Catholic church admits complaint about hospitals was smokescreen. Real goal is to kill all contraceptives in all insurance plans.

There are a few yellow belly Democrats taking the same stance as the fear mongering anti-woman Republicanteabaggers. Senators like Bob Casey, Joe Manchun and I don't yet know who the other Democrats are. The president is right to protect women right and no matter what the media narrative is, Obama will not suffer from his decision at the polls.

This is an option for women right and women health to choose for their prevention purpose. The U.S governments do not force anyone to choose.

There is a lot of false spin from GOP and right wing media that U.S government is forcing Catholic Church employee to have contraception onto their health plant. It's a shame that we have one party of government is trying to score political point over the right of women health for prevention.

Its half time in America, GOP is down, so they cry fault!

Without contraceptives, the Catholic Church better start building orphanages in every town in America.

BTW: In Catholic Italy, abortions are LEGAL and paid for by the the state.

Funny how the right didn't have a problem for the eight years of the Bush administration where this was law.

And what does the state paying for abortions in Italy have to do with the church paying for contraception coverage in insurance plans in the U.S.?

And w hat does a woman using the health benefits that she EARNS through employment to purchase birth control have to do with what the pope believes?Nothing. What's next? The church claiming she can't use her salary to buy birth control, too?

And to think....If we got single-payer, none of this would even be an issue.

The Vatican has already proved their belief that church doctrine supersedes the laws of any nation by obstructing justice in the harboring of pedophiles. If it was possible for priests to impregnate young children, this probably wouldn't be an issue. Now that the Vatican has established itself as a rightwing PAC masquerading as a tax-exempt religious organization, they need to be investigated by the IRS. Tax these holy-@!$%#s back to Rome.

There's no such thing as Catholic Italy, with the possible exception of the Vatican.

Sorry...

Italy is "Catholic Italy"...

Would it have been easier for you to understand if she said "Italy, which is almost 90% Catholic,"?

After years of being part of the subtext, the fact that the anti-abortion movement is beginning to openly admit they're also the anti-contraceptive movement is probably a good thing.

This is a fair questions (post #1.4) that deserves a thoughtful response:

. . . . what does the state paying for abortions in Italy have to do with the church paying for contraception coverage in insurance plans in the U.S.?

A lot, actually. A society can and should be judged on how well it takes care of itself. At present, the United States is going through "significant" "growing pains" as it grapples with caring for its citizens and their general welfare (which I include healthcare). Many if not all religious-based hospitals and healthcare organizations receive a certain percentage of money from Medicare and Medicaid. Without this money, most healthcare organizations (both "religious" and "secular") would most likely financially fail and be forced to close their doors. This, of course, would be quite traumatic for the surrounding communities as they deal with an already stressed healthcare system. How OTHER countries deal (or not deal) with caring for the welfare of their citizens can prove to be quite informative. There's no reason to invent a well-working wheel when it has already been invented. And, conversely, there is no reason to duplicate weaknesses, either, when a given system fails its citizenry. So, it's actually HEALTHY to know how other countries manage their healthcare delivery system. I WANT to know! We all should want to know. It's called learning and making informed decisions.

Right now. . . it's tough being sick in the United States. This is true even if one HAS insurance. Preventative care (and a healthy life-style) goes a LONG way in keeping people healthy. Contraceptives goes a LONG way in keeping people healthy. THIS includes prevention of sexually transmitted diseases. Condoms should be free and available for everyone. Dying from untreated HIV or Hepatitis C is not very pleasant. It has been well proven throughout the years that people will engage in sex. LOL! This is certainly true for the "religious" people as well as the "non-religious" people. Any organization that does not see this and appreciate this is, quite frankly, dysfunctional. I am a practicing Christian and I am not alone in saying that our country needs a comprehensive plan to keep our citizenry healthy. As a matter of fact, it is because I am a practicing Christian that I feel very strongly about this! Right now, I see the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church as being exceedingly dysfunctional. I certainly do not see any Christ-centered decisions made by the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. The same goes for many of the less-traditional Protestant denominations, too.

I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that any healthcare organization is free not to accept Medicare and Medicaid. By not accepting these programs, they may be more free to do what they please. Of course, I would not want to go to their hospitals or healthcare facilities knowing that they may be keeping well-researched prevention measures and treatment away from the public.

I do find the fact that abortions are legal and state paid in Italy to be of interest. And relevant to this discussion: if the Catholics are this up in arms about a policy that they live with in Italy, and in about 28 out of the 50 US states already, it clearly reflects the fact that they are not being honest about their objections. It's not the coverage: its an attempt to affect US politics. But I do agree the Catholic church should be free to have its own laws in its own country and within its church. US companies need to abide by US laws and we are talking about applying a law equally to all US businesses not churches. The religious beliefs of the business owner, notwithstanding.

I don't think they recognize divorce either, so next they could not provide health insurance for employees who are divorced, oh nevermind, that would involve men, nevermind, it's not that important. This is a group who have legalized pedophilia within their own ranks, I have even heard devout Catholics who cover for them, by saying it's not that many of them doing it. Sorry,the limits to the things that will be overlooked in what one views as some kind of unquestionable authority. As a society, we should have ZERO tolerance for child abuse. So until they clean up their own act, they have a lot to prove to the people that they are honorable. You could get off to a good start and support this health care legislation, since you are so against abortion, do something in the positive direction to actually reduce the numbers. Frauds. JC your word play doesn't change the fact that you knew exactly what the point was, they are frauds who want to have influence over the government, particularly women's wombs.

GOP has being given a false argument vs. the President Health Plant for taken away people to choose, and now they’re taken away women right to choose for prevention purpose. Shame on GOP.

The reason the government have health prevention option on a health plan for American workers to choose from, because we have different faith of working American at Catholic Institution--some is Christian, some is Buddha, some is Catholic, etc.

By the way, when is Mitt Romney going to talk about his faith-Mormon, instead of women contraception?

When will the GOP senate focus on real issue, instead of women contraception?

When that private business is for profit and taking advantage of government programs, the I would say the government is well in their rights to look out for worker rights. The church is the one that is trying to control their employees adn dictate how and what they do in their own private lives and bedrooms.

GOP has being given a false argument vs. the President Health Plant for taken away people to choose, and now they’re taken away women right to choose for prevention purpose. Shame on GOP.

Women can still choose - go buy contraception - choose a new job - The only one losing any choice is the employers who are being ORDERED to provide it - Where is their choice?

When will the GOP senate focus on real issue, instead of women contraception?

GOP Senate? You do realize the Dems have control of the Senate right?

Yes, government should be telling what private business should be providing their employees, ask workers about safety regulations and should there be any. And yes government has the responsiblity to monitor the pollution that private industry inflicts on the public. The government also has the responsibility to protect the public from white-collar crime in the stock market, insider trading with lobbying groups in the legislature, and the government has the responsibility to collect taxes from the wealthy to help fund wars. There never should have been tax breaks in times of war after 9/11. The lack of protection by the government, who is representative of us, which is sad, to tell ya the truth. Be angry at yourself, BM.

Yes, government should be telling what private business should be providing their employees, ask workers about safety regulations and should there be any.

So a jobsite that is unsafe is comparable to providing condoms? I disagree

Government has a responsibility to do what the people want them to do - Their job is to serve the people not order them

Be angry at yourself, BM

I am not angry at anyone - Do i have to be angry if i disagree with you ? Can i not give a differing opinion without being angry

Govt is a fraud

-How well did the EPA do watching the oil companies?

How well did the SEC do watching insider trading ?

