Colorado Christian University Sues Federal Government Over Health Care

LAKEWOOD, Colo. (CBS4) – Colorado Christian University in Lakewood is taking the federal government to court. The school says it’s being coerced into violating its deeply-held religious beliefs.

The beliefs involve strong opposition to abortion.

There are some 4,000 students and 500 employees associated with the university. The school offers a group health plan to its employees and students.

Under a federal mandate the plan must offer contraceptives. That leaves the school’s administration, led by former U.S. Sen. Bill Armstrong, facing an important ethical question.

“(It’s) whether or not people, or in our case universities, who have seriously held moral convictions against abortion, should nonetheless be required to pay for it and support it, and endorse it, in effect,” Armstrong said.

The departments of Health and Human Services and Labor and Treasury have been named in the lawsuit charging, “A deliberate attack by the government on the religious beliefs of the Colorado Christian and millions of other Americans.”

Beverly C. Ailts is the executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Colorado and feels the university’s lawsuit is misleading.

“No one is compelling anyone to take action against their religious beliefs,” Ailts said. “They are making contraception more accessible and affordable to those who want to take contraception.”

“I supposed that if we lose then one option that we will look at … is to simply stop offering health insurance coverage to our employees,” Armstrong said.

Right now the university’s stance against abortion is so strong that employees must sign a pledge not to take part in it.

More from Investigates
Comments

One Comment

  1. davidwamsley says:

    If the opposition to the mandate to pay for others contraceptives and abortions is not affirmed by the courts up to the SCOTUS. Then Obama care is over.
    The law was writtian in such a way that if one provision is unconsitutional, the whole bill is invalid and unconsitutional.
    Obama care will support late term abortion with our taxes.
    I wish the University every success in their opposition to this obseane legislation.

    1. Joe says:

      Would love to see your facts on where you think that if one provision is unCon that the entire legislation is. So far, even the one (and only) state court that ruled some provisions UnCon, gave the legislation itself a stay so parts could be activated.

      1. USArtguy says:

        It’s called a “severability clause”, which provides that if any part of a law is found unconstitutional, the rest would remain intact. The administration didn’t include one.

        http://www.nolo.com/dictionary/severability-clause-term.html

        Just Google “severability clause Obamacare”.

        And take a look at this man’s highly expert opinion http://spectator.org/archives/2011/11/23/the-bell-tolls-for-obamacare

      2. Jack Chaffin says:

        Joe, the law omitted the “severability” clause, usually included. The clause usually states that if any part of the law is invalidated, the reminder of the law is still in force. The Democrats were so interested in ramming this through that they neglected to add this. So yes, many legal experts believe that laws without such clauses are negated if any part is judged unconstitutional.

      3. Toneyuki says:

        Jack, it wasn’t neglect. They had to leave it out. If they had included it, then the CBO score wouldn’t have been under 1 Trillion.

      4. Scott Lennox says:

        it’s NOT in the Constitution, the provision is in the bill

      5. Krp says:

        The 11th circuit declared the mandate unconstitutional but left the law intact. The PLANIIFFS then appealed to the Supreme Court the severability of the mandate.

        The Administration wanted to drag its feet so that the law would be implemented before ti could be heard by SCOTUS, but the plaintiffs appealed NOT the mandate but its severability.

      6. Shea says:

        There is no severability clause.

        If the courts rule the law to be severable, millions of contracts from mortgages to employment to unions will have their contracts invalidated because the court will have ruled every law to be severable.

        Obamacare is not severable. If one sentence is unconstitutional, the whole law is unconstitutional.

        Obamacare is a violation of the 10th amendment and the interstate commerce clause (i.e. the federal government does not have the authority to regulate LACK OF commerce).

        If it is not struck down by SCOTUS, we will see it repealed in ’13.

    2. constitutionalAtty says:

      you are correct as there is no severability clause included in this catastrophic legislation. Obama didn’t want congress, or the courts to be able to remove portions of the bill. Joe below, hopefully those “facts” help. It is easily researched.

    3. Pilot.Dave says:

      Although I do not believe any MAN should any say in what a WOMAN does with her body, I agree even more strongly in what the University is arguing – freedom of religion is a founding concept of America,

      Also, the writer including the B.S. of Beverly C. Ailts simply shows a liberal bias by CBS…

      1. STLDan says:

        No one is infrining on any religious rights here. Get a clue. Are they being told how or not to worship? Are there churches being shut down? They have ZERO chance of winning this rediculous law suit. If you dont agree with abortion, dont get one. Apart from that, shut the hell up!

      2. Hugh Askew says:

        STLDan, who thinks his freedoms extend to making me pay for his mistakes, needs to get a clue.

        Shut up?
        So much for freedom of speech when speech opposes your irreligious self-righteousness, eh?

      3. Shea says:

        I agree we should have no right to regulate what a woman does with her body.

        You must also agree a woman has no right to decide what to do with someone else’s body.

        Therefore if you believe life begins at conception, it is consistent to say a woman has no right to kill a constitutionally protected person simply because they have not yet been born.

        Not all pro-life positions are religious… this one is one of two possible libertarian approaches (both opposites I might add).

    4. Brian T. Robinson says:

      There is one problem with your theory — the US Supreme Court has already ruled that you do not need a severance clause to save the constitutional parts of a statute if one part runs afoul of the Constitution. Meaning if the mandate is found to be unconstitutional, then it would be stricken and the remainder of the statute would be in place.

      1. vangrungy says:

        “the US Supreme Court has already ruled that you do not need a severance clause to save the constitutional parts of a statute if one part runs afoul of the Constitution. Meaning if the mandate is found to be unconstitutional, then it would be stricken and the remainder of the statute would be in place.”

        Are Supreme Judges actually Kings?

      2. Krp says:

        What is being appealed is the severablility. THe 11th Circuit declared the mandate severable. What was appealed was the severablility.

        So if the law IS severalble. then what you have is a legislation that was passed under false pretenses.
        The mandate was part of the funding of the law and this was supposed to lower the deficit (yeah right). Now with the funding mechanism gone, you have a budget busting bill,

      3. Shea says:

        If this is the case, Obamacare is not a law.

        The way in which the law was passed was for budget neutral items. A stricter vote is needed for budgetary items and striking the mandate DE-FUNDS the program, requiring it be passed as a law.

        If the court rules the mandate to be severable, the law becomes a non-law, and even the administration has said it would be ‘unworkable.’

    5. bob says:

      like the one rick santorum’s wife had?

