Judge slams critics of Texas school prayer ruling

Talibangical teabaggers.
The worst of the worst.

If they have no shame for what their failed policies did to this great nation during the 8 disastrous years that Bush was in office then there is no way that they will carry any shame for that…

The worst terrorist attack (9-11) happened because of complete ineptitude on the part of George W. Bush; but they wore 9-11 as a badge of honor… Osama bin Laden celebrated out in the open for 7 years as Bush attacked illegally attacked Iraq; and they act like it was nothing… our economy crashed, and they laughed…

No, those right-wing bastards have no shame.

Marine Corp Pat wrote:

If they have no shame for what their failed policies did to this great nation during the 8 disastrous years that Bush was in office then there is no way that they will carry any shame for that…
The worst terrorist attack (9-11) happened because of complete ineptitude on the part of George W. Bush; but they wore 9-11 as a badge of honor… Osama bin Laden celebrated out in the open for 7 years as Bush attacked illegally attacked Iraq; and they act like it was nothing… our economy crashed, and they laughed…
No, those right-wing bastards have no shame.

unfortunately, there isn't a fck you icon.
dumb piece of chit!

I love it when one of these idiotic Federal Judges gets his titty in a wringer and then has the nads to try and berate others.

This guy was wrong in his first ruling and is now trying to tap dance and divert attention from his stupid decision.

Much like obama and his trampling of the First Ammendment.

So students will still be able to pray during the ceremony and all the right wingers have their panties in a twist? Sounds like more rethug political posturing!

Wall Street Government wrote:

Talibangical teabaggers.
The worst of the worst.

Hold on sparky, you twit Obama is putting his nose into Religion with forcing the Catholic Church to pay for abortions, morning after pills and birth control pills.

Sheik Yerbouti wrote:

So students will still be able to pray during the ceremony and all the right wingers have their panties in a twist? Sounds like more rethug political posturing!

LOL, the govt intrudes on the christian (dominant religion by the way in the US) all the time. Case in point Odumbos birth control and Catholic Church fiasco.

Paul Revere wrote:

<quoted text>
Hold on sparky, you twit Obama is putting his nose into Religion with forcing the Catholic Church to pay for abortions, morning after pills and birth control pills.

Your research must have stopped at FOX.com

This regulation only applies to the health insurance that a hospital, charity or other employer provides for its employees. It does not regulate the care that a Catholic charity provides to its patients. As Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wrote recently in a USA Today op-ed,“our rule has no effect on the long-standing conscience clause protections for providers, which allow a Catholic doctor, for example, to refuse to write a prescription for contraception.”

Honest, Texass
You can secede any time you want...

Wall Street Government wrote:

<quoted text>
Your research must have stopped at FOX.com
This regulation only applies to the health insurance that a hospital, charity or other employer provides for its employees. It does not regulate the care that a Catholic charity provides to its patients. As Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius wrote recently in a USA Today op-ed,“our rule has no effect on the long-standing conscience clause protections for providers, which allow a Catholic doctor, for example, to refuse to write a prescription for contraception.”

GForcing the Catholic Charities to provide those services to its employees is a clear violation of the first ammendment.
The church provides the insurance that pays for those mandated services. So the mandate is in fact forcing the Church to violate canon law by providing birth control and abortions to its employees.
The propoganda from tha obama camp is all smoke and mirrors. The so called conscience clause covers only end providers which would be a doctor. That does not allow for a religious organization to provide health insurance that does not cover prohibited items. By forcing the Church to provide coverage for these items they are forcing the church to pay for them. That equates to the Government restricting the free practice of a religion.

Sheik Yerbouti wrote:

So students will still be able to pray during the ceremony and all the right wingers have their panties in a twist? Sounds like more rethug political posturing!

What article did you read?
The judge is the one that got all upset because he was called out on his invasion into the free practice of the students religion.
The so called right wingers are applauding this reversal of his earlier decision to ban prayer completely.
The political posturing is being done by this left wing judge with his attack on the people that fought the earlier ruling.

Your Ex wrote:

Honest, Texass
You can secede any time you want...

Would love to!

UR BS wrote:

<quoted text>
GForcing the Catholic Charities to provide those services to its employees is a clear violation of the first ammendment.
The church provides the insurance that pays for those mandated services. So the mandate is in fact forcing the Church to violate canon law by providing birth control and abortions to its employees.
The propoganda from tha obama camp is all smoke and mirrors. The so called conscience clause covers only end providers which would be a doctor. That does not allow for a religious organization to provide health insurance that does not cover prohibited items. By forcing the Church to provide coverage for these items they are forcing the church to pay for them. That equates to the Government restricting the free practice of a religion.

Do they take the same law and apply it to molestation?

The Vatican has already agreed to other requests from the U.S. bishops.

The Americans won approval to temporarily strengthen two canon law
provisions, raising minors' age of consent from 16 to 18 and extending
the statute of limitations in abuse cases till the victim is 28. The
pope applied both changes worldwide last year.

