Advertisement

Archive for Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Brownback voices disapproval of Obama rule on contraceptives

February 28, 2012

Advertisement

— Gov. Sam Brownback said women who want health care coverage that includes birth control but work for employers who oppose birth control based on religious reasons should go work elsewhere.

Brownback's comment was made Monday during a call-in show on C-SPAN in response to a comment from a woman from Osawatomie, who said women's rights were being trampled in Kansas. The caller criticized Brownback for opposing President Barack Obama's position that contraceptives should be provided as part of the federal health reform law.

Brownback disagreed with the caller, saying that Obama’s decision was infringing on basic religious freedoms.

Obama had issued a rule to require employers to cover all FDA-approved contraception. Churches were exempted from the requirement. Later, Obama announced that faith-based employers, such as religious-affiliated hospitals and schools, wouldn’t be required to provide free contraceptive coverage to employees, but the insurance companies would.

The new policy has continued to anger some religious groups, including some Roman Catholic Church leaders.

Brownback said the rule will require some religious institutions to violate their basic tenets by having to provide coverage for contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.

“That’s not denying women’s rights. If a woman then wants birth control, go work somewhere else,” he said.

Obama administration officials have said the rule won’t violate religious freedoms and will give women access to important preventive care. Supporters of the rule, including the ACLU and women’s advocacy groups, say the measure will improve female health.

Kari Ann Rinker, state coordinator for the Kansas chapter of the National Organization for Women, criticized Brownback over his remarks.

“In this clip, Gov. Brownback states that churches should not be forced to provide birth control to their female employees due to their particular religious convictions. This casts a far narrower net over a policy that in reality would affect millions of women across the nation, who either work for or are insured by a family member through a religiously owned hospital, university, school or organization.” Rinker said.

She also said the governor’s “flippant” suggestion that women work somewhere else “is a verbal strike against women’s right to participate as equals in society and access a full range of preventive health care. This is preventive health care that would, in fact, reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies and abortions across the nation.”

Brownback’s opposition to the birth control rule has arisen during the legislative session. His administration has pushed for approval of a bill that supporters say will protect religious liberty.

Lt. Gov. Jeff Colyer testified in support of the measure, saying it was needed because Obama was attacking religious rights, citing the controversy over the contraceptive coverage requirement.

“As you consider House Bill 2260, the federal government’s recent attempts to trample the religious liberties of millions of Americans must be at the forefront of your debate,” Colyer said. “Religious liberty is at the heart of who we are as a people.”

But opponents of the bill say it will allow people to claim religious reasons for challenging a Lawrence ordinance that bars discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender persons.

Comments

Ray Parker 2 years, 1 month ago

There is no valid prohibition in the U.S. Constitution against the influence and advice of the church on government. The legally recognized prohibition is against government interfering with the church, particularly the federal Congress. Cardinal Francis George of Chicago says Catholic hospitals in the United States may close in just two years under the new mandate the Mombasa Marxist regime put in place forcing them to pay for contraceptives, abortifacients, and sterilizations for their employees. The same would go for most other religious-affiliated or pro-life hospitals and clinics, particularly in view of the obvious intent of the Mombasa Marxist regime to force unrestricted abortions into every medical facility, without exception. The real question is, does the Mombasa Marxist intend to force every pro-lifer, Catholic, Protestant, Jew, Hindu, or otherwise, out of federally-run socialized medicine in the USofA, particularly any medical professionals who refuse to commit, assist, or refer abortions? No compromises. Pro-lifers will demand medical insurance and medical facilities that exclude absolutely all contraceptives, abortifacients, sterilizations, and abortions, followed by the total repeal of the Marxist medical takeover. Count on it.

0

blindrabbit 2 years, 1 month ago

Thinking back to the 1960 election, all non-Catholics were scared to death of JFK because of what people perceived to be control from The Church. JFK in his speech and actions proved that The Church did not own him, and from my viewpoint he did a admirable job of preventing and church-state conflicts during his administration. Now to 2012 and we have a bunch of conservative Catholics (Santorum, Brownback, Blunt and Gingrich) who are attempting to prove JFK and the seperation of church and state has no validity. Throw in a bunch of right-wing protestant fundalmentalists and a Mormon or two and you really have a toxic mix. How are women going to survive this New Repressionism!

