Babbling

[GaiusIuliusCesar]

For catholic nonprofits. 

I've spent a long time contemplating this issue. At first I was inclined to side with the church as a matter of principle, (shocking to some as that might be) I do mean what I say when it comes to the first amendment... However... A clear point to this legislation that should be emphasized is the fact that said organizations are tax exempt. Which I personally see as a total violation of the first amendment because here the government is clearly establishing a favorable environment for religious institutions. That being said when it comes to charitable activity I'm fine with it. In this case I'd argue that the catholic nonprofits be given a choice, either provide the pills and condoms or forfeit their tax exempt status. I have no doubt the end result will be the same, but without any cause for controversy except by the religious right, who can all die in a pit as far as I am concerned. 

So in summery, I barely agree with Obama, I grant the church some leeway but ultimately side against them due to the tax issue. 

[Iowa_CubsFan]

F*ck Catholics.

This is a church that continues to be the biggest hipocryte there is in the world, and while trying to make sure priests molest little boys without fear of legal action.

If Obama wants to offend catholics let him do so. They don't vote Democrat l anyways

[Glodson]

I don't agree with Obama. No business, or organization, should have any say over the healthcare of an individual. It doesn't matter what the religious organization believes, it is up to each individual to decide the morality of it. And they need to be free to either opt to use contraception or not. How they see and understand their own religion is their own freedom. So, I don't like this. Just because an institution employes me does not mean they get to decide any facet of my life outside of my employ with them. Unless my behavior away from work somehow endangers the image or the integrity of my employer, my life is my own.

This applies to everyone. And all organizations. Just because the Church leaders believe that it is a sin doesn't mean that each individual follower holds suit. The followers should be allowed to make their own choices, and the employer simply doesn't even have the right to know about this, unless it could somehow impact the job. For example, your boss has a right to know if you are going to have surgery but not if you are going on the pill.

[Nyanya]

---

Iowa_CubsFan wrote:
F*ck Catholics.

---

Tolerance at it's finest.

[Jingai]

  It isn't even up to that, it is the fact that in the original PPACA legislation, there was a grace period

for groups with specific religious objects to the brith control mandate to apply for and recieve an exemption.

This is President Obama dictating doctrine to a religious group, which is in fact a violation of separation

of church and State.

  I don't mind people being on birth control, and I agree that what people do in their private lives is their

business. The Church has a very specific doctrine on this, and now the Obama administration is trying to force

them to comply with a regulation that runs counter, for no justifiable reason. The good news is that

several Congressmen are working on a bill to grant religious groups an automatic exemption to this

particular provision.

[Master-Debater131]

Multiple Bishops are already saying they will refuse to abide by this rule.

I really cant wait for the cops to show up and start arresting them. That will truly be a great day for our nation.

/sarcasm

[Gaius_Sextus]

---

Master-Debater131 wrote:
Multiple Bishops are already saying they will refuse to abide by this rule.

I really cant wait for the cops to show up and start arresting them. That will truly be a great day for our nation.

/sarcasm

---

So birth-control or abortion? Don't these stupid fuuuuuudgeers understand that a pregnancy prevented is an abortion prevented?

[GiantMegaDoucheX]

---

Master-Debater131 wrote:
Multiple Bishops are already saying they will refuse to abide by this rule.

I really cant wait for the cops to show up and start arresting them. That will truly be a great day for our nation.

/sarcasm

---

I can see it now...

"ITN: Thousands of Bishops arrested"

"Also ITN: Child Molestation Cases Disappear completely!"

[Glodson]

My point is that the ones running it can have whatever morality they wish, that does not give them the right to force that onto any of their employees. It isn't their business what the employees do. This isn't saying that the religious groups need to change their doctrine, but nor can they use their position as employers to force that onto anyone that happens to work for them.

Not all Catholics fall in line and feel that contraception is a sin. As such, they should have access to it. Just because the employer has a religious and non-profit status is no reason for the employer to have the right to dictate to their employes what medical services they are allowed. It is a special pleading, and it doesn't make sense.

[Master-Debater131]

---

Gaius_Sextus wrote:

---

Master-Debater131 wrote:
Multiple Bishops are already saying they will refuse to abide by this rule.

