Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: White House May Look to Compromise on Contraception Decision. [View all]zipplewrath
(16,698 posts)While you're being so adult, you might try seeing an issue from another point of view, without presuming yours is superior, but merely different.
In theory, there are two rights in conflict here and both are presumed to be "inalienable". Fundamental to the concept of human rights is that it is both wrong, and foolish, to sacrafice an inalienable right merely to be accomodating to someone elses wants. You don't sacrafice a right for a want so to speak.
I do think the original poster is being a touch harsh, although I understand where their lack of trust comes from. But we do have two concepts bumping into each other here. 1) religious freedom and 2) the right to health care. I realize this administration doesn't accept the second as an actual right, and in fact demonstrated as much in their health care debate by outlining exactly who doesn't deserve governmental support in obtaining health care. But for alot of democrats, they still perceive health care as a right.
Working under the presumption that both are rights, the administration does need to try to work out solution, not a compromise, that recognizes both rights. The argument is valid that the religious freedom "ends" when they want to enter the market place. Basically force the churches to decide if they are running religious orders, or schools. If the former, then there should be strick limitations upon them, foremost obviously being a non-profit status but quite possibly strict rules about who they can hire and under what circumstances. Alternately, if they are going to agree to those stipulations, they may "get a pass" on this issue. May get tough for Notre Dame though depending upon how it would affect their football TV contracts though.