0

voevoda 2 years, 1 month ago

It's all too easy for men to claim "religious freedom" to restrict contraception to women. But the same argument about the supposed "violation" of Catholic doctrine would apply to other insurance-related situations. For example, Catholic doctrine prohibits divorce, and particularly remarriage after divorce. Would Catholic employers be permitted to deny insurance coverage to the spouses of employees who remarried, on the grounds that they aren't "really married" per Catholic doctrine? And why is it that the Catholic clergy and defenders, such as Brownback, aren't demanding that Church institutions be exempt from covering such illicit spouses?

0

jayhawxrok 2 years, 1 month ago

Brownback, how about you and Rick Santorum peddle this horse puckey in Iran if you want to live in a theocracy so dang bad. I'm sick of you American Taliban lunatics thinking your religious views should control the lives of everyone.

0

Michael Rowland 2 years, 1 month ago

Religious beliefs should not be forced on others, that is the quickest way to alienate people and get many people to lose faith and stop going to church. The tools should be provided to everyone and it should be up to everyone's individual beliefs as to whether they use it or not. I will not force an atheist or a Muslim or a Hindu to accept Christian doctrine. Doing so justifies the stereotype that Christians are self-centered and holier-than-thou.

0

Stephanie Anderson 2 years, 1 month ago

I know several women in my life that use contraceptives for purposes other than birth control...such as to manage crippling endometriosis, or to balance hormones to prevent female balding from worsening. These hormone pills have uses beyond preventing birth. It's not exactly easy to just find new employment, especially in this economy.

0

lawslady 2 years, 1 month ago

Everyone needs to remember that the government is not making anyone do anything. The government (both state and federal) has long used money (tax dollars) to drive/influence public policy. For example, the federal authorities have used federal tax money to "require" a certain speed limit on any roads that the state wants federal help building or maintaining. It's just that now the governments (both pro and anti factions) are using money to influence decisions on reproduction. For example, those opposing abortion have implemented plans that deny state dollars to those clinics/places/doctors that provide or advise women about such a procedure. The federal government is not required to provide money to anyone who wants it - they can set up rules for what/who gets the money. If someone or some group (like a church or corporation) doesn't want to follow the public policy being promoted, all it has to do is turn down the money. Easier said then done, I know. But no one is being required to take the money. They are only being required to do (or not do) certain things if they want the money. Carrot (or stick). And perfectly legal.

0

Jimo 2 years, 1 month ago

The point cannot be made too frequently ---

This isn't an issue about what churches do or do not do.

This is about what church affiliates must do when they freely choose to leave the world of religion and insert themselves into secular ventures. No one makes them do this.

What's more, religious institutions already share an undue advantage over secular competitors because of their tax free status. In other words, taxpayers already subsidize these ventures, to the harm of their secular for-profit and non-profit competitors. Now church affiliates (or the churches that think they control the affiliates) want even more subsidies from the government by being exempt from ordinary regulations.

Didn't Douglas Co. learn this directly just a few years back when some church out on the Farmers Turnpike decided they wanted to erect outdoor lighting and instead of getting a permit from the County just took matters into their own hands and did it anyway - much to the objection of their neighbors? Wasn't the Church's initial instinct to squawk about how their religious rights were being trampled on when the only issue was the application of laws of general application to everyone?

0

Sparko 2 years, 1 month ago

Churches have no place in political debate. I don't want a church to force Sharia Law, Papal dogma or any other extra-consitutional principles on the bulk of America. What if one of Brownback's religious teachers said it should be unlawful for women to drive, and they should not be forced to allow them to convey themselves to work, or pay road taxes? We could play this game all day--but the truth is this "issue" is a distraction. What is Brownback doing to enhance jobs and the economy? All the man can do is tear-down.

