-
SEQUESTER: The Horror!
March 1, 2013 | 4 comments
-
SOTU Preview: Human Props, Budget Fights, and Wedge Issues
February 12, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Hello, I Must Be Going
August 14, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Weekend Political Wrap-Up, Paul Ryan Edition
August 12, 2012 | 16 comments
-
Esquire Blogger Sees Paul Ryan, Shreds His Safety Net
August 11, 2012 | 13 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Noah Millman is wrestling with a fair-minded compromise between a government trying to enforce a right to health care and religious employers trying to follow their institutional conscience. He comes up with ending private health insurance. But it seems to me what he has discovered is the inherent problem of rights that impose unequal obligations on others to be fulfilled. More rights for me means fewer rights for thee.
View all comments (9) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by W. James Antle, III
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/02/02/my-right-to-your-money
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
C Bowen | 2.2.12 @ 6:24PM
The whole thing is contrived, Mr. Antle.
The Catholic Church via Catholic Charities (sic) (as well as mainline Protestants and some evangelical outfits) profit immensely off the Federal government--see the refugee scams--and then occasionally get all high and mighty on these issues only to cave and pass the costs down.
Honestly, the best we can hope for is a knock down drag out fight and achieve separation of church and state--that great, ironically, liberal goal.
Cut off the 501c status, and then we might see some church militants in our favor.
Stan Redmond| 2.2.12 @ 9:05PM
Unfortunately "Separation of church and state" is only a one way valve. The gov't can meddle all they want but when some high school baseball player says a prayer at school. WATCH OUT
Warrior | 2.2.12 @ 10:07PM
There is nothing in the Constitution that calls for a separation of church and state. Mr. Bowen is correct, the tax exempt status should be pulled from any and every church, temple, mosque, etc.
RJ| 2.2.12 @ 7:23PM
Here is the deal I offer liberals. Design the government as you like, but I will run it. Want to give that a try? Don't worry, I will show the same fidelity to your laws as your liberal brothers have shown the Constitution.
Clint| 2.2.12 @ 7:23PM
"Nationally, Catholic Charities is the largest private provider of social services to children, families, and individuals impacted by poverty. While its mission is based in Catholic Social Teaching, it honors and respects all of the religions and beliefs of the very diverse people it serves. 92% of all expenses are for program services, the remaining 8% is for supporting services."
David W| 2.2.12 @ 10:26PM
Per Walter Williams, any right that incurs an obligation on my part (other than to let that person have the right) is no right. Nothing is free, someone pays for it. It may be only a small amount, but that amount adds up.
If I or someone has to provide money (or something else) so that someone can have a "right" (whether it is health care or not) then that is no right, for that right forces me to give up my right to keep what I earn, which is my property. No true conservative should have to wrestle with that.
Should we help others? Yes, but that is a moral obligation that exists not because of Obama asking what would Jesus do, but because of Jesus and of God. We were given free will to determine how to help others, or not if we chose. If I chose not, then that is really between me and God, not between me and Obama who thinks he is God (or is it God who thinks he is Obama, I get it confused).
RJ| 2.2.12 @ 10:39PM
Good comments. Boiled down, modern day liberalism is no more than demand to be dependent on others. We could also call it a government license to steal.
Janwly| 2.3.12 @ 3:36AM
I'm pretty sure Milman said that what he wanted to end was the tie between employment and health coverage, which is quite sensible.
Tea Party Jim| 2.3.12 @ 12:52PM
I'm sure, if abortion and contraceptive coverage were left out of policies provided by the Catholic institutions, those who MUST have such services can be assisted by Planned Parenthood funds (they now have more coming from KOMEN), or perhaps procure supplemental coverage from some enterprising abortion/contraception insurance company. Employees need FOOD more than they need contraceptive services; will that be the next requirement for employers' provided health plans?
The arguments FOR this mandated coverage are as silly as the federal government's "assured" health fairy tale plan.