I’m pretty sure everyone is familiar with the fact that I am a good Christian father/propane salesman from TX. I pray and love the Lord as he loves all human beings- I’m just not so sure we should be protesting this. If your business is against providing contraception to its employees, it’s then the responsibility of your health-care providers (unless you choose not to partake). If you don’t want the pill don’t take it, but don’t impose your opinion on others who may not be able to afford it.

What if the religious institution it's self was undecided on birth control? I don't believe in marijuana addiction even though most health insurance companies cover substance abuse.I just accept that others might have a different opinion and I'm glad they offered it to me if I ever changed my mind.

Hank and Kenneth, you are missing the point. This is about forcing people to violate their consciences by purchasing things they find morally wrong. Under the mandate we have no choice...we ALL must purchase it (or pay the consequences)....even if we don't want it...even if we think it is wrong. All people are free to choose whether they want to use contraceptives....this protest is all about restoring the freedom to choose whether they should pay for or provide or cooperate in something they find morally wrong.

Well Paula... I don't believe that Religious institutions should be forced to comply if they are morally opposed, but if you own a business that is not religiously affiliated then I am sorry it should be offered. It is not medically necessary for a man to get an erection, but it will still be covered. I also don't like the fact that I will have to pay for, nor do I want to pay for a variety of blood pressure pills, diabetes meds, statin drugs all because someone choose to be unhealthy. The person who needs theses medications must prove that these conditions are not caused by their poor habits. Sounds crazy huh? Well it is not fair to pick and choose what you want to pay for and what you don't.

Why is it not fair for me to decide how I spend my money?

This is the perfect statement for this...So my birthcontrol goes against god's will? Doesn't that mean your viagra goes against god's will for you to never have sex again?? So you all want to protest birthcontrol...Then lets take Viagra out of the list of meds that is covered by health ins. Fair is fair we can't protect ourselfs so lets take away mens magic pill!! FAIR IS FAIR!!!

I think the point that is being missed in all of this is the fact that the religious institutions do not have to provide the contraception. The non-religiously-affiliated insurance company does. No one is asking the Catholic church to empty their collection baskets for birth control pills. And this does not fall on the tax payer, either, as the cost is to the insurance company. And do you know what is a heck of a lot less expensive to the insurance companies than unwanted and unplanned pregnancy and babies? Birth control. Which will lead to lower premiums in the long run. The facts are that 98% of women have used some form of contraception at some point in their lives. I say all of this as a very happily four months pregnant woman, after eight years of being happily on birth control, who is very happy to go back on birth control once I pop this baby out until my husband and I are ready to make another one.

It's not about birth control - it's about unelected officials in HHS who get to define what is and isn't a religious institution.

Sara, we do get it. How do you think the insurance companies will pay for this "free" contraception? Premiums, of course. Premiums all businesses, even those such as Catholic hospitals, that object morally to birth control. We are not asking you or anyone else not to use birth control. That is your choice. We choose not to be forced to pay for it. We are more than happy to give our money time and love to any unwanted children born as a result. Many of us already do this, and more are helping every day.

The fact of the matter is that NO ONE will be funding BC for anyone. Premiums will go down because the Insurance companies will save money by not covering the much higher costs of pregnancy and childbirth.
And, what about the religious freedom of women who find it religiously and morally correct to take responsibility for their reproduction? If a woman of this belief is denied BC coverage by here employer , her religious freedoms and beliefs are being violated.
SO. Let the insurance companies fund this money saver and let all women have the freedom to make their own religious and moral decisions in this regard.
This claim of support for " religious freedom" is exactly the opposite.

Pat, your comments make no logical sense. You seem to indicate that it is an employers responsibility to fund a person's religious behaviors. In fact, the opposite is true. Freedom of religion guarantees that people only pay for those activities within their religious dictates. To force someone to pay for someone else's religious behavior is a violation of freedom and conscience.

In other words, if contraception is a personal moral choice, then persons should pay for it themselves.

Awesome job Hoppel family. Government stay out of our lives!

