johnnyrodgers20 Posted February 15, 2012 Author Share Posted February 15, 2012 Oops. Looks like the Church is not winning the fight . . . even among Catholics themselves. http://andrewsulliva...e-issue-ii.html If you really oppose abortion, you should back contraception, especially for those women least likely to afford it outside health insurance plans. But the new rigid fundamentalism of the John Paul II and Benedict XVI hierarchy cannot allow such moral trade-offs. But trading off the rape of children for the reputation of the church? Suddenly they get pragmatic. I'm sorry but I find the protectors of child rapists preaching to women about contraception to be a moral obscenity. When all the implicated bishops and the Pope resign, ther replacements will have standing to preach. This is one of the reasons I gave when I stated that the clergy who betray the flock and abuse young boys should be held accountable and be given the same sentence as any other pedophile. The main reason is that it is the morally right thing to do and for the boys to have some kind of justice and closure, if that is possible on such a heinous crime. I agree, that anyone who helps these priests do not have the standing to preach to the flock and there should be some kind of house cleaning to help get the respect back for the church. Link to comment
husker rob Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 so if the insurance companies have to cover contraceptives for women, how long will it be before you have to get a prescription from a Doctor to get a box of Trojans? Probably never, because you don't need a prescription to buy them now. Or are you going with the "the insurance company will thus pick up a portion of the cost" angle on that question? Yeah . . . not sure where that's coming from. yeah, when will the insurance company foot the bill for this. why does it always have to be just the women who get the benefit. I think your logic train just derailed. You clearly have some ignorance when it comes to birth control. One, they have side effects. Two, birth control pills are not only prescribed for anti-baby-making. There are other issues like acne and other things having to do with the female reproductive system. Three, condoms are over the counter. Birth conrol medication is not. And I can't think of anything over the counter that insurance covers. 1. side effect of this medication could cause unwanted facial hair 2. if they need to take birth control to stop acne, they might be confused about what the white stuff on her face actually is 3. really???? i did not know that you could buy condoms over the counter, hell it wouldnt suprise me if they started handing them out in schools somewhere. (apparently i should have written SARCASM in big bold letters with a crayon so some people can understand it) Link to comment
VectorVictor Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Because the tender sensibilities of the perpetually persecuted (in their own minds) religious majority is a fascinating topic. Carl, let's be honest here--it's not just in their minds that they're being persecuted. The News Corp-owned media outfits do a great job of reinforcing a persecution complex to go along with their daily conservative affirmations. So do the pulpits that don't pay taxes but talk out the side of their mouth regarding matters where politics and religion collide. I mean, how else are you going to get them to act--fear is the most potent of motivators. Just ask any old-school Catholic. Regarding the bold: I agree. That's what I meant by the "in their own minds" in the parenthetical. Sorry--yes, I understand that. What I was failing to convey was that, IMO, there's a difference between a singular person possessing a persecution complex, and a whole group of people erroneously possessing said complex because of the reality that is constructed for them. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 In 2010 Catholic Charities received nearly $2.9 billion, or about 62 percent of its annual revenue, from tax dollars, and only 3 percent from the church. http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20120111/discuss/701119970/ How dare the government tell those Catholic charities what to do . . . with . . . the . . . government's . . . own . . . . . . . money. Damn. Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Looks like the president has plenty of backing in his "assault on religion." It's not even close: By a lopsided margin of 66 percent to 26 percent, Americans support President Barack Obama's proposal to require private health insurance plans to cover the full cost of birth control for women, according to a new CBS/New York Times public opinion poll. Rephrasing the question to ask specifically about "religiously affiliated employers, such as a hospital or university," barely moved the needle, to 61 percent to 31 percent. LINK Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Looks like the president has plenty of backing in his "assault on religion." It's not even close: By a lopsided margin of 66 percent to 26 percent, Americans support President Barack Obama's proposal to require private health insurance plans to cover the full cost of birth control for women, according to a new CBS/New York Times public opinion poll. Rephrasing the question to ask specifically about "religiously affiliated employers, such as a hospital or university," barely moved the needle, to 61 percent to 31 percent. LINK The GOP's desperate search for a wedge issue will have to continue. This one will fizzle out. Link to comment
Excel Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Contraceptives? Birth control? What kind of crap is this? Nothing should get in the way of my little swimmers eating all the eggs they want... Link to comment
VectorVictor Posted February 16, 2012 Share Posted February 16, 2012 Contraceptives? Birth control? What kind of crap is this? Nothing should get in the way of my little swimmers eating all the eggs they want... If that's the way you feel, Oklahoma state congressman... Link to comment
