Justice Sonia Sotomayor delays health law's birth control mandate

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Oh. Jesus.

Yinz believe that the first amendment says that religious freedom trumps all, right.

it's not enough to be free to practice the religion of your choice but your religion and interpretation of can dictate national policy. Or block it.

Kinda like extortion. Right?

Typical libtard attempt to misframe the issue. Tell me, dumbfuck, how is asking for a waiver under Odumbocare an attempt to "dictate national policy"? No one is trying to repeal the contraception mandate; they're just asking for a waiver from it. Can't you tell the difference, idiot? Do you think it's ok for Odumbo's bureaucrats to grant waivers to thousands of their political cronies and union buddies but not to people with religious objections?

You also have it completely backwards when it comes to who is the extortionist here. The Catholic Church didn't ask for this fight. They are the ones being stiff-armed by out-of-control, mandate-crazed libtard bureaucrats. If you push them hard enough, a lot of them will say fuck it, we'll just drop our healthcare plans altogether instead of violating our religion. Is that what you want, asswipe?

Asswipe believes not having to pay out of pocket for your condoms is more important than freedom of religion. It's bad enough that the dickhead is so ready to give up his constitutional protections at all. What is truly pathetic is how he is willing to do it for diddly squat like this.

[JD Barleycorn]

I'm not sure it is possible for a justice to delay a law. They can overturn a law on constitutional grounds, they can stop a law from going into effect once again on constitutional grounds, but I am not sure that they can set aside part of a law without declaring the entire law unconstitutional. It is not the place for the Supreme Court to assist in the implementation of any law. They either say it is good or it is bad. Then it goes back to the Congress (from whence it came) to be corrected, rewritten, or scrapped.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

This is confusing. We went through the entire Supreme Court thing where the Court decided that the ACA was constitutional.

Or at least that is what the public was lead to believe.

Now this. So my question is, What is next?

In between President Obama signing executive orders that Cherry Pick out certain parts he does't like, ( sort of a de-facto line item veto), and now this, what is left of the legislative Proccess that is set forth in our Constitution.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Individual Mandate was constitutional. "The Requirement that everyone must purchase Health Insurance of pay a tax". This was key because in the individual market people with pre-existing conditions can not be denied insurance. Younger, low risk policy holders are needed to offset the high risk policy holders who will be submitting more claims. It's the only way that the math would work in the individual market. Othewise the health insurance companies selling policies on the government exchange would just lose money if they can only insure high risk people.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

FYI: It was NEVER the goal of the ACA to insure everyone and BEFORE the ACA ...

every citizen and NON CITIZEN had the "opportunity to obtain" health care. The taxpayers were paying for it, just like the taxpayers are going to pay for the ACA.....THAT IS ... the ones who get jobs to earn the money to pay the taxes!!!!!

Where is your new candidate for 2016? She's been MIA LATELY.

LL, in the individual market of the old system if a citizen had a pre-existing condition, for example, high blood sugar(glucose), high blood fat(triglycerides) or high cholesterol the health insurance companies would not write you a policy. This was deemed as too much risk. In the mind of the actuary/underwriter you are already sick, and therefore too risky to insure. Millions of people fell under this condition.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

LL, in the individual market of the old system if a citizen had a pre-existing condition, for example, high blood sugar(glucose), high blood fat(triglycerides) or high cholesterol the health insurance companies would not write you a policy. This was deemed as too much risk. In the mind of the actuary/underwriter you are already sick, and therefore too risky to insure. Millions of people fell under this condition.

You've fallen for the bullshit. I know, President Obama said this scenario on national TV multiple times. In Texas, you would go into the "high risk" pool and would be required to pay higher premiums. That is, if you (or your spouse) couldn't get a job that offered health insurance bennies. He lied. Again.

Donk.

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

The Supreme Court ruled that the Individual Mandate was constitutional. "The Requirement that everyone must purchase Health Insurance of pay a tax". This was key because in the individual market people with pre-existing conditions can not be denied insurance. Younger, low risk policy holders are needed to offset the high risk policy holders who will be submitting more claims. It's the only way that the math would work in the individual market. Othewise the health insurance companies selling policies on the government exchange would just lose money if they can only insure high risk people.

The Obama Administration is the entity that keeps saying, "it's the law, it has passed Constitutional muster, that is that"

Of course, that doesn't count for the parts of the Law that they find inconvenient, only the parts that make average Americans adhere to the parts that pertain to them.

