I've pondered and pondered on this. I simply don't understand how anyone can say we've abandoned the Constitution. As someone mentioned earlier, via the ammendment process, the document is a living document. People are as loyal to their ammendments as they are to the original document. In my opinion, it's the most viable document and foundation for a system of government that can be written and implemented. It provides the greatest ability to sustain a democracy known because of it's ability to be ammended.

 

I don't feel that we've moved away from the Constitution. Do I feel some things are outdated and that special interests have twisted certain provisions to suit their interests? Yes. But I also feel that as a people we still have the rights afforded us via both the original document and the ammendments.

Not saying things were perfect back then, but if you think our society today is more civil than it was 230 years ago ... well, I don't know what to say.

 

I'm not sure it's a question of "more civil or less civil," it's really a question of there have been degrees of incivility throughout our history.

Thomas Jefferson for one. In the beginning he hated it, wanting the Articles of Confederation to continue with minor changes.

 

He feared a centralized government. He strongly supported the constitution during his presidency and fought against the federalists to preserve it.

I'm not sure it's a question of "more civil or less civil," it's really a question of there have been degrees of incivility throughout our history.

 

Isn't that the same thing?

Isn't that the same thing?

 

My point was that there have been many episodes, from the founding of the country to Jacksonian era, to the Civil War, and so on that have been anything but Civil. This era is not greater or less than IMO, just the same as always.

I always thought that "Civil War" was one of those oxymorons. Like jumbo shrimp and business ethics.

I always thought that "Civil War" was one of those oxymorons. Like jumbo shrimp and business ethics.

 

happily married

I've pondered and pondered on this. I simply don't understand how anyone can say we've abandoned the Constitution. As someone mentioned earlier, via the ammendment process, the document is a living document. People are as loyal to their ammendments as they are to the original document. In my opinion, it's the most viable document and foundation for a system of government that can be written and implemented. It provides the greatest ability to sustain a democracy known because of it's ability to be ammended.

 

I don't feel that we've moved away from the Constitution. Do I feel some things are outdated and that special interests have twisted certain provisions to suit their interests? Yes. But I also feel that as a people we still have the rights afforded us via both the original document and the ammendments.

 

What do you think of Obama's decision to force religious organizations to provide birth control in violation of their church doctrine?

For me that is a violation of one of our freedoms. It is situations like this, one small step at a time and freedom disappears.

What do you think of Obama's decision to force religious organizations to provide birth control in violation of their church doctrine?

For me that is a violation of one of our freedoms. It is situations like this, one small step at a time and freedom disappears.

 

I missed that one, do you have an article on that? I don't know of any church organizations that provide birth control.

I missed that one, do you have an article on that? I don't know of any church organizations that provide birth control.

ObamaCare..

It was announced yesterday that Obama Care trounces the First Amendment.

ObamaCare..

 

Can you cite for me where in ObamaCare it states that church organizations must provide birth control?

 

The statement was: What do you think of Obama's decision to force religious organizations to provide birth control in violation of their church doctrine?

Hard to figure out the wording of the bill but it seems religious institutions have to pay for the birth control. Is that the same as providing birth control?

Here in Louisville there's been a great controversy over Catholic Partnerships becoming a partnership with University Hospital because it would have meant the end of services such as tubal ligations at University, which is the largest provider of reproductive care for low income and indigent women in the region. Commonwealth Attorney Jack Conway ruled that a public institution cannot deny such services and the deal has fallen apart. Thus I believe the allegation that religious healthcare providers must offer birth control is false.

Can you cite for me where in ObamaCare it states that church organizations must provide birth control?

 

The statement was: What do you think of Obama's decision to force religious organizations to provide birth control in violation of their church doctrine?

 

The edict says that all employers, even religious organizations, that have employer-provided healthcare must offer birth control meds without a co-pay.