VectorVictor Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 An interesting op-ed discussing potential fallout from recent comments Republican candidates and their fiscal supporters have made regarding the recent Birth Control/Contraceptive debate: polling numbers among single women are swinging significantly in favor of Obama again: Among this group, Obama now leads Romney by 65-30 — and there’s been a net 18-point swing towards the President among them: After unmarried women dropped off for Dems in 2010 and were slow to return to the Dem fold in 2011, Obama is now approaching the 70 percent he won among them in 2008... ...And the pitched battle over birth control could continue to galvanize and unite this group behind him, particularly if Romney is forced to embrace the conservative position. via Washington Post --- And then we have Foster Friess, a big fan of Santorum, who single-handedly made any discussion of this contraceptive debate an 'assault on religion' disingenuous at best. Link to comment
johnnyrodgers20 Posted February 17, 2012 Author Share Posted February 17, 2012 Looks like the president has plenty of backing in his "assault on religion." It's not even close: By a lopsided margin of 66 percent to 26 percent, Americans support President Barack Obama's proposal to require private health insurance plans to cover the full cost of birth control for women, according to a new CBS/New York Times public opinion poll. Rephrasing the question to ask specifically about "religiously affiliated employers, such as a hospital or university," barely moved the needle, to 61 percent to 31 percent. LINK The GOP's desperate search for a wedge issue will have to continue. This one will fizzle out. You are wrong that this was a wedge issue picked by the GOP to try to win the presidency. It was BO who made it an issue probably for the very same reason you thought the GOP did it, he wanted a wedge issue to help get him reelected. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 You are wrong that this was a wedge issue picked by the GOP to try to win the presidency. It was BO who made it an issue probably for the very same reason you thought the GOP did it, he wanted a wedge issue to help get him reelected. If it's true that Pres. Obama did this to help him win re-election then the GOP blundered right into the trap. I though Obama was a bumbling idiot? Apparently he is a political mastermind. I just like that they are fighting over this issue when the GOP legislature in Iowa mandated contraception coverage for ALL employers INCLUDING the church itself. Of course . . . it's fine when the GOP does this. When Obama does the same it's fascism. Link to comment
johnnyrodgers20 Posted February 17, 2012 Author Share Posted February 17, 2012 You are wrong that this was a wedge issue picked by the GOP to try to win the presidency. It was BO who made it an issue probably for the very same reason you thought the GOP did it, he wanted a wedge issue to help get him reelected. If it's true that Pres. Obama did this to help him win re-election then the GOP blundered right into the trap. I though Obama was a bumbling idiot? Apparently he is a political mastermind. I just like that they are fighting over this issue when the GOP legislature in Iowa mandated contraception coverage for ALL employers INCLUDING the church itself. Of course . . . it's fine when the GOP does this. When Obama does the same it's fascism. No one ever claimed BO to be an idiot just an ideolog!! You are wrong again, whether the GOP or BO does it, it is wrong, so "theGOP legislature in Iowa mandated contraception coverage for ALL employers INCLUDING the church itself" is wrong. It doesn't matter who does it if you have a conviction then you must abide by it or you are a hypocrite, and that is what those GOPs are to me!! Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 You are wrong that this was a wedge issue picked by the GOP to try to win the presidency. It was BO who made it an issue probably for the very same reason you thought the GOP did it, he wanted a wedge issue to help get him reelected. If it's true that Pres. Obama did this to help him win re-election then the GOP blundered right into the trap. I though Obama was a bumbling idiot? Apparently he is a political mastermind. I just like that they are fighting over this issue when the GOP legislature in Iowa mandated contraception coverage for ALL employers INCLUDING the church itself. Of course . . . it's fine when the GOP does this. When Obama does the same it's fascism. No one ever claimed BO to be an idiot just an ideolog!! You are wrong again, whether the GOP or BO does it, it is wrong, so "theGOP legislature in Iowa mandated contraception coverage for ALL employers INCLUDING the church itself" is wrong. It doesn't matter who does it if you have a conviction then you must abide by it or you are a hypocrite, and that is what those GOPs are to me!! Actually, MANY people claim that Pres. Obama is an idiot. Why do you think that teleprompter jokes are so widespread? Particularly when every president has used them since they were invented. I wasn't talking about you in particular. I was talking about the GOP. Perhaps Romney IS the perfect candidate for them since they too appear to be on both sides of most issues. Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 No one ever claimed BO to be an idiot just an ideolog!! I thought Bo was our coach? Link to comment
johnnyrodgers20 Posted February 21, 2012 Author Share Posted February 21, 2012 you don't get out much, do ya? I go to church every week, I was an alter boy for 4 years, I went to a catholic school for 9 years. Never once have I ever heard a priest or any catholic for that matter "encourage" pedophilia. Yeah, I know about the scandals and the FEW priests who partook, but they have all been condemned by the majority of priests. And I haven't found one catholic who have "encouraged" other priests to sexually abuse children. There are GREAT priests out there, but you just decide to look at the bad ones and its a shame that people like you group the good in with the bad. There was a culture of ignoring, and covering up the abuse of these priests though. It makes the Sandusky mess look very, very innocent. Instead of turning the priests over to law enforcement, they would transfer the priest to another parish. That goes way beyond a few bad priests. Protecting the image of the church took precidence, like it always has throught it's history. Sad but true!! Link to comment
Recommended Posts