> it's the only thing approaching a valid argument on the other side of the > issue, Sam. Valid argument, meet Sam, Sam meet valid argument. Some > Catholic institutions say they should not have to pay to include > contraceptives in coverage they are funding for their students and/or > employees, since their religious beliefs say that contraception is wrong. > Geez. You are making me do all the work here. Of course, it hasn't been > demonstrated that it costs more to cover contraception, but hey, there's a > First Amendment claim that isn't completely laughable. You're welcome. > Anyway, that has all the makings of a supreme court case, eventually -- the > right to not be messed with vs the right to believe that women do not have > a right to not be messed with. Anyway, getting back to Fluke, none of that > applies to student insurance at Georgetown if it is true that Georgetown > doesn't subsidize it at all. On what basis would Georgetown have a First > Amendment claim? PT is right. Either come off auto-pilot or STFU for a > while, geez. >
> > >> I don't see how you can construe a First Amendment right to dictate > health > >> care you aren't paying for. > > > > wa? > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:347946 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
