johnnyrodgers20 Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 BO has made it a real fight for religious feedom in this country. He is now forcing catholic institutions to give insurance for contraceptives, female sterilization & the morning after pill which is in direct conflict with the church's teachings. http://www.weeklystandard.com/articl...46.html?page=1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 It's not an "assault on religion." It's an attempt to provide contraception to people who want and need it. It's dumb for Obama to have mandated it for churches for whom the idea of contraceptives is anathema, but it was not designed nor intended as an "assault on religion." This is a prime example of someone coming up with what they think is a good idea and not thinking through the consequences. That's still not great governance, but it's no "assault on religion." The Catholic Church is right about this. This is an infringement on their religion, and this mandate will not stand. Politics aside, forcing the religious to do something against their religion is not OK. Link to comment
2ndNnine Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 But sexual assault and ruining the lives of little boys is A-OK with them. The catholic church is a f'ing mess and should shut the hell up. Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 But sexual assault and ruining the lives of little boys is A-OK with them. The catholic church is a f'ing mess and should shut the hell up. Because horrible things have been done in the Catholic church in the past does not mean they give up all rights for the future. Even convicted murderers have rights in prison. Link to comment
Sub-Husker Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 BO has made it a real fight for religious feedom in this country. He is now forcing catholic institutions to give insurance for contraceptives, female sterilization & the morning after pill which is in direct conflict with the church's teachings. I am more concerned that he is following the teachings of Saint Augustine, with all the "Good Wars" he's getting us involved in. Link to comment
johnnyrodgers20 Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 It's not an "assault on religion." It's an attempt to provide contraception to people who want and need it. It's dumb for Obama to have mandated it for churches for whom the idea of contraceptives is anathema, but it was not designed nor intended as an "assault on religion." This is a prime example of someone coming up with what they think is a good idea and not thinking through the consequences. That's still not great governance, but it's no "assault on religion." The Catholic Church is right about this. This is an infringement on their religion, and this mandate will not stand. Politics aside, forcing the religious to do something against their religion is not OK. Let me ask you this, he knew about this a year ago and rather than getting rid of this part of OC he chose to give them a year to get in line with it. Now he knew about it why is he still trying to force the church into doing something against their will. And if he is trying force them why isn't it an assault on the Catholic church, just wondering what you would deem an assault on the church if this isn't? Link to comment
johnnyrodgers20 Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 BO has made it a real fight for religious feedom in this country. He is now forcing catholic institutions to give insurance for contraceptives, female sterilization & the morning after pill which is in direct conflict with the church's teachings. I am more concerned that he is following the teachings of Saint Augustine, with all the "Good Wars" he's getting us involved in. I agree I am not in favor of how he is winding down the wars but I don't want the US in another one for heaven sake! Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Let me ask you this, he knew about this a year ago and rather than getting rid of this part of OC he chose to give them a year to get in line with it. Now he knew about it why is he still trying to force the church into doing something against their will. And if he is trying force them why isn't it an assault on the Catholic church, just wondering what you would deem an assault on the church if this isn't? I would consider a ban on Catholicism an assault on the Catholic church. This isn't that, and it's not even close. It's the same as asking the church to stop burning witches or stop the Inquisition. There are many things that the Church has done that secular government doesn't agree with. Some of those things are right to stop and some are wrong. There are many people, both Catholics and non-Catholics, who believe that contraception is not only OK, but a right. They are not assaulting the Church, they simply believe differently than church dogma states. Again - this was not the best way to go about this. I see both sides of the issue and I think they both have valid points. I'm not even sure whose side I'd fall on at this point. All I'm saying is it's not an "assault." That's an unnecessarily inflammatory word, much like "class warfare." Link to comment
Cactusboy Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 They don't have to take the contraception, right? So what is there to worry about, since Catholics don't believe in contraception. If my employer were to make bowls of cheese to it's employees and all the employees are lactose intolerant...why should any of us care? We just wouldn't take it. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Let me ask you this, he knew about this a year ago and rather than getting rid of this part of OC he chose to give them a year to get in line with it. Now he knew about it why is he still trying to force the church into doing something against their will. And if he is trying force them why isn't it an assault on the Catholic church, just wondering what you would deem an assault on the church if this isn't? I would consider a ban on Catholicism an assault on the Catholic church. This isn't that, and it's not even close. It's the same as asking the church to stop burning witches or stop the Inquisition. There are many things that the Church has done that secular government doesn't agree with. Some of those things are right to stop and some are wrong. There are many people, both Catholics and non-Catholics, who believe that contraception is not only OK, but a right. They are not assaulting the Church, they simply believe differently than church dogma states. Again - this was not the best way to go about this. I see both sides of the issue and I think they both have valid points. I'm not even sure whose side I'd fall on at this point. All I'm saying is it's not an "assault." That's an unnecessarily inflammatory word, much like "class warfare." Sounds like you should be goosestepping in the Soviet Union Chairman Mao. I kid. I kid. Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Mao was the Chairperson in China, carl. I'm so disappointed in you. Link to comment
Cactusboy Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 AHHHHHH....I see the issue is it will be required in Catholic institutions where many aren't Catholic...like hospitals and colleges. I'm predicting there will be a compromise before this goes into affect. Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I'm predicting there will be a compromise before this goes into affect. Agreed. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Mao was the Chairperson in China, carl. I'm so disappointed in you. Yeah . . . I was trying to stereotypically mix my Nazi/Communist/Marxist/Fascist examples. I should have made it a bit more obvious. You Mussolini, you. Link to comment
Recommended Posts