    6. David says:

      You actually have that backwards.
      The law is written in a way to survive the loss of any one part of it.

      It’s deficit spending is also capped by law–if you change any part in a way that adds to the deficit, you must offset it with cuts elsewhere.

    7. Linann M Singh says:

      If you do not like abortions…..tie you d**k in a knot.

  2. amy says:

    Good for them! We need more like this organization to stand up and refuse to be bullied into dulling down our morality.

    1. Jamie says:

      We need more people to stand up the self righteous religious nuts like you. If you don’t like abortion don’t have one. Don’t you dare tell me what to do with my own body.

      1. Brian says:

        Do whatever the hell you want with your body; but the body inside of you is entitled to liberty.

      2. Justice says:

        Agree with Brian – AMY. I know people like you want to believe it is ALL about you; but it is not.

      3. Tim says:

        Jamie,

        If you want to have an abortion, then don’t work for Colorado Christian University and expect to get benefits for having one! Don’t YOU dare tell CCU how to compensate their own employees!!!

      4. Californian7 says:

        Jamie-
        I’m amazed you don’t see yourself as a “religious nut”. Think of “religion” as your world view – yours is either humanism or leftism….In my dealings with leftists, when they accuse you of something – 9.995 times out of 10 they are doing the very same thing…….it is my opinion that the anger in your post gives you away……

      5. HisAmazingGrace says:

        Jamie,

        We’re going to assume you didn’t understand what Amy was saying. As an American taxpayer and a Christian who holds the belief that abortion is the killing of a child, we should NOT be made to pay (through taxes) for someone else’s abortion.

        Easy to understand?

      6. Doogie Hauser says:

        HisAmazingGrace

        You are taxed. You have representation. Religious freedom does not mean that you are necessarily exempt from US law.

        Easy to understand?

    2. Jess says:

      I believe in the power of a choice. If a woman choses to engage in sexual activies then she must face the consequences. Abortion is not a choice. The choice has already been made when someone considers aborting a fetus.

  3. Shari says:

    By forcing individuals or groups to use private money to fund something that is against their beliefs is not only an assault on religious freedom, it is an assault on basic liberty.

    1. slinky says:

      Are any of my tax dollars going to support this university? If so, it is an assault on my religious freedom and on my basic liberty.

      1. Tim says:

        slinky,

        If federal funds do go to CCU that is obviously irrelevant. The school’s policy on employee health care pre-dates Obamacare. Had their policy been contrary to federal law, they would have lost such federal funding long ago. It is not as though Obama’s Department of Education is going to suddenly realize that they have been improperly sending funds to a school that violates federal law simply because that school is now suing the Federal government!

      2. Shea says:

        I know CCU does not take federal funds. They are independent and free.

    2. trutherator says:

      Forcing anybody to do anything with their own money is an assault on liberty.

  4. pyramid says:

    Do you suppose Jesus approved of all of Caesar’s policies when He said, “Render unto Caesar . . .”? How is this different?

    We need to be ready to answer the hard questions.

    1. mike says:

      Jesus certainly did not approve of all of Caesar’s policies. The application of his statement is for us to be obedient to the laws of the land. However, in Jesus’ day, the people of Judea could not vote Caesar out of office, nor were they protected by a Constitution. In order to be “salt and light” we must be involved in what our government is doing. This includes being informed, bringing suit to see that the Constitution is upheld, voting, and so on.

      1. pyramid says:

        Thanks Mike.

      2. t0mas says:

        *Cough* Romans 13:1&2 *Cough*
        Excuse me… oh, here I go again.
        *Cough* John 19:11 *Cough*

        Who allows people into office? Who has the power over Government? Who works ALL THINGS to His glory?

      3. Shepherd says:

        We like Mike!

      4. Shepherd says:

        @t0mas “We The People”

        You should always read scripture in context. Now go drink some water.

      5. Lee says:

        “Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

      6. USArtguy says:

        Uh, t0mas, the United States of America shouldn’t exist then… We’d still be servants of the crown.

      7. MorganGray says:

        t0mas, yes, the Bible says we are to obey civil authority. But, what if civil authority sets itself up against the Law of God?
        Did Daniel obey the civil authority? Did Shadrach, Meshach and Obenego? Did the early Christians, who practiced their faith in defiance of Roman tyranny?
        Did our founding fathers obey civil authority?
        Did Frederick Douglass obey civil authority, or Sojourner Truth?
        How about Rosa Parks?
        We are to obey civil authority right up to the point where it contravenes God’s Authority. The founders did so, and therefore their hands were clean when they started to disobey civil authority.
        It is the same for us today. We obey the civil authority, we try to work through the proper legal channels, like bringing suit in court, UNITL the civil authority becomes so oppressive that it becomes “their right, it is their duty to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security”.
        And for the record, we are nowhere near that point – yet.

    2. Inverse Pyramid says:

      Jesus was answering a question about paying taxes.

      Do people understand context anymore?

      So the angel was disobeying God when he told Joseph — at God’s direction — to take Mary and Jesus to Egypt? By your misinterpretation Joseph should have disobeyed the angel and rendered Jesus to be slaughtered by Herod.

      Hard questions?

      Hardly…

      1. pyramid says:

        Inverse:

        Slow down partner. I am on your side. My point is there will be many retorts to this effort, and we as Christians need to be prepared to answer in a loving but wise way.

        Mike had a good answer. Bear in mind the average young person today has no idea who Joseph was let alone why he would go to Egypt.

        PS I accidentally “Reported” your post – sorry.

      2. Joe says:

        @Shepherd, so wait “You should always read scripture in context.”. We can read scripture in context, but interpreting the Constitution “in context” is fraudulent?!? What a nice double standard you zealots have come up with! The commerce clause allows the legislation, plain language, and it’s been upheld by the SC in every conceivable instance over the last 15 years. Precedent is a B when you dislike legal legislation.

      3. Jack Chaffin says:

        Joe, that is the whole question. The commerce clause has never been used to COMPEL commerce. So don’t pretend that this is old stuff.

    3. LaVonte d'Ashawn Jackson IV says:

      Pyramid,

      1. Don’t pretend to know the Bible or what Jesus said. You just look stupid.
      2. The question is only difficult for you stupid democrats.
      3. If you don’t know how your analogy is different, my explanation will go over your head.

      Fool.

    4. constitutionalAtty says:

      Jesus lived under the rule of a King, we live in a Republic. If you don’t know that much you are a but a sheep….baaaaaaaa baaaaaaa

    5. Mikey De says:

      Jesus did’nt have a vote on what Ceasar demandes. The holy land was an occupied territory. I thought Liberals were soooo smart. You don’t even kinow your facts and yet you run your mouth. Go read something other than Rolling Stone!