Yeh let's give the gov't more power -They have done such a great job right?

ORDERED to provide it, usually when I use caps in one word, I am emphasizing a point that I feel strongly about. You then proceed to criticize the government because it was not strong enough or too corrupt to fight the corruption of the oil industry and the financial markets. Do you never hold private industry responsible for any neglect they inflict on the public, often times willing to poison the population to save a buck? You should be appalled that a few greedy individuals could be capable of putting the general public and our environment at risk for the almighty dollar. And blame the government agencies because they aren't powerful or smart enough to catch these criminals. You my friend, are on the wrong side. Period.

Women can still choose - go buy contraception - choose a new job - The only one losing any choice is the employers who are being ORDERED to provide it - Where is their choice?

When will the GOP senate focus on real issue, instead of women contraception

The catholic church can choose, too - choose to stop being an employer. Either go out of the businesses they are in and stick to churches only, or find a country where the values reflect Catholic values, like Iran or Saudi Arabia.

Do you never hold private industry responsible for any neglect they inflict on the public, often times willing to poison the population to save a buck?

Yes i do and so does the government - That is why they went after BP right? Holding them responsible

You should be appalled that a few greedy individuals could be capable of putting the general public and our environment at risk for the almighty dollar.

Forcing those greedy individuals to spend millions, if not billion,s to clean up their mess is going to do alot more in the future to stop it then another govt agency - Take 20 billion form an oil company and see how fast they react - Appoint another govt watchdog and all they do is buy them off -

And blame the government agencies because they aren't powerful or smart enough to catch these criminals

The federal govenment is not powerful enough ? Really ? I think you are gith though at the end there - they are not smart enough - But hey lets give the "not so smart" ones more power - Yeh that makes sense

You my friend, are on the wrong side. Period.

Oh ok if you say so - I guess anyone who disagrees with you is wrong and you are right ?

Maybe just maybe it is YOU who is on the wrong side?

The only one losing any choice is the employers who are being ORDERED to provide it

Not true...not even close.

Where is their choice?

Well...I'm glad you asked!

The churches put off by the rules can still CHOOSE to stop running the organizations that fall under the guidelines.

The Church affiliated organizations who dislike the guidelines can still CHOOSE to fund their interests & activities out of their own coffers....w/o collecting federal monies...and avoid the the guidelines.

They can also CHOOSE to make changes in their operations which will allow them to hire a majority workers who are of the same religious faith...and avoid the guidelines.

They have all sorts of choices!

i don't believe the papacy when fallible lies are told
if they really want to help the poor they should sell some of their gold

~Larry Norman

As for this....

....government telling private business what they must...

LOFL...wait! When a church hospital has to meet government requirements in order to qualify for tax dollars they want to recevie ...it's government tyranny foisted upon "private business".

But when an auto manufacture has to meet government requirements to qualify for tax dollars they want to receive ...it's socialism run amok!

The catholic church can choose, too - choose to stop being an employer. Either go out of the businesses they are in and stick to churches only, or find a country where the values reflect Catholic values, like Iran or Saudi Arabia.

Oh so you would rather people lose their jobs and the church leave then the employees not to have birth control - Thats a great idea

And hey all those catholic charities that do great work around this country - Let's get rid of them all cause they do not give birth control to their employees

Saudi Arabia and Iran comment is just nonsense - Try to deabte like an adult in the future please

Church affiliated organizations can still CHOOSE to fund their interests & activities out of their own coffers....w/o collecting federal monies...and avoid the mandate.

You mean charities- Yeh you would rather cut financing to charities in order to provide birth control to employees of that institution ? Who cares about all the great work they do right? Its not like there are people in this country getting help from these orginazation are there?

They can also CHOOSE to make changes in their operations which will allow them to hire a majority workers who are of the same religious faith...and avoid the mandate.

Now that would be discrimination -Which would send liberals into another frenzy

LOFL...wait! When a church hospital has to meet government requirements in order to qualify for tax dollars they want to recevie ...it's government tyranny foisted upon "private business".

But when an auto manufacture has to meet government requirements to qualify for tax dollars they want to receive ...it's socialism run amok!

Hmmm you want to attack hospitals now too? I guess you would prefer all the religious hospitals in this country just get up and leave? Yeh that would leave us in great shape wouldnt it?

'

In December 2000, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that companies that provided prescription drugs to their employees but didn't provide birth control were in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prevents discrimination on the basis of sex.

and this is why many of these schools and hospitals have been providing this benefit - without complaint or drama - for YEARS!

You are the one that suggested they should lose their jobs, BostonMan. Don't make an argument that you think is stupid. That makes no sense.

People have a right to purchase birth control in this country. If the church can't handle that, they need to find a country where birth control is against the law - whether it bothers you or not, those countries would include Iran or Saudi Arabia. Why does it bother you to point out the similarities?

If you are going to do business in the U.S.A., you have to abide by the laws of the U.S.A. And people have a right to spend their money (that includes the benefits they earn) on whatever they want without interference from a religion - whether that religion is Catholicism or Islam.

As for their charitable works, might as well s hut them down now b/c they are only going to keep getting uppity and start denying services that violate their sharia-style beliefs. Let government handle it. At least that way, half the money won't be going to defend pedophiles. Oh, and themen and women that work for those charities can have their birth control.

The purpose of eliminating any and all contraception is only one of the goals. Other ones are to divert attention from the hijinx of their clergy, and their coverup of same.

If they think they are exempt from the law,then yes they can just get up and leave. All of these facilities, both public and supposed private, or whatever know how much government funding they get, and that much of their revenue comes from government health programs. There is NO private industry that is not subsidized by the taxpayer. BM, do you live in the real world? Don't take the money from the government and think you can outskirt discrimination laws because of some antiquated religious belief. If you want to be that Private, then don't take the taxpayer subsidies and don't bill medicare,medicaid, or whatever, see how long you last in the fine private health care system we have here in the US. This is pure bull.

Religion has always been about control.

If you control the brain, you control that whole thing.

How well did the SEC do watching insider trading ?

The SEC did a terrible job because there's a revolving door between Congress and Wall Street-when the economy finally crashed, Hank Paulson, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs was calling the shots as Secretary of the Treasury-a grotesque conflict of interest.

Don't know about the EPA, but I can tell you about a giant fireball that consumed dozens of homes in San Bruno, CA a couple of years ago (4 miles from where I live). This was proven through dozens of investigations and lawsuits to have been a direct result of PG&E's cost-cutting and willful negligence-they KNEW someone was going to get hurt or killed someday and didn't care. The reason PG&E wasn't brought to heel before 8 people fried in their homes at dinnertime is because they were in bed with the California Public Utilities Commission.

There's a saying: the definition of 'chutzpah' is killing one's parents and then demanding leniency on the grounds one is an orphan.

'Republicans', 'libertarians', and 'conservatives' practice a variation of this: they allow moneyed interests to write laws putting greedy, incompetent people in positions of oversight, and then scream 'government can't do anything right!' when the sh!t inevitably hits the fan.

And hey all those catholic charities that do great work around this country - Let's get rid of them all cause they do not give birth control to their employees

If they accept government funds, then they must follow the law.

I understand that the concept of the RCC obeying secular authority is a foreign one, but it's something that the RCC is simply going to have to get used to doing if it wants to continue enriching its coffers at the taxpayers' expense.

The RCC is no paragon of moral authority; it is no model of transparency. If it wants to figuratively pack up its marbles and go home to Rome - good riddance.