I really cant wait for the cops to show up and start arresting them. That will truly be a great day for our nation.

/sarcasm

---

So birth-control or abortion? Don't these stupid fuuuuuudgeers understand that a pregnancy prevented is an abortion prevented?

---

You do realize there are other options than birth-control or abortion right?  Such as *GASP* not having sex!

There are these great things called personal respolsibility.  I know..i know.  Hard thing to accept.

[stevo1588]

Using birth control IS personal responsibility.

[Master-Debater131]

---

Glodson wrote:
My point is that the ones running it can have whatever morality they wish, that does not give them the right to force that onto any of their employees. Actually. Thats exactly what it means.  When you join a company of any sort you have to abide by their rules.  DOnt like it? Leave.It isn't their business what the employees do. This isn't saying that the religious groups need to change their doctrine, but nor can they use their position as employers to force that onto anyone that happens to work for them. They wernt forcing anyone.  All they were doing is not supplying something that goes against their religious beliefs.  If people want to get contraception they can go somewhere else.

Not all Catholics fall in line and feel that contraception is a sin. As such, they should have access to it. Just because the employer has a religious and non-profit status is no reason for the employer to have the right to dictate to their employes what medical services they are allowed. It is a special pleading, and it doesn't make sense. You really make it seem like there are absolutly no other possible means to get contraception.  Target? Wal-Mart?  I guess those things dont exist.  If people want to get it on they can get any form of contraception from countless different places without ever having to talk to the Church about it.

---

This whole thing is about forcing a religion to do something it doesnt want to do.

Imagine if suddenly Obama said that all Muslims had to sell Pork at their places of worship.

Same **noel** thing.

[Glodson]

But each person should be allowed to have a normal sex life, and should have the option for birth control. There's no reason to deny them this, especially if they have an insurance policy that will cover it. Allowing a religion-based employer to deny them access to something through insurance is just asinine. Most of us do pay in to get the coverage, so we should be allowed full use of it. Even if the job is with a Catholic based institution.

How I use my insurance is between me and my doctor. No one outside that should have a say.

[Jingai]

  The Catholic church isn't forcing it onto their employees however. There is nothing that

stops a Catholic or laity from receiving birth control, or from going to Wal-Mart to buy a prophylactic for that matter.

There is also nothing that stops them from going to a clinic such as Planned Parenthood to terminate a pregnancy.

The issue is that the Obama administration is forcing the Catholic church to cover services it finds religiously

objectionable by providing insurance coverage for it.

  The point isn't that people can't get access to these services, the point is that the Obama Administration

is using the regulations of the PPACA to force a religious institution to provide funding for services that it

deems to be objectionable on religious grounds, which is a direct conflict with the Separation of Church and State

provision of the Constitution.

[crapshot2]

---

Master-Debater131 wrote:

---

Glodson wrote:

---

This whole thing is about forcing a religion to do something it doesnt want to do.

Imagine if suddenly Obama said that all Muslims had to sell Pork at their places of worship.

Same **noel** thing.

---

this is a health issue. I could make the exact same argument about christian scientists.

[Gaius_Sextus]

---

Master-Debater131 wrote:

---

Gaius_Sextus wrote:

---

Master-Debater131 wrote:
Multiple Bishops are already saying they will refuse to abide by this rule.

I really cant wait for the cops to show up and start arresting them. That will truly be a great day for our nation.

/sarcasm

---

So birth-control or abortion? Don't these stupid fuuuuuudgeers understand that a pregnancy prevented is an abortion prevented?

---

You do realize there are other options than birth-control or abortion right?  Such as *GASP* not having sex!

There are these great things called personal respolsibility.  I know..i know.  Hard thing to accept.

---

So if I don't want to chance getting pregnant, I should never, ever, have sex my entire life? Do you know how **noel** stupid you sound?

[Glodson]

No, the whole thing is about a group of people forcing how they see religion ONTO other people. If the people working for them agree, they won't use it. Those that don't agree would be denied the option.

And no, it isn't. It would be more like allowing a Jehovah's Witness group denying transfusions because of dogma to patients that want and need it.

