Today's edition of quick hits:
* When James Eagan Holmes was apprehended by Aurora police, he identified himself as the Joker. He'd also dyed his hair red or orange.
* Though there were some competing accounts throughout the day, the official death toll stands at 12 people -- 10 victims died in the theater, 2 died later at area hospitals.
* Mitt Romney delivered remarks on the tragedy in New Hampshire earlier.
* The threat of a financial crisis in Spain once again appears very real.
* The crisis in Damascus has sent as many as 30,000 Syrians fleeing into Lebanon.
* The drought that covers more than half of the continental United States "is the most widespread in more than half a century. And it is likely to grow worse."
* A public-health emergency: "Whooping cough is causing the worst epidemic seen in the United States in more than 50 years, health officials said Thursday, and they're calling for mass vaccination of adults."
* The epicenter for new HIV infections is America's Bible Belt.
* Glenn Kessler, after weeks of credible criticism, is reevaluating his defense of Romney's Bain rhetoric.
* And it really is hard to imagine what Brian Ross was thinking.
Anything to add? Consider this an open thread.
Leave a Comment:
A public-health emergency: "Whooping cough is causing the worst epidemic seen in the United States in more than 50 years, health officials said Thursday, and they're calling for mass vaccination of adults."
Thank you Jenny McCarthy, you ignorant moron. And all the idiot parents who listen to you. It's really too bad there isn't a licensing examination that has to be passed in order to procreate, it would be our last chance to bring back darwinian evolution, which in humans is supposedly in favor of intelligence. (A fact most definitely no longer in evidence)
The epicenter for new HIV infections is America's Bible Belt.
See above: the "cure" for HIV/AIDS is use of the supposedly-human ability to foresee the consequences of one's actions and modify their behavior as a result. But that takes intelligence, and Homo Sapiens mostly no longer sapes (as current Bible Belt politics demonstrates).
Romney can save his fancy words of sympathy about the Colorado shootings, when Romney doesn’t even have the balls to stand up to these extremists of hatred and the NRA. Save your words Romney your talk is full of crap and the people don’t need to hear anymore of your lying crap. As if you would do anything Romney, when you haven’t shown any backbone as of yet; you deceptive worthless weasel. All Romney knows how to do is make things miserable for people, unless your extremely wealthy and that is worthless to America and its people. Imagine the nerve even to show Romney saying that on the news trying to make it look like Romney has some empathy other than bs and deception. Romney is only well practiced in saying rhetoric to push his deceptions.
If everyone in that theatre were carrying legally concealed weapon instead of banning them, they may have a chance.
Yeah Cindy a little 38 cal. against an AK47 and a vest.Better be pretty good at head shot's.
Hell yeah, 50 people with guns against a lone killer with AK47... Pop him on the head, arms and legs, I'll take my chances.
Cindy do you realize that if everyone had a gun and started shooting at whoever they thought was the real killer more people would of died or been hurt. Do you really think untrained people with guns is going to solve anything? What in the world are you thinking with that nonsense thought?
Cindy must believe in circular firing squad's.
There was a guy with a gun who came upon the Gabby Giffords shooting scene as it was happening. He was about to shoot the gunman, when he realized he would have been shooting the guy who was taking the gun AWAY from Loughner.
Ordinary people, even with 'training' in gun handling, are not trained to operate in crisis situations. They are not knowledgeable about what gun men are likely to do or not...
Whether carrying a gun do more harm or good is highly speculative. In this particular situation would you rather be a sitting duck or at least give yourself a chance to survive by firing back eigther by killing, injuring or having the assailant retreating. You have to play the odds, and the odds are always better with a gun than not having one. It's like playing the lottery...You have to be in it to win it.
It is not speculative, and you're completely wrong. This isn't about odds, it's about human behavior, and having a gun wouldn't have saved these people.
Cindy
The man was wearing full body armour and there were gas canisters. Good luck "popping" him in the head and arm. You are delusional and have a dangerous attitude.
* And it really is hard to imagine what Brian Ross was thinking.
He wanted to provide Breitbart with some material to trip over?http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/20/Exclusive-Dark-Knight-Shooting-Suspect-James-Holmes-Registered-Democrat
Do you think this unfortunate incident would break the momentum of attacks on Bain and Romney's tax return? The media would be all over this story for another week.
The american people want to look at romneys business thru his tax returns , screw what the media wants , if he is to dishonest to show them , then heis not trust worthy enough to lead america , period
Friday news dump by Glenn Kessler?
Kessler really needs to step down. His ego is not allowing him to do his job effectively.
Fact checking really could be a valuable thing. But, what it is in 2012 is false equivalency Op-Ed writing.
I know one shouldn't laugh about HIV infections but I can't help but find it at least a little funny that the new epicentre for them is among the people most likely to say "HIV/AIDS is God's punishment for fags" or "HIV/AIDS is the gay plague."
Poetic justice?
I just cannot listen or watch Romney speak.
I'm certain he is sincere, but the stance, the look, the feeling he's looking down on you as a lesser person just drives me nuts.
Zeta: "You people" have gotten all you're going to get from Romney.The real Ann Romney showed up that day did'nt she."You people".Did she say that because the interviewer was a black woman?
OOOHHHH!!! , Ouch , That line has been bothering me also joca41 , you may have just nailed it , her hubby talks the same way , down to people , the gop sheep are not offended by this at all , that amazes me
Why do we hear so much about what Romney said and not the president?
As for 'better gun laws' not preventing this guy from getting a gun, true. But the lapsed assault weapons ban would have prevented the purchase of the automatic weapons he used.