As usual, I'm not the least surprised, because this has been the OFFICIAL POLITICAL position of the catholic church for nearly 50 years in this country - to impose CATHOLIC religious positions on reproduction on the WHOLE population.
And, anybody who is or was catholic, and attended catholic schools KNOWS this.

The church hasn't been hiding its goals, anymore than Hitler hide what HE had in mind, you all simply have NOT been paying attention, or taking these religious thugs and criminals SERIOUSLY.

you would rather cut financing to charities in order to provide birth control to employees of that institution ?

You're confused BM.

This isn't about what I would "rather"...or what I want...or what I believe. You insisted that churches were losing their ability to choose. I simply demonstrated the absurd, factually inaccurate nature of that claim.

Who cares about all the great work they do right?

Lots of people care about the work they do...no one is saying otherwise. But doing good work doesn't mean they get to operate by different standards or rules than other groups.

And, if the church itself truly "cares about all the great work they do"...they should be willing to fund the effort themselves!

Its not like there are people in this country getting help from these orginazation are there?

Nice red herring!

Now that would be discrimination

No...read more carefully BM!

-Which would send liberals into another frenzy

LOFL...oh those evil awful liberals!

I guess those 98% of Catholic women who use (or have used) birth control in direct opposition to Catholic doctrine...and the 60% of Catholics who don't believe the Church's teachings on abortion are important...and the 58%of Catholics who believe that the church's insurance programs SHOULD cover contraception...are all liberals...right?

Hmmm you want to attack hospitals now too?

No...just pointing out the painfully evident hypocrisy contained in the double standard you're promoting.

I guess you would prefer all the religious hospitals in this country just get up and leave? Yeh that would leave us in great shape wouldnt it?

Part red herring...part implicit premise question...ALL logical fallacy! LOL...

@bassdad

a giant fireball that consumed dozens of homes in San Bruno, CA a couple of years ago (4 miles from where I live).

I was visiting friends in up in Hillsborough...their place has a great view. I will never forget the sound or the sight of the smoke/flames. It was spooky and unsettling even from miles away!

It's true, pedophiles are on the moral low-ground. That's you, Roman Catholic Church.

Says someone who is all for the government telling private business what they must provide to their employees? Hmm who wants control again ?

Because businesses, private or public, are dependent upon the Government. Meaning, they don't live or work or prosper in a bubble, but in a real world where a balancing act is performed every single day.

I guess those 98% of Catholic women who use (or have used) birth control in direct opposition to Catholic doctrine...and the 60% of Catholics who don't believe the Church's teachings on abortion are important...and the 58%of Catholics who believe that the church's insurance programs SHOULD cover contraception...are all liberals...right?

Or RINOs.

The more extreme the 'right' gets, the fewer fit into the mold.

Smith Cassidy

It's true, pedophiles are on the moral low-ground. That's you, Roman Catholic Church.

Just as with the "if men could get pregnant, abortions would be free", if Altar Boys could get pregnant Church Doctrine would change over nite.

The whole logic of this argument against the inclusion of contraceptive is bogus from the get-go.

According to all the sources I've come across, Catholic women by large use such contraceptives, even for reasons other than birth control, treating other womens' health issues with the same pharmaceuticals. http://guidetobirthcontrol.com/catholic-teachings-women-religiously-pill-926219a

Not even Churches with pews should be exempt. If the Gov forces a Church to offer to their employed followers insurance that includes contraceptive, and nobody accepts the offer out of their religious beliefs - then there should be no problem. If any of the Churches employees do accept the offer, then the Church has a bigger problem of effectively spreading what they believe to be the word of God.

It seems to me if they want people to not choose birth control or abortions, they should work on that by spreading their version of the Word of God in open hands rather than shoving it down peoples throats.

Why does the Church fear offering their employees such a service if they have devout followers?

Only in hell should Universities and Hospitals be exempt! That is just crazy - and only a glimpse into the ultimate mission of the Church to control everyones' choices whether a member or employee of that cult or not - according to all the Church Officials quoted in the USA Today article. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-02-08/catholics-contraceptive-mandate/53014864/1

Just as with Sharia Law, the main reason any hint of "tyranny" by our Gov - even when appropriate - seems to incite a very aggressively defensive response from Religious institutions/Conservatives. I believe that by far the primary reason behind such an automatic response is their own ultimate goal to be the Biggest kid on the block able to dictate to the rest of the World what they can and cant do and how to do it - anything that hints at hindering the Right Religious folks' eventual domination over everyone and everything is automatically meet with fist rather than open minds, hearts & hands holding only the word of God and the rewards of following such as the Churchs' means for which to gather their people and raise it's membership :(

Just as with the "if men could get pregnant, abortions would be free", if Altar Boys could get pregnant Church Doctrine would change over nite.

Q. How do you get a nun pregnant?

A. Dress her up like an altar boy!

Sorry. Satan took over my fingers for thirty seconds.

BostonMan-3128434

-How well did the EPA do watching the oil companies?

How well did the SEC do watching insider trading ?

Yeh let's give the gov't more power -They have done such a great job right?

This is so disingenuous it's almost comical.

The EPA was systematically neutered by Republicans intent on deregulating everything and shrinking government... maybe you recall, during the Gulf oil spill, the stink about the Bush appointees responsible for regulating oil exploration? The ones doing coke with the oil execs? - Same thing's happened to the SEC. Phil Gramm sucked the life out of that agency.

Didn't used to be that way, you know. This all happened because you Republicans promised things would be so much better without rules.

So NOW, you Republicans come around and blame the government for failing to watch the oil companies and the SEC - after having been neutered by -- you.

It's nearly funny - but not quite.

was visiting friends in up in Hillsborough...their place has a great view. I will never forget the sound or the sight of the smoke/flames. It was spooky and unsettling even from miles away!

Widewillie-I tutor in a school a mile down the road from where the blast was. Two of my students saw the blast-one was so petrified he didn't sleep for three nights and refused to be alone for a week afterward. The other one refers to the date it happened as "The Day The Town Blew Up."

Every Sunday morning, I sit with some friends from work, eat breakfast and read the Sunday Chronicle-and EVERY SUNDAY for what seems like forever, there was a front-page article blasting (no pun intended) PG & E. You name it, they did it...falsifying work records, raising pressure on pipelines when they knew the pipes probably couldn't take it, 'losing' and being caught shredding documents. I came to call my weekly reading, "This Week In PG & E Sucks."

And, every time I hear some smart-ass 'conservative' saying 'less government is the answer,' I just post a link of the blast and ask, "How would LESS 'regulation' have prevented this?" And, all I ever hear in return is crickets chirping...

I see a real simple fix. If a Catholic or any other religious employer is willing to pay 100% of insurance premiums then they can exclude birth control.

As long as employee's continue to pay part of their insurance premiums they should have access to birth control if they choose to use it.

Some people want to complain about government regulations affecting the Church. Now the Church admits that it wants to interfere in everyone's life. But that's OK with them. Keep it to your congregation.

See, this is why we need to keep the separation of church and state.

There's no such thing as Catholic Italy, with the possible exception of the Vatican.

Then there's no such thing as Christian USA; which is an assertion I hear a lot on the vine. So JC, you can never again make the argument that the US is a "Christian Nation" without contradicting yourself.

Some people want to complain about government regulations affecting the Church. Now the Church admits that it wants to interfere in everyone's life. But that's OK with them. Keep it to your congregation.

The Church is nothing more than another form of government, albeit an archaic one. It was designed as a governing body, acts as a governing body, and is indeed more than willing to become the governing body whenever the opportunity presents itself.

The separation of Church and State is entirely necessary in maintaining our Democratic Republic, because the Church is essentially a rival government based on religious doctrine rather than commonlaw.

