Women, Hobby Lobby and the GOP: Hell to Pay in November?

It has more to do with those with the most "gold" making the most "rules" (for others) without any delegated (social) power to do so under our form of Capitalism regardless of our form of Socialism under our republican form of Government.

 

You failed to answer the question he asked.

 

I'll try again.......

 

The PPACA is a law passed by Congress and enacted into law with the signature of the President. It provides specific health care benefits to women. While employers, based upon the "Hobby Lobby" Supreme Court decision some employers can opt of of providing certain benefits based upon claimed religious beliefs. The women are still entitled to those benefits under the provisions of the PPACE and denial of those benefits constitutes a violation of their Right to Equal Protection enumerated in the 14th Amendment.

This is NOT about whether Congress can authorize the benefits because it already has. This is about Congress providing the legislation necessary "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof"
.

That doesn't say they "can if they feel like it" but instead that the legislature is "To make all laws" and that's their Constitutional responsibility to carry out. It's the House GOP that's in violation of the US Constitution currently because it is taking no action to ensure that women being denied benefits provide for by LAW will actually receive those benefits. What the benefits that are already a part of the law is irrelevant to this requirement in the US Constitution.

Blame the Republicans in Congress, specifically the House GOP, for violating Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution.

- See more at: http://constitution.findlaw.com/article1/article.html#sthash.NgLUUatW.dpuf

 

A liberal partisan Democrat can always find a constitutional rights violation except for the times they actually occur.

 

This changes nothing. People will vote as they've always voted, with apathy and knee jerk partisanism.

 

Except for independents, hopefully. Hey...you look familiar...in a "unusual way"...:



"The Temptress" returns !!

 

Now answer the question. Does the Constitution of the United States require the Congress to develop the health insurance system any man or woman demands?

 

You know the world has gone nuts.... when people start claiming "Plan-B" is a Constitutional right.

 

Or "equal protection under the law".

 

(You do realize you are frantically arguing about protecting "specific benefits" in a health plan that covers the cost of breast-feeding equipment for men, yes ?)

 

Approaching this purely from a Constitutional law issue...

The U.S. Constitution does not set forth an explicit right to health care, and the Supreme Court has never interpreted the Constitution as guaranteeing a right to health care services from the government for those who cannot afford it. The Supreme Court has, however, held that the government has an obligation to provide medical care in certain limited circumstances, such as for prisoners.

 

Thank you for an honest answer

 

Standards are a social Power delegated to our elected representatives.

In any Case, our federal Congress can use Socialism to bailout Capitalism to their heart's content, in the federal districts.

 

You just can't seem to muster the ability to answer a simple question. Either that, or you simply don't know.

 

Projecting much? Our federal Congress is Delegated the Social Power to legislate, "in all cases whatsoever", in the federal districts.

 

Neither can I
Your Daily Bread™
Maybe we should have lost the 2nd World War. We'd have important things to think about.

 

You prove my point more with each response.

 

Standards are a social Power delegated to our elected representatives.

In any Case, our federal Congress can use Socialism to bailout Capitalism to their heart's content, in the federal districts.

Our federal Congress is Delegated the Social Power to legislate, "in all cases whatsoever", in the federal districts.

 

But you still can't tell me where the Constitution says that the congress must develop, implement and administer health insurance.

 

Our federal Congress is Delegated the Social Power to legislate, "in all cases whatsoever", in the federal districts.

Our federal Congress can use Socialism to bailout Capitalism to their heart's content, in the federal districts.

Standards are a social Power delegated to our elected representatives.

 

It also contained a specific implementation date for the employer mandate, what's your point?

 

You're just intentionally looking silly now.

 

but, how can that be, I am not the one without a clue and without a Cause.

 

It also covers prostrate cancer for women.

Once agian the issue isn't the provisions of the law but instead the issue is "equal protection under the law" for women that can be denied statutory benefits established by existing law because of their employers religious beliefs.

I would remind you and others that Hobby Lobby didn't win it's case based upon a "Constitutional" argument but instead it won based upon a "Statutory" argument. The PPACA (Obamacare) regulations conflicted with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) and the Supreme Court ruled that the conditions of the RFRA prevailed for the owners of Hobby Lobby.

The women are still entitled to the benefits under the PPACA but Hobby Lobby doesn't have to provide them (but the government must ensure that the women still receive the benefits). It is the responsibility of Congress to ensure that these women received the benefits established by the PPACA under Article I of the US Constitution. Since this could involve government spending the Constitution also establishes the the legislation must originate in the House of Representatives. The ball is in the court of the GOP controlled House based upon the US Constitution.

If the GOP controlled House does not provide for the women to receive the benefits, regardless of what they are, and fails in this Constitutional role and responsibility, then it would become the President's responsibility to protect the Constitutional Rights of the Women.

There are those in the "right-wing" that do hold the political position of "To hell with the Constitutional Rights of the Woman" whenever it conflicts with their political agenda of course. Are you one of those?