I think it would be a GREAT idea since we have so many unwanted children in the world. Lets stop the unwanted pregnancies that will lead to abortion or an adotion agency. Abortion is worse than making contraceptives more avaliable in book. People need to look at it that way what is the bigger picture ABORTION!

When I pay my property taxes to the county and to the state I am paying for people to drive to church on the roadway system that was paid for with my tax money. Maybe some of us do not want to pay for the roadway system for that use. But then the roadway system is used for many other uses, therefore there is a "community benefit" in supporting the community use of the mutually paid-for roadway system. If I want to use the roadway system for my benefit I have to allow others to use it for their benefit, even when it works against my belief that the churches should pay taxes to help pay for that roadway system.

Likewise, women who use the health care system for “reproductive health care” are using the healthcare system like drivers are using the roadway system. Some use it to prevent unwanted births and others are using it to ensure the healthy delivery of their baby. Both are valid choices an both benefit our community.

Businesses are not allowed by discrimination laws because they are not religious institutions. They are commerce institutions and commerce is regulated by the state.

Keep the tentacles of religion out of the state’s business.

Hey Karl Boob.... Er I mean Schuub.... Not everyone who had gastric bypass got it free. I'm one of those who PAID out of my own pocket. Thanks. As for'eating like a pig, true, but at least there was surgery to rid myself of a serious problem. Can't do anything about ignorance Mr Boob. And what does weight loss have to do with contraception?! You're just bitter and lashing out. Get over yourself and move along. Oh and growing up would do you a world of good. No wonder I hate Maryland.. Such closed minded and clannish and hateful people. M

It's not just birth control that is causing the upset. These organizations would also be required to provide insurance that covers abortion-inducing drugs. This violates the consciences of many more than just the birth control issue.

Where in the United States Constitution does it authorize the federal government to do this? Our constitution enumerates SPECIFIC powers to the federal government, any power not specifically delegated to the federal government belongs to the STATES and the PEOPLE. Wake up people. This isn't about birth control, viagra, sex, or abortion- it is about an out-of-control, LAWLESS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Stop watching TV and read the rule book. If you don't like the constitution, go through the amendment process and get it changed- don't just ignore it.

Ah yes, how bothersome it must be to the morally righteous people of Harford County to be covered under the same insurance plans as people who use contraception, fat people and drug users. Brandon is right. You need to take care of everybody in your community. What would Jesus do?

Aside from the fact that both drug users and enormous people pretty much cause thier own health problems - yes, that bothers me because people who otherwise keep themselves healthy; don't eat like horses, drink in excess or smoke...not to mention drug addicts and the promiscuous gobble up health care resources that might be spent on the innocent. I truly believe even in private insurance that people that smoke and are overweight should pay more; it is moving in that direction as it should. What would Jesus do? I seriously doubt he would eat an entire pint of Ben and Jerry's and wash that down with a half a bottle of cheap scotch, wake up the morning after and repeat. That would be gluteny and sloth; both looked down upon as selfish and nonproductive.

Selfish and nonproductive like your plentiful comments on the Patch. When you put down your final fork I hope your maker will look kindly upon your record as a human being, but don't count on it, darlin'...

Christine...guess that means you don't have anything otherwise productive to add. Usually when a response is nothing other than personal it means the respondent can't argue the point. This has nothing to do with my maker...the idea that everyone has a responsibility to themselves and thier fellow citizens to make good decisions isn't exactly heinous - in fact I would argue just the opposite particularly when we have pooled money that comes largely from the backs of those that make good decisions. Forgiveness, charity and generousity matter, but we're not required as a culture to go bankrupt to ensure people that make all these bad lifestyle choices get to eat up our dollars with no consequence - that's your sin hook, line and sinker. People can pay for thier own birth control - it's not that expensive. A 15 trillion dollar current debt doesn't spell well for anybody's future.

Karl, arguing a point with you no matter how valid it may be would be futile. You know that... Out of curiosity, at your work do you have to participate in the plan your employer offers or could you chose another plan or no health insurance at all. I'm not being sarcastic this time... just wondering.

