Senate Dems stop "conscience exemption"

  • Thread starter Thread starter garn9173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Disappointed, but it is nice to see that three Democrats had a little sense.
I’m not surprised to see that McCaskill of Missouri voted yea. She has yet to respond to my letter, not that I was counting on that anyway. She is going to hear from me again.
 
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.
Do you think a bill would of passed in a majority Democrat senate if the bill had more narrow religious exemptions? I do not.
 
For those who vote Democrat, take notice. You are directly supporting a culture of death, including abortion, contraception, sterilization, and where desired, euthanasia. Very direct but very true. By supporting such politicians and policies, you are, I believe, endangering your soul. May God have mercy.
 
For those who vote Democrat, take notice. You are directly supporting a culture of death, including abortion, contraception, sterilization, and where desired, euthanasia. Very direct but very true. By supporting such politicians and policies, you are, I believe, endangering your soul. May God have mercy.
To be fair, voters need to look at each specific candidate, not just “Democrat” or “Republican.” There are pro-choice Republicans and a few pro-life Democrats.

Three Democrats supported the Respect for Conscience Act and one Republican did not.
 
Because the are CINO?🤷
Brian, In all charity I think your response lacks charity.

There are many Catholics whose consciences arent fully formed, but that doesnt make them “Catholic in name only”

Anyone baptized into the baptism of Our Lord and raised hopefully into new life is a Catholic. And Our Lord loves them and spilled His Precious Blood and hung on the Sacred Cross for them as He did for you or who you seem to deem “real Catholics”… 🙂

In this Lenten season of great grace and penance, we need to pray for others and not condemn them lest we be condemned.

We all are sinners.

Have a blessed evening. 🙂
 
For those who vote Democrat, take notice. You are directly supporting a culture of death, including abortion, contraception, sterilization, and where desired, euthanasia. Very direct but very true. By supporting such politicians and policies, you are, I believe, endangering your soul. May God have mercy.
How do you think Our Blessed Lord would handle these realities?

Image all those who vote democrat were surrounding Him, ready to listen to Him.
What and how would He teach them? What would He say?

Something to ponder during this Lenten season. 🙂
 
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?
Take your pick. They both have the same destination.
 
I don’t really think that the bill was too broad.

What is too broad is the HHS Secretary’s powers under the health care bill.

This time the mandate requires coverage of contraception, sterilization, morning after pills. Next time it might be abortion. HHS could mandate coverage of euthanasia. It could mandate coverage of assisted suicide. It could mandate no medical coverage for those deemed in a persistent vegetative state. It could mandate organ retrieval from those deemed brain dead.

The Secretary has the power to mandate. Only a broad conscience exemptions can protect the religious freedom of those who do not wish to violate their conscience at the order of the government.
 
I’m not surprised to see that McCaskill of Missouri voted yea. She has yet to respond to my letter, not that I was counting on that anyway. She is going to hear from me again.
She and Russ did not respond to my letter. Roy did.
 
MODERATOR NOTICE

Members are understandably frustrated, but please remember to post charitably. NO NAME CALLING
 
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.
I just lost some respect for Senator Rubio. Senator Blunt did the right thing - we do need precisely those broad exemptions in order to protect us from being forced to cover other immoral stuff that’s yet to come down the pipeline (euthanasia, sex change surgeries, embryonic stem cell based therapies, etc) and we most assuredly need to protect non-religiously affiliated employers as well. If a layperson operates his own company or small business, he should enjoy the same right of denying contraception coverage to his employees as a Catholic hospital or university would. Non-religiously affiliated (lay) employers should not be expected to violate their own moral consciences by offering abortion/contraception/sterilization coverage to their employees.
 
I’ve wondered about this for years. BTW, the same can be said for Jews, clearly the current administration is no friend of Israel.
Not every American Jew is a “friend” of Israel. Many, if not most, place their loyalty to the United States far above that to Israel.
 
I don’t really think that the bill was too broad.

What is too broad is the HHS Secretary’s powers under the health care bill.

This time the mandate requires coverage of contraception, sterilization, morning after pills. Next time it might be abortion. HHS could mandate coverage of euthanasia. It could mandate coverage of assisted suicide. It could mandate no medical coverage for those deemed in a persistent vegetative state. It could mandate organ retrieval from those deemed brain dead.

The Secretary has the power to mandate. Only a broad conscience exemptions can protect the religious freedom of those who do not wish to violate their conscience at the order of the government.
👍
 
Brian, In all charity I think your response lacks charity.

There are many Catholics whose consciences arent fully formed, but that doesnt make them “Catholic in name only”

Anyone baptized into the baptism of Our Lord and raised hopefully into new life is a Catholic. And Our Lord loves them and spilled His Precious Blood and hung on the Sacred Cross for them as He did for you or who you seem to deem “real Catholics”… 🙂

In this Lenten season of great grace and penance, we need to pray for others and not condemn them lest we be condemned.

We all are sinners.

Have a blessed evening. 🙂
👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top