Don't Miss

Enter your photo in the Ultimate Fan contest by midnight to win a suite night at a Salem Red Sox game and a chance at a trip to Fenway Park.

Liberty University v. Obamacare

The courts can bring clarity to controversial mandates about insurance and birth control.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week resuscitated Liberty University’s case against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. The Baptist school in Lynchburg will head to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals seeking relief from two provisions of the law.

Count us among those who are glad this case will be heard. Don’t get us wrong. We think Liberty will lose and the provisions the school is challenging will remain important cornerstones of rational healthcare reform. But Liberty deserves its day in court, and this case — or another like it — could bring needed clarity and resolution to two requirements that continue to inflame passions and opposition.

Continue reading this editorial.

Join the conversation [ADD A COMMENT]

4 COMMENTS

  1. scott whitaker | December 2, 2012 at 8:16 am

    I’m a bit surprised at the RT’s continued use of the word “Obamacare”. It is a pejorative term for the Affordable Care Act used by the Act’s detractors and now apparently by some lax writers. It’s been around long enough that we don’t need the “also known as…”.

  2. The Other Rick | December 2, 2012 at 1:11 pm

    Actually it’s far better known as “Obamacare”, as well it should be.

    When it’s in full effect, for better or worse, then everyone will know without a doubt which President, party and voters are responsible for it. Who to credit if it’s a success…or (more likely) who to blame when proves to be a failure.

  3. Chris | December 2, 2012 at 2:57 pm

    If you would do your homework and read into this so called Obamacare, you will find it has little to do with care and much more to do with the governments insatiable appetite to TAX the WORKING class. This way they can continue to pay off the WILL NOT WORKing class.

  4. Scott M. | December 2, 2012 at 10:58 pm

    @3 Chris, by the will-not-work class, you do mean the rich who don’t have to work right?

Error submitting comment

Name is required

A valid email is required (test@test.com)

Comment is required

Add a comment

Your email address will not be published.
All fields are required to comment.

processing

Friday, May 24, 2013

Weather Journal

Severe storm risk continues today

Wed, 22 May 2013 13:19:25 +0000




.....Daily Deal.....


Recent Comments

  • Robert C.: I love when people use the cars vs. guns argument because it’s so easy to tear apart. The first...
  • Jim Lucas: Holder is lying again (gasp). He personally signed off on the DOJ action against Rosen…..then said...
  • Art Hill: “…she should go to jail for contempt of Congress.” If having contempt for this Congress...
  • Jim Lucas: #3 Mr. Hill….that is absurd.
  • Jim Lucas: #62 Will….it is of course an interesting & pertinent question as to the guidlines. But, once...

Categories

Archives