Cause Romney's comments were more compassionate and comforting. Possibly because his religious up-bringing.
Romney and the words compassionate and comforting are oxymorons.
It is time we get real about gun control!
TRMS Blog, " Neither the Catholic Church or any other house of worship are required to "provide products" in this case, contraceptives to their employees. Churches are exempt from preventative care requirements. Romney knows this but continues to lie."
Then why have 45 Catholic Institutions (including Notre Dame and EWTN) sued the Obama administration and HHS? Because the law WOULD require Catholic institutions to cooperate with the very devices you (TRMS) say they would not have to.
It is NOT Romney who continues to lie,
It's TRMS who continues to Lie!
What is really at risk is the fundamental right to religious freedom
Recently, in an unprecedented effort to preserve Religious Freedom and defend First Amendment rights, twelve different lawsuits were filed by forty three different Catholic organizations in Federal courts. As the impassioned debates continue, the supporters want to compel church institutions to distribute contraceptives, provide abortion inducing drugs and pay for sterilization. They claim there is some kind of "War on Women". The Church, through these lawsuits, insists it is a matter of religious freedom guided by moral conscience.
A rally for Religious Freedom
Share on emailEmail
Print
Share on facebookFacebookShare on deliciousDelicousShare on myspaceMySpace
Share on twitterTwitterShare on stumbleuponStumbleShare on diggDigg
More Sharing ServicesMore Destinations
WASHINGTON,DC (Catholic Online) - Amongst the forty three organizations taking this bold move were the Archdiocese of New York, the Archdiocese of Washington, DC, a Catholic publisher, Catholic University of America, and Franciscan University.
Interestingly, the University of Notre Dame also filed suit, though UND president, Fr. John Jenkins, in 2009, invited President Obama to provide the university's commencement address and awarded him with an honorary Doctor of Law Degree.
These lawsuits serve as a sign of national, religious solidarity, as it has been reported that every Catholic Bishop in America has publicly expressed concern over this impending policy.
According to Harvard professor, Mary Ann Glendon, in an article published in the Wall Street Journal, "The bishops join a growing army of other plaintiffs around the country. Who are asking the courts to repel an unprecedented governmental assault on the ability of religious persons and groups to practice their religion without being forced to violate their deepest moral convictions."
The purpose of these lawsuits is two-fold, as they address the HHS mandate, a proposed federal policy that would violate both, the civil rights of workers, and the human rights of the unborn. Firstly, the lawsuits are in place to prevent the Health and Human Services mandate from becoming policy. It
The mandate would force employers, including Christian employers such as universities, food pantries,outreaches to the poor and needy and hospitals, to go against Church teaching and violate conscience. They would be compelled to fund and facilitate what supporters euphemistically call "reproductive services" in violation of Church teaching and moral conscience.
Secondly, the lawsuits are designed to send a clear message to President Obama about the vital importance of the [peaceful] preservation of Religious Freedom as a fundamental human right in the U.S. for people of all faiths.
Earlier this year, on March 23rd, the first national rally included an impressive 140 cities and 65,000 protestors. Despite the fact that media coverage of this debate was almost non-existent from the major media networks, ABC, NBC, CBS, and MSNBC, Civil Rights advocates are organizing a second "Stand Up for Religious Freedom" rally on Friday, June 8th, 2012.
In response to this time-sensitive debate over Church vs. state, citizens all across the U.S. will be gathering in the streets from coast to coast to promote the preservation of Religious Freedom, and peacefully express their opposition to the HHS mandate.
Adele M. Gill Copyright Distributed by NEWS CONSORTIUM
False, the church wouldn't be involved in the process. Saying that they would be is like saying your employer is involved in how you spend your wages, and should have control of it. The lawsuits are specious and doomed, and serve no purpose other than to prove how stupid these people are. This has nothing to do with religious freedom, and all to do with control by those who want to deny people their health care.
You are incorrect.
Chicago, Ill., Jul 10, 2012 / 01:03 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago has joined two Catholic dioceses and their charitable affiliates in a lawsuit over the federal contraception mandate, a move that one observer says demonstrates the potential societal impact of the rule.
The charitable ministry “will lose its identity as Catholic unless the HHS mandate now in force as the recent law of the land is changed,” Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago said in a July 9 statement supporting the charity's entry into a lawsuit against the federal government.
Chicago's Catholic Charities joins the Dioceses of Joliet and Springfield, and their respective Catholic Charities organizations, in challenging the Obama administration's mandate.
Formulated under the federal health care reform law, the rule requires religious employers to provide contraception, sterilization, and abortion-causing drugs in employee health plans.
Catholic Charities cannot obtain an exemption from the rule because it serves Catholics and non-Catholics equally. The mandate exempts only those organizations that primarily employ and serve members of the same faith for the purpose of instilling “religious values.”
Chicago's Catholic Charities employs 2,700 staff. During 2011, their efforts provided approximately 2.5 million meals to the needy, over 450,000 nights of shelter to the homeless and displaced, and nearly 900,000 hours of service to the elderly.
According to Wall Street Journal columnist Bill McGurn, these figures show the real-life impact of the mandate. “In terms of religious liberty, the new lawsuit breaks no new legal ground. What it does is offer a window into how much the decency of daily American life depends on churches using their free-exercise rights,” McGurn wrote in a July 9 column.
At stake in the lawsuits, Cardinal George said, is the freedom of the Catholic Church and other religious groups to serve the public without violating their principles.
“This is the issue now before a court. It is also the issue before a nation that portrays itself as the 'land of the free,'” Chicago's cardinal archbishop observed.
