West Posted March 18 Author Report Posted March 18 19 minutes ago, robosmith said: California state has nothing to do with Obama and his DoJ. They didn't even lose the case before SCOTUS despite what you LINK says. It's a pattern of behavior in the more radical element of the party that's been driving it for the past 15 ish years. Quote
robosmith Posted March 18 Report Posted March 18 2 minutes ago, West said: It's a pattern of behavior in the more radical element of the party that's been driving it for the past 15 ish years. It's a matter of your FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND the US Justice system. Quote
West Posted March 18 Author Report Posted March 18 (edited) 30 minutes ago, robosmith said: It's a matter of your FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND the US Justice system. In the case of the Catholic nuns the Democrat states lost 7-2 in the Supreme Court. I would submit its the democrats who do not understand the system and in fact use the process of a 10 or 15 year legal battle to intimidate people. The states have a deep pocket of money whereas the catholic nuns did not and instead get buried in legal fees. pretty disgusting Edited March 18 by West Quote
robosmith Posted March 18 Report Posted March 18 42 minutes ago, West said: In the case of the Catholic nuns the Democrat states lost 7-2 in the Supreme Court. I would submit its the democrats who do not understand the system and in fact use the process of a 10 or 15 year legal battle to intimidate people. The states have a deep pocket of money whereas the catholic nuns did not and instead get buried in legal fees. pretty disgusting They could have just provided the health insurance benefits for their employees like everyone else. Duh Quote
West Posted March 18 Author Report Posted March 18 35 minutes ago, robosmith said: They could have just provided the health insurance benefits for their employees like everyone else. Duh The employees could've paid for their own birth control duh Quote
robosmith Posted March 19 Report Posted March 19 2 hours ago, West said: The employees could've paid for their own birth control duh There's a reason why it was mandated for coverage. Unfortunate you don't understand why. Take a guess. Quote
West Posted March 19 Author Report Posted March 19 (edited) 2 hours ago, robosmith said: There's a reason why it was mandated for coverage. Unfortunate you don't understand why. Take a guess. It was overturned 7-2 at the Supreme Court. What don't you understand about that? The leftist states dragged catholic nuns through hell and then ultimately lost. They ought to be ashamed of themselves Edited March 19 by West Quote
robosmith Posted March 19 Report Posted March 19 1 hour ago, West said: It was overturned 7-2 at the Supreme Court. What don't you understand about that? Nothing 1 hour ago, West said: The leftist states dragged catholic nuns through hell and then ultimately lost. They ought to be ashamed of themselves Just cause you don't understand the reason for the requirement doesn't make it invalid.' The SCOTUS put institutional prerogatives above public health and personal freedom to decide, that's ALL it means. Quote
West Posted March 19 Author Report Posted March 19 5 hours ago, robosmith said: Nothing Just cause you don't understand the reason for the requirement doesn't make it invalid.' The SCOTUS put institutional prerogatives above public health and personal freedom to decide, that's ALL it means. It doesn't matter their reasoning it wasn't rooted in the reality of THE LAW. Hence the 7-2 loss Quote
robosmith Posted March 19 Report Posted March 19 5 hours ago, West said: It doesn't matter their reasoning it wasn't rooted in the reality of THE LAW. Hence the 7-2 loss That wasn't the end result. Quote Although the Obama administration granted an "accommodation" to the Little Sisters and other objecting religious non-profits, the sisters sued the government in 2013 saying the process still required them to essentially give a "permission slip" for contraceptive coverage to be delivered through their health plans. In 2016, a divided Supreme Court sent the case back to the lower courts and instructed both the administration and the non-profits to reach a compromise where cost-free contraceptive coverage could still be offered to employees while respecting the moral objections of religious groups. The SCOTUS sent it back to the lower court. Why are you LYING? Quote
West Posted March 19 Author Report Posted March 19 5 hours ago, robosmith said: That wasn't the end result. The SCOTUS sent it back to the lower court. Why are you LYING? Then ruled in 2020 that the Trump administration acted properly when they granted a religious exemption.duh Quote