    6. Vic says:

      Jesus said ‘render…’ not SURRENDER unto….’

    7. Brian Carter says:

      “Render unto Caesar . .” If you finish the sentence, you have your answer. “… and render unto God, that which is Gods”

      In other words, don’t surrender to the government your natural, or God given rights.

  5. Kettering1 says:

    Americans should be like this University–Grow a backbone and oppose the unconstitutionality of this draconian Obamacare. Our tax-dollars are used to murder innocent babies so indirectly we have blood on our hands. AMERICA SPEAK UP, SPEAK LOUD, SPEAK OFTEN.

    1. BLM says:

      You are a little mistaken- our tax dollars are used very directly to kill babies around the world. I know firsthand that in Cambodia right now U.S. tax dollar funded abortions are available on a walk in basis and performed in hours in urban areas. Sickening. If an average person breaks a bone in that country however it takes days or weeks for them to see a doctor. I’m have no doubt you will find similar U.S. involvement in many other countries.

      1. constitutionalAtty says:

        wow, u think we support that? A fool and his thought are soon parted…foolish man.

      2. kelpiejethro says:

        I’ve never waited more than a few hours to get an xray for a broken bone in this country. Once Obamacare kicks in and everyone is forced into the government pool, hours will turn to days, then weeks and eventually months as you try and get approval from a beaurocrat for an xray.

  6. Jeff Maschler says:

    ITS ABOUT TIME!!!

  7. Beck says:

    Can we call it what it is…infanticide or child sacrifice..abortion is a medical term.

    1. Melanie says:

      How about calling it what it really is? MURDER.

    2. ablecynic says:

      It is truly child sacrifice. The child in the womb is sacrificed for the convenience of the mother and father (and sometimes the family.) Planned Parenthood and the other abortion providers will tell a woman with a child in her womb that she will be happier, healthier, and better — AND it will be better for the child, if she has an abortion. It never is. We get 2 or 3 women every month who have come in years after having an abortion to request psychiatric care to help with the guilt.

  8. NCMike says:

    I agree. It’s about time that Americans started standing up for their right. The morally reprehensible relativism that pervades our culture opens the door to totalitarianism, and the loss of liberty. Wake up America. Grow up, and stand up for your children and grandchildren. We must stop the destruction of our culture, our values, and our liberty. If not now, when?

    1. TXMatt says:

      I very much agree. Well said. If we don’t stand up for our morals, who will?

    2. just a sailor says:

      It is no surprise that Obamacare runs at odds with Christian beliefs.
      The head of the government is a Muslim sympathizer. The Muslims get a pass while Christins are foced to go against their religion.
      Remember this regime was the follower of a preacher that had no problem useing the Lords name in vain as he codemed the country.
      At the least we need a President that follows a religous leader that has no problem saying God Bless America.
      May God be with the university

      1. Maria says:

        You do not know a thing about Christianity. I guess wall street and big oil are your Gods

    3. Maria says:

      “Totalitarianism” is how Bush and the GOP went to war, by lying and fear mongering. Federal government is there to protect our “freedoms” especially from extremist that include Christian extremist too. It is the parents’ job to discipline their kids and if u feel so strongly about having Christian principals and values, stop preaching to the choir and practice living it, like Mother Theresa. The federal government is not imposing their health care on anyone. Listen I have a handicap child private insurance doesn’t cover didly and thanks to the affordable health care act that was passed by Obama, that what ever is not covered by “Private insurance”, Medicare pays the cost, which by the way, comes from “our own taxes”.

      1. workingstiffdad says:

        Sorry, Maria. Read your Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Debates record ….find out what federal governemnt is “there for! I contribute to charities to help be “my brother’s keeper”. I DO NOT have an obligation to give my income or property to the Government to hand over to you without my permission! Your ponzi scheme utopia is bound to crash and burn. Enjoy your Medicare today, becasue it will be stopped or it will implode under its (and your) weight on the productive members of American Ciitizen society. However, your nearest private charity hospital (Catholic, Presbysterian, Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran, etc.) run by the Christians you bach will be there for you and your ilk.

  9. DeVan says:

    Abortion was deemed legal by the Supreme Court based on a right to privacy in the Constitution. But the ObamaCide law mandates that private medical records be given to the govt! So either we have privacy or we don’t. Cant’ have it both ways. Either the govt. can meddle in our private medical affairs in which case abortion is NOT supported by the Constitution OR the right to privacy prevails and the ObamaCide law is un-Constitutional. Check mate. Strange that I have yet to hear of anyone challenge ObamaCide based on the right to privacy……?

    1. joe says:

      It’s because the right to privacy has no relation to the legislation. If you actually read the bill (as with most bills) it’s tied to a constitutional prong to make the legislation valid. In this case it’s the commerce clause being challenged and over the last 15+ years going back all the way to the late 1700’s it’s supported legislation such as “obamacare”. No one is making the argument you think should be made because it’s a bad one.

      -Licensed Attorney

      1. DeVan says:

        I beg to differ. The right to privacy is at the heart of the matter – along with freedom of religion. I also agree that the individual mandate is not supported by the Commerce Clause, but if it is I suggest Congress require every American to purchase a gun!

      2. Jon Weiss says:

        Actually, under the laws in place at the time of its writing, the 2nd Amendment, along with the “Provide for the Common Defense” clause found in the Preamble and again in Article I of the Constitution, requires every able bodies male from 16 to 60 to own a gun as a member of the “Militia”.

        Modern anti gun activists will argue that the creation of the National Guard revokes the idea of a state militia, except that the National Guard has been (in violation of the very precept of the Militia) used in fighting foreign wars. This is an action that was never intended for the militia. From 1775 to 1917 this retention of the National Guard within the borders of the U.S. remained intact. It was only in the “foreign entanglements”, which Washington and Jefferson both warned against, that the illegal use of the National Guard became common practice, but such use is still illegal. For those who are too dense to comprehend the technical aspects of the point, suffice it to say that there is a reason it is called the “National GUARD” and not the “National OFFENSIVE FORCE”. In fact the “militia” was never intended to be used outside the borders of the state, let alone the nation. But the overbearing Federal Government, (another thing which the Founding Fathers cautioned against), simply usurped the power of the states to meet its own whims of the day.

