’t have to worry about her switching her vote over and over again. she’s absolutely horrible.
 
Rence said:
Instead of blaming the democrats for everything under the sun, maybe they should work more carefully on the next one so that it’s not so broad, and more specific. :rolleyes:

Yeah, let’s tag a broad bill on for vote, call it a ‘conscience protection’ amendment and not give it any limits and then complain when it gets tabled. You know, it’s not always someone else’s fault…sometimes people really do bring things on themelves.

An amendment worded so broadly would allow employers to not cover employees for almost anything just by citing ‘moral grounds’.

cnn.com/2012/03/01/politics/senate-health-care/index.html

Try again…
Click to expand...
Ooooor we could blame democrats because people like you were the ones who passed this garbage bill to begin with. I don’t recall republicans passing this hhs mandate. And you want to blame people for the solution they come up with a this garbage?
 
Rence said:
Instead of blaming the democrats for everything under the sun, maybe they should work more carefully on the next one so that it’s not so broad, and more specific. :rolleyes:

Yeah, let’s tag a broad bill on for vote, call it a ‘conscience protection’ amendment and not give it any limits and then complain when it gets tabled. You know, it’s not always someone else’s fault…sometimes people really do bring things on themelves.

An amendment worded so broadly would allow employers to not cover employees for almost anything just by citing ‘moral grounds’.

cnn.com/2012/03/01/politics/senate-health-care/index.html

Try again…
Click to expand...
Contraception is not the only thing that many religious employers do not want to fund; sterilization, abortificants, abortion itself etc. because Obama or Sebelius could add abortion to be mandated as part of ObamaCare in the future. The Blunt amendment would of created provisions so that ObamaCare could not be used to mandate that religious employers have to violate their conscience.

Caridnal Dolon and the Bishops supported the amendment.
 
Again proving there is no such thing as a pro-life Democrat.

And some will still try to defend their voting for Democrats.
 
I am wondering here since I am not an expert on the subject. Are we going the same route as Nazi Germany or Communist Russia? Just maybe more gradually?
 
Disappointed, but it is nice to see that three Democrats had a little sense.
 
wondrousgnat said:
I am wondering here since I am not an expert on the subject. Are we going the same route as Nazi Germany or Communist Russia? Just maybe more gradually?
Click to expand...
Imperial Rome, Communist China, name your totalitarian regime. They’re all the same.
 
wondrousgnat said:
I am wondering here since I am not an expert on the subject. Are we going the same route as Nazi Germany or Communist Russia? Just maybe more gradually?
Click to expand...
Maybe it will be gradual. Maybe not so much. When this whole HHS mandate was first mentioned at Mass just a few short weeks ago, Father reminded us that Germany began to persecute and imprison her own citizens fairly quickly. Hitler rose to power in 1933. The Nuremberg Laws were passed in 1935.

I’m no expert either, not by a long stretch. But, I too wonder where we are headed.
 
This was a bad bill, written so broadly that any employer could literally deny his employees coverage for pretty much anything. I have heard that Rubio had proposed a much more narrowly tailored bill that would only address contraception and religiously affiliated employers, but apparently the GOP decided to go for the broader bill.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top