0

Bruce Bertsch 2 years, 1 month ago

If President Obama said the sky was blue, Brownback would disagree.

0

omgsmileyface 2 years, 1 month ago

WHAT OTHER JOBS? I wish there were other jobs available in Lawrence There are no jobs in this town.. and the few that are out there most are part time and do not offer insurance anyway. But less birth control = more mouths to feed no matter how you look at it. Maybe if Brownie would create more jobs this would make more since to me.

0

Patricia Davis 2 years, 1 month ago

Have we had enough yet? If so, we—the moderates of Kansas who believe in quality education for all of our children, who support a fair tax structure for business AND the people of Kansas, who understand the vital importance of a social safety net, who believe that care for disabled isn't up for bid, and who think that religion or the lack of it is equally safe-guarded and doesn't require public sanctity tests—to create a new party and finally drive these idiots out of our government.

0

Bob Forer 2 years, 1 month ago

I just don't get it. It is estimated that over 95% of practicing Roman Catholics have chosen to ignore their Church hierarchy's dictates on birth control. If Catholic bureaucrats can't even convince their own to follow the "rules," what business do they have imposing their rigid and antiquated views on non-Catholics.

0

1957 2 years, 1 month ago

1.2 million left the workforce in January because they can't find work (BTW - that's why the unemployment rate went down) The price of gasoline is going through the roof Home prices drop another 4% Orders for durable goods drops 4% And on, and on, and on...

So what do you do if you are the Administration? Distract! Get the people talking about sex and religion!

This is a nonissue, do not be led like sheep.

0

Gregory Newman 2 years, 1 month ago

I propose a bill that only women will determine what goes with their body on both state and federal level. We do not live in the 1800's. Come on ladies speak up before we men will have you back in the home barefoot and pregnant and can only leave the house when a man says so.

0

CrazyUkrainian1 2 years, 1 month ago

The world would be better off if Brownback's parents used contraception.

0

KayCee 2 years, 1 month ago

Well, I can see that 99% of the posters have a completly skewed undrstanding of the issue; what the mandate said, what the exceptions are, what the Catholic Church says and why. Since this came into the public discussion many evangelical churches are seeing where they could also be discriminated against by the government, and they are joined with the Catholics to opose these 'mandates'.

0

Jock Navels 2 years, 1 month ago

maybe he should have said, "Let them eat cake." When the Catholic Church ran things, we call it the Dark Ages. Want to go there again? When will DarthSam want to outlaw the fork? or zero? or a round earth not in the center of the universe? Jeez, what a stoopid man.

0

nytemayr 2 years, 1 month ago

Brownback... I have one question how about Christian companies that do not allow blood transfusions based on religon? Can those JW faith based Christian companies disallow all medical treatments to their employees for medical procedures involving the use of blood or blood products?

Slippery slope Sam?

0

dhupeseib 2 years, 1 month ago

Hospitals, whether run by a non-profit, profit or charitable institution, are in the business of making money. Religious-owned hospitals do not hire just those who have taken the vows of their religion but hire whomever they can find to fill the positions so that they may keep their doors open and continue to make money. Brownback's statement that women should quit their jobs and go work for another business is arrogant, sexist and, dare I say it, Taliban-like.

0

Randall Uhrich 2 years, 1 month ago

Well, f*ck him. He has no business making decisions on women's health.

0

Les Blevins 2 years, 1 month ago

What do Republicans and our governor have in common with the Taliban? Answer; both want to reduce women's rights and strengthen the powers of men over women wherever possible. Republicans in general and Brownback in particular also consistently represent fossil fuel interests over the welfare of the public. And although it isn't mentioned in the local media Kansas has no official energy policy owing to the fact the Koch brothers and other commercial enterprises hold sway over the Kansas legislature.