      3. constitutionalAtty says:

        All i can say joe…find a new field of expertise if that’s the best you can do. I suspect you are a first year student studying the constitution and arguing with other 18 year old students about this. Keep it up you are the kind of future Lawyer that is fun to practice against.

      4. Luke says:

        In no case, has someone been forced to buy a product against their will, i.e. purchase adequate coverage. This idea is as yet untested under the commerce clause of the constitution. Nothing you can say right now changes that fact.

        As far as why no one is making the argument, it’s not necessarily that it’s a bad one. Rather, people are often afraid of wading into the unknown. Such a court battle will be long and drawn out, and with no precedent on which to base your case, it would be risky. People are attacking the angles that have clear precedents that would indicate Obamacare as unconstitutional before they attempt avenues with no precedent to back it up.

  10. Mojo says:

    Wow, talk about twisting reality and crying wolf. There’s a slight difference between contraception and abortion. You do realize your tax dollars go to weapons that kill human beings. Remember that one of the Commandments? Oh right, you only apply it to things convenient to your hatred of Democrats and Obama. You guys are frauds and hypocrites, and filled with hate. Go ahead, try to take apart the only real health care reform of the last few decades, because obviously your Jesus can’t stand the idea of universal health care, especially for the poor.

    1. Wade Smith says:

      The law required abortion services be included in the insurance offered. Abortion the willing killing of an innocent helpless human being. The commandment you are looking for is Commandment 6: You shall not murder.Exodus 20:13; Deuteronomy 5:17.

    2. Will says:

      double wow to you, Weapons that “Defend” your right to even have a country to complain about your health care!! Obama care was passed as a Mandate and since its been questioned they themselves have called it a “tax” If thats the case the Bill before it was a Law originated from the Senate. Hum according to the Constitution all Tax proposals must come from the House. So procedurally its wrong which in its own should disqualify it. btw if we need this so bad why do we still have medicad/medicare then?

    3. WAZ says:

      Mojerk – the constitution compels government to protect American citizens. It is one of the very few things that government can do. Part of that protection is the the creation of, and ability to use, weapons.
      Your arguement is baseless, and typical of the left. Please don’t label our desire to excercise individual rights as”hatred”
      And please don’t try to tell us about “our” Jesus…we know – and you have no standing to lecture.
      Keep telling yourself that Healthcare will be free…Hope and Change right?….While you are at it – name the other nine Commandments…..tic….tic…tic….thought so.

    4. Obamacare is wrong says:

      Doesn’t matter. ObamaCare is forcing a religious organization to offer something they feel is against their beliefs. End of story. It’s wrong. Therefore, ObamaCare, as it’s written, is wrong.

      1. Concerned Citizen says:

        You’re correct, it’s wrong. Obama excluded Muslims and Amish people from this healthcare and is forcing everyone else to participate. To me that is discriminating against me because I should have a free choice to opt out of Obamacare like the Muslims and Amish people just to make things fair.

    5. Joe says:

      Here’s an interesting scenario for the zealots. Christ is in the modern day middle east, there’s an Ak-47 at his feet, and an extremist 100 feet away walking to a detonator that conceivably would kill 50 million people if it’s activated. Do you think he picks the gun up and shoots the extremist, or for that matter does anything to stop the person? Expand the situation further, let’s say it was a biological weapon that would be released and take down 90% of the Earth’s population? I think in both situations scripture would dictate that the individual would probably release the destruction on the world without any interference from the almighty. The only conclusion is that, it’s hypocritical to mix your political and religious ideologies, for the sole fact that it’s impossible to rectify one with the other. If anyone knows of a Judeo-Christian denomination that can integrate fully with a major political platform of any party, please share.

      1. Jack Chaffin says:

        Joe, if you think that Jesus Christ would need an AK-47 to stop your fictional terrorist, you don’t know who Jesus Christ is! Silly example. Typical straw man.

      2. constitutionalAtty says:

        rectify? don’t you mean reconcile…first use a dictionary if you want to sound knowledgeable, second quit the salacious arguments…they are meaningless Joe and you miss your chance to be thought intelligent by opening your mouth.

    6. constitutionalAtty says:

      We as Christians reserve the right to apply it…whereas you who are not Christians quit quoting what you obviously do not believe…you have no standing to use the Word. Also, even if there were no clauses for contraception or any of the other things that the govt wants to supply to us I would still not want this misnamed idiotic national healthcare!!!! I’ve lived where I was subjected to this before and it sucked…baaaaa baaaaaa. sheep and slaves all.

    7. MorganGray says:

      Mojo… people like you really make me fear for the future.

      Your assertion that there is a difference between contraception and abortion is at its root, incorrect. If your are talking about *preventing conception* you are correct. Condoms or diaphragms do that *PREVENT* conception.
      But, what most people mean is “birth control medication”. These do not prevent conception. They prevent implantation of an already conceived baby. In effect, they cause miscarriage before implantation, and therefore are abortion inducing drugs.
      I’m sorry if that bursts your pro-death bubble.

      Why do we need to reform healthcare in the first place? It’s broken.
      Who broke it? People like you, the lazy taker class who want everything for free.

      Yes, our tax dollars go to fund weapons which defend your right to get on pages like this one and misquote Scripture. Don’t like being defended by our military? Feel free to leave. I’ll even pay for your one-way ticket to Iran, or Venezuela, or Red China, or the Sudan. You can try to exercise your free speech rights there if you like.

      The word in Exodus 20:13 is “ratsach” (Strong’s #H7523) it means, to murder, premeditated, the act of homicide.

      We as Christians are to care for the “widow and the orphan” – those who cannot care for themselves, not the lazy – those who *will not* care for themselves.

      Try again.

      1. Rob says:

        They are not abortion inducing drugs. It was THOUGHT by doctors that preventing implantation could be one of the possible mechanisms, along with preventing ovulation, and preventing fertilization by affecting sperm transport, etc. But even the high doses in the morning-after pill do nothing if the egg has already been released:

        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17241840
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21072474

    8. Reader says:

      Read that commandment in context and you might be surprised with your own statement. Why do you think it is written that god smiled upon David when he slew the ammorites? God does not say as has been paraphrased by so many “Thou Shalt Not Kill” your own bible says quite clearly the commandment was “Thou Shalt Not Murder”. Killing in war is not murder and neither is killing in defense of ones own life. Weapons themselves are not the problem but their just application and use. Now for the actual topic at hand your statement is not related and will be disregarded as the fluff it is.

    9. armyman62 says:

      Mojo, …
      The original text of the “commandment” you refer to was “Thou shall not commit murder” that is a little different than killing in self defense, for example or while at war under legal orders of your command.

