US bishops gather to preserve religious liberty as decision on health care law awaits

Judged:

1

1

1

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
they shall establish no law to restrict the free exercise of religion. That's what the law is. The rights of Christians format stop at the church house door. They also apply to any charities they own.

Judged:

1

1

1

Xstain Fumblementalist wrote:

<quoted text>1. You don't complain about Ann Coulter or drug addict Rush L. using invective, you brain dead racist.

2. The other racist wants to lie. Now he's been found out. That's a general finding about him - being so religious and all - being a lying racist. He made the big deal about denying it. Which he did rather badly, due to his immense stupidity.

3. It's important to know he devalues an entire group of people based on skin color, independent of other considerations.

4. Scratch a racist, find a homophobe. They go together.

You fcking lying filth.

Judged:

1

1

1

Xstain Fumblementalist wrote:

<quoted text>Hey cretin, a university or a hospital is not a house of worship.

The First Amendment also says the government may not elevate the beliefs of any one religion over others.

When it comes to tax dollars we don't have to support RCC-misogynist dogma.

This is trivial, fourth grade stuff, you stupid, racist, homophobic theocrat.

Judged:

1

1

1

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
it doesn't have to be a house of worship. The constitution doesn't mention a house of worship. And yes Chatholic Charities are a part of their church. And no obammy can't tell them what to do.

Judged:

1

1

1

Xstain Fumblementalist wrote:

<quoted text>Hey racist, your and the other pos's racism speaks to your other bigotries, including homophobia. His claim not to be a racist speaks to his lying.

The Catholic social service agencies have already been reigned in by the courts - the RCC agencies were going to stop doing adoptions in MA when they were told they could not discriminate - bigots that they are - against glbt parents in adoptions.

I also gave the example of the bigoted church which got in trouble for discriminating in how it rents out its banquet facilities to the public.

The government may not use tax dollars to support any one religion's (hateful, ignorant) dogma in places of public accommodation. That includes hospitals and universities. This is simple fact, no matter how much you sexually sick, stone age bigots yelp.

Judged:

1

1

1

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
I understand. You can't discuss the issues so you call names. How liberal of you. The church won't but insurance that covers contraceptives. That's a fact. And Barry Obbammyy and you don't have to agree with it.

Judged:

1

1

1

Xstain Fumblementalist wrote:

<quoted text>Hey sick liar fer jeebus, I have discussed the issues at length. You are a liar.

No church ever had to cover the cost of birth control for employees in its health insurance. Ever. You are a liar.

Even the RCC owned, public institutions under discussion don't have to themselves pay for birth control in their secular employees' insurance plans. The insurance companies agreed to cover this to accommodate the RCC misogynisitic homophobes in dresses. You are a serial liar.

And a bigoted half wit.

Judged:

2

2

2

McGruff wrote:

<quoted text>
it doesn't have to be a house of worship. The constitution doesn't mention a house of worship. And yes Chatholic Charities are a part of their church. And no obammy can't tell them what to do.

Judged:

1

1

1

Cat74 wrote:

When Rush used drugs, and he no longer does, he paid for them himself. Our Street people buy drugs with the taxpayers money. That is the difference. Of course that will go on until we elect some people who respect the rule off law. Democrats will be painted as anti law enforcement, because they ignore more laws then they obey.

Cat74 wrote:

I would still rather live next door to Rush then some Cabreenie Green leftover. His children won't steal everything not nailed down.

KKKafeteria KKKristains wrote:

<quoted text>
Hey stupid freeek, the point about "tough on drug users...until I get caught" Rush L. is that the other racist bigot doesn't complain about the drug addict's invective.
Okay, you stupid pos? Was that simple enough for you?
...We are becoming too tolerant as a society, folks, especially of crime, in too many parts of the country.... This country certainly appears to be tolerant, forgive and forget. I mean, you know as well as I do, you go out and commit the worst murder in the world and you just say you're sorry, people go, "Oh, OK. A little contrition."... People say, "I feel better. He said he's sorry for it." We're becoming too tolerant, folks.
--Rush Limbaugh TV show (10/5/95)
These tough sentencing laws were instituted for a reason. The American people, including liberals, demanded them. Don't you remember the crack cocaine epidemic? Crack babies and out-of-control murder rates? Liberal judges giving the bad guys slaps on the wrist? Finally we got tough, and the crime rate has been falling ever since, so what's wrong?
--RushLimbaugh.com (8/18/03)
In the audio link below, I go into detail about these non-thinking talking points that "you can't tell people what to do with their bodies" and "you can't legislate morality." First of all, we tell people what they can do to their bodies all the time--no cocaine, no prostitution, no throwing yourself off a building. Second, laws are nothing but defining morality!
--RushLimbaugh.com (6/27/03)

KKKafeteria KKKristains wrote:

<quoted text>When they get tax dollars in any number of ways, have secular employees, are not houses of worship and are places of public accommodations they are no longer in the religious realm and the RCC misogynists in dresses do not get to impose their sick sexual mores in such venues.

Because were are not a theocracy. The government doesn't support the advancement of a particular religious dogma in the public realm. It violates the Establishment Clause, you sick racist, homophobic, sexist bigot.

KKKafeteria KKKristains wrote:

<quoted text>Hey lying, racist sht for brains, I have argued the issues in terms of content. Along with calling you out as a bigot.

Why don't you go whine about drug addict Rush L. or coke whore, imo, Ann "Eva Braun" Coulter employing name calling if name calling so upsets you, you religious freeek pantywaist?