Municipal wastes and byproducts should be converted to useful products as near where they become waste as possible. For example when and where worn tires are removed from a vehicle they become waste tires, and I say that location is the most desirable place to convert them to a useful product. And when heat is needed at that location, the worn out tires could be used as a heat source via combustion if the appropriate appliance is available for effecting the conversion. This principal is widely ignored in advanced countries and I believe this leads to the kind of problems we see around the world. It just so happens I've developed a new and useful appliance that some may point at and call an incinerator and some would more accurately call a furnace. An incinerator is for the primary purpose of disposal where a furnace is for utilization of a fuel source via combustion. You'll see my prototype waste combustion furnace at http://aaecorp.com but what puts this furnace in the appropriate category is not so readily apparent and the Journal World is not about to reveal to their readers that my company has proposed collaboration with the city to cut the cost of waste management and cut our fair city’s carbon footprint.

0

FriendlyFire 2 years, 1 month ago

Does Brownback have the same health insurance plan as all State of Kansas employees? If so, his dependents (wife and daughters) have access to use birth control for ANY medical reason and have it covered in full. Conversely, they also have the choice not to use it even if their policy covers it. What a concept. Too bad Brownback doesn't think the rest of the women in this State are capable of making the same decision for themselves.

0

Michael LoBurgio 2 years, 1 month ago

Brownback: ‘Go work somewhere else’ if you want contraception

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R) has a simple solution for women who work for religious institutions that refuse to cover birth control: Find a new job.

During a call-in show on C-SPAN Monday morning, a woman named Doris from Osawatomie, Kansas told Brownback that she was worried that he wanted to turn back the clock on women’s rights.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/27/brownback-go-work-somewhere-else-if-you-want-contraception/#.T01il8auXSc.twitter

0

Gandalf 2 years, 1 month ago

Wonder what birth control method Mrs. brownback uses?

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 1 month ago

The cultural revolution will continue until the GOP brings us soylent green to eat...

0

mikekt 2 years, 1 month ago

I pity poor Sam Brownback because his politics are so lame. He is always having to drag his Publican Right Wing Self Serving Religion into them, to have any politics at all.

0

Katara 2 years, 1 month ago

When the contraception controversy first started to hit the news, there was a poster here who claimed to be Catholic and stated that while birth control for the sole purpose of pregnancy prevention was against Catholic Doctrine, birth control used for the treatment of medical conditions or to prevent pregnancies when it was deemed that a pregnancy would be bad for a woman's health was not against Catholic Doctrine & the Church was cool with it.

If that is a true statement on the Church's position, my question is how will the Church know what the actual purpose of a woman's birth control usage? Wouldn't that violate HIPAA since the Church would be an employer?

Is the Church willing to deny women access to a medical treatment because they are just assuming that it is being used solely for pregnancy prevention?

0

Mike Ford 2 years, 1 month ago

you know....there are plenty of isolated dying communities in rural Kansas where intellect is seen as witchcraft or superstition and the dark ages live....maybe some of the posters here need to go back there to the dark ages where they can be superstitious and judgemental without affecting others.

0

kansanjayhawk 2 years, 1 month ago

No one should be forced to pay for the condoms and birth control pills of another. The government should not facilitate activities that moral Americans oppose!

0

Chris Golledge 2 years, 1 month ago

I see this as a collision between equal opportunity employment, which would push toward a decision to have the churches pay for it (not create a situation where religious faith was a factor in employment), and separation of church and state, which would push toward the government not telling a church how to run their affairs.

There exist laws on this kind of thing. Any experts on Title VII out there? Others that may apply?

0

FalseHopeNoChange 2 years, 1 month ago

Looking at this "scientifically" the female subject is the problem here. This is my shared "consensus" with China.

0

yourworstnightmare 2 years, 1 month ago

If Governor Blowback wants theocracy, he should go live somewhere else. Iran comes to mind.

0

Slowponder 2 years, 1 month ago

Heck-of-a-job-Brownie is agin it? I am fer it.

0

autie 2 years, 1 month ago

but....but what if it was a Christian Scientist hospital? I bet that is a really cheap plan.

0

Mike Ford 2 years, 1 month ago

der kommissar brownback has spoken.....agree or else....