People in a church that do not always fall into line with the dogma. Just because the Bishop says this doesn't mean that everyone agrees.

But let's take your bad example. Let's say that somehow we had a law that made people sell food in a church, and that law for some reason forced Muslims to offer pork. It doesn't mean that Muslims have to buy pork. The option just has to be available.

Here's why this analogy fails: no law requires any establishment to make arbitrary items available. But laws are there to ensure that people are treated fairly. It makes no sense to allow an institution to deny coverage because of their moral objections to certain medical services that would be normally covered by the same policy elsewhere. PETA cannot offer coverage and then deny people insulin because it was made with animal by-products. Nor can the Catholic Church force those that work for their groups to fall inline with their moral vision.

[Gaius_Sextus]

---

stevo1588 wrote:
Using birth control IS personal responsibility.

---

Nope! Women should get their vaginas sewn shut and their **noel**' cut off. Problem solved!

[Glodson]

I would argue that allowing a religious entity to deny its employes the coverage infringes on the Free Exercise Clause. Just because I work for a religious organization that believes contraception to be a sin doesn't mean that I agree. Their denial is effecting my life and denying me a choice. Their religious values are being imposed on me. I am having my own religious freedom trumped by the exercise of theirs.

This isn't about making the Catholic Church accept contraception. It is about them following the law, just as everyone else. They can tell their followers what they believe to be the will of God, but each individual should have the freedom to decide for themselves, just as everyone else. Just because they work for the Church shouldn't mean that the church gets to decide what options that person can explore. If they wish to get a hormonal birth control, they should expect for their insurance policy to cover it. Once I get my insurance through my employer, it is mine. I get to decide how I use it. That's my objection to this. And since I believe that I should have that right, it is something that I believe should be extended to everyone.

[Gaius_Sextus]

---

Jingai wrote:

  The Catholic church isn't forcing it onto their employees however. There is nothing that

stops a Catholic or laity from receiving birth control, or from going to Wal-Mart to buy a prophylactic for that matter.

There is also nothing that stops them from going to a clinic such as Planned Parenthood to terminate a pregnancy.

The issue is that the Obama administration is forcing the Catholic church to cover services it finds religiously

objectionable by providing insurance coverage for it.

  The point isn't that people can't get access to these services, the point is that the Obama Administration

is using the regulations of the PPACA to force a religious institution to provide funding for services that it

deems to be objectionable on religious grounds, which is a direct conflict with the Separation of Church and State

provision of the Constitution.

---

And if they cover ED medications?

[Master-Debater131]

Hey heres a great idea.  Want to use contraception from a insurance plan? DONT WORK FOR THE CHURCH!

I really dont get how hard this is for you people to see.  They signed on to work for a group knowing full well what they were getting into. They knew that by working for the Church they were going to have to live with their religious rules. 

It isnt like they signed on to work with them and then suddenly the Church came to them and gave them a huge list of things they couldnt do. 

If a person is to **noel** stupid to realize what working for the Church means then that is their own **noel** fault. 

[Icarus27k]

---

Iowa_CubsFan wrote:


If Obama wants to offend catholics let him do so. They don't vote Democrat l anyways

---

Except in the 2008 Presidential election when Catholics voted 54% Obama, 45% McCain.

Or the 2006 midterm House elections when they voted 55% Democratic, 44% Republican.

[GaiusIuliusCesar]

That's perfectly fine as far as I am concerned, however if they are going to put a hole in the federal health safety net they should forfeit their tax exempt status. They can't have it both ways either they are in support of national policy or they aren't. 

Also its worth pointing out the specific issue is in the coverage employees get, in theory Catholics who work for catholic organizations shouldn't need these services even if they are covered, in practice its just a case of one hypocrisy inviting another. 

[GaiusIuliusCesar]

Reminds me a lot of the Pope, you know... the former member of the Hitler youth who blamed atheists for the Nazis...

[GaiusIuliusCesar]

That won't happen, and they will provide the services. This cuts both ways if they stop their charitable work they will lose a number of potential converts and hurt their image overall. It might be just the push needed to get a few more fence sitters to make the same jump I did from heresy to apostasy.