“I am sorry that the intransigence of the Department of Health and Human Services has made it necessary to defend in court what every American could take for granted until this year,” he said.
In a July 9 announcement about the lawsuit, Chicago Catholic Charities President and CEO Monsignor Michael Boland said the loss of religious freedom is “the sole matter at hand” in the challenge to the contraception mandate.
The priest took issue with the narrow exemption and its criteria, saying the Department of Health and Human Services “fails to understand that there is no distinction between our Catholic faith and our commitment to serve the needs of all people regardless of their religion.”
“We support health care reform and efforts to expand access to health care to all Americans. But we oppose any policy that compels us to compromise our Catholic faith,” Msgr. Boland said.
He noted that the mandate's intrusion on religious groups “affects all religions and anyone of faith.”
“We must take a stand, not only on behalf of Catholic Charities, but for all faith-based organizations,” the monsignor declared. “We must protect our right to serve all the poor, not just those HHS defines for us.”
More than 50 plaintiffs, including several Catholic dioceses and their Catholic Charities affiliates, are now involved in 23 lawsuits against the contraception mandate.
Tags:Contraception mandate, Religious freedom, Obama Administration
Evangelical College Wheaton College joins Catholic Law Suit vs HHS mandate.
You are seriuosly incorrect.
Washington D.C., Jul 19, 2012 / 04:07 am (CNA).- A leading evangelical college in Illinois has joined The Catholic University of America in filing a lawsuit in D.C. District Court against the contraception mandate issued under the health care law.
“I think the fact that evangelicals and Catholics are coming together on this issue ought to be a sign to all Americans that something really significant in terms of religious liberty is at stake,” said Dr. Philip Ryken, president of Wheaton College.
Ryken explained at a July 18 press call that the college – a Christian liberal arts institution with approximately 2,400 undergraduate students and 600 graduate students – allows its faith to penetrate all aspects of campus life, from hiring decisions to theology to its “community covenant.”
The college opposes both drugs and procedures that cause abortion, he said, and “we should not be coerced to provide these services.”
The lawsuit marks the most recent legal action taken against a federal mandate that will soon require employers and colleges to offer health insurance plans that cover contraception, sterilization and early abortion-causing drugs free of charge.
Kyle Duncan, general counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which is representing Wheaton College in the case, said that the new suit shows the threat posed by the mandate to people who hold a wide variety of religious beliefs.
He stressed that while most houses of worship are exempt from the mandate, religious institutions such as schools and charitable agencies do not qualify for an exemption because they hire and serve those of other faiths.
Furthermore, he said, the administration’s proposed “accommodation” was never actually put into law and fails to adequately protect religious institutions from involvement in the objectionable coverage.
According to the Becket Fund, Wheaton College’s action marks the first time that a Catholic and evangelical institution have come together in a partnership to oppose the same regulation in court.
John Garvey, president of The Catholic University of America, also spoke at the press call, saying that he welcomed Wheaton College and was happy to stand in solidarity with his evangelical brothers.
The fact that Protestant colleges are joining in the lawsuits against the mandate shows that the issue is not merely a Catholic one, Garvey said.
Nor is it an issue of contraception, he added, since evangelicals do not morally object to artificial contraception.
Rather, Garvey explained, it is a matter of religious freedom, which properly belongs to people of all faiths.
Nearly 60 plaintiffs have filed a total of more than 20 lawsuits against the mandate. While a Nebraska judge dismissed one of these lawsuits on July 17, Duncan said that this was the result of a mere technicality and did not affect Wheaton’s legal action at all.
Other plaintiffs in ongoing lawsuits include numerous colleges, dioceses, Catholic Charities agencies and private business owners throughout the country, along with religious media network EWTN and Catholic publishing group Our Sunday Visitor.
In a statement announcing the new lawsuit, Ryken said that “distinctively Christian institutions” such as Wheaton College “are faced with a clear and present threat to our religious liberty.”
“Our first president, the abolitionist Jonathan Blanchard, believed it was imperative to act in defense of freedom,” he said. “In bringing this suit, we act in defense of freedom again.”
Garvey agreed, explaining that “Wheaton’s lawsuit is another sign of how troubling many people of faith find the government’s efforts to chip away at our first freedom.”
Tags:Contraception mandate
Mother Angelica's EWTN continues active lawsuit against HHS mandate.
6/28/2012
Supreme Court Decision Fails to Stop HHS
Mandate, EWTN Lawsuit Continues
Irondale, AL (EWTN) – EWTN Global Catholic Network, which
filed suit against the U.S. Government in February to halt the implementation of
the so-called HHS contraception mandate, says the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision
to uphold the Affordable Care Act in its entirety ensures that the Network and
many other entities must continue the battle for religious liberty in this
country.
“The decision by the United States Supreme Court to uphold the Affordable
Care Act is certainly a disappointment for EWTN,” said EWTN President and Chief
Executive Officer Michael P. Warsaw. “It was our hope that the Court’s decision
would stop the implementation of the HHS mandate that requires employee health
plans to provide coverage for morally objectionable services like contraception,
sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs. Because the Court has upheld the law,
the rules which empower the government to issue its unjust mandate appear to
remain in effect. As a result, the EWTN lawsuit seeking relief from the mandate
will continue to move forward.”
EWTN’s lawsuit, which was filed February 9 in U.S. District Court in
Birmingham, Alabama against the Department of Health & Human Services, HHS
Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, and other government agencies, not only sought to
stop the imposition of the contraception mandate, but asked the court for a
declaratory judgment that the mandate was unconstitutional. EWTN was the first
Catholic entity to file a lawsuit against the U.S. Government after the final
rules were issued. The Attorney General of the State of Alabama filed documents
March 22 in U.S. District Court in Birmingham, Alabama joining EWTN as a
plaintiff in its lawsuit.