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 1 month ago

The problem here is twofold. 1) churches used to be open only on Sundays. They would occasionally have funerals and weddings too. Now they try to offer cradle to grave services to church members. That is fine. God bless them. However, hospitals, daycares, softball leagues and whatever else have absolutely nothing to do with religion. What makes America great is that we are a melting pot. This doesn't happen when we isolate ourselves in bunkers only with like minded people. 2) politicians like Brownback and Santorum want to impose their mythical belief systems on others. Get real. Without access to birth control, there will be more unwanted pregnancies which will lead in turn to more abortions. Politicians like these two also want to use issues like this to whip the weak minded into a frothy voting block. IT IS 2012. I agree with the state senator who introduced a bill in another state arguing that life begins at ejaculation. What will Brownback and Santorum and the catholic priests do with all their new found free time when that law is passed?

0

Armored_One 2 years, 1 month ago

True or False: Religious institutions (I.E. churches) are exempt from paying taxes.

True or False: The government has the right to regulate business as it falls within their sphere of control.

True or False: Religious exemptions exist in a number of fields of today's business world.

True or False: A business is not a religious institution, nor should it be given the same legal status as a religious institution.

Churches, and by default, religions, are in theory supposed to be one of the original not-for-profit organizations. Businesses, by definition, do not fall into that category. Allowing religious exemptions for businesses should not be allowed under the Constitution, as only the Catholics are the only branch of Christianity that adamantly refuses to accept that birth control isn't only medically needed, it is fundementally a right. Self determination and all.

Religions that insist on sticking their noses into the private sector or into the realms of the government should lose all exemptions. Period.

Either this is a theocracy or it isn't. Anything less than drawing a line in the sand will continue to allow religion to pervert what should be a magnificient document.

0

Gandalf 2 years, 1 month ago

Gov. Sam Brownback said women who want health care coverage that includes birth control but work for employers who oppose birth control based on religious reasons should go work elsewhere.

Or alternatively employers who wish their religion to dominate their employee's, could move elsewhere. Iraq?

0

08Champs 2 years, 1 month ago

I would think that you would have to "exclude" contraception coverage, rather than add it, as it is bundled into prescription coverage as a basic provision. SO if you're catholic, or if your religion/world view prohibits birth control, or your name is Brownback/Santorum/insert religious zealot here.... THEN DON'T TAKE THE PILLS! So very simple....

0

coleja 2 years, 1 month ago

Brownback strikes again. . . when it is going to be time to elect for someone new because he's obviously a clown. All Obama wants to do is make sure that contraceptives are available to women. HELLO BROWNBACK.. if you should ever be greatful now would be the time. Brownback is so headstrong anti-abortion that he fails to realize that by more women being able to have access to free contraceptives that the number of women getting abortions would go down significantly. But, again let's focus on contraceptives and abortions Brownback MEANWHILE people are still trying to find jobs, the education budget is up and down, and the number of people losing their houses day in and out don't seem to be as important as abortion and women health care. Don't get me wrong I'm a woman and healthcare to me is as important to me as it is the next guy but STILL!

0

tomatogrower 2 years, 1 month ago

Wow, if religious organizations end up with only people who don't use contraception, then there will be a lot of organizations shutting down.

0

Ray Parker 2 years, 1 month ago

Cardinal Francis George of Chicago says Catholic hospitals in the United States may close in just two years under the new mandate the Mombasa Marxist regime put in place forcing them to pay for contraceptives, abortifacients, and sterilizations for their employees. The same would go for most other religious-affiliated or pro-life hospitals and clinics, particularly in view of the obvious intent of the Mombasa Marxist regime to force unrestricted abortions into every medical facility, without exception. The real question is, does the Mombasa Marxist intend to force every pro-lifer, Catholic, Protestant, Jew, Hindu, or otherwise, out of federally-run socialized medicine in the USofA, particularly any medical professionals who refuse to commit, assist, or refer abortions? No compromises. Pro-lifers will demand medical insurance and medical facilities that exclude absolutely all contraceptives, abortifacients, sterilizations, and abortions, followed by the total repeal of the Marxist medical takeover. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood facilities in Texas are closing for lack of state taxpayer funding, now cut off in defiance of federal threats, although Planned Parenthood may continue attempting to sell porn, sex addition, sodomy, fisting kits, high-risk GPS condoms, and pedophilia to schoolchildren.

