President Obama's totalitarianism...

To Mack:

You mean so we can continue to fornicate without "consequences" and continue to harden our consciences toward God? How wonderful!

To All:

I remember then-Presidential Candidate Obama standing on stage (promoting infanticide) talking about how proud he was that he can teach his daughters to know that if they "make a mistake," they can "have a second chance." Talk about a man who hates women and even his own daughters! If they choose to fornicate and happen to become with child, daddy will sear their consciences with shame and hard-heartedness by forcing them to murder the child they are carrying. They can then go on to live grief-stricken lives and either champion abortion themselves in an attempt to justify their actions or become shrunken souls and get pummeled daily by depression. For a soul that does not come to joy of knowing the Christ and His forgiveness, those are the only two options.

We Pro-Lifers are often quickly tagged as judgmental and hateful (funny how facts never seem to bother progressives, so instead of actually considering the truth of a matter, responses are usually just name-calling). I find in fact that Pro-Lifers often plead with grief with those women facing such a decision, and the hate comes from Pro-Deathers who can't ever tolerate opposing views, and again resort to yelling and name-calling.

Personally, I get angry with those who promote child slaughter, not with those facing the decision or its consequences after. Promoters and Legislators of Death hate women, and are only self-seeking.

There are really two debates here. One debate is whether or not contraceptives of themselves are bad or good (and whether you are pro-life or pro-abortion will inherently direct your decision). The other debate is whether a government should be able to mandate by law that "all insurance companies be required to provide birth control and sterilization, as well as drugs whose purpose is to kill unborn babies." Even if we set the first debate aside, can both sides not see that this ruling is a violation of religious freedom -- and is in no way something we should allow our government to do? If people want to choose contraceptives, then pay for it out-of-pocket. None of my insurance plans have ever covered any "medically unnecessary" procedures or prescriptions. Heck, I couldn't even use my TSB fund toward prenatal vitamins!

Not only would the Christian conscience be violated if this HHS' ruling is implemented, but it would further promote the demise of denominations by Sanger's pernicious Pill as articulated by this conservative Lutheran college president:

"Evidently other Lutherans also imbibed from the worldview [of death] that fewer children is better. The [Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod] birth rate in 1961-2002 went from 3.3% to 1.3%, prompting a Missouri pastor to write:

“Our church body has been complicit in its own demise by not emphasizing God's plan for procreation in marriage. We’re contracepting ourselves out of business.”"

-Rev. Dr. Mark Zarling, President of Martin Luther College, Christian Education: A Matter of Life or Death, http://wlsce.net/sites/default/files/symposium/ZarlingLutheranSchools.pdf, Sept. 19-20, 2011.

Once the fertility rate dips well below 2.1 per woman (the minimum replacement rate), what will reverse that organization's precipitous decline? What's the LCMS forecast in 10 or 20 years especially with this HHS ruling in place?

PP v Casey - people *counted on* abortion ...

If Mack were correct, don't you think that out of wedlock pregnancies might have gone down, instead of up, since 1973, then? Or really since the Supreme Court decision that eliminated laws prohibiting contraception?

And yes, Comrade Soetoro does seem to be our new Caesar. Too bad we didn't listen to our Founders, who having read their Tully remembered what the Caesars did....

You said, "He's passing the expense from employer to insurance company -- but what does this do? Won't the insurance company just increase their dues accordingly?"

Yup, they probably will. But mandated contraceptive coverage in health insurance policies is required in ~20 states already, and this will happen for everyone pretty soon unless the Affordable Care Act (a/k/a Obama Care) is repealed, modified to remove the contraceptive requirement, or declared unconstitutional. No one knows whether or when any of the above will occur.

IMHO, the compromise reached seems reasonable to me, and I've heard that the Catholic Health Association is OK with it as well, but don't know if any other faith-based organizations that could be affected by this have weighed in on this yet.