I see a real simple fix. If a Catholic or any other religious employer is willing to pay 100% of insurance premiums then they can exclude birth control.

Agreed.

And to think....If we got single-payer, none of this would even be an issue.

True. If we had single-payer the fundamentalist conservatives would attempt to make all contraception illegal for everybody.

They really are evil, our friends over there running the Catholic church. Then again, we are talking about people who coddle pedophiles and actually enabled the serial rape of young children. So the notion of being surprised by how nasty the Catholic leadership can be is somewhat naive, I suppose.

That is one of the truest statements of heard on newsvine...the Catholic church wants to desecularize America, and their first attempts were getting God put in the Pledge, and then getting faith based funding, ect, now they are going against women's rights and health, the next thing they will have us do is force us to attend church every sunday.

Just say NO to all Churches and all Religions.

:)

Many Catholic Universities, Hospitals Already Cover Contraception In Their Health Insurance Plans

How much did the GOP wine with cheese about not being around when health reform was debated? Sounds like good governing, sarcasm...

Just say NO to all Churches and all Religions.

I guess it would probably be easier than actually trying to work together. Doesn't seem like a particularly believable approach though......

I guess it would probably be easier than actually trying to work together.

OK, let's negotiate.

Tell the Church bishops that as long as they hire and service mainly catholics, they are exempt from having to pay for contraceptives.

In return, they do not get to decide whether non-catholics have access to health care coverage that pays for contraceptives.

Tell them I strongly suggest they accept this offer, because they really won't like the next one.

Tell the Church bishops that as long as they hire and service mainly catholics, they are exempt from having to pay for contraceptives.

They are already exempt. It is not their money that pays for healthcare coverage. It is the employees. It is part of their total compensation package. If it didn't go to the premiums it would go to the employee as cash and the company would pay payroll taxes on it. It would cost both the employee and employer more to have a competitive compensation package.

They are already exempt.

I know! ;-)

Shhh! we're negotiating.

The real question is "When will white males realize they are not the only human beings?" Look at their positions. It should be obvious that they consider themselves human beings with all the rights and privileges that go with that and that women and people of color are below human. That is why they look at equal rights as somehow meaning taking rights away from them.

amen...I hope this exposes the Catholic church and there is a backlash against the priesthood...they are evil as the poster of this article states.

Next thing you know the church will begin claiming that living in a nation where women are allowed to take birth control is against their beliefs, and therefore all sales of birth control must be stopped at once. They are just that controlling and evil.

and therefore all sales of birth control must be stopped at once.

Rick Santorum has already said as much....

They don't want any Americans, anywhere, to have contraceptives covered in their health care plans.

Stay out of the bedroom or pay taxes...

BTW: In Catholic Italy, abortions are LEGAL and paid for by the the state.

RI Mom

Just a wedge issue for the G-NO-P....

That's Rick Santorum's major platform agenda, getting rid of contraceptions and abortion in all circumstance. He says nothing about protection of children, child abuse, pedophilia, and rape.

Lola-O, I believe he doesn't speak about rape because in his eyes it is not a crime, but a very strong marriage proposal.

Women on birth control mean fewer parishioners paying tithes into the Catholic church, It's about controlling women, yes, but it's also about less money coming in.

Best contraceptive available by their own standards is Abstinance. Wonder how long it would take for many of those guys to decide that their women are quite capable of making that decision for themselves when they experience their own recommended method of contraception. Perhaps it is time for women to unite to retain their rights to that decision. Might be a long dry spell, might not. Abstain.

Oh Opinion8ed! That is the best suggestion I have heard in a long time. I am sure it would not take long before the dudes would say yeah, you're right, that is if they don't go out and get a bunch of prostitutes out of frustration. After all, we all know what a standup bunch of guys we have in charge of legislative issues!

truthseeker, you have pinned the tail on the correct ah-h-h (er) donkey.

Education will help lots.

Now here's where the sticking point is: You're allowed the free exercise of your religion in your own home, your place of worship and your own person. What you are not allowed to do is infringe upon the rights of others because your religion says you can. Don't believe me? Try and take a slave because the Bible agrees with slavery. Stone an adulterer to death in the street. Sell your disobedient kids into slavery.

Simply put, there something your religion doesn't condone? DON'T DO IT. There something in your job your religion doesn't condone? GET A DIFFERENT JOB.

The constitution may be of help to you:

I'm not the one needing help, Greenwood. I understand that law perfectly. Please direct your help to those from the relgious right who repeatedly lobby legislators to create laws based on their Christian beliefs.

Keep the damn church out of business or tax them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14002700

The Vatican began publishing annual financial reports in 1981 when Pope John Paul II set out to challenge perceptions that the Vatican was rich.

The churches shouldn't be allowed to dictate workers rights, especially in parts of their organization that are for-profit. If their employees pay taxes etc, they should be bale ot avail of the services, regardless of the employers religius views.

http://www.usccb.org/about/financial-reporting/

A church of worship is one thing, but when a church gets into the insurance business they have to abide by the same rules and laws as anyone.

Any idiot should know this.

The churches shouldn't be allowed to dictate workers rights, especially in parts of their organization that are for-profit. If their employees pay taxes etc, they should be bale ot avail of the services, regardless of the employers religius views.

So if the employer is a religious person , he or she should have to go against their views to adhere to what the government dictates?

If you want birth control and you work for a religious person who does not offer it you have options

Get a new job

But your own birth control

Seems pretty simple to me -

If i do not like my pay at a company i find a new job

If i do not like their healthcare coverage - find a new job

What's the problem

Ok, if there something non worshippers don't like GET A DIFFERENT JOB.

You're misunderstanding my statement to be contradictory.

I'll use another example for you. My boss is muslim, which means he cannot eat pork as per the teachings of his religion. He is also a delicatessen manager, dealing in cold cuts of turkey, chicken, beef AND ham. Does he refuse to serve ham and pork products to customers because his religion forbids him from eating it? No. He understands that his religious choices should not be forced upon other people. Would he still be working there if he refused to do his job because of religious reasons? Hell no.

And the last question I'll ask: If you went to buy some of fine Virginia ham and my boss refused to sell it to you because the Quran forbids the consumption of pork, would you support him like you're supporting these Catholics?

Good points made, Arad!! I sincerely hope others appreciate the points that you made as well.

Thats why there are rules and regulations regarding employees, and I'll bet in these business the employees still pay into government programs, if the church wants to dictater policy contrary to government requirements let them pay all of the associated taxes, etc, for the employees since they are trying to dictate what regulations thye are going to allow to protect their employees. Thats the problem. These poeple are still paying all of the government deductions but the church is trying to stop them from having the rights afforded by those deducitons and regulations.

Does he refuse to serve ham and pork products

Should the government force him to sell ham though?

And the last question I'll ask: If you went to buy some of fine Virginia ham and my boss refused to sell it to you because the Quran forbids the consumption of pork, would you support him like you're supporting these Catholics?

Yes and i go would go buy a ham at another store - Pretty simple right? Why would i want to force him to do something he disagrees with when i can walk out of his store and go to another and get the ham ?

Should the government force him to sell ham though?

If he's taking government money to sell said ham, yes.

Yes and i go would go buy a ham at another store - Pretty simple right? Why would i want to force him to do something he disagrees with when i can walk out of his store and go to another and get the ham ?

Somehow, I doubt it, but lets leave that discussion for another day.

Let's follow up on your response then: What if my boss is the only vendor who sells cold cuts? What if the other vendors are muslim as well? What if a major muslim religious leader decries the sale and consumption of ham worldwide and forbids the support of those practices?