0

Katara 2 years, 1 month ago

"That's not denying women's rights. If a woman then wants birth control, go work somewhere else," he said." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ That's funny. That's what people said when pharmacists and doctors wanted to be exempt from dispensing drugs/or performing medical procedures that they felt were against their moral beliefs but Brownback and his supporters thought that was denying those folks their rights.

0

autie 2 years, 1 month ago

After some reading..Brownback's position on this one doesn't meet muster for the establishment clause in the first amendment. Denial of uniform access to contraception by federal law is establishing a religion if that denial if based on religous dogma. Game, point, match.

0

pace 2 years, 1 month ago

Sam has put his heel on women's neck and is grinding it in. Women don't need jobs they need to mind. Let him go to.

0

Enlightenment 2 years, 1 month ago

Not all women use contraceptives for family planning, many use them to regulate menstruation cycles, another reason why insurance should cover contraceptives for women.

0

blindrabbit 2 years, 1 month ago

What gets me, these social conservatives are so wanting to control the lives of women (denying contaceptives, elective abortion) at the same time they rail against the repressive govenments and religions of the MiddleEast. From my vantage point, I see little difference except geography.

0

FalseHopeNoChange 2 years, 1 month ago

Liberal women need their men like The Obama to get them what they need. The Obama and Liberal women know what the score is. They know what they like. They know what they need. . He knows how to make them smile.

Besides, this "riveting" Liberal woman issue takes their eye of of his economic malaise. Fade them out of position.

Browny should just stay out of Liberal womens way and let them get their little satiating pill.

0

kawrivercrow 2 years, 1 month ago

He has the right answer, but for the wrong reason.

Why don't we cover oil changes and brake jobs in our auto insurance? Same reason we shouldn't be covering contraception with our health insurance. Insurance is to share risk for expenses that may be occur as accidents or unforseen events.

Contraception, like brake jobs, are simply routine, common sense maintenance measures, not emergencies or unforeseen events. Do any of you feel like paying for my brake job? No? Good, because I don't feel like paying for yours, either.

Just so everybody knows...My wife went to Planned Parenthood, got an exam and Rx for OCPs and I went there every 3 months and picked up the re-filled script, paying out of pocket. It was $15/mo. Being personally accountable is not that difficult and is actually very rewarding once you get out of the 'I need a nanny-state beaurocracy to take care of me' mentality. I wish more people would give it a try.

Aside from that, Brownback is a loser-idiot that is looking for a fecal firestorm if he doesn't learn to keep his greasy religion separate from his grimy politics.

0

blindrabbit 2 years, 1 month ago

Another old white Catholic man trying to keep women in-place (as has been the Church's position) since whenever. Hopefully, many un-liberated women will wake-up to the fact; unfortunately, many women are willing to accept this kind of serftitude and servitude.

0

Enlightenment 2 years, 1 month ago

Ok, let's hear from men who support Brownback and religious organizations that disagree with the requirement to offer contraceptives via employer health insurance.

Now, let's hear from the women in relationships with the men that are against contraceptives.

I would like to know if they have ever used contraceptives or some form of family planning.

Also, I would like to know how another persons decision to use birth control infringes on their religious freedom.

0

08Champs 2 years, 1 month ago

contraception is legal - I'd like to see the Catholic church and other religious entities punish their parishioners for using it, rather than attempting to take away basic healthcare from women. (yeah, good luck with that). Preach that on Sundays and make it the responsibility of your parishioners to "not partake" rather than punish the rest of the planet for your archaic views.

And those religious zealots that believe sex is solely for procreation - tell that to the 70 year old guy filling his Viagra prescription.

0

Catalano 2 years, 1 month ago

Brownback and Santorum were obviously separated at birth.