Show me in The Constitution where the President, or Congress, has the power to change parts of an existing Law that they do not like, with outgoing through the Legislative Proccess.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

LL, in the individual market of the old system if a citizen had a pre-existing condition, for example, high blood sugar(glucose), high blood fat(triglycerides) or high cholesterol the health insurance companies would not write you a policy. This was deemed as too much risk. In the mind of the actuary/underwriter you are already sick, and therefore too risky to insure. Millions of people fell under this condition.

Hellooooooooo!

Ask Michelle Obama for some guidance .... let me save you some time ....

1. reduce glucose
2. reduce fat
3. reduce "bad" cholesterol

or another version

1. don't consume sugar (or reduce it to a possible minimum)
2. quit eating Twinkies and candy bars
3. Quit drinking alcohol
4. Quit smoking blunts and cigarettes

Helllooooooooooooooo!

all of the above ... save money, too!!!!

So now we have to revamp the entire health care system with "accommodations" for those who cannot control their food intake and can't get off their fat asses to control their weight.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Typical libtard attempt to misframe the issue. Tell me, dumbfuck, how is asking for a waiver under Odumbocare an attempt to "dictate national policy"? No one is trying to repeal the contraception mandate; they're just asking for a waiver from it. Can't you tell the difference, idiot? Do you think it's ok for Odumbo's bureaucrats to grant waivers to thousands of their political cronies and union buddies but not to people with religious objections?

You also have it completely backwards when it comes to who is the extortionist here. The Catholic Church didn't ask for this fight. They are the ones being stiff-armed by out-of-control, mandate-crazed libtard bureaucrats. If you push them hard enough, a lot of them will say fuck it, we'll just drop our healthcare plans altogether instead of violating our religion. Is that what you want, asswipe?

Asswipe believes not having to pay out of pocket for your condoms is more important than freedom of religion. It's bad enough that the dickhead is so ready to give up his constitutional protections at all. What is truly pathetic is how he is willing to do it for diddly squat like this.

WOW! Talking about back pedaling!

At least Yinz ain't insulting nobody!

Well the way I read this, It wasn't about a waiver but removing that mandate from the law altogether. NOW you're saying it's about a group of poor little nuns who want to be protected from free condoms.

You're out of control. You're off base. And, bubba, you're rude.

Now shut the fuck up and stick your beads up your self righteous ass!

[I B Hankering]

It remains to be seen if this is anything more than a momentary respite.

Originally Posted by lustylad

Who is using this issue as "subterfuge for political gain"? Most Catholics are in favor of helping the poor so they should be a natural constituency for healthcare reform, not forced to violate their religious tenets. You libtards are the ones shooting yourselves in the foot with your stupid mandates requiring free contraception for everyone.

+1

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

it won't stand.

It was a short story, Corpy. why did you only cut and paste the lead?

what were you trying to hide?

No one is really surprised that it's beyond your intellectual ability to click on the hyperlink provided and read the article for yourself, you lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM.

[Yssup Rider]

Actually, shitbreath, it's nothing more than you being disingenuous for a change.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

All those thousands of indigents can afford to purchase Obamacare now?
What happens to all of them now when they show up at the emergency room without Obamacare card in hand?

Are you planning to get back to us after your first emergency room visit?

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

All those thousands of indigents can afford to purchase Obamacare now?
What happens to all of them now when they show up at the emergency room without Obamacare card in hand?

If you are a family of 4 and make less than $20,000 the individual will be on the state Medicaid program, you don't qualify for an Obamacare policy. If your income is > $20,000 and < $92,000 you will get help(subsidy) to pay your premium. If you make more than $92,000 you don't qualify for the subsidy. In this case you should just call the 1-800 number of the health insurance company you want to use. You don't need to go to HealthCare.gov if you are not getting a subsidy. If you have signed up before the deadline you should have your card, unless there are problems with "backend" processing.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

All those thousands of indigents can afford to purchase Obamacare now?
What happens to all of them now when they show up at the emergency room without Obamacare card in hand?

Exactly what does an Obamacare card look like, dipshit?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Actually, shitbreath, it's nothing more than you being disingenuous for a change.

Actually, you just admitted that it's beyond your intellectual ability to click on the hyperlink provided and read the article for yourself, you lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

LL, in the individual market of the old system if a citizen had a pre-existing condition, for example, high blood sugar(glucose), high blood fat(triglycerides) or high cholesterol the health insurance companies would not write you a policy. This was deemed as too much risk. In the mind of the actuary/underwriter you are already sick, and therefore too risky to insure. Millions of people fell under this condition.

I have had pre-existing conditions since childhood, and I've always been able to find insurance. I've associated with insurable groups, where risk is determined on a group level, rather than individual level. It wasn't that hard to health insurance.