At the time EWTN’s lawsuit was filed, Warsaw said that he took the action
to defend not only the Network but other institutions across the country –
Catholic and non-Catholic, religious and secular – from having this mandate
imposed upon them. The mandate empowers the government to force EWTN and other
employers to inform employees about how to get contraception, sterilization and
abortion-inducing drugs – and later to provide these things to employees for
free. If they refuse to do so, for any reason, it further empowers the
government to impose crippling fines for refusing.
“The challenges to religious liberty continue every day at the federal,
state and local levels,” Warsaw said. “The fight to secure our religious
freedoms must continue.” EWTN Global Catholic Network, in its 30th year, is
available in over 200 million television households in more than 140 countries
and territories. With its direct broadcast satellite television and radio
services, AM & FM radio networks, worldwide short-wave radio station,
Internet website www.ewtn.com, electronic and print news services, and
publishing arm, EWTN is the largest religious media network in the world.
Liberal Supreme Court Justice's Opinion may aid in defate of HHS mandate against Religious Freedom .
5-July-2012 -- Catholic News Agency
More Sharing ServicesShare | Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on favoritesShare on print
Liberal Justice's Opinion May Help Fight Against HHS
Mandate
(http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=25223)
WASHINGTON
D.C., July 3 (CNA) .- Challengers of the Obama administration's contraception
mandate may have been handed a surprising advantage by the Supreme Court's
liberal wing, in its partial dissent on the health care reform law.
"A
mandate to purchase a particular product would be unconstitutional if, for
example, the edict impermissibly abridged the freedom of speech, (or) interfered
with the free exercise of religion," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in a June
28 opinion supporting the law's "individual mandate."
The rule requiring
citizens to buy insurance was upheld by the vote of Chief Justice John Roberts,
who interpreted it as a use of federal taxing power. But four other justices,
supporting the individual mandate without calling it a tax, signed on to
Ginsburg's opinion supporting religious liberty.
In a new column for CNA,
religious freedom attorney Kim Daniels says the four justices may have given
"unlikely support" to opponents of another controversial provision in the health
care law, which requires employers to cover abortion-causing drugs as well as
contraception and sterilization.
"Justice Ginsburg describes the HHS
(contraceptive) mandate to the letter: it's a mandate to pay for particular
goods and services, and it interferes with the free exercise of religion,"
writes Daniels, a former counsel to the Thomas More Law Center and current
coordinator of Catholic Voices USA.
While the justice's affirmation of
free religious exercise is "basic constitutional law," Daniels says it was
"notable that Justice Ginsburg chose to draw attention to this truism" using
"language that opponents of the HHS mandate will no doubt highlight" as they
challenge the contraception rule.
Justices Breyer, Kagan, and Sotomayor
all joined Justice Ginsburg in her affirmation of religious freedom against
government attempts to force the purchase of morally objectionable
products.
The court's decision on the health care law, Daniel writes,
"not only leaves the many legal challenges to the HHS mandate in force, it
underscores their validity." Over 50 plaintiffs are currently involved in 23
lawsuits against the contraception mandate.
Daniels' essay explains how
the contraception mandate violates the U.S. Constitution, by exempting some
religious employers - according to a narrow set of criteria - but requiring
others to provide insurance coverage for products and services they
oppose.
"Now that the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act is no
longer in question, it's time for the administration to revisit its divisive
efforts to coerce religious employers into facilitating insurance coverage for
goods and services that violate their faith," the Catholic Voices USA
coordinator writes.
Her column can be viewed in full at:
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=2212.
Click
here to share this news story with a friend.
You can face the facts and understand the TRUTH. Or you can continue to listen to the lies of TRMS.
Biased sources do not proof make. You're the one who is mistaken, and making up links that aren't there. I'm listening to my own sense and the actual facts on the ground, not anyone else. YOU, on the other hand, are listening to a vacuum of facts, and the empty echoes of your own head.
Do you mena biased links like "The Huffington Post"?
Catholic University, Archdiocese Of Washington Sue HHS Over Health Insurance Mandate
Posted: 05/21/2012 1:47 pm Updated: 05/21/2012 1:47 pm
redditstumble
60
12
4
75
Get DC Alerts:
Sign Up
React:
Amazing
Inspiring
Funny
Scary
Hot
Crazy
Important
Weird
Follow:
Catholic Church, Health Care Reform, Health Care Law, Video, Catholic University HHS Lawsuit, Catholic University Of America, University Of Notre Dame, Contraception , Cua, Notre Dame, Roman Catholic Church, DC News
WASHINGTON -- A coalition of Roman Catholic entities in the nation's capital has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services in an attempt to block the implementation of a health care reform mandate forcing the institutions to provide health insurance covering contraception and other medical procedures that run counter to church teachings.
The Jones Day law firm, which filed suit in United States District Court for the District of Columbia, is representing the coalition that includes Catholic University of America, the Archdiocese of Washington, the Consortium of Catholic Academies, Archbishop Carroll High School and Catholic Charities of D.C.
As The Associated Press reported, dozens of Roman Catholic institutions sued the Obama administration over its health insurance mandate on Monday, including the University of Notre Dame and the Archdiocese of New York.
Catholic University's president, John Garvey, said in a statement released late Monday morning:
Read the legal complaint here.
Also on HuffPost:
Or one of Ms Maddow's own selective resources, The Hill?