I must chime in and say that this is one of the cleanest debates I've seen! Thank you for discussing the issues.

It saddens me to read so many comments that have strayed from the main purpose of the rally. Our purpose is to bring attention to the first amendment of the Constitution regarding "Freedom of Religion." The Obama administration is trampling on that right. It is that simple.

Brandon, "freedom of religion" to me means the right to practice my faith without government interference. I agree with you in regards to civil unrest and uprising over the horizon. One thing is for sure, these sure are troubled times in America.. Never have I been witness to so many protests over the past few years; war, religion, gas, Tea Party..and the list goes on......Hats off to the Hoppel family for getting involved and doing the right thing!

I see Government, Religious Institutions AND Corporations as entities that interfere with my right to practice living my life. The fact is we have been making "government" the bad guy for a while now does not elevate Religion and it certainly doesn’t elevate Corporations. In the end we are a country that needs to find a way to balance the power or Individuals, Corporate Organizations, Religious Organizations and governments. Don't we live in a Democratic Republic?

The argument that there is an orchestrated effort to diminish the right to practice religion in this country is an attempt by religious organizations, most expressly the one with a pope, to gain a greater share of power in our political system. They do not want to be part of the democratic process. They want to tell us how we should live.

We are "one nation under God." We are endowed by our "Creator with certain unalienable rights." God has blessed us abundantly. Faithful Christians believe that we are on this Earth to love and serve Him and we practice our religion based on His Word. We expect to follow the tenants of our religion peaceably without compromising our principles for anyone, including the president of the United States. Why? Because we are protected under the U.S. Constitution.

Many of our early settlers immigrated to the "New World" in search of religious freedom in the 17th century. When our government was formed in 1789, it was deemed important to include Freedom of Religion in the Bill of Rights. It is a guarantee of the first amendment. If people do not agree, then let them try to change the amendment. There is a process for doing this. Until then, religious institutions have protection under the tenants of our Constitution.

If Google serves me right the words 'under God' were not added to the Pledge of Allegiance until 1954, thus undermining some people's rights of freedom FROM religion. Many of the early settlers were considered extremists in their countries and continued to exile people they did not agree with them once they got here. Freedom of or from religion and separation of church and state go hand in hand. I was brought up in the Catholic faith, but I have no problem granting free birth control to people who want it.

Thank you for the history lesson, Brandon. I taught early American history for over thirty years. Interestingly enough, during my time in the classroom, there were two instances of Jehovah Witness children who would not recite the "Pledge of Allegiance." They stood quietly and politely with their hands at their sides while the rest of the children recited "one nation under God." Their religious liberty was respected as per the first amendment.

How do you think those children felt, Jae.... being singled out as non-believers? We are lucky to live in a country where we can support Planned Parenthood, the Catholic Church, neither one or both. It's not all black and white, Jae. What version of early American history did you teach in your over thirty years to the heathen children you encountered?

It seems the main enemies of my scientific pantheism are the main stream religions, who feel they are somehow at war with me.

It seems a very low flight of spirituality to infer the 'god' in the pledge of allegiance and on our money refer only to your own beliefs.

It seems to me that if a person goes to work for a religious institutions or one of it's business entities, they should know the organizations stand on things like birth control, abortion, etc. If one accepts a position within such an organization, I'd think he/she were doing so with full knowledge of the health insurance limitations, just as an employee of an organization that conducts radom drug tests does so with the understanding that they, at some point, will have to comply.

If we are concerned about women's health, why not choose that which is natural as opposed to a synthetic chemical solution that is a number one carcinogen such as arsenic and asbestos found by the World Health Organization. Instead the government wants to ban large sodas. I am against giving women cancer. Read the warnings.

I find myself falling somewhere in the middle on this one… if a woman has an actual legitimate medical need to be taking birth control then it should be covered by her health insurance as would any other maintenance drug. After all, a valued employee of a religious employer could develop such a condition. If, however, the objective is to enjoy a worry-free good time I’m inclined to suggest you and your partner pay for it yourselves. We always had to.

The government mandate will be overturned by the Supreme Court. No worries