POLL: Should Brown Stop Comparing Himself to Ted Kennedy?

What do you make of the latest controversy in the U.S. Senate race?

Should Scott Brown stop running radio ads that compare his views with the late Senator Ted Kennedy? 

Brown recently came under fire for running radio ads that contend that Kennedy would have agreed with him that employers and insurers should be able to exclude health care coverage of drugs and procedures that go against their moral views.

Ted Kennedy's son, Patrick, asked Brown to stop running the ads in which he says, “Like Ted Kennedy before me, I support a conscience exemption in health care for Catholics and other people of faith.” 

However, a look at bills that Ted Kennedy sponsored in the 1990s and 2000s show that Kennedy would have required all employers who offer prescription drug coverage to include contraception coverage, according to a front page story in Tuesday's Boston Globe

Please share your views on this latest controversy by taking this poll and leaving a comment below.

Diana March 02, 2012 at 04:35 PM
FYI, Catholic Charities gets 62% of its funding from the government, so I think they need to suck it up and render unto Caesar. http://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/document.doc?id=2853
Karl Weld March 02, 2012 at 04:49 PM
No Diana, Catholic Charities should tell the Feds to pound sand, not take the money and administer to their faithful the way they see fit. And BTW, we overthrew a king so we wouldn't have to "suck it up and render unto Caesar" anything. It's nice of you, however, to point out the obvious tyranny of Big Government though. Because THAT'S what this debate is about.
Diana March 02, 2012 at 04:54 PM
Karl, if you have a problem with rendering unto Caesar, take it up with Jesus. And hey, if the Church wants to stop taking government money that's fine, but they don't get to take the money AND tell the government to pound sand. That's not government tyranny, that's RCC hypocrisy.
Don March 02, 2012 at 05:20 PM
Diana, remember - Jesus told you to take a hike a few weeks ago. Probably stands today, but I wouldn't want to speak for the Lord.
Diana March 02, 2012 at 05:39 PM
Well, I personally don't require Jesus's approval, but I'm not claiming to speak for him, I'm quoting scripture. That particular quote is referenced in three out of four gospels, so don't feel obliged to take my word for it.
Richie M March 02, 2012 at 06:29 PM
Thanks for the clarification Diana. I really was wondering who you were addressing ("posting for" to quote you) in your post last night at 7:31 pm. Normally when someone addresses me by my first name I assume (apparently I'm wrong) that their comments are directed at me. And all the while you were posting for the benefit of other people.
Marcy March 03, 2012 at 01:11 AM
Richie - you are right. So many people really do not want to hear it when you mention that Ted Kennedy gave that young woman a permanent solution to birth control. It's so mean, you're talking about Ted Kennedy...I do not believe the man should have not have found peace in his life, but to be held up like some kind of amazing leader. Really?
Marcy March 03, 2012 at 01:42 AM
I don't think any company should be required to cover birth control. If a woman meets the criteria to receive government support due to insufficient income, I'm not opposed to having birth control provided for her. Otherwise, buy your own birth control. Give me a break. Our insurance covers this almost 100%, but I refuse to use the coverage because it cuts out the little guys like Michael at The Medicine Store. (only CVS, Walgreen's etc - will they cover). So it runs just under $500.00 for the year at Michael's. The Georgetown U chickie must be buying some other fun things if hers is running almost $1000.00 per year as she states. This is getting ridiculous. Hell, I think we should buy everyone a puppy. Because people might get depressed if they don't have a puppy. Give me a break and take responsibility for your own life and your reproduction.
Marcy March 03, 2012 at 02:22 AM
That said, clearly they are going to cover it because it makes financial sense. But do not force religious organizations to "go with the flow" if it is against what they believe in. Get a new job if this is a problem for you! Imagine what Democrats would say if starting tomorrow we said - Sorry, all students will have to say the Pledge at school. Oh, it goes against your beliefs - so sorry - suck it up. In fact, isn't there something going on with this right now in a local school district? I think I can be pretty objective when I say allow the religious organizations to have their own voice, considering I have never belonged to one.
Diana March 03, 2012 at 03:02 PM
Marcy... Democrats (and all thinking people) would generally be against requiring students to say the Pledge, not because the Pledge is "against their beliefs", but because requiring it is unconstitutional. Health insurance is part of your compensation package. It's payment for labor, not a gift to be administered or not at your employer's whim. There are all sorts of regulations governing compensation, and if you're going to run a business, you have to abide by them. This regulation is not special, and neither are the businesses run by the Church. Again, this would not apply to the Church itself, they won't have to offer IUDs to nuns, or even the nice Church secretary. It will apply to their business interests, and the employees of the Church's businesses are entitled to all the same protections as employees of any other business.
Donald Robinson March 05, 2012 at 06:54 PM
Just go to planned parenthood for contraception. It's free!