Notre Dame, Catholic institutions sue Obama over contraception mandate
By Elise Viebeck -05/21/12 12:38 PM ET
The University of Notre Dame joined other Catholic institutions Monday in suing the Obama administration over its contraception mandate.
The lawsuit argues the mandate in the healthcare law requiring that insurance plans cover birth control for women without a co-pay violates the religious freedom of Catholic institutions.
< a href="http://adclick.g.doubleclick.net/aclk?sa=L&ai=B882eeBwKUIfjOqih6AHe7JjJAdmCxsICAAAAEAEgmeD2AjgAWPnKruQ0YMn224qwpOwPsgELdGhlaGlsbC5jb226AQlnZnBfaW1hZ2XIAQnaAYcBaHR0cDovL3d3dy5oaWxsbmV3cy5jb20vYmxvZ3MvaGVhbHRod2F0Y2gvbGVnYWwtY2hhbGxlbmdlcy8yMjg1ODUtd2FzaGluZ3Rvbi1hcmNoZGlvY2VzZS1zdWVzLWFkbWluaXN0cmF0aW9uLW92ZXItYmlydGgtY29udHJvbC1tYW5kYXRl4AEGwAIC4AIA6gIhSGVhbHRod2F0Y2hfQ29udGVudFNxdWFyZV8zMDB4MjUw-AKB0h6AAwGQA-ADmAPgA6gDAeAEAaAGFg&num=0&sig=AOD64_1TnmD8DPWGnsxZrIqFYtDt1lOnqQ&client=ca-pub-5456982649231368&adurl=http://bs.serving-sys.com/BurstingPipe/adServer.bs?cn=brd&FlightID=4103226&Page=&PluID=0&Pos=8687" target="_blank">
The Archdiocese of Washington, the Michigan Catholic Conference and the Catholic University of America are among the other plaintiffs in the suit.
Notre Dame's participation is notable because Obama gave a controversial commencement speech at the school in 2009. Anti-abortion-rights groups criticized the school for inviting Obama because of his position on abortion.
The suit was one of 12 similar actions filed Monday around the country, a release from the Archdiocese of Washington stated, bringing the total number of cases now pending over the mandate to more than 30.
Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the archbishop of New York, praised the trend in a statement.
"We have tried negotiation with the administration and legislation with the Congress — and we’ll keep at it — but there's still no fix," he said.
"Time is running out, and our valuable ministries and fundamental rights hang in the balance, so we have to resort to the courts now."
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which Dolan leads, had warned lawsuits were coming in a letter sent to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) last week.
"Absent prompt congressional attention to this infringement on fundamental civil liberties, we believe the only remaining recourse … is in the courts," lawyers for the group wrote May 15.
White House spokesman Jay Carney said in February that Obama takes objectors' concerns "very seriously" and is "very aware of and engaged in this issue."
"We are very sensitive and understand some of the concerns that have been expressed," Carney told reporters.
"We're not trying to win an argument here. ... We're trying to implement a policy that will affect millions of women."
The archbishop of Washington has been sharp in its criticism of the mandate in recent days, particularly ahead of a graduation speech given by HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on Friday at Georgetown University.
On Monday, the Archdiocese denounced the mandate for not providing an exception for some Catholic institutions, such as hospitals or schools, because they serve and employ non-Catholics and do not primarily strive to "inculcate religious values."
"Catholic institutions of the Archdiocese of Washington, including its schools and social service ministries, do not qualify as religious and the mandate forces them to provide coverage for drugs and procedures that we believe are morally wrong," Archbishop Donald Wuerl said in a statement.
Under the White House’s proposal, most employers must cover contraception in their employees’ healthcare plans without charging a co-pay. Churches and houses of worship are exempt altogether. Religious-affiliated institutions, such as Catholic hospitals and schools, don’t have to pay for the coverage through their own plans — their employees will instead get contraception directly from the insurer, still without a co-pay.
—This story was updated at 1:22 p.m.
If Rachel Maddow told you tomorrow that the New England Patriots WON the 2012 NFL Super Bowl. YOU, would believe her.
I got news for you, The New York Football Giants WON the 2012 Super Bowl. I would post headlines and articles from ESPN, Giants dot com and NFL dot com and you would argue that thses are biased resources.
TRMS is lying to you. The Catholic Church's several institutions have sured HHS mandate and the NY Giants would have won the Super Bowl this year.
It's the exact same thing.
@Irish
Regarding your post #10.10.
That is nothing but a load of stinking C$^%&%*^*P
To put it mildly.
HuffPo is aggregation, not straight-line any particular way. Learn your sources.
@maphi & dirty
post #10.10
It's a fact. The NY Giants did win the Super Bowl.
Likewise, more than 40 Catholic Organizations have filed suit against the HHS mandate.
You have ears to hear but refuse to listen. You have eyes to see and refuse to see.
Somebody is lying(my guess is TRMS) but it's NOT Romney.
The analogy is perfect.
grumpy, you rely on M.H. Perry for news and information and insights. And you're gonna doubt my resources? hahahahahahahahahahhahaha
Nope, I depend on the ORIGINAL sources. So, take your assumptions and shove them where your brain is, up your ass.
Well, given the small & narrow size of me brain I can assure you I'll find plenty of room up there for "ass"umptions. hahahahahahahaha
No wonder I couldn't find my hat. I had placed it where my brains were......... I was sitting on it! hahahahahahaha
Sing along with me now, the Dennis Leary "No Cure for Cancer" theme song:
"I'm an a@@hole" "I'm an a@@hole"
Yes, yes you are.