My boss is muslim, which means he cannot eat pork as per the teachings of his religion. He is also a delicatessen manager, dealing in cold cuts of turkey, chicken, beef AND ham. Does he refuse to serve ham and pork products to customers because his religion forbids him from eating it? No. He understands that his religious choices should not be forced upon other people.

If his religion thinks it's Ok it's up to him. I don't know his particular religious beliefs but it's entirely possible that he may be more interested in money.

And the last question I'll ask: If you went to buy some of fine Virginia ham and my boss refused to sell it to you because the Quran forbids the consumption of pork, would you support him like you're supporting these Catholics?

I don't get it? He's suppose to be forced to sell me Virgina Ham because I want it?

I don't get it? He's suppose to be forced to sell me Virgina Ham because I want it?

Employees work at a business to serve the demand of the customers. My boss works in a business where products that he can't use because of his religion are served. If a customer asks for those products which are opposed to his religion, he gives them to the customer because THAT IS HIS JOB.

So I'll restate the question: If my boss, a muslim with dark hair and skin, refused to sell you ham because his religion states the food isn't 'halal', would you accept it?

Somehow, I doubt it, but lets leave that discussion for another day.

Meaning you have no reply ?

Let's follow up on your response then: What if my boss is the only vendor who sells cold cuts? What if the other vendors are muslim as well? What if a major muslim religious leader decries the sale and consumption of ham worldwide and forbids the support of those practices?

That is a lot of whatifs - None of which are even remotely close to reality - And of course you do realize that the church is only saying that people who are against contraception shoukld not have to follow the law - NOT EVERYONE right?

So I'll restate the question: If my boss, a muslim with dark hair and skin, refused to sell you ham because his religion states the food isn't 'halal', would you accept it?

Once again, we live in a free country. He doesn't have to sell me anything he doesn't want to. I don't run his business. I will go where I can buy what I want if he doesn't want to sell me something.

Employees work at a business to serve the demand of the customers. My boss works in a business where products that he can't use because of his religion are served. If a customer asks for those products which are opposed to his religion, he gives them to the customer because THAT IS HIS JOB.

Employees work to get a paycheck - If he feels strongly enough about a product he will not serve it or sell it - It is an individual's choice where to draw the line - Not the government's -

So I'll restate the question: If my boss, a muslim with dark hair and skin, refused to sell you ham because his religion states the food isn't 'halal', would you accept it?

If he refused to sell it he would not have it instock and i would not go to his store to get ham - I do not go to an italian restaurant to get chinese food right? So if a muslim store does not sell ham i will go to a store that does

I'm hungry.

Meaning you have no reply ?

Meaning I'm not going to derail the conversation by speculating on the colossal stink you'd raise with the store management because the arab wouldn't sell you some ham.

That is a lot of whatifs - None of which are even remotely close to reality - And of course you do realize that the church is only saying that people who are against contraception shoukld not have to follow the law - NOT EVERYONE right?

And that's getting dangerously close to meddling in United States politics, which puts the Catholic Church's tax exempt status in jeopardy.

Once again, we live in a free country. He doesn't have to sell me anything he doesn't want to. I don't run his business. I will go where I can buy what I want if he doesn't want to sell me something.

Except that he doesn't determine what he sells, customer demand does. And when the store manager hears that paying customers are being turned away because a product offends him, management will ask him to adjust his attitude or they'll show him the door. Why should hospitals/pharmacies be different?

Edit:

Employees work to get a paycheck - If he feels strongly enough about a product he will not serve it or sell it - It is an individual's choice where to draw the line - Not the government's -

If the business recieves government aid, it most certainly is the government's choice.

If he refused to sell it he would not have it instock and i would not go to his store to get ham - I do not go to an italian restaurant to get chinese food right? So if a muslim store does not sell ham i will go to a store that does

It isn't a muslim store, and there is ham -right- -there- within view but not reach. And you go to a deli to get deli meat. What is one kind of deli meat? Ham. Except this person running the counter isn't going to give you the ham that's -right- -there- because it isn't 'halal'.

I'm hungry.

Me too and this guy's got nothing on me with the Ham I like Roast Beef or Turkey. LOL

It isn't a muslim store, and there is ham -right- -there- within view but not reach. And you go to a deli to get deli meat. What is one kind of deli meat? Ham. Except this person running the counter isn't going to give you the ham that's -right- -there- because it isn't 'halal'.

Do they have corned beef? Man, I haven't had a good reuben for a LONG time. A reuben and a bowl of potato soup, with bacon of course, I can get that in the meat dept so deli-guy won't loose his job today.

I can get that in the meat dept so deli-guy won't loose his job today.

Lol

Boston, why do you support the idea of a Muslim emergency room doctor allowing your daughter to die after a car crash? You say you don't? Of course you do. You can't NOT support the idea of a Muslim doctor refusing to help females or Christians or Jews. That's what you support when you support religious people refusing to do a job or provide a service b /c of religion.

You are basically supporting the idea of sharia law.

So if the employer is a religious person , he or she should have to go against their views to adhere to what the government dictates?

Yes, if his/her views run counter to the law...of course.

Should a Muslim employer be allowed to implement elements of Shira Law at their company...or should they be "forced" to adhere to what the government dictates is legal?

How about a Juedo/Christian adherent to Old testament teachings? Should the employer be allowed to kill employees who worship a different god or attempt to work on the Sabbath....or should they be "forced" to adhere to laws the government dictates?

So if the employer is a religious person , he or she should have to go against their views to adhere to what the government dictates?

Yes, if his/her views run counter to the law...of course.

Should a Muslim employer be allowed to implement elements of Shira Law at their company...or should they be "forced" to adhere to what the government dictates is legal?

How about a Juedo/Christian adherent to Old testament teachings? Should the employer be allowed to kill employees who worship a different god or attempt to work on the Sabbath....or should they be "forced" to adhere to laws the government dictates?

Except this person running the counter isn't going to give you the ham that's -right- -there- because it isn't 'halal'.

I would speak to his employer. And if I was told that company policy was to follow Muslim dietary laws I would go elsewhere. I would not call the police and complain that my civil rights were violated, because I do not have the civil right to force someone to sell ham.

greenwood 'the church is not rich' were you trying to be sarcastic?

THE VATICAN BILLIONS by Avro Manhattan.

This information was published 10
years ago, and the figures are probably even more startling today.

"The Vatican has large investments with the Rothschilds of Britain, France and
America, with the Hambros Bank, with the Credit Suisse in London and Zurich. In
the United States it has large investments with the Morgan Bank, the
Chase-Manhattan Bank, the First National Bank of New York, the Bankers Trust
Company, and others. The Vatican has billions of shares in the most powerful
international corporations such as Gulf Oil, Shell, General Motors, Bethlehem
Steel, General Electric, International Business Machines, T.W.A., etc. At a
conservative estimate, these amount to more than 500 million dollars in the
U.S.A. alone.

"In a statement published in connection with a bond
prospectus, the Boston archdiocese listed its assets at Six Hundred and
Thirty-five Million ($635,891,004), which is 9.9 times its liabilities. This
leaves a net worth of Five Hundred and Seventy-one million dollars
($571,704,953). It is not difficult to discover the truly astonishing wealth of
the church, once we add the riches of the twenty-eight archdioceses and 122
dioceses of the U.S.A., some of which are even wealthier than that of Boston.

The above figures are for the USA alone. Does this mean GM and oil companies can be exempt from contaceptive mandate? When you talk about a war on religion know who you are talking about. This is not a religion it's a mega corporation disguised as a religion.