Diana March 06, 2012 at 04:32 PM
Donald, birth control is not routinely provided free at Planned Parenthood. In fact, of the six PPs in Massachusetts, two of them don't provide sliding scale payment at all, and the other four require proof of income and in some cases residency. Easy enough to find out by going to the PP website, if you care at all about knowing what you're talking about.
Patricia B March 06, 2012 at 05:24 PM
Just to say I mistakently marked Anne Justice's 10:50 entry as inappropriate. It is not inappropriate - is there a way to remove the flag? thanks.
Patricia B March 06, 2012 at 05:24 PM
what if the church, and many are, self insured?
Diana March 06, 2012 at 05:30 PM
Patricia, I'm not sure I understand your question. Can you please clarify? Thanks!
Patricia B March 06, 2012 at 05:46 PM
If you are referring to self insured, a business may opt for self insured whereas they pay claims out of pocket. companies I have worked for treat Workman's comp this way. And, I have heard many religious organizations are self insured.
Diana March 06, 2012 at 05:49 PM
Yes, had an under-caffienated moment. I'm not sure whether the law as written differentiates between self-insured and other plans, but I don't think it necessarily should. Again, this is about the employees' rights, and as long as the employee is paying into their insurance plan, then their rights should prevail. If the RCC would like to 100% pay for their employees' insurance.
Diana March 06, 2012 at 05:50 PM
BTW, I can't see Donald's 2 recent comments, am I the only one?
Patricia B March 06, 2012 at 05:52 PM
I cannot see them either. Diana, does that mean, since I pay a portion of my insurance coverage, that everything should be covered, even things considered cosmetic surgery? Is there a limit?
Diana March 06, 2012 at 06:03 PM
No, but it means that you should get reasonable medically justifiable coverage, and birth control is absolutely reasonable medically justifiable coverage. Can we really, as a society, not get together and agree that birth control is a net good? That boggles my mind.
DannyBoy March 06, 2012 at 06:18 PM
Try telling that to the Catholic Church and socially conservative people, who don't believe in such a concept...
Patricia B March 06, 2012 at 06:20 PM
Diana, we're back to square one. Birth Control is good, and people should pay for it when they want it. It's not that expensive - what the cost of a few latte's a month? And, if they are that poor they would qualify at PP, no? You just can't force a religious institution to go against their teachings... I think we've beaten this horse dead...
Diana March 06, 2012 at 06:21 PM
Well, they're welcome to not use it. That doesn't mean that they're welcome to try to prevent other people from using or having access to it. Apparently they have a very narrow (and utterly incorrect) view of what "religious freedom" means.
Diana March 06, 2012 at 06:25 PM
Patricia, we're only back at square one if you disagree that birth control is a prescription medicine to deal with a health issue, since prescription medicines to deal with health issues are generally covered by insurance. Prescription medications are not lattes. What other prescriptions do you feel health insurance shouldn't cover?
Patricia B March 06, 2012 at 06:32 PM
No one is trying to stop anyone from using or accessing Birth Control. That is how the left is tryiing to frame this and it's bs. As I said, my opinion is that the government cannot and should not force any religious organization to break with their faith. Be it catholic, muslim, hindu, protestant, jewish, etc.... That's my opinion and I'm done with this topic -this could go on forever.
Diana March 06, 2012 at 06:44 PM
Well, if you're done you're done, but frankly, there's plenty of BS spewing from both sides, and I'd say that comparing prescription medication to lattes and conflating two comments of mine to imply that I'm saying that the RCC is trying to limit access to birth control is considerably BS-ier than noting that a large part of the purpose of insurance is to cover prescription medications.
Anne Justice March 07, 2012 at 02:01 AM
Scott Brown tried to deceive voters by using Ted Kennedy's words out of context! That is Sleazy! That was at least related to the question at hand. With the sideshow issues though,how strange that plenty of negative incorrect comments are said reguarding Planned Parenthood as well as so called free contraception and are allowed but no one can mention that Viagra is covered by insurance companies without being deleted. Both are prescription medication! Where's the outrage over Viagra??
DannyBoy March 07, 2012 at 02:42 PM
Hey Patricia, I guess "Joe the Plumber" from Ohio has a chance to get elected to Congress this year. Check out this link: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/03/07/ohios_joe_the_plumber_gets_gop_nod_for_congress/?p1=Well_Politics_links Though I must say that I highly doubt how effective he's going to be in helping craft legislation for our country.
mplo June 09, 2012 at 06:36 PM
I can't stand Scott Brown either, and yet I didn't like Martha Coakley much. I ended up voting for the Green Party last time, instead of voting for either Scott or Martha.
david mokal June 09, 2012 at 07:45 PM
Anne I totally agree he's being a grave robber by doing that. Im independent but Warren will get my vote. She's down to earth and self made and a family person. Brown just another blowhard and has done nothing for the working class. Mouth Moves says nothin. Yup and I voted for him too. He says "LIKE TED KENNEDY" meaning I'm like...Should have said Ted Kennedy said or did.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something