A response from my GOP Senator on the Blunt Amendment

[sinkingfeeling]

Dear Sinkingfeeling,


Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to Senator Blunt's amendment to S. 1813, the highway reauthorization bill. It is good to hear from you.



As you may know, the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act" (PPACA) includes a controversial provision that requires almost all private health insurance policies, including those issued by religious institutions, to cover free sterilizations and contraceptives. I know that you support this federal mandate. However, voluntary services, drugs, screenings, and procedures all cost money. As such, this new mandate will force insurers to increase premiums on all policy holders, regardless of whether they want or need sterilizations or contraceptives. Furthermore, this mandate unfairly forces people to choose between their health and their moral or religious values. Americans should not have to pay for services or be forced to provide healthcare plans that conflict with their deeply-held beliefs.



Senator Blunt's amendment would simply restore conscience protections that existed before President Obama's health care law by prohibiting the government from imposing mandates that violate the moral or religious convictions of those who purchase or provide health insurance. We must remember that "freedom of worship" is not the same as "freedom of religion," as it does not provide sufficient protection under the First Amendment. Religious persons should be free to practice their faith in all areas of their life, including the public square, and should not be compelled to limit their religion to the physical confines of a church.



I am sorry we do not agree on this issue, but please be assured that I respect your opinion and will keep your concerns in mind.



Again, thank you for contacting me on this very important issue. Please be sure to visit our website at www.boozman.senate.gov. I look forward to your continued correspondence.





Sincerely,

John Boozman
U.S. Senator

[gratuitous]

1. And thank you, Sen. Boozman

As you know, I'm a member of the Church of the Brethren, which has for more than 300 years taught that All War is Sin. I take it by your letter to sinking feeling that no American should have to pay for things that conflict with their deeply-held religious beliefs. As such, can I count on you to sponsor, fight like the dickens for, and pass a law that exempts me from having to pay that share of taxes that goes for war under the rubric of "defense" or "national security"?

Thank you in advance for your anticipated fierce advocacy on this vital issue, on which more is spent in the United States than in the rest of world combined.

Love and kisses,
gratuitous

P.S. I hope you're not going to wimp out on this, and look like a mealy-mouthed hypocrite who uses religion as a pretext when it suits your political purpose, but drops it like a hot potato when it doesn't.

[sinkingfeeling]

3. +1000 He thinks we're all too stupid and will believe birth control costs more than

insuring a child from conception until the age of 26!

[catbyte]

2. Pompous arrogant douchebag

[southernyankeebelle]

4. I wrote my congressman but I got a polite comment but a disgreement none the less. I did

write him back and told him politely I went and early voted and I wouldn't be voting for him. I am sure he won't care. We have enough crazy teabaggers that will vote for a crazy man.

[MarkCharles]

5. "would simply restore conscience protections that existed before President Obama's health care"

LIE!!!! Write the man back and tell him to learn the facts.

#1 28 states had a mandatory provision for contraception coverage in health insurance regulations of their states. One of those states was Massachusetts, where Mitt Romney signed a law extending such coverage, even after it was already in place for regulations in coverage of voluntary health insurance.
....another one of those states was Arkansas, signed off by Gov. Mike Huckabee.

#2 Bozeman misunderstands the First Amendment which COMMANDS that "Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion"... thus the Blunt amendment would be the FIRST TIME Congress chose to do so. Note carefully the words "respecting an establishment of religion". No doubt, the words were chosen carefully, so as to avoid such atrocities as the Blunt amendment, which voluntarily treats certain religions with more "respect" than others.

[sinkingfeeling]

6. I am going to write him back. Several things I'm going to call him on and ask him

why he can't just be honest.

[MarkCharles]

7. Why CAN'T he be honest???

He's a Republican, silly!!!!!