"So should a religious man go against his beliefs to do a job"?

Hmmm good question..... Then I guess none of the military or police would be religious, since "Thou shall not kill"

We can could also take out car salesmen, stock traders, since your kinda stretching those "white lies" (why this beauty still has 100,000 miles left in it)

And of course, none of the politicans are really religious, just look at the lies in their campaign adds.

And then there's all the preaching of hate and fear.

Church tax exempt status needs to go bye-bye.

and then there are no religious people that work or shop on Sunday, since this day is suppose to be holy.

Wow, religion ! Talk about dictatorship in religion. What the hell ?

Come to think of it, check out the Bishops drawer. Don't be surprised to find dozens of condoms for his own planned non-parenthood.

This is a case of the religouse leaders in Rome trying to dictate their laws to America.
This was one of the fears in electing John F. Kennedy to the office of Presedent by the Right. Now the Right have gone crazy.

I would not call the police and complain that my civil rights were violated, because I do not have the civil right to force someone to sell ham.

There's also no civil right for an employer to tell their employees what kind of healthcare they can use their benefits for. The health benefits they EARN.

You are basically supporting the idea of sharia law.

• 12

• !

#5.28 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:32 PM PST

This must be like being gay and being Republican, sometimes we just want what we fear the most. R's fear gays, because they fear themselves. R's hate Sharia law with such passion and view it as such a threat because they understand that their own religious beliefs pose the same threat to society, they want it yet they hate it so much - only if they could just give it a more acceptable name, maybe one starting with a C?...

You are basically supporting the idea of sharia law.

WOW - You are the master of exaggerating - Nowhere did i say anything even remotely close to that - But i have noticed some on here just make things up so it's no suprise

Why is it impossible for the Church to let their employees choose to have the coverage or not? Render unto Caesar. If you want Caesar's money, you follow Caesar's rules.

What's the point of faith if you don't have the option?

You are basically supporting the idea of sharia law.

WOW - You are the master of exaggerating - Nowhere did i say anything even remotely close to that

BM...perhaps it wasn't your intent to support Shira Law.

But that's exactly what you're doing when you imply that religious employers shouldn't have to go against their views and adhere to what the government dictates.

If what you wrote wasn't what you meant...than clarify the meaning. But, no one is "making things up"...they're your words.

Sharia law is Islamic law - there are a number of Christian faiths which have very extreme views to them, the primary one being that everyone should be under religious rule, either directly or indirectly such as could happen with the proposed law to exclude contraceptive from health care plans provided by employers, with a religious persons beliefs dictating the options of a non-religious person only because the non-religious person happens to work for a very religious person. If somebody wants religious rules to dictate an employee/employer contractual relationship, then it seems to me that one is asking for Christian law to be the law of the land rather than a purely civil/non-religious/nonsectarian rule of law - or in other words, a situation very much like that of areas ruled by Sharia law, only a Christian version - Christian Law, Dominionism, call it what you want - it is pure hell for non-religious folk.

It's sad that many of the modern day hells on earth such as Iraq and Afghanistan, where people die in their own streets at the hands of soldiers have such strong supposed religious conotations to them - such as American Christians fighting Islam (which is after all how R's reasoned to themselves as to the righteousness behind the war)

Christians who follow Christ do not fear death. Those who don't believe don't realize that they should.

LOL. If they didn't fear death they wouldn't run to doctors to prolong their lives.

Hahaha here's a guy who depends on death in order to eat, telling non-believers to fear it.

Didn't you know that death is nature's way of passing energy from one being to another?

And NO Christians fear death more than most others. Thats why they run to the fairy tales.

Oh ya I forgot.....you have a book that says you are ABOVE the rest of the creatures ummm hmmm.

I'm not sure where I read this but I found it telling:

If one adult were to have an imaginary friend he talked to and expected answers from, you'd call him crazy - BUT- if you get a large enough group of them together doing the same thing, you call it a religion.

Well, Buddhism is considered a religion, and Bhddhists don't believe in a Supreme Being. Same for Shinto.

It may be true that Christians who follow Christ don't fear death.

Culling the "real" Christians from among the presumptuous herd who make the claim has always been the problem. Even more so today, it seems.

Buddhists don't consider Buddhism a religion.

The Buddha realized that peace and happiness were attainable only by realizing his problems were constructs of his own mind, and that only he could do anything about it.

Nor does Buddhism claim a Deity.

I find Buddhist and Hindu spirituality to be much more user friendly then that of Judeo-Christianity with its emphasis on authoritarian fear, gloom and doom.

Christianity could not exist without fear of death.

It may be true that Christians who follow Christ don't fear death.

Culling the "real" Christians from among the presumptuous herd who make the claim has always been the problem. Even more so today, it seems.

The thing is... they DO fear God.

It's not the fear of actual death that keeps 'em coming back for more, It's the fear of being punished AFTER death for not following "the rules".

The main problem is that "the rules" are arbitrarily "defined" to suit the purposes of the controllers, while the sheep just shut the @!$%# up and do as they are told... or it's off to the fires of hell with them.

well greenwood - there are some who really, truly DON'T CARE

Buddhists don't require belief in an over-reaching spritual entity, but it isn't forbidden either.

The thing is... they DO fear God.

I believe in God - I do not fear God.

The main problem is that "the rules" are arbitrarily "defined" to suit the purposes of the controllers, while the sheep just shut the @!$%# up and do as they are told... or it's off to the fires of hell with them.

What controllers?

One might safely say that most people believe in a Deity in one form or another.

It might be equally said that the essence of true belief lies more in its' self motivation than any doctrine of coercive fear.

I have a belief in a Deity because our ability to discern that deity's ongoing creation tells me such may be the case. It's more intuitive than it is belief in a man made system of spiritual control.

If you are truthful and have no notion of what is meant by "controllers" then you have no grasp of what is under discussion.

Sorry.

The same people that you pledge all your money to help controla womans body Greemwood. But I think you knew that already.

The same people that you pledge all your money to help controla womans body Greemwood. But I think you knew that already.

Really? I thought donations went to a number of things in this country - Here are a few things - But i guess some liberals hate charity ?

Catholic Charities USA Partners with Parentfinder.com for Nationwide Adoption Services

02/03- Catholic Charities Continues to Assist Victims of Alabama Tornadoes:

http://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/

Maybe some of you who are so anti religious should go read up on all the good they do -

Any good they may do is outweighed by their evilness, like wanting to control the women's healthcare benefits that they earn. Those healthcare benefits belong to women just like their salary does, and they have a right to spend it on whatever the hell they want to.

On the other hand all monies right wingers donate to charities are meant to ease the guilt for all the people who were hurt as a result of how the dollars were accumulated.

"Liberals hate charity"? See? Hyperbole works both ways.

If religion would cease trying to impose its' doctrines into our national policies so many us wouldn't feel a need to be "anti religious."

My anti religious stance is directed exclusively at political right wing phony christianity. Everybody else is ok with me.

The same people that you pledge all your money to help controla womans body Greemwood. But I think you knew that already.

You know who controls me? Me.

Yes, you control you. And that's why you shouldn't allow any muslim or other religious body to tell you what you can purchase with the benefits you EARN as part of your salary.

To be honest, I don't know why any company should be forced to provide you with healthcare.

I don't know why anyone would want to work for a company that doesn't offer health care.

My condolences Don. Take care.

No apology necessary, Don. I'm so sorry.

Without contraceptives, the Catholic Church better start building orphanages in every town in America.

