We need to oppose this law

  • Follow Letters

Maybe it is time for some peaceful civil disobedience to oppose the health care law. The following is a reason why.

The health care bill pushed through by the Obama administration includes a provision which requires religious-affiliated groups and organizations to provide no-cost contraception and some abortion-related services in the medical insurance they provide to employees outside the church.

These non-church employees work at hospitals, universities, schools and other centers established by the churches. This action especially affects the Catholic church, which is against birth control and abortion.

This action by the Obama administration is supported by the Department of Health and Human Services, which gave a one-year time frame to implement that part of the health care bill.

This is an attempt by the federal government to dictate the beliefs and conscience of religious groups. Freedom to practice one’s religion is a part of the First Amendment. The federal government’s actions seem to be another effort to curtail your liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.

If religious organizations drop health care coverage, they face a penalty for violating the health care law.

When questioned by reporters, White House press secretary Jay Carney showed the arrogance of this administration by stating that there is no debate about the policy in the White House and that the decision has been made.

So not only is the health care law being forced on those Americans who did not want it, but now the administration is forcing Christians, especially a percentage of Catholics, to violate their religious beliefs and conscience.

Hopefully the Supreme Court will rule the bill unconstitutional or Obama will be voted out and the new president will repeal the law and we can start from scratch on reforming health care in America.

George J. Weber

Augusta

Comments (10) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
TParty
6003
Points
TParty 03/29/12 - 06:42 am
5
4
Oh, this again. How fun.

Oh, this again. How fun.

nofanofobama
6856
Points
nofanofobama 03/29/12 - 06:56 am
5
7
hopefully the court will

hopefully the court will shoot this power grab down and we can truly then address health care perhaps starting with tort reform like loser pays....otherwise it address none of the reasons we were told by obumler..

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 03/29/12 - 07:46 am
7
6
Maybe they should change the

Maybe they should change the name to “Slow Letters to the Editor” or “Redundant Letters to the Editor” or “RBP: Republican Babbling Points”.

Swampman
46
Points
Swampman 03/29/12 - 09:56 am
4
0
Once upon a time, Richard

Once upon a time, Richard Nixon, a Republican president who made his reputation as a ferocious anti-communist, proposed health care reform remarkably similar to that of the legislation now under review by the Supreme Court. It went nowhere, mainly because the Democratic Congress, preferring a single-payer approach, objected to...drum roll, please...the individual mandate. Congress saw Nixon's plan as a sop to corporatist interests, to be sure. I do not, however, recall anyone claiming to see the creep of socialistic anti-Americanism in Nixon's plan.

Years later, a moderate New Hampshire Republican dusted off Nixon's plan and made it work pretty well for his state. He's running from that fact right now, of course, but...well...

Yet it becomes a Supreme Court case and a rallying cry when passed into law today. Where were all these cries about the destruction of our civil liberties when these very same defenders of freedom where shredding the Constitution in the name of a War On Drugs and a War On Terror?

Swampman
46
Points
Swampman 03/29/12 - 10:07 am
2
0
*sigh* Not really, no.

*sigh*

Not really, no.

justthefacts
22990
Points
justthefacts 03/29/12 - 10:19 am
4
0
Yes, swampman, it is

Yes, swampman, it is interesting. I wondered where all the cries about the destruction of our civil liberties were when President Obama extended and expanded the Patriot Act.

Swampman
46
Points
Swampman 03/29/12 - 10:45 am
3
0
Yes, apparently even

Yes, apparently even Democrats have been forced to drink the Kool-Aid of the War On Terror (tm).

Conservative Man
5577
Points
Conservative Man 03/29/12 - 04:44 pm
1
1
Bottom line. Obamacare is not

Bottom line. Obamacare is not about healthcare.The agenda has ALWAYS been about control. You control someone's access to healthcare, you control them.....period...

Bizkit
33336
Points
Bizkit 03/29/12 - 05:48 pm
1
0
It is all about control. What

It is all about control. What government needs to do is regulate not mandate. Drug companies, insurance companies, biotech companies need to be regulated to lower costs then try to reinvent americans so they aren't the most sue happy people on earth or some new reforms in the legal and medical establishments. Increase efficiency with less bureacracy. I think we can create a "fair" system for the poor, fair for those who suffer from malpractice so they are compensated, fair environment. Our government in particular is too incompetent to manage something like America's health care-they need to regulate not manage or mandate. They are all a bunch of idiots. Boehner, Pelosi, Reid they are like B actors from a horror flick. I'm beginning to think a rite of passage in Congress is having your brains sucked out and replaced with a computer chip that makes you a mindless ideologue clone unwilling to compromise or listen. I wouldn't have let anyone of em babysit my kids why would I trust them with my money?

fedex227
11187
Points
fedex227 03/29/12 - 09:31 pm
1
0
Maybe we should start a
Unpublished

Maybe we should start a little closer to home ...

(15 Mar) AP ... In today’s news about more men who want to control women’s bodies, Georgia’s state representative, Terry England, wants to force women to carry stillborn fetuses to term–just like cows and pigs do, he says.

England was speaking on the floor of the Georgia legislature in favor of HB 954, a bill which makes it illegal to obtain an abortion after 20 weeks. However, he was pushing for that law to also apply to women who are carrying a stillborn fetus or one that is likely to die before it reaches term, making it illegal for women to have the dead fetus removed until their bodies do so naturally.

He then referenced the livestock on the farm where he once worked and how they had to sometimes deliver stillborn animals:

"Life gives us many experiences…I’ve had the experience of delivering calves, dead and alive. Delivering pigs, dead or alive. It breaks our hearts to see those animals not make it."

Man, I hate admitting I live in Georgia sometimes.

FLIPPED OUT
33
Points
FLIPPED OUT 03/30/12 - 03:12 pm
0
0
Is everything OK?

Is everything OK?

Back to Top

Top headlines

Search of alleged dealer's home found drugs, firearms

An Augusta man who alleged sheriff's officers have used illegal steroids, some for years, came to the attention of a Richmond County Sheriff's narcotics officer twice, according to an ...
Search Augusta jobs