It seemed to me that we were focusing on the rights of the priests and forgetting the rest of the problem -- the harm to the church. In the church no rights are absolute. All rights are balanced against other rights. In the Catholic system, justice is the common good. You can't assert your rights to the point that they take away mine. Don't the faithful have the right to a priest who is not going to harm them?"

So the law of the church should supercede that of the crimminal law of a particular country?

Alot of parishioners weren't involved, why are they forced to pay?

UR BS wrote:

<quoted text>
GForcing the Catholic Charities to provide those services to its employees is a clear violation of the first ammendment.
The church provides the insurance that pays for those mandated services. So the mandate is in fact forcing the Church to violate canon law by providing birth control and abortions to its employees.
The propoganda from tha obama camp is all smoke and mirrors. The so called conscience clause covers only end providers which would be a doctor. That does not allow for a religious organization to provide health insurance that does not cover prohibited items. By forcing the Church to provide coverage for these items they are forcing the church to pay for them. That equates to the Government restricting the free practice of a religion.

How does the first amendment apply to this mandate?

Wall Street Government wrote:

<quoted text>
Do they take the same law and apply it to molestation?
The Vatican has already agreed to other requests from the U.S. bishops.
The Americans won approval to temporarily strengthen two canon law
provisions, raising minors' age of consent from 16 to 18 and extending
the statute of limitations in abuse cases till the victim is 28. The
pope applied both changes worldwide last year.
It seemed to me that we were focusing on the rights of the priests and forgetting the rest of the problem -- the harm to the church. In the church no rights are absolute. All rights are balanced against other rights. In the Catholic system, justice is the common good. You can't assert your rights to the point that they take away mine. Don't the faithful have the right to a priest who is not going to harm them?"
So the law of the church should supercede that of the crimminal law of a particular country?
Alot of parishioners weren't involved, why are they forced to pay?

First off what does the molestation issue have to do with this law?
The Pope agreed to a request by the American Bishops that dealt more severely with any priest that was found to have molested anyone. What does that have to do with birth control? By the way the American Bishops are against the birth control thing so there is no request from the American Bishops.

Wall Street Government wrote:

<quoted text> How does the first amendment apply to this mandate?

The irst ammendnment applies because the Government, in the form of the obama administration, is forcing a religious organization to act in a way contrary to its beliefs. That inhibits the free exercise of that religion. Hence the violation of the first ammendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"

Nuff said.

UR BS wrote:

<quoted text>
First off what does the molestation issue have to do with this law?
The Pope agreed to a request by the American Bishops that dealt more severely with any priest that was found to have molested anyone. What does that have to do with birth control? By the way the American Bishops are against the birth control thing so there is no request from the American Bishops.

Does the law of religion take precedence over the laws of the land?
You seem to think it does.
Hence the comparison

UR BS wrote:

<quoted text>
The irst ammendnment applies because the Government, in the form of the obama administration, is forcing a religious organization to act in a way contrary to its beliefs. That inhibits the free exercise of that religion. Hence the violation of the first ammendment.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"
Nuff said.

No it doesn't.
If the government had singled out catholics, you might have a point.
The law applies to all institutions not just religious.
Another comparison, the law states you can only have one wife, mormons say you can have 20, so is the government prohibiting their religious laws?
After all, the government is "forcing" you to limit your number of wives.

Wall Street Government wrote:

<quoted text>
Does the law of religion take precedence over the laws of the land?
You seem to think it does.
Hence the comparison

You are soo far off base it isn't funny.
I'm not sure what axe you have to grind with Catholics but your prejudice is showing.
There is no comparison what so ever. The Church never sanctioned molestations. They have never stated that molestation was legal under canon law. So your comparison is a ;poorly veiled attempt to attack the church.

Wall Street Government wrote:

<quoted text> No it doesn't.
If the government had singled out catholics, you might have a point.
The law applies to all institutions not just religious.
Another comparison, the law states you can only have one wife, mormons say you can have 20, so is the government prohibiting their religious laws?
After all, the government is "forcing" you to limit your number of wives.

The Government isn't forcing me to limit my number of wives at all. I learn quick 1 is more than enough!
The First Ammendment is very clear. The Government shall enact no law that restricts the free exercise of a Religion. Note the reference to Religion in the Ammendment. You can not include any reference of any other type organization so it does indeed apply.
Forcing the Catholic Church to violate its canon law by providing contraception to its employees is a clear restriction on the free exercise of their religion.
The lame attempt by obama to reword his requiremnet should be seen as what it is by the church. It is nothing more than obama attempting to pull te wool over the eyes of the church and I do not believe that the church will fall for it.
Now as to the Mormons. I believe that there is room for question there but it does not come up to the same level as this does.
The Mormons allowed multiple marriages, they did not require it. The Catholic Church prohibits the use of contraception other than the so called rythm method.
The Mormons are not violating Church Edict by only having one wife while a Catholic that distributes contraception is violating Church Edict. So 2 very different levels of intrusion into a persons religion here.