And the Irish experiences with Catholic orphanages and schools has been priest pedophiles.

Kindasorta -Sortakinda a self feeding unethical system.

Na bac le mac an bhacaigh, agus ní bhacaigh mac an bhacaigh leat.
Translation: Don’t bother the beggar’s son and the beggar’s son won’t bother you.

And many of those beggar's children in orphanages grew up and are now testifying against the Catholic Church on charges of child abuse and sexual abuse. That is exactly why Ireland recently voted to break off diplomatic relations with the Vatican.

My condolences Don.

Now the Catholic Church is suing the US over this? Good luck, since when did they own this country?

They seem unable to grasp the difference between being required to provide birth control...and being required to use it. No one is forcing anyone to use it.

Religious freedom doesn't give them the right dictate women's reproductive freedom.

Hard to belive it's 2012 and we are still dealing with nonsense like this.

Don, condolences for your loss. Take care of your real world, we'll continue the fight here for you!!

NotKidding, I truly didn't think that after our push for women's equality that I'd find myself having to do this all over again. I'm sure women that took abuse in the 60's are feeling the same. It simply boggles my mind but part of me believes that this smack down against women is the same as initially and that is fear that we'll become uppity just as those that are against us. Control over others is ludicrous and those that think this is sane have another think coming. This may just be their downfall.

Sorry for your loss Don.

js....the catholic church used to believe (and perhaps still do) that women were entirely evil and could only corrupt men. They advocated celibacy and believed even sex for procreation was bad. They promoted chastity as a virture and were even against marriage. They had to cave on that one...but they have never gotten over their fear and hatred of women and their bizarre antipathy towards sex. Their biggest problem with abortion up until about 150 years ago was that it was used to hide the "sin" of sex. Same thing with birth control.

You're right...this battle was fought in the 60's but once again religion is trying to drag us back into barbarism, superstition and theist tryanny. They make themselves less and less relevant with every attempt.

bonos_rama

Next thing you know the church will begin claiming that living in a nation where women are allowed to take birth control is against their beliefs, and therefore all sales of birth control must be stopped at once. They are just that controlling and evil.

So true BR. I have always said nothing good comes from organized religion. They are feeding the people bs in exchange for money. It's a business imo that needs to be taxed (retroactive for 50 years), or shut them all down.

When I was in a fire, the church some family member went to raised around 30k by using the accident as a cause to raise cash. I didn't see a dime of it, but they got themselves a nice little home back in the mid 70's from it.

Doctors saved my life while charlatans used me as a 12 yo to c0on people out of their cash, and done all in the name of their BS god you sheeple have been spoon-fed and brainwashed into believing in.

Say NO to all Church and Religion, and you will lie a much happier and better life by doing so.

Less money into these charlatans pockets means you can save for your family and kids.

TAX all Church and Religions, or shut them all f*(& down.

I'm with you there. I am torn because it is a difficult line to draw-- on one hand, you must respect religious practices. On the other, if an organization is running a business (such as hospital, university, etc.) there's more at play and rules about how employees must be treated.

But for the bishops to make such a statement was a very ill-advised move, and weakens their argument tremendously.

If the Catholic Church believes that their employees are not using birth control then they are in total denial of reality.

Seattle - Exactly.

With all the evidence we have of critical population in some countries and the inability of those nations to adequately support existing populations, the church stand against contraception makes no practical sense at all.

Taken at it's essence, the catholic church must believe that the carrying capacity of the earth is limitless. Which is absurd.

Can any of us imagine a United States with a billion population? How about a Bangladesh with half the current US population crammed into a land area the size of New York state?

This is the church's vision? The federal government needs to slap these religious fools down in no uncertain terms.

Of course it's absurd; but it would be a violation of the First Amendment for the federal government to go about handing out slap downs to every fool who deserves one. Thus the frustration here...how to draw the line between protecting religious practices (even if one believes they are ridiculous) and protecting the employees of a church run business?

You want the feds to slap down the religious people for their beliefs? How about the Government slaps down people that have multiple children they cant support?

The religious fight against contraception and abortion is the leading cause of that situation, so slapping down the church would be the best bet to solve that, not the people.

The religious fight against contraception and abortion is the leading cause of that situation,

Oh it is not the irresponsible people's fault? Always someone's else's fault right?

Let me rephrase as I may have misspoken.

I didn't mean slapping down any specific religious belief per se. What I do mean is slapping down any attempt to impose a specific religious belief on unbelievers as a matter of national policy.

If religious believers don't want to use birth control or have abortions as a matter of religious conviction that is their right. It is NOT their right to legislate their private religious views on the wider population.

If they don't want to conform to the law of the land then they can forgo any federal assistance in matters that contradict their faith. Let the true believers pony up.

We are not a nation of mullahs or ayatollahs who would presume to base national policy on religious doctrine. Ain't gonna happen.

What's needed is a POTUS, preferably a second termer who, 30 seconds after inauguration, will tell the religious right to drop dead and butt out of secular politics.

Let 'em chew on that for four years.

Thanks for the clarification JW.

I think some of the @!$%# the Catholic's have done is disgusting, criminal and immoral and not even close to being in line with the bible, I'm not very familiar with the bible but I'm pretty sure God would be against raping little boys.

That being said, as far as their religious conviction, I'm sure there's some good Catholic's out there, we just hear about the scum, if a Catholic organization is against birth control, IMO they shouldn't be forced to provide it for free.

I remember going into the health dept. in NorCal and here in Wa. and going up to the counter and getting condom's, no charge, why does the Govt. need to force organizations/companies to provide free birth control. I havent been in a health dept. office in several years but if they still provide birth control, I know in Ca. they offered the pill too, why force it to be added on to health coverage?

the way I'm reading,

I didn't mean slapping down any specific religious belief per se. What I do mean is slapping down any attempt to impose a specific religious belief on unbelievers as a matter of national policy.

is your all for the opposite happening, imposing policy on believers to benefit non-believers, but hey, to each their own opinion.

cannonballer

I think the imposition of a national policy on all employers is what's intended.

As I understand it some religious institutions would not have provided reproductive services or even covered such services for religious reasons regardless of where they might be sought.

This is unacceptable. The fact that millions of Catholics routinely ignore the church's stance on contraception, if not abortion, makes the church's position seem ludicrous and petty.

In a wider sense, the stance against contraception is untenable, not to mention stupid.

Let me rephrase as I may have misspoken.

I didn't mean slapping down any specific religious belief per se. What I do mean is slapping down any attempt to impose a specific religious belief on unbelievers as a matter of national policy.

If religious believers don't want to use birth control or have abortions as a matter of religious conviction that is their right. It is NOT their right to legislate their private religious views on the wider population.

If they don't want to conform to the law of the land then they can forgo any federal assistance in matters that contradict their faith. Let the true believers pony up.

We are not a nation of mullahs or ayatollahs who would presume to base national policy on religious doctrine. Ain't gonna happen.

What's needed is a POTUS, preferably a second termer who, 30 seconds after inauguration, will tell the religious right to drop dead and butt out of secular politics.

Let 'em chew on that for four years.

Now that I can get behind.

BM

C'mon man, don't be so obtuse.

Denying people contraception is a direct cause of some abortions; the one follows the other.

The religious fools who intrude in other people's business have a direct responsibility for such a result.

Thus the origins of all Christian sub sets becoming mainstream over time. the Episcopal church was founded by the adulterous Henry the 8th. So England broke away from Vatican. It's high time American Catholics broke away from the Vatican kingdom. no one can serve two masters.

in American institutions serve the people, NOT the other way round.