robosmith Posted March 19 Report Posted March 19 13 minutes ago, West said: Then ruled in 2020 that the Trump administration acted properly when they granted a religious exemption.duh That wasn't the end. Little Sisters sued AGAIN. Duh Quote
West Posted March 19 Author Report Posted March 19 7 minutes ago, robosmith said: That wasn't the end. Little Sisters sued AGAIN. Duh You misread the article. Duh Quote
West Posted March 19 Author Report Posted March 19 37 minutes ago, robosmith said: That wasn't the end. Little Sisters sued AGAIN. Duh https://readlion.com/in-religious-liberty-win-herzog-foundation-granted-injunction-in-case-over-biden-era-pregnancy-rule/?_hsenc=p2ANqtz-96tZrBBFQGt69GKzcf0DxQ4hzHyhMe0RvjGosZChYkwokuAhh740IDPWIWTdoj-n-o7Dw-F624LmvKfY95XpuTVya8Fw&_hsmi=352703150&fbclid=IwY2xjawJIMypleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHcuRtg9zkFj3usMaa3RmKjMHXmUD_U48gXnsAeo-ZC0JQxFFxTt2B1oPOg_aem_jYU8eVjWlZTfg-XAmjujTA Here's another one. Quote
robosmith Posted March 19 Report Posted March 19 9 minutes ago, West said: https://readlion.com/in-religious-liberty-win-herzog-foundation-granted-injunction-in-case-over-biden-era-pregnancy-rule/?_hsenc=p2ANqtz-96tZrBBFQGt69GKzcf0DxQ4hzHyhMe0RvjGosZChYkwokuAhh740IDPWIWTdoj-n-o7Dw-F624LmvKfY95XpuTVya8Fw&_hsmi=352703150&fbclid=IwY2xjawJIMypleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHcuRtg9zkFj3usMaa3RmKjMHXmUD_U48gXnsAeo-ZC0JQxFFxTt2B1oPOg_aem_jYU8eVjWlZTfg-XAmjujTA Here's another one. "Blatant attack on religious freedom" of an institution takes precedence over the FREEDOM to DECIDE of an INDIVIDUAL who cannot afford an abortion. LMAO Aren't you noble to stand up for an employer who refuses to pay for a HEALTHCARE TREATMENT for an employee because they don't like it. Or are too cheap. 🤮 Quote
West Posted March 20 Author Report Posted March 20 (edited) 25 minutes ago, robosmith said: "Blatant attack on religious freedom" of an institution takes precedence over the FREEDOM to DECIDE of an INDIVIDUAL who cannot afford an abortion. LMAO Aren't you noble to stand up for an employer who refuses to pay for a HEALTHCARE TREATMENT for an employee because they don't like it. Or are too cheap. 🤮 You can decide. You just can't expect your Christian employer to be financially burdened by said decision if it violates religious conscience. Why the left continue to harass Christians is whacked. Edited March 20 by West Quote
robosmith Posted March 20 Report Posted March 20 20 minutes ago, West said: You can decide. You just can't expect your Christian employer to be financially burdened by said decision if it violates religious conscience. ONLY if you can afford it. Employer is financially burdened EITHER WAY. They are paying for time off for that employee's maternity leave. The REASON that coverage is required is because it is far more cost effective and safer for the employee to NOT go through birthing. 20 minutes ago, West said: Why the left continue to harass Christians is whacked. Sorry but religious belief does NOT take precedence over practical REALITY. Quote
West Posted March 20 Author Report Posted March 20 (edited) 24 minutes ago, robosmith said: ONLY if you can afford it. Employer is financially burdened EITHER WAY. They are paying for time off for that employee's maternity leave. The REASON that coverage is required is because it is far more cost effective and safer for the employee to NOT go through birthing. Sorry but religious belief does NOT take precedence over practical REALITY. This is nonsense. Leftists have no problem using high priced lawyers to institutionally harass Christians. Their money would be spent on PAYING FOR THEIR OWN BIRTH CONTROL AND CONDOMS Edited March 20 by West Quote
robosmith Posted March 20 Report Posted March 20 2 hours ago, West said: This is nonsense. Leftists have no problem using high priced lawyers to institutionally harass Christians. Their money would be spent on PAYING FOR THEIR OWN BIRTH CONTROL AND CONDOMS You STILL don't know what you're talking about. Nor do the judges who are putting religious preference ahead of democratically passed LAWS. Quote
West Posted March 20 Author Report Posted March 20 (edited) 11 hours ago, robosmith said: You STILL don't know what you're talking about. Nor do the judges who are putting religious preference ahead of democratically passed LAWS. The President issued a religious pardon which is in his purview to do. Instead of accepting the will of the people the Democrats did their "resist" bullshit and ended up harassing nuns by use of the legal system. Look I don't care what your opinions are on birth control. You shouldn't be imposing that on other people via LAWSUITS aka lawfare. It's pretty sick. Edited March 20 by West Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.