0

nugget 2 years, 1 month ago

Ah, yes. The classic diversion. Use politics to preach social morals then make out like a bandit with the payoffs from corporations.

Fools me every time.

0

loudmouthrealist 2 years, 1 month ago

I often wonder at the post's on this forum. Usually you will find a pretty even distribution of ridiculous far-right and far-left comments.

But when you have 15 comments in almost an hour and not ONE of them defending Browneye's position, you know that even ardent republicans are starting to realize how far gone this guy is.

0

hujiko 2 years, 1 month ago

Why do men bring it upon themselves to determine what is right for women?

"Go work somewhere else," Sam.

0

Cait McKnelly 2 years, 1 month ago

Let me officially voice my disapproval of Brownback :P

0

Roland Gunslinger 2 years, 1 month ago

"go work somewhere else"

The Governor is attempting to make it extremely difficult to staff a Catholic hospital. 95% of the workforce are women and well over 95% of those women aren't catholic and want access to contraception.

Go work somewhere else... lol. How about the religious businesses stop imposing their beliefs on others? No one is forcing anyone to take anything. If you don't believe in taking contraception then don't take it. But don't tell baptist Jane Doe she's not allowed cheaper access to it as a condition of her employment.

0

Kim Murphree 2 years, 1 month ago

If the fight is between civil rights for women and religious "rights," I vote women's rights every time! If the religious organization is receiving tax breaks, and we know they are, then they don't have the ability to say "no" to a basic health care product for women, just because they are women. Do they say "no" to vasectomies?

0

zzgoeb 2 years, 1 month ago

I'm confused? Is this part of the "more jobs for KS" Brownie has talked so much about? Is he encouraging skilled workers to leave KS? What a knucklehead! Oh, and here's the other part; churches don't pay taxes, nor do their institutions, but they lobby voters constantly on political issues...I'm pretty sure they should lose their tax-exempt status. Hey, I just helped solve the revenue problem!!!

0

JackMcKee 2 years, 1 month ago

Brownback's political career is coming to pretty steep cliff. Let's see if he drives it right over the edge.

0

FriendlyFire 2 years, 1 month ago

What about the thousands of State employees that currently count on birth control and other contraceptives coverage via their insurance policy? Will the State of Kansas soon become one of the "religious institutions" that women looking for basic healthcare coverage should avoid?

0

James Nelson 2 years, 1 month ago

I've got a good idea for Gov. Brownback. If he feels that strongly about abortion then I highly recommend that he never, ever have one performed on himself. I can guarantee him that no one will force him to have one anyway. Now, why can't he just leave the 90% of truthful Kansans alone to do what is legal with their own bodies?

0

ksjayhawk74 2 years, 1 month ago

I like how Brownback's statement, "If a woman then wants birth control, go work somewhere else,", just proves the point that the religious organization just want to impose their unpopular values on women.

He's saying that the only option for a woman who want to use birth control is to not work for a "religious" organization. Therefore, if you do want to work for a religious organization, you have to accept the fact that you shouldn't be using birth control, because your employer doesn't want them to be having sex, unless it for the sole purpose of making a baby.

These organization are fighting for the "right" to control women's lives and health. Brownback, Rick Santorum and plenty of other politicians are very willing to wage war against women's health, specifically contraception.

Rick Santorum has said that he would give states that right to ban contraception if they wanted to!!! He's also against prenatal testing!!!

Why are these politicians so willing to fight against women's rights and health?

0

cowboy 2 years, 1 month ago

Brownback , Santorum , et al seem to have a basic disbelief in the separation of church and state. Perhaps they should go to work somewhere else.

0

Fred Whitehead Jr. 2 years, 1 month ago

Brownbackwards should go to work somewhere else. I would suggest the South Pole.

0

asixbury 2 years, 1 month ago

The churches are still complaining, even though they are exempt from directly providing the coverage? I wonder if anyone is actually listening to the details and not just jumping on the religion bandwagon that Brownback created to deter us from the real issues in this state. Can we focus on the economy now? I'm tired of Brownback's preaching.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.