Irish is a man of few words. (his own words anyway)
Yes, ira, you are an @sshole. The first step is admitting you have a problem.
People who are totally convinced that their s**t doesn't stink are basically incapable of admitting that they have problems.
I wish news media outlets like MSNBC and the Maddow Show / Blog (among the thousands) would stop encouraging these mass killings through their constant repetition of the perpetrators name. Stop giving these sick individuals what they most want, attention. If these poor, sick individuals knew they would get no recognition for their 'efforts', it would greatly reduce their incentive to try to grab attention through extreme acts of violence. This, and other murderous individuals do not deserve to be called anything more than 'Accused Criminal'.
Just waiting for the next NRA 'Celebration' in Aurora Colorado...
My heart goes out to the victims...
We are so remarkably blessed to live in a nation where a shooting incident, not related to terrorists, will command 24/7 news coverage and Presidential and Presidential hopeful's schedule changes and condolences. Others, hit by death via remote control or suicide bomber, in far away lands most of us couldn't find on a map, garner 30 seconds on Al Jazeera or PBS News Hour.
Furthermore, the shootings in the US this morning remind me to ask, once again, (I asked this question of everyone I could think of regarding the victims of Gabby Giffords' shooting): What happens to the victims who are without health insurance? What happens to the families that lost a wage earner? What about the person who co-signed for one of the fatalities' undischargable, life-crippling student loans. The only citizens whose lives shall be secure in their path will be the gun owners and lobby (Louie Gohmert-Pyle-style) and the prisoner in his government vouchsafed accommodation for therest of his life in the admirably de facto death abolitionist Colorado system. Anyone up for solving even one of these problems? Oh, oh, and yeah, the Pentagon is in meetings to make $75 million in YemenAid (guns, training & comm.) from the lemons of more than a million starving Yemeni children. Is it any wonder the angels weep?
And why is none of what you speak of mentioned by our reps in DC? When they fail to lead our nation thru those issues , they lead us to failure
And that really brings home the gop anti constitutional government rhetoric
There's more, ..........
Church in US Commences Campaign for Religious
Liberty
'Fortnight for Freedom' Promotes Nationwide Awareness
of Religious Liberty
By Ann Schneible
ROME, JUNE 21, 2012
(Zenit.org).- United States bishops launched a two-week, nation-wide campaign
today to promote awareness of the Church's teaching on religious freedom through
prayer, study, catechesis and public action.
The United States Conference
for Catholic Bishops called for the campaign - dubbed the "Fortnight for
Freedom" - in response to the Health and Human Services (HHS) federal mandate
that would require employers of Catholic institutions to violate Church teaching
by being legally required to pay for insurance that provides abortion-inducing
drugs, contraception, and sterilization procedures to employees. The campaign
begins today, and will conclude on July 4th, American Independence
Day.
Bishops have requested that all parishes encourage the faithful to
pray together, such as by reciting a prayer for religious freedom at the end of
all the Masses. Parishioners are also encouraged to contact their elected
officials, urging them to safeguard religious freedom.
Leading the
project is the recently appointed Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore,
Maryland. In a video statement made through the USCCB Web site, Bishop Lori says
that religious freedom is our "first freedom." Religious freedom, he says, is
"not a privilege that the government grants to its citizens, and so may take
away when it wishes. Instead, religious liberty is inherent in our very
humanity, put there by the creator."
"The declaration of independence
boldly proclaimed that our inalienable rights are endowed by the creator, not by
the state."
Bishop Lori concludes by calling upon Catholics to be active
in defending religious freedom. "As Catholics, as Americans, we have the
blessings of religious liberty and freedom of speech. Each of us reflects on
these issues facing our country, and each of us should become engaged in the
debate in the public square."
The two-week campaign corresponds with a
number of saints who faced persecution by political power, such as St. Thomas
More, St. John the Baptist, Sts. Peter and Paul, and the first martyrs of the
Church in Rome.
You are correct, somebody is lying. But it's NOT Mitt Romney. It's TRMS
@Irish
I am not sure which "TRMS" statement you are quoting, but it is not a lie.
And no, I didn't read everything you copied and pasted. And no, I didn't copy and paste what is written below. It is my understanding of the issues that I arrived at from previous thinking, experience and debate and by learning as much as I could from the discussions that I heard and read about when this subject "hit the fan" a while back.
It boils down to these questions for which there in some cases no easy simple answers:
When do private beliefs become public policy?
Reproductive issues - when are they private matters and when are they public concerns? [e.g. Contraception, abortion]
Religious beliefs - when are they private and when do they become public concerns particularly when those holding those beliefs want to make everyone else abide by those beliefs? [e.g. Contraception, abortion, marriage, evolution ....the list goes on and on and on and ......]
----------------
Note: If we had a Health Care Insurance system in this country that was NOT primarily employer based, we would NOT be having this controversy.
"Churches are exempt from preventative care requirements" is basically the correct.
Religious institutions are exempt from the requirement if it is in violation of their religious beliefs.
The purpose of a church is support of the religion, and everyone employed at that would be expected to abide by the religious teachings. Therefore they are exempt. Nobody disagrees with this.
The debate is whether or not an institution whose purpose is NOT support of a religion should also be exempt.
For instance, the purpose of a hospital run by the Catholic Church is not support of the religion, and everyone employed at the hospital is not required to be Catholic. In addition, many "Catholic" hospitals (this does not mean hospitals run by and for Catholics) receive Federal funds. They can do this because they are explicitly NOT religious institutions. Employees at Catholic hospitals are not required to be Catholic. Other examples are "Catholic" colleges and universities.
