The verdict is in…

Supreme Court Upholds Pro-Abortion, Pro-Rationing Obamacare

‎”Under the Affordable Care Act, abortions are free of charge, but life saving medicine and treatments require a co-pay. All Americans who are on government subsidized healthcare plans (which would be almost all Americans) will be forced to pay for abortion through a hidden surcharge that insurance companies are not even allowed to tell their customers about, except in the initial sign up process. This is how radically pro-abortion the Obama administration really is, and its ‘health care reform’ policy reflects this radical stance.” – Father Shenan J. Boquet, president of Human Life International

“The Supreme Court today officially declared that our current government pays no heed to the Constitution. Neither the President, nor Congress, nor the Supreme Court appears willing to protect life or liberty. If ever there were a time in history when the American people needed to be informed voters on Election Day, this is it. The mandate is a brazen attack on our religious liberty. Today’s ruling on Obamacare was a setback, but it is not the end of the battle.” – Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life

I’m preparing for the fallout…

At least everyone in the DNC is staying classy. Te he. I just made myself laugh.

About Katrina Fernandez

Mackerel Snapping Papist

  • Kristen Lueken

    merg. I read the thing this morning. The most frustrating part, is that the first several pages were about how constitutional mandate ISN’T. A couple of my favorite quotes (these are from the majority opinion, not just the dssenters):

    “The Framers knew the difference between doing something and doing nothing. They gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it. Ignoring that distinction would undermine the principle that the Federal Government is a government of limited and enumerated powers. ”

    “Even if the individual mandate is “necessary” to the Affordable Care Act’s other reforms, such an expansion of federal power is not a “proper” means for making those reforms effective. ”

    “When Congress threatens to terminate other grants as a means of pressuring the States to accept a Spending Clause program, the legislation runs counter to this Nation’s system of federalism.”But then of course, after saying all that smart sounding stuff the majority (of three + two who didn’t really agree with anything in the first place) decide to go ahead and point out a couple of loopholes that the govt. didn’t actually have a right to appeal to: Well you called it a penalty instead of a tax, but we’ll go ahead and treat it as a tax because if you weren’t ass-hats and you knew the constitution that’s what we’re sure you would have meant. And oh yeah, we’ll go ahead and sever the really unconstitutional bits from the rest even though you technically didn’t include a severability clause because if you weren’t ass hats and you knew anything about being legal that’s what you totally would have done, right? (I hope your comment policy is ok with asshats, I really can’t think of a synonym that implies quite the same thing).