• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Democrats say the damnedest things.....

YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Dirty Penguin said:
Again...where is she wrong....?

SCOTUS allowed HL to opt out of covering certain contraception that they (HL) feels goes against their religious beliefs. But if that is the contraception the woman wants or needs then she will not be able to get it through her health insurance....just because HL covers some of the other contraception doesn't necessarily mean that those particular contraception are conducive to that particular woman.
Click to expand...
Oh, come now, at the very least, Hil Hil was being less than honest. If the company provides for 16 fricken contraceptive choices it is more than a bit disingenuous to claim that said company "doesn’t think she should be using contraception…This kind of decision raises serious questions." Hilary is right about the serious questions and one would be why she is claiming something that is not true in full knowledge of what the truth is. The truth just doesn't work into her narrative to keep the alleged "war on women" alive.
 
Dirty Penguin

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
YmirGF said:
Oh, come now, at the very least, Hil Hil was being less than honest. If the company provides for 16 fricken contraceptive choices it is more than a bit disingenuous to claim that said company "doesn’t think she should be using contraception…This kind of decision raises serious questions." Hilary is right about the serious questions and one would be why she is claiming something that is not true in full knowledge of what the truth is. The truth just doesn't work into her narrative to keep the alleged "war on women" alive.
Click to expand...

But that is EXACTLY what HL believes. The contraceptives they list in their argument they believe no one employed by them should be using them that's getting health insurance through them because in their opinion, which isn't based on scientific evidence, they believe the contraceptives cause abortions which is why they refuse to pay for them under their insurance policy. The truth of the matter is not all women can use the other forms of birth control and not all women can use the ones they, HL, have a problem with.....but for the ones that want or need to use them...HL is not allowing them, under the employees health insurance, to use them......
 
metis

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
It appears that Ginsberg was right and the five Republican appointees were wrong, as there are now lawsuits being proposed to stop insurance for any birth control being considered by at least one Catholic institution, and another conservative-oriented company is considering whether they can dismiss gay employees; this according to CNN last night.
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Hillary, despite her special relationship, seems unaware of British political parties....
"It is so special to me, personally, and I think it is very special between our countries," Clinton said. "There's just a -- not just a common language -- but a common set of values that we can fall back on. It doesn't matter in our country whether it's a Republican or Democrat, or frankly in your country whether it's a Conservative or a Tory."
 
Last edited:
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Dirty Penguin said:
But that is EXACTLY what HL believes. The contraceptives they list in their argument they believe no one employed by them should be using them that's getting health insurance through them because in their opinion, which isn't based on scientific evidence, they believe the contraceptives cause abortions which is why they refuse to pay for them under their insurance policy. The truth of the matter is not all women can use the other forms of birth control and not all women can use the ones they, HL, have a problem with.....but for the ones that want or need to use them...HL is not allowing them, under the employees health insurance, to use them......
Click to expand...
But you're reading more into it than she actually said. She said that they don't think they should be using contraceptives. Not quite the same thing. I'd give her a pass if she said "some" contraceptives. She didn't because she KNEW that that would make her assertion relatively meaningless. Like, if you have 20 choices and are good with 16 of them it's pretty hard to say you are against contraception, period.
 
esmith

esmith

Veteran Member
Sunstone said:
Just out of curiosity, Esmith, how often do you think you meet politicians -- of any party -- who are not good liars?
Click to expand...
To put it bluntly, a politician is someone who is willing to tell you what you want to hear even though it may or may not be completely false or completely true. The informed voter has to see through the thin veil of what the politician is saying and see what they really believes and is willing to do to accomplish his or her agenda.
 
Last edited:
Sunstone

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
esmith said:
To put it bluntly, a politician is someone who is willing to tell you what you want to hear even though it may or may not be completely false or completely true. The informed voter has to see through the thin veil of what the politician is saying and see what they really believes and is willing to do to accomplish his or her agenda.
Click to expand...

Jeebers, Esmith! We agree on something. How far behind can be the apocalypse?
 
Dirty Penguin

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
metis said:
It appears that Ginsberg was right and the five Republican appointees were wrong, as there are now lawsuits being proposed to stop insurance for any birth control being considered by at least one Catholic institution, and another conservative-oriented company is considering whether they can dismiss gay employees; this according to CNN last night.
Click to expand...

Or the ones that want to be exempt from even hiring any LGBT person based on their religious perspective....

Faith leaders: Exempt religious groups from order barring LGBT bias in hiring - The Washington Post
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The White House is standing by a statement on its website claiming that border security is at its strongest in history even in the face of a spiraling border crisis in Texas.
Under the heading “border security” on the White House website's section on President Obama's immigration proposal, the whitehouse.gov website gives the president credit for having "doubled the number of Border Patrol agents," saying "today border security is stronger than it ever has been."
The White House says the statement is true despite the estimated 52,000 unattended children who have crossed the southwest border so far this year and the roughly 90,000 expected by fall.
Click to expand...

White House stands by claim that border security is stronger than ever | WashingtonExaminer.com
 
Dirty Penguin

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
Revoltingest said:
White House stands by claim that border security is stronger than ever | WashingtonExaminer.com
Click to expand...

I would tend to agree with the WH on this. Obama, the deporter in chief as he's been called, his administration is deporting more illegals than any other president in our recent history. More money has gone to the boarder to beef it up more than a couple of the current federal law enforcement agencies (combined) so it is more secure than any other time in our history. Additionally...the ones crossing the border are actually turning themselves in to the border patrol. These are the typical illegals entering the country trying to avoid officers. They're actually crossing the boarder and seeking out the authorities or waiting to be picked up by the authorities.
 
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
Dirty Penguin said:
I would tend to agree with the WH on this. Obama, the deporter in chief as he's been called, his administration is deporting more illegals than any other president in our recent history. More money has gone to the boarder to beef it up more than a couple of the current federal law enforcement agencies (combined) so it is more secure than any other time in our history. Additionally...the ones crossing the border are actually turning themselves in to the border patrol. These are the typical illegals entering the country trying to avoid officers. They're actually crossing the boarder and seeking out the authorities or waiting to be picked up by the authorities.
Click to expand...
*yawn*

The Obama Administration's 2 Million Deportations, Explained | Mother Jones

Lies, damned lies, and Obama
 
Revoltingest

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
YmirGF said:
One does not have many choices once one has boxed themselves into a corner. What else can one do except double-down?
Click to expand...
To be fair, the illegal alien....er, "undocumented citizen", problem is multi-faceted, & one can find info which paints Obama as friend or foe. Looking at the same news & stats, I see an administration which hinders states from catching illegals, seeks votes from illegals, pays little attention to border security, & has reduced the return portion of deportations. Does he view these illegal alien children as "pre-Democrats"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top