The ACA requirement is that insurance policies should cover preventive care services and prescriptions with no co-pays - meaning no charge to the policy holder in addition to the premium.
Insurance companies seem happy with this - prevention is a lot cheaper than covering a medical issue. A prescription for birth-control is way way cheaper than covering the cost of a pregnancy. Anyone who has been or known someone who has been pregnant - particularly if there are problems with the pregnancy and with labor and delivery knows this to be true.
In addition, the same contraceptive medications are used to prevent and treat "lady part" conditions that are not birth control - such as ovarian cysts and endometriosis.
The Catholic Church teaches that birth-control is a sin and (apparently) using contraceptives to treat conditions that are not birth-control is also a sin.
The Catholic Bishops believe that all of the employees and patients at their hospitals and all of employees and students at their colleges and universities should obey their - the Catholic Bishops - religious teachings.
Hence - the controversy. Can an employer block the insurance companies from providing preventive care with no co-pays based on their - the employers - religious beliefs?
@maphi
All due respect, I disagree. You would need to be Catechesis well informed & knowledgable. Be a Canon Lawyer and have a background in Law. One of which you have indicated maphi that you do. I don't doubt that. However, this might be out of your personal jurisdiction. There is also the fact that the Catholic Church is also a universally.internationally recognized entity as well as nationally recognized religious organization.
All fields of Catholic organizations (hospitals, care centers, legal organizations, food pantries, religious communities, monastic communities (religious, cloitered and secular as well as recognized sects (ie Maronite Monks & women's religious) Women's Crisis Organizations.... and countless others (far too many to name) are all included as Catholic Church organizations and part of the official Catholic Church. One need only try to count the thousands of religious orders (Benedictine, Augustians, Carmelite etc etc) in an attempt to embrace the magnitude of the vast expanse of the Catholic Church. Therefore, with that alone considered, I again, respectfully would suggest, you simply are not qualified to speak either on behalf of the Catholic Church or in reference to this issue on the precepts of it's legality.
Arguably, I would only have one seed of qualification and that being along the grounds of catechisis education. But I do know that all the Bishops, with the approval of Pope Benedict XVI have organized this effort and that constituting all requirements to be established as authentic Catholic teaching. The Bishops are "in communion with the Holy Father." It is a world wide catholic effort.
Again, appreciate the analogy or not, the NY Giants won the 2012 Super Bowl. There is NO denying that fact.
And THE Catholic Church and over 40 lecit Catholic Organizations have filed a legitamate suit against the pending HHS Mandate. There is NO denying that fact either. It has to do with "Religious Liberty and Freedom of expression".
Like it or not, that, is the truth.
@Irish
From your post #13.2:
No one is saying that this is not true - not me, not you, not TRMS
That the law suit is based on "Religious Liberty" - everyone agrees that this is the basis of the law suit.
I wrote the stuff below and was about to delete it all. Go ahead and read it anyway. I do not care. I have tried to be reasonable and am tired of it.
The way I see it, the Catholic Bishops believe in Religious Freedom - as long as this means that they can dictate to their employees and students what their (the employees and students) religious beliefs should be.
-------------
I am not Catholic.
I am therefore - as you pointed out - not qualified to speak either on behalf of the Catholic Church. I also do pretend to do that.
You are correct (I assume without actually checking the number "40")- "the Catholic Church and over 40 lecit Catholic Organizations" has indeed filed suit.
I am not disputing that (but at the same time am wondering it this is still on-going or if your information is out-dated).
I agree with your statement - "You would need to be Catechesis well informed & knowledgeable." I do not pretend to know what is in the Catechesis.
My statement "The Catholic Church teaches that birth-control is a sin and (apparently) using contraceptives to treat conditions that are not birth-control is also a sin..." is my understanding as an outside.
If this is incorrect, please let me me. I am confident that this statement is accurate, because that appears to be the belief that is the basis of the law suits.
In your original post back in #10 you stated:
In your post #10.9 you pasted an article from "The Hill" as a source backing up your point. Below is a paragraph from near the bottom of the post:
You used this article to support you point. I wonder if you actually read it - especially this paragraph.
Faced with the backlash from the Bishops, the White House proposed a mechanism to address the Bishops concerns, while still making contraceptive medication (for birth-control and other purposes) available with no co-pays for individual employees who chose to use them.
However, the proposal was not acceptable to the Bishops. Hence the law suits.
I sent off a request to a few members of Congress that Franks, Gohmert, Rooney and Westmoreland be censured and Bachmann be removed from the Intelligence Committee and resign from Congress. I told them that I think it is long past the time that Congresscritters be held responsible for making statements that upset countries we are trying to negotiate with ending up with people of that country hearing the innuendos and lies and attacking our Representatives like Clinton was in Egypt.
Bachmann is on the Intelligence Committee and should know better and if she doesn't, she shouldn't be on that committee. We had one McCarthy, which was enough, we don't need one with lipstick.
I doubt Congress will do their job, but I'm one person that told them it's time they did their job to prevent this crap from continuing. When any Congressperson makes a statement to the world or goes to another country to tell them our government can't be trusted, they should realize they are number one on that list and should be forced to resign. If they don't like our government, they shouldn't collect a paycheck for telling other countries how corrupt our government is just to screw up our negotiations.
Another group of people died today because of the NRA
dear rachel - I want to begin a specific campaign - a very unique kind of campaign - I have very few skills in facebook, twitter, etc. But what I see may be sincerely important in following up on what I've heard so many interviewed who were involved in last night's massacre, and also those interviewed who were involved in Columbine.