      1. nc says:

        just because you are commanded by a legal or superior order to kill does not justify it. ask the nazis about that one. i do however agree with your general idea that there is a difference between killing and murder but you might be more careful about how you try and illuminate that difference.

  11. phillysmart says:

    Socialism doesn’t work it makes skaves out of people …resist at all costs

  12. GerryC says:

    Growing up, I was always told that without good health nothing else mattered. Why would anyone want to turn our “health” over to the government? They ruin everything they touch. USPS, Mediicare, Social Security, and every other “SYSTEM”

    Our health is the last thing we have. Gerry

    1. joe says:

      They created everything they touched, USPS, Medicare, and SS. Stop acting like it was private enterprise then the government took over.

      1. Jack Chaffin says:

        The difference s that a government that can give you everything you want, can take everything you have. Government is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Government is not trustworthy. Government simply cannot make all the decisions that private persons make in their lives.

        In other words, Joe, if you want to be RULED, this is not the country to expect it. Go someplace else where the citizens are not sovereign. We are Americans, and we will not be ruled. Your regime is about to go down.

      2. constitutionalAtty says:

        True Joe, the implemented those services and they all are utter failures. thanks for pointing that out. Problem no is they aren’t satisfied with ruining what they built with their own hands and they want to ruin the good that was in fact developed by private industry. Once again…you should study to be quiet and do your own business…to quote what a very wise person once said. Emphasis on quiet….shhhhhh

  13. Brodave says:

    Keep up the good fight.

    Do everything possible to keep the progressive liberal Democrats out of our lives, businesses and educational institutions.

    Stop this madness.

    Vote a straight GOP ticket in Nov 2012.

  14. Stuart Smedley says:

    “The last official act of any government is to loot the treasury.” ~ George Washington

    ————————– http://911essentials.com

  15. M says:

    Contraception is not abortion… Not even close. It’s one thing to be against abortion (if that’s what you believe), it’s another to be against life saving medication for women who face painful reproductive disorders.

    1. MorganGray says:

      You’re right. True contraception – the prevention of conception is not abortion.
      But, what most people mean when they are asking to have their contraceptives paid for by tax dollars is birth control pills, which prevent the implantation of an already conceived baby, which is the early termination of a pregnancy, which is abortion.

      Please deposit another quarter and try again.

      1. Rob says:

        No, it doesn’t prevent implantation.

        Not even the morning after pill does that:
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21072474

  16. Karen says:

    ‘Contraception is not abortion… Not even close. It’s one thing to be against abortion (if that’s what you believe), it’s another to be against life saving medication for women who face painful reproductive disorders.

    Contraception CAN sometimes be an abortion. Depends what the contraceptive is. Sometimes they are abortifacients. That bit isn’t relevant though. Even if all contraceptives weren’t such–like, NO private institution should be mandated what they HAVE to pay for. Why in Hades should it be ‘standard’ as part of a health care package? Why does a 60 year old woman need to pay for that? If people want to buy condoms on their own or other birth control, they can have at it without everyone else being forced to pick up what should be their dime. I happen to not think there’s anything wrong with a glass of wine at meal time. HOWEVER, I understand why the tax code doesn’t allow deductions for same on a government expense account. i.e. many would find it offensive (if not immoral) for the government to reimburse for same. This is no different, and actually drives the cost of health care up for everyone. People want health care for the BIG ticket items — unless, of course, you are a democrat socialist hack, then you want everyone else to pay for you to play around – in this case life itself.

  17. Joe Geddis says:

    We have one King in the USA, and that is the Constitution–It is the ultimate ruler of our land. As Christians, we are told to “honor the king”. Obamacare does the exact opposite–it tears down the our rights. We Christians should stand strong for the “king”. Bravo to CCU!

  18. J. Lee says:

    What is won by the oppression of these people’s beliefs? If a government can force them to do something like this, what unpalatable thing might it serve you in the future? Why wouldn’t we rather let those who wish to opt out, do so? Using the force of law in a case like this is a disgrace, and a dangerous precedent. Given that this government may do this, we are no longer privy to using the term “Land of the Free”.

  19. Concerned Citizen says:

    Obama claimed that in this country people get to practice freedon of religion with no restraints, but yet under the obamacare we can’t opt out from his healthcare plan or we will be penalized, is that completely against what he said? I would think it is a personal attack against Christians, because Muslims and Amish are not subjected to Obamacare.
    America doesn’t need a dictator.

    1. Jon Weiss says:

      Very true America has never needed a dictator, but sadly 32% of registered voters went to the polls in 2008 and elected one.

  20. Just-us says:

    The constitution is a contract with King George and only pertains to the 13 colony states, not people. The City of London, DC, and the Vatican make up the 3 city empire and we are a crown colony/ plantation of slaves while they remain Sovereign. The US is a corporation operating in a foreign district with its own rule of law known as Lex Fori. That means the ruling class set up federal courts to criminalize the people of your state(domestic) not within the district of columbia inc.(foreign) Queen Elizabeth controls and has amended U.S. Social Security /and/ The TRUTH About COURT ROOMS! STAY OUT! <<google and read these two.

  21. Jon Weiss says:

    Obamacare has never been Constitutional, even the basic grounds on which it was passed through Congress was a lie.

    Pelosi repeatedly told us that the “Commerce clause” allowed Obamacare to become law, yet the Commerce clause only allows Congress to “regulate” commerce, it does not grant Congress dictatorial powers to demand that we participate in Commerce. Obamacare is little more than another of Obama’s many dictatorial end runs around the law to impose his will on the people of this country, directly contrary to the will of those people.

  22. Steven Brungard says:

    This University and other christian businesses want religious privilege, not religious freedom. They want exemption for non religious activity, like the provision of health care and health insurance. The law exempts religious activity like a religion business and its employess doing religious work. It does not exempt and should not exempt non religious work. Exempting non religious work would violate the constitution.

  23. TexasForever says:

    Good for them certainly more than the Catholics are doing.
    U.S. Catholics Bishops love ObamaCare because it gives healthcare to ILEGAL ALIENS. The Catholic Church LOVES Illegal aliens!

  24. ssquared says:

    Think how much better off the country would be if Kathleen Sebelius, Janet Napalitano, Eric Holder and Frank Marshal Davis Jr. aka Barack Obama had been aborted.