No co-pay contraception for women is a guarantee of your employment insurance

The Catholic Church's position actually is opposed to any required contraceptive coverage, regardless of whether there's a co-pay or not.

And yet 28 states already require this coverage. Where was the Church's outrage then?

So, whats the problem here? Politics. The GOP has their backs up against the wall...they can't attack the POTUS on the economy...so they attack Clint Eastwood for politizing his super bowl ad?? Attack the POTUS on this issue. It's pretty clear to a rational person that this is utter chaos among the GOP.

So, whats the problem here? Politics. The GOP has their backs up against the wall...they can't attack the POTUS on the economy...so they attack Clint Eastwood for politizing his super bowl ad?? Attack the POTUS on this issue. It's pretty clear to a rational person that this is utter chaos among the GOP.

and men. I know I want to be able to get it/buy it/use it.

and men. I know I want to be able to get it/buy it/use it.

When has the store deprived you of your desire?

When has the store deprived you of your desire?

Have you not heard of conscience clauses?

I'm glad to see that posters and the general public see through this subterfuge and smoke n' mirrors.

The GOP had set high hopes running on the economy and having a businessman as a presidential candidate. Now we are back to gays and abortion.

If you noticed in 2010, they did not use the social conservative message as much as they used to. IT was JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS JOBS.

And remember Romney recently getting in trouble for using a clip of Biden quoting McCain in 2008 and pretending it was Biden talking about Obama for 2012. The one about "If we keep talking about the economy we will lose"

The right are extremely disappointed that the economy is improving, especially after claiming it was Obama's policies that initially made the economy worse and it was Obama's policies and the "confidence fairy" that was preventing recovery. Suddenly the economy gets better without a single solitary GOP jobs bill, needless to say the right is not too happy about this.

Reminds me of the Laura Ingraham interview with pathetic Mitt last week:

INGRAHAM: Isn't that a hard argument to make if you're saying -- Okay, he inherited this recession, and he took a bunch of steps to try to turn the economy around, and now we're seeing some more jobs, but vote against him anyway?

Isn't that a hard argument to make? Is that a stark enough contrast?

ROMNEY: Have you got a better one, Laura? [laughter] It just happens to be the truth.... at some point it's going to get better, but I don't think President Obama's helping it.

I would be fine with a pharmacist asking someone "What religion are you?" and if they say Catholic, then the pharmacist can say "under the rules of calling yourself Catholic, I can not fill this order" and let the private market fix the problem, like the right tell us fixed everything.

And not for the better, IMO.

indeed this is why i think that the Christians need to work

Yes..you would think they would want their priests to use condoms when they molest the young tykes.

sigh

DH: I've always thought that was the big push behind no contraceptives, afraid the gravy train will dry up. They aren't nearly as concerned about children as those collection envelopes!!

Repeat after me God Is Money ! Money is God!

Money is God God is Money!

So that's why they want god on our money....because that's what they really worship....duh.

The 4th Reich rising. Hitler along with the Catholic Church outlawed contraceptives, and abortions in Germany.

Hitler did not outlaw abortion and contraception.

I am giving you fair warning; if you don't all wake up, you will lose this country to fascism.

McCarthy said we need to wake up or lose this country to communism.

And what is this new surge in Santorum's campaign?! Where is this money coming from?

People who dislike Romney.

CommisarCain

Hitler did not outlaw abortion and contraception.

Yes he did, for "Aryan" women. Of course it was still sometimes forced upon "defectives', like the mentally ill, gypsies and the Jews.

McCarthy said we need to wake up or lose this country to communism.

McCarthy was an @!$%#, among other less pleasant things.

Yes he did, for "Aryan" women. Of course it was still sometimes forced upon "defectives', like the mentally ill, gypsies and the Jews.

So he did not outlaw abortion.

McCarthy was an @!$%#, among other less pleasant things.

And so are the people who cry "FASCISM!" at every turn.

Then do not get a job at a Catholic school or workplace - Or buy your own birth control - Seems pretty simple to me

Seems simple to me too. If you're a Catholic school or workplace, don't hire "unbelievers" but hey that would be discrimination wouldn't it?

Over 90% of Catholic women use contraceptives.

And also pay all of your employees taxes and other decuctions since you are limiting their access to what is provided.

Seems simple to me too. If you're a Catholic school or workplace, don't hire "unbelievers" but hey that would be discrimination wouldn't it?

Who said not to hire anyone? Just making things up are you ?

Over 90% of Catholic women use contraceptives.

And yet they were somehow getting contraceptives BEFORE the gov't forced churches to provide them so i am sure they will be fine after

And also pay all of your employees taxes and other decuctions since you are limiting their access to what is provided.

Huh ? They do not have it now - They are not limiting anything - They ar not EXPANDING - what do you not understand about that?

BostonMan-3128434

Then do not get a job at a Catholic school or workplace - Or buy your own birth control - Seems pretty simple to me

Actually just have the Catholic schools and businesses stop taking taxpayer's Federal funds. Then they can offer whatever insurance they wish.

Actually Boston Man they were more than likely getting them through their Catholic Provided Health INsurance.

The whole thing is a big lie on the part of the church.

Thats right, they are LIARS. go figure.

Because...We are supposed to follow "gods" command of going forward and being fruitful.

Well didn't we already accomplish that in SPADES?

Seems like we could cross that off the list as DONE.

I agree blue wolf, those who wish to fore-go contraception certainly have the right to make that choice. I just don't see why others should have to as well. My wife and I decided to not have children, that should be our right as well.

In contraception, two people go through the motions of an act of self-giving, but obstruct the natural fruition of their act, i.e., the conception of children, which is the ultimate purpose for which God created sexuality. Sexual union is a gift from God to the married, but by practicing contraception, married couples are accepting the pleasure God built into the act and yet denying Him its purpose, new people. They are in effect mocking God.

Yes, this sounds completely insane to me, but that's it in a nutshell. No sex unless you're planning on a kid from it. No wonder these guys are crazy.

blue wolf

Well didn't we already accomplish that in SPADES?

Don't know about you, but, I only had two! ;-)

Anyway- with this type of thinking and those (like Santorum) that feel sex/marriage is only for procreation would what? Demand hubby and I get a divorce because we're both "neutered"?? Besides, I'm past child bearing age, so, I should live in a convent or something????

Rachel, if a woman reaches menopause & can no longer bear children she needs to be cast aside for a newer nubile model so the man can procreate some more. Crazy thinking isn't it? But think about it - was not that long ago that this was the way things went.

Send me an fr Rachel. My old sn was my real name Clarke Ong. :)

It's the Small Brain winning over the Big brain in Your Skull!

Now all any Religion needs is a CHILDCARE CENTER !!!!

Rachel, if a woman reaches menopause & can no longer bear children she needs to be cast aside for a newer nubile model so the man can procreate some more

nica- truth that it was that way...how ever, hubby had a vasectomy in his mid-30's (long before I met him)...so, we should both be cast aside....

blue- what happened?? Clarke?

I had to delete that account because it was impossible to get a comment to post....some computer or technical glitch.

Anyway ya its me :)

Okay..FR sent!! You were one of my first friends here, can't let ya go!!

Me too, blue?

Oh I would accept no refusal nica :) You guys will have to send them though.....don't know why but I can't from my end :(

Good to see you back!

Thank you, thank you, thank you very muuuuch

OOOOOO - nice to see you in blue, blue...

lol awww shucks

ditto!

You know, I couldn't post for a coup[le months and it was drivin me nuts.....grrrrrrrr I'd see a comment and couldn't reply AHHHHHHHHHHHH!