And it is this: Don't Speak His Name. Don't Speak His Name.
In the tribe that we all are in this country, and with very little recourse to address preventing this kind of horrific tragedy, what we in our tribe can do is 'not speak his name'. I'm not being silly or naive. This is a powerful issue, and in native cultures, punishment for severe crime was shunning. What more powerful way could we addresss this one person's atrocious act than to ban his name, and if I could convince media, to ban his face. I'm very serious, Rachel. I will, tonight, begin a campaign to 'Don't Speak His Name'. He is the Aurora Monster, and he has no name - no longer. His face is no face. He has no name. 'Don't Speak His Name.'
I will not speak his name. I will encourage in any way I possibly can, that all do not speak his name. In this way, he has no distinction, and his acts, as terrible as they were, will be lodged in the realm of non-acknowledgement.
His victims are certainly and completely acknowledged. He is not. It is all we can do, is to shun this individual completely. He is only 'The Aurora Monster'. Do you get this? This may make a difference.
Geez! That Irish Pat didn't just kiss the Blarney Stone; he must have swallowed it whole!
Thank You! I'll wear that as a badge of pride. Thank You. Gave me great reason to smile and lol. If I hadn't given up drinking 15 yrs ago, I'd have chased it (Blaney Stone) down with a Guiness Stout.
But I can belt out a well done rendition of the Wolfetones "A Nation once Again!" Given I am born on St Patrick's Day, I should have license to speak all the "blaney" I want :-)
When boyhoods fire was in my heart, I'd read of of ancient free men. Of Greece & Rome who bravely stood. Three hundred brave and free men. And yet I prayed I yet might see her fedders rent in twain and Ireland long a province be, a Nation once again.....................
all together now, A Nation once again, A nation once again, and Ireland will long a province be, a Nation once again!
how's that for blarney to a tune? Thanks again for the sentiments above!
And perhaps you should go to Ireland and stay there. Just sayin.
Donna...,
I doubt very much that real Irish people would accept that sort.
Heck Donna, if the Yankees played all their home games in Ireland I would. But County Cork is a long, long ways from Yankee Stadium. Besides, my three children and five grandchildren live here. Then there's the NY Giants, Boston Bruins and Notre Dame football right here in the USA.
I guess I'll stay here, watch "The Quiet Man" with John Wayne, sing a bunch a Rebel Songs and live the Irish-American dream. New Hampshire's a nice place to settle in.
God Bless you both too!
Interested in a career in Journalism? Want to be the next big star on FOX? Then enroll in "The Orson Wells School of Journalism".
Learn how to stay cool under pressure the way Orson Wells did while reporting on the Martian invasion-(this great reporting was debunked by an as yet unborn President Obama to cover up his alien roots).
Discover the various ways the U.S. Government plots against reports they do not like.
Learn the sad truth of how the Martians spread the seeds of socialism as they destroyed businesses and downsized the military.
Enroll now, before we are forced to outsource courses to India!
ALL SIZES OF BUSINESS: Obama vs. Romney
GOP policies give the largest of corporations the financial edge, which, in an economic downturn, are able to out-last smaller corporations, who are able to out-produce mid-size businesses, who are able to out-price small-businesses. The Obama Administrations rollback takes the financial edge from larger corporations, while Mitt Romney, and the GOP, suggest a zero tax on money brought back from overseas by corporations.
The GOP endorsed out-of-pocket Ryan Medicare Plan costing retirees income, could affect businesses as well, as some of our retirees with lifetime savings and investments are among businesses biggest customers.
Wages and income drive consumerism, which supports businesses. The Obama Administration is more likely to work to sustain people’s income and increase worker’s wages than a Republican administration.
Did Republican leaders intend for the Bush tax-cuts to line business owners ‘personal’ pockets, or to create business? Some business owners have ‘increased’ profit, quarter after quarter, but are not sharing even a small percentage of the increase with their employees, or using the money to risk expanding their business by buying from other businesses. Let those certain business owners pay a little more in taxes, if they are not willing to share any of their cuts with employees and other businesses.
The Obama Administration saw an increase of GDP in 2011, $15 trillion, Bush’s GDP in 2008 was $14 trillion, but none of us could see the increase in the economy because the increase was all sitting at the top, not taxed, and not spent, in anyway, by America as whole, and not distributed well through the country.
In order for the economy to do better, we need to redistribute what money the nation ‘already’ has, through ‘all’ levels of American wealth; all business-sizes, all level’s of wages and income, it all works together. It is almost laughable, for Mitt Romney to think that non-taxed money from overseas and sustaining the Bush tax cuts is going to save the economy! Bush tax-cuts meet Mitt’s magic money!
Craig Ferguson is ace. His monologue last night referring to why he'd ditched the monologue recorded Thursday night because of what happened in Aurora.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/late-show-craig-ferguson-dark-knight-rises-shooting-monologue-352763
What is happening in the Middle East shows exactly how stupid and greedy rich people are. These rich people think they are so privileged and have to dictate how someone should live or serve the rich that in reality they are putting people in misery, despair, and death. And when the people who are the ones put into misery, despair, and death finally reach a point that there is nothing to loose, they pick up rocks or whatever is available to say enough is enough. No matter how many bombs and bullets you throw at these unfortunate people, they are going to finally get justice and demand change. Just because some Syrian leader was a Doctor doesn’t mean anything, he is still just as stupid, power craving, hypocritical, arrogant, corrupt, deceiving and greedy as any other dumb rich person. And if you do not think these rich people and care to say certain religious leaders are the problem in this world, guess again, because they are in the majority of cases and are that worthless to the greater good of the world.