  25. Brian says:

    It is not your or anyone elses right to tell a women what she has to do with her own body. If she decides to have an abortion and there is a God he will deal with it and it not your right according to scripture JUDGE NOT LEST YOU BE JUDGED. It amazes me how many so called Christians deny the words of the Christ. By the way if you are such great Christians can you get fired or are you denied employment if you ever got a divorce or married a divorced women THE CHRIST is very clear about how he feels about this read the bible yourself. Get off your high horse, can I object if an insurance company covers a smoker, an alcoholic or denys coverage because someone forgets to wear a seat belt or motorcycle helmit. Access to insurance is not a relligious issue and your personal beliefs correct or incorrect cannot be interjected because you feel you have the right to dictate your religous belief on others. This country was founded on the right of people to belleive as they wish and NOBODY had a right to interject their religious beliefs on annother. Remember our country was founded by people fleeing religious persicusion by one group of Christians forcing they beliefs on other Christians.

    1. DM says:

      where ever you get your theology, you need a refund, it certainly is not Christian. It totally is not only my right but also obligation to say whether a baby should be murdered whether it is inside it’s mother or not has nothing to do with it. The prohibition against murder trumps any of your so called “right to do whatever with my body” arguments. Deny the words of Christ? Outrageous! There could hardly be more of a denial that what you are doing in promoting murder, or maybe you thought that was loving your neighbor as yourself? Your next door neighbor – as close as it could be and much smaller and weaker than you so you murder it or think others should have the right to do so? Jesus said to judge righteous judgement and the context of what you quote was about judging unrighteous judgement. Judge is to discern and not necessarily to condemn at all.

  26. 'Nother Son O' Ursus says:

    Re: “The beliefs involve strong opposition to abortion…”

    The simplest approach to correct this issue is to remove this college’s professional-accredition, (which may be on shaky-ground due to ‘Creationist/ID’ fantasy-beliefs to beginwith!), until it let’s go of these obviously anti-social beliefs…or goes bankrupt!

    Either way, it’s a ‘win-win’.

    As a retired health care professional, {municipal A-EMT-4-Paramedic & Field-Internship instructor}, and a ‘retired/recovering’ Christian, I’m throughly & totally disgusted with ‘professionals’ who use so-called ‘conscience-clauses’ as excuse for ‘failure-to-treat’-related malpractice!

    It’s NOT about the doctor, nurse or pharmacist; It’s STRICKTLY about what the patient-consumer wants!
    ..Either provide full services or get into a theological-employment!

    1. DM says:

      If you actually knew real science, math and logic you would know that its evolution that is bankrupt of any credibility and scientifically bogus. If you are a “recovering” christian you have a few mile left on your path as you have not learned the truth about creation yet. Keep chugging away.

      1. Nealo says:

        What is the ‘real’ science, math and logic that makes evolution bankrupt of credibility? I’d love for you to point out some peer reviewed information on this.

  27. DM says:

    I am confused here – but interested as my daughter graduated from CCU. The objection is based on contraception or abortion? The school policy is against abortion but is it also against contraception? Is there some sort of equivalency being made here? If the objection is against paying for abortion as a general fund that somehow funds what people not attending CCU or working there do, then that is not clear.

    The story says the problem is that “Under a federal mandate the plan must offer contraceptives. That leaves the school’s administration, led by former U.S. Sen. Bill Armstrong, facing an important ethical question.” but then it goes on to say ““(It’s) whether or not people, or in our case universities, who have seriously held moral convictions against abortion, should nonetheless be required to pay for it and support it, and endorse it, in effect,” Armstrong said.” So which is it? Abortion or contraception? Are they equating the two? The other big question is whether anyone who pays for this insurance is somehow funding abortion in other places and for other recipients.

  28. DJ says:

    Another example of the fall of the American Empire… A country with a million different interests, pulling only for their own interest. You guys are doomed… to bad you’ll bring down the entire world with you, well expect China. What a sad country you have become. Religion is tearing you apart… and the western world watched, shaking their head.

  29. Nealo says:

    Nothing gets the Jesus freaks in more of a snit than a program helping poor people with healthcare. Jesus always said “every men for himself!”.

  30. Guest says:

    I will hold my own beliefs with strength and love in my heart while some of you only preach hatred and intolerance of all those who disagree with you. Much love and peace to you all.

    1. Ranger01 says:

      1st commandment – Love thy neighbor as thy self. It does not say Love Thy Jew, or Love thy Christian as thy self…Everyone.. If people are real Christians, they will follow the Bible on this.

      1. Ranger01 says:

        Sorry, Matthew 22.39 Second Commandment from Jesus.

      2. lew says:

        Actually, 1st commandment is… love your God, the 2nd is love your neighbor.

  31. Ranger01 says:

    I commend the School for standing up for it’s rights, it;’s faith. If we are forced to go against our faith, then we must stand up for what we believe is right.

  32. cindy says:

    This school sounds like a scarey chauvinistic cult.

  33. ~Mike says:

    Wow, force employees and students to sign a pledge, based upon religion, to prevent free choice, as well as attempting to legally remove that choice as an option, even though there is absolutely no requirement that anyone ever exercise that option…

    Nope, not the Taliban, thats the Christian Moral Minority! They’ve failed at allowing free choice by education, so as usual resort to forcing beliefs on everyone!

    1. lew says:

      Oh, you’ve had free choice. The choice is school a that believes on thing, or school b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k which believes you can murder your children.

    2. Ronnie Lester says:

      “Choice” on its face is no virtue. it’s what the choice is for, as well as if it really is a choice. Most pro-aborts aren’t really interested in choice. No, they’re interested in the freedom to take defenseless lives.

      If “choice” really were everything, then leftists would be open-minded toward abstinence education.

      1. ~Mike says:

        “Most pro-aborts…”
        Another close-minded “Righty”

        READ THE ARTICLE. It is about the AVAILABILITY of CONTRACEPTION. Nowhere does it say anything about abortion.

        BTW, how’d abstinence work out for Sara Palins daughter, eh?

  34. lew says:

    Can anyone show which article of the Constitution you see healthcare listed?

    1. ~Mike says:

      More brain-dead rhetoric:

      “Can anyone show which article of the Constitution you see healthcare listed?”

      US Constitution
      Article 1, Section 8
      “Powers of Congress”

  35. Me says:

    TexasForever – let’s not start Catholic bashing just for the purpose of Catholic bashing. Here’s the real USCCB thoughts on the matter (http://old.usccb.org/healthcare/2010-USCCB-health-care-reform-summary.pdf).

  36. Ronnie Lester says:

    An unjust law is no law at all. — St. Augustine

    Government should never be allowed to compel actions directly opposed to religious beliefs. That’s called tyranny.

