Even private citizens are protected under the I Amendment. If this SCOTU says otherwise, it doesn't make it alright, it only means they are wrong, and should be rejected too.
'Businesses like Hobby Lobby, which sued the administration over the rule, would probably not be affected by the change because it is not technically a religious employer.' - Fox News
So what does the Obama administration think the Catholic Church is - a fly-by-night, flim-flam road show? Even a third party insurer forces the insured to be paying for it overall. After all, Insurers don't really give things away for free. They take out of your 'right' pocket to give freely to your 'left' pocket. That's free healthcare for ya.
What a waste of oxygen. Environmentalists should be alarmed at the waste of their government cutting trees, printing stuff that amounts to nothing but what we are already facing. They should be suing against Obamacare just based on this non-changing "change".
We are moving off insurance which is set to go over $1500/mo when I retire. Our plan now...
- to pay the Obamacare fine and
- to pay cash for checkups and minor procedures.
- have found doctors who do not accept insurance and medicare, and do not use electronic health records.
- sign up under an exchange should we come down with a condition that requires hospitalization (preexisting conditions now cannot be denied coverage)
- to get a blanket lump sum medical disability insurance should I end up in the hospital for designated surgeries or treatments.
I am already getting better primary care at the cash-only doctor including very comprehensive blood tests unavailable under my current insurance plan.
We have been in the health care industry (providers and technology) for over 30 years. There is nothing good about what is coming. Whether or not you have insurance coverage, consider finding a respected cash-for-services doctor who you can trust and who shares your feelings about Obamacare. Avoid electronic health records. Use a trusted compounding pharmacy on a cash basis where you can.
Why is that everyone says ObamaCare can not be overturned down the road when this human garbage leaves office ?
Does anyone else see how subtle this is? Doesn't the Constitution give the Legislative branch the job of changing law? The White House is changing law. The White House gives permission. The White House allows this and that. The White House oversteps and no one even cries foul anymore.
Not only is HusseinCare a major shift to socialism, it (as you imply) also sets a precedent for future Presidents to remove more liberties.
Bush set us up for this, Hussein delivered, and the next tyrant-in-waiting is licking his chops.
these un's ?
Since when are people who want to murder unborn babies entitled to taxpayer subsidies? Nobody is saying take these sicko's right to kill their babies we just don't want to be forced to pay for it.
Yahoo News claims there will be a religious opt-out: http://news.yahoo.com/source-religious-opt-birth-control-162017140.html
And we know Muslims are exempt from Obama care. Those close to the Obama regime can opt out of or get by with anything - avoiding taxes, prosecution. In this administration, justice and policy are uneven, partisan, racist and do not follow the rule of law.
Lying, stealing, bullying, cronyism is what this regime is all about.
If you read that exemption it was carefully worded to restrict it only to "long established" religions (e.g. islam). It you become a mail order minister, set up a new Church of No Insurance, you would not be exempt.
I'm still praying the Supreme Court will find a way to strike this law down in spite of Roberts' bad judgment last year. Everyone, including we the people, should be able to opt out of this socialist scheme.
I think they did provide Congress a way, but the House is not acting because the elephants want Obamacare powers.
The court said that the penalty is a tax. If it tax, the bill would have had to originated in the House. Obamacare originated in the Senate.
There was so much in Obamacare not done properly I believe it will be struck down. All I know is Roberts better do something to redeem himself.
I still wonder if that is what Roberts did - gave Congress the tool.
I recall reading that through some subtle and circuitous rulings the Supreme Court gave Congress the tools to position the 17th Amendment as un-Constitutonal. But that Congress left it on the table because the massive power offered them by the 17th amendment, was too great to walk away from.
SCOTUS only ruled on one part and that was before it was implemented. Once implemented and WE are harmed (forced to buy insurance, forced to pay a penalty which DHHS has now deemed to be a "shared responsibility payment") individuals like me can and will sue. We are not required to pay for someone else's medical insurance they same way they are not required to pay for our new vehicle that has 18 airbags.
Impeachment will not start with Boner and McConnell on sight. MAYBE Rand Paul can rally enough support from the likes of the few conservatives around but the aformentioned two statues are incapable and scared of doing what many know needs to be done.
edit: sorry, this post was to be a reply to sandra123456 early in the thread.
And the stupidity (in the eyes of anyone with some pride in themselves) continues, with a bunch of indignant creeps on the road to communism.
You can read this law and still not know what's in it. It's like a paint by number set with HHS choosing the numbers. Last I heard there were over 13,000 pages of rules and regulations and counting. Those are above and beyond the nearly 3,000 page law itself.
Let the court cases continue.
I want to see this law hanging lifeless on a meat-hook.
But don't you get it yet? That IS the plan. Make insurance so expensive few people will be able to afford it. Then everybody will be forced to go into single-payer socialized medicine. Then we will be no better than England or Canada, countries that not only have huge problems with their medical care, but also are charging their citizens a fortune for it. What's not to love?
Obama: "...a single-payer healthcare plan, a universal healthcare plan. That's what I'd like to see. BUT, as all of you know, we may not get there immediately..."
While good peope play fair and patiently wait for response from the courts, Obama has taken illegal/unconstitutional actions and pushed through his agenda, all with the help of the old timer, established Repub congress..
It seems evident he has blackmailed Republican leadership the same way I think he got to Petraeus. It's been his MO since the beginning.
Unless WE do something -because congress won't, we're going down with the ship.
4 more years of this War on America? When's the impeachment starting?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Somebody got a reading comprehension problem?
I assume that if Hobby Lobby were owned by Muslims and they objected on religious and moral grounds it would be A OK!
RESIST! I will not comply, period.
If it is against the Constitution I have no reason to comply.
Having said that, I want to add that I'm encouraged by his buckling on at least part of the mandate to provide objectionable "healthcare" by those who religiously or by conscience object to forced supplying of birth control. Let's hope that the SCOTUS does the right thing, for once, and stops his mandate completely for everyone. If not, I say we use the old "civil disobedience" trick the Left used in the 60's.
I read an article that the penalty for failing to comply is $95 in 2014. The penalty ups to $695 in 2016. I don't care if it goes up higher yet...I won't pay it
That is what I thought too, but apparently it is higher. The link TRS included above gives an example.
I am figuring between one and two months' premium for planning purposes.
Here is your grounds: ObamaCare individual mandate referred to as “shared responsibility payment” http://patdollard.com/2013/01/shared-responsibility-payments-obama-admin-releases-regulations-irs-penalty-rates-for-obamacare-individual-mandate/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
We have no Constitutional obligation to share the responsibility for someone else's medical costs.