    Religious freedom is our first liberty. That’s how important it is. But today’s leftists are trying to legislate and judiciate it out of existence. They must be stopped.

    1. ~Mike says:

      The only thing that needs stopped are religious fanatics imposing their own distorted rhetoric on the rest of America. Which, by the way IS against the Constitution!

      Christian Taliban or Muslim Taliban, there really is no difference.

    2. Doogie Hauser says:

      Ah, yes…Anarchy. What a lovely concept. (not in reference to St. Augustine, but in regard to the utter drivel that followed)

      ‘Compelling actions’ works both ways, as in yes, the US Government most certainly has the right (and my full support) to compel you not to stone your neighbor to death. Or did you forget that you’ve already been ‘compelled’ to leave much of your antiquated and barbaric belief system behind? Have you even read your bible recently, or do you just stick to your favorite passages?

  37. ~Mike says:

    lew, you are obviously one of many religious fanatics polluting the American way of Life.

    CONTRACEPTION (the article did not say abortion, it said contraception!) is a theological argument, and to many against their beliefs. But it is NOT a crime. Murder is.

    First and foremost, the option of contraception is a choice! And NO ONE is forcing that choice on anybody. If a religious organization asks people to sign a pledge not to exercise that choice, great. But do not force your morally upon people if they do not share your beliefs!

    Remember, the article is about CONTRACEPTION not abortion. Two completly different issues. And nobody is forcing anybody to go against their beliefs and use contraception, it is only available if they CHOOSE!

  38. Michael P Coleman says:

    Why do i have to pay for abortions ? Charge the customer. Especially late term abortion, when they pull the child out in pieces, while alive ! Think they don’t feel the pain of being ripped apart ? THINK AGAIN !

    1. ~Mike says:

      Another Idiot.
      NOWHERE in this article does it say OR even imply you’re paying for an abortion.

  39. retired military says:

    “No one is compelling anyone to take action against their religious beliefs,” Ailts said. “They are making contraception more accessible and affordable to those who want to take contraception.”

    For Catholics contaception and abortion are against church teaching.

    Obamacare is a slap in the face of PRACTISING CATHOLICS (John Kerry, The Kennedys and Pelosi are CINO – Catholics in Name only.).

    1. ~Mike says:

      “Obamacare is a slap in the face of PRACTISING CATHOLICS”

      The only “slap-in the-face” is this statement that implies practicing Catholics are so weak in their convictions that they might not make a CHOICE in compliance with church teachings.

      The Christian/Catholic/Muslim Taliban has no tolerance for anything but their own twisted perspective. I’m sure more than one religious fanatic here would love to see the Inquisition revived for people who don’t believe exactly as they do?

  40. Doug Ragan says:

    “I supposed that if we lose then one option that we will look at … is to simply stop offering health insurance coverage to our employees,” Armstrong said.

    This is the entire point of the Reform Act, to get as many people off private health care as possible and force more people onto the government teet.

    This bill was written to force the insurance industry out of business. It is nothing less than an act of terrorism.

    1. ~Mike says:

      Another mindless drone.
      The Affordable Care Act does not take anyone off “private health care”!

      If you took a momument to actually read it instead of listening to the anti-Obama propaganda spewed by Fax News and lobbyist for multi-billion dollar insurance companies, you would learn that the Affordable Care Act provides consumer protections and actually promptes competitivness between “private health care” companies.

      Or would you prefer to stay with a broken system that rewards mega-companies with hundreds of billions of dollars in profits by denying coverage at will and raising rates 20-30% a year.

      The insurance companies have spent hundreds of millions of dollars prompting propaganda and hatred against Obama and health care reform, simply because it interfers with their mega-profits at the expense of ALL Americans.

  41. carmella says:

    i do not believe in war of any kind. a waste of human life and tax dollars. i find war immoral, unconscionable, and a detriment to human kind. yet my taxes are spent on the military. with the kind of ‘logic’f this ‘university’, they as well should be vehemently against the ‘killing of another human being’. war kills everyone in its path. no one is safe. if they are in fact following their beliefs regarding the sanctity of life..why do they not protest war?? why do they not protest the abuse of children in the world now??? why do they not help the living? i
    i fel that their stance is politics driven. they are a ‘christian fundiamentalist ‘
    university using their dogma to drive home an agenda. they are republicans trying to force the issue of religion on the general population. they they use threats of ‘with drawing’ medical benefits for their employees to further drive home their ‘beliefs’ with that kind of logic…. i wish to sue the us government for using my tax dollars to prompte war…..a thing that i am fanatically opposed to.

    1. Me says:

      Wow! I don’t believe I read anything in the article which would even hint at the University’s stance on war or child abuse. The venom you’re spewing is completely internally driven and reflect only your own issues. You’re about as far out as can be imagined given the starting point. Amazing.

      1. Suzanne says:

        No you didn’t read anything about war or child abuse. Because all of the antiabortionists are supposedly for the sanctity of life yet they don’t say word one about all the wars killing thousands daily. But save those all those little zygotes.

  42. walter12 says:

    Sue and sue the evil Obama government. And keep suing each and every day, if it will do any good.

  43. I get it says:

    They left out and GOD’s things to GOD. GOD’S law is supream and comes first.
    Obama’s DOJ no justice for many will just file this in the big round can by their desk.

  44. Suzanne says:

    Well that’ll show ’em. If I can’t get abortion out then we will just leave our employees with no insurance. Brilliant

  45. WaryWorldTraveler says:

    I just want to say to the people saying the US should incorporate Christian values into law (especially the ones that get angry and violent about it) sound an awful lot like the religious zealots in Pakistan (and I would know, I’ve been there).
    And a bit of advice: you can only use the “against my religion” argument on things that affect YOU. Otherwise we would have polygamy, human sacrifices and other extremist views to deal with. If your religious views start hindering other people’s lives, you just have to get over yourself and deal with the fact you won’t get your way. You don’t want contraceptions (which is what this is about so stop yelling about late term abortions you know nothing about) then don’t use them. But the people that do want them should have them available. If you don’t want modern medicine, don’t use it, but don’t ask us all to rely on faith healing, prayer and scripture when we’d prefer some Tylenol.

  46. BearPoop says:

    The EO Obama signed to please the pro life senators to get their votes violates Article 1 Section 1 Clause 1. The ENTIRE Law violates Article 1 Section 8 and Obama EO further violates Article 1 Section 7.

    The problem is that most people have never actually READ the Constitution

  47. Just a Girl says:

    It’s absolutely fine if you are pro-life, but unless you are also pro-social services (to support all those babies you are forcing women to bring into the world) than you are a hypocrite. All these conservatives and religious folk seem to care about the fetuses until they are born into poverty and then no one wants to have their tax dollars going to support them. You can’t have it both ways, it just doesn’t work, look at the mess going on in some of those poor, overpopulated third word countries. And before you say, the mothers should put their unwanted babies up for adoption, just go look at how many kids are already in foster care who can’t find loving homes. By taking away choice, you just create more poverty and more women having back alley procedures done out of desperation.

    Also, I hope none of you rabid pro-lifers (who constantly cite the bible) have ever had a divorce, because that too would make you raging hypocrites. I am fine if you want to live by your holy book, but you can’t just pick and choose the parts of it you like.

    1. daytoker says:

      If you want to live under a dictatorship Iran is a good place to start… Here in America we have a choice, and that choice is not mandated by any government official… It is our choice to abort or not abort… Not the Liar in Chief….

      1. Just a Girl says:

        For the record, I am neither pro-life, nor Christian, nor even American. I left that comment to point out the hypocrisy of a lot of rabid pro-lifers, in that they care about the unborn fetus but they care nothing of the child’s life, welfare or fate after it’s born. Then they want it to be anyone’s problem BUT that of the taxpayer. That’s where the wrong is.

  48. daytoker says:

    This is America, we live under the laws stated in our Comnstitution, not the Fiat laws enacted by a DICTATOR…

    It is time to stand up for the Constitution and tell POTUS to stop dictating what we can, or cannot do…

    America, home of the free, land of the brave…. Right, if you say so… We have turned into a bunch of Sheep being led to slaughter…. Wake Up…..

  49. E. Wilkins says:

    Does the University recieve federal money? Whats that? Yes you say? Then shut the hell up or stop taking federal money to educate your drones.

    If you people want to live under a religous government, go to Iran. If you want to live in a country where you aren’t killed for voicing your opinion, then stop acting like you are on some moral high ground.

    You ignorant Christians, Muslims, Catholics and the rest of you have more blood on your hands throughout history than anyone else. And you “demand” to have changes made because you favor them?

    What are you going to do when it isn’t done your way? Declare a christian fatwa on the US?

    Oh…you’ll deny your employees healthcare. Wow, that is very “christian” of you. Also, by law, you have to offer health care to full time employees.

    You have no right to discriminate.

    Seriously, go to Iran…or Afghanistan…or any country ending with stan. And take your intolerance with you.

    You religious and evangelical nuts are almost too much to bear.

    1. USWarrior says:

      You go way too far. They have every right to receive govt funds without having to bend their beliefs. While I don’t completely agree with the law suit, they are well within their rights to require those they employ to hold and adhere to the same beliefs. I won’t tell you to shut the hell up simply because it’s your right to have you beliefs and to speak or write them.

  50. USWarrior says:

    I think that the agreement the employees sign should suffice. I don’t view birth control as a form of abortion, as it simply prevents pregnancy altogether. To stop offering health insurance would be simply wrong and very un-Christian in my opinion. Trust your employees to do what is within the religious realm and let them keep their insurance.

  51. JesusEffingChrist says:

    Here is a better idea…if a Church wants to stand on it’s religious rights to break the law, fine – take away it’s tax protection so it can pay it’s fare share to the government just like everyone else.

    After reading comments I had to vomit, defecate, then LMFAO at the silliness of the righteous.

    You think life begins at conception? You think a fetus is protected with liberty? Stupidity. Children do not even have the same constitutional rights as adults.

    Better watch your own children – especially the boys because when they masturbate by your wisdom, they are murdering prospective zygotes.

    But all they have to do is just ask Jesus to forgive them and it’s OK right? Religion kills and it’s directly responsible for so many deaths in the history of the Earth it’s sick.

    Child molesters hide where they can were dresses and funny hats and get all the kiddies they want with religion.

    Let the people use a condom and you won’t need abortion – because you can’t stop breeding. You are stuck in the middle ages, no better than the religious idiots we are spending trillions of dollars trying to wipe off the planet.

  52. Jimmy J says:

    So if my religion opposes inter-racial marriage, I can not provide health insurance to spouses of employees who are of different race than the employee? What about religions don’t recognize a marriage done by another religion, could a Catholic/Muslim school not provide health insurance the spouse of an employee if they were not married under Catholic/Islamic rules? Can I refuse to pay social security for my employees because they can buy condoms or beer with their social security payments later? Where is the line?

  53. Billigflug New York 2012 says:

    Share Service,hear have purpose nation narrow comment fix perform sorry increasingly public conduct various task studio per tiny debt act hence wave good tonight report criticism though industrial further claim training ahead permanent noise manage picture close lean totally mother body since population attitude package drive degree away dark relevant different pleasure what upon manner low directly past most twice unemployment rare largely advise increased ignore border attend create voice lie floor seek perform project liability revolution school whereas total matter award help recover close fairly call grow point

  54. real estate,real estate listings,real estate foreclosures,remax,real estate value,commercial real estate,real estate careers,google real estate,real estate companies says:

    hello!,I love your writing very much! share we be in contact more approximately your article on AOL? I require an expert in this house to unravel my problem. May be that’s you! Having a look ahead to see you.

  55. free back link says:

    This is really fascinating, You’re an excessively skilled blogger. I have joined your rss feed and look forward to in quest of extra of your magnificent post. Also, I have shared your web site in my social networks

  56. I recently found what I hoped for before you know it at all. Reasonably unusual. Is likely to appreciate it for those who add forums or anything, web site theme . a tones way for your customer to communicate. Excellent task Thank you for the sensible crit says:

    I’ve read a few just right stuff here. Definitely price bookmarking for revisiting. I surprise how so much effort you place to create one of these excellent informative site.

  57. An enjoyable read. I actually have some more thoughts about this. Would you consider writing a guest article for my blog? says:

    I beloved up to you will obtain performed proper here. The cartoon is attractive, your authored subject matter stylish. however, you command get got an shakiness over that you want be turning in the following. sick for sure come further before once more since exactly the similar nearly a lot incessantly inside of case you protect this hike.

  58. siding cleaning says:

    It’s actually a cool and helpful piece of info. I am happy that you simply shared this useful info with us. Please keep us up to date like this. Thank you for sharing.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

More From CBS Denver

NEWS TEAM
Send A News Tip

Listen Live

AM/FM Stations

Featured Shows & Multimedia