• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Catholics hear anti-Obama letter in church

j-mac said:
This is simply untrue. period.


j-mac
Click to expand...

It is forcing the corporation to pay for it. Not the church. If the church would go to a non-profit status, it wouldn't force them to do anything.
 
j-mac said:
The part I bolded, and I could care less what a paper that has proven themselves a mouthpiece for the administration has to say.


j-mac
Click to expand...

They are MOUTHPIECES now.. NOT devout Catholics who choose to practice birth control?
 
TheNextEra said:
It is forcing the corporation to pay for it. Not the church. If the church would go to a non-profit status, it wouldn't force them to do anything.
Click to expand...

I don't believe you are correct in that, I never say anything explicitly saying that only profit centers in the name of the Church were included. Like I said the way it is being reported, and the way I am hearing this, is that if you are employed by the Church, and have your health insurance through the church like other employers the church must provide these contraceptions up to and including sterilization, and abortion svcs. This is against Church doctrine, and you have the Obama administration now telling the church what it can, or can not do, and in the case of the Catholic Army Chaplins, censoring their sermons.

Yet, if it were the Church trying to tell Obama what to do, you all would have a cow.

j-mac
 
liblady said:
silly. i said catholics priests molest children, which is true. i did not say all, so get off it. and no, if you look at the links i provided, you'll find that multiple molestations were accounted for. i am not discriminating, either, so get the **** off that too. this isn't abut catholic priests, and i'm sorry i sued them in my initial repsonse. simply put, the letter that was read to parishioners was misleading, and the bishop knew that.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that it was intentionally misleading.

No your other post did not specifically say "all" but it didn't say "some" either. Your wording implied all far more than it implied some. Your hatred for catholics is glaring. Tolerance is the key here. Or do you believe that tolerance does not apply to catholics?

I suppose I'll drop this so not to derail the thread any more than I already have. I just get bothered when people hate on a group of people for stereo types and act like its ok
 
Last edited:
liblady said:
really, which part? and if you think catholics overwhelmingly supprt this, you're wrong.

Catholics support White House contraception mandate - The Washington Post
Click to expand...

So government doesnt exist to protect the rights of minorities? Nice to know. Terrible logic there Liblady.

If people have a religious objection to a government regulation, most often the government issues an exemption to allow works that benefit the public good to continue without them sacrificing their beliefs. This regulation by the administration is both very narrow and an outlier position in American law. The only states which have similar conditions are New York, California and one other state.

Im going to guess this is going to come down to a costly court fight for both sides with Obama ultimately being struck down because he is anot accepting a reasonable demand on the part of the church to offer relief for religious belief by offering a release valve to allow patients to go elsewhere for those specific services. But, who knows what SCOTUS is going to do nowadays. Kelo stood up after all.
 
j-mac said:
I don't believe you are correct in that, I never say anything explicitly saying that only profit centers in the name of the Church were included. Like I said the way it is being reported, and the way I am hearing this, is that if you are employed by the Church, and have your health insurance through the church like other employers the church must provide these contraceptions up to and including sterilization, and abortion svcs. This is against Church doctrine, and you have the Obama administration now telling the church what it can, or can not do, and in the case of the Catholic Army Chaplins, censoring their sermons.

Yet, if it were the Church trying to tell Obama what to do, you all would have a cow.

j-mac
Click to expand...

I'll just comment and say that if it is how you are saying it is, I would disagree with that and support getting that taken out.

However, if it is like how I am explaining it, I have no problem with for profit companies having to provide this.
 
bennymac5151 said:
and federal funds should never go to abortions considering how divisive of an issue it is. If half the country strongly opposes something, then we should not make it part of the national budget. This is exactly why federalism is a much better way to deal with these things.
Click to expand...

No federal funding is going towards abortion. This is birth control, not abortion.
 
j-mac said:
I don't believe you are correct in that, I never say anything explicitly saying that only profit centers in the name of the Church were included. Like I said the way it is being reported, and the way I am hearing this, is that if you are employed by the Church, and have your health insurance through the church like other employers the church must provide these contraceptions up to and including sterilization, and abortion svcs. This is against Church doctrine, and you have the Obama administration now telling the church what it can, or can not do, and in the case of the Catholic Army Chaplins, censoring their sermons.

Yet, if it were the Church trying to tell Obama what to do, you all would have a cow.

j-mac
Click to expand...

Where have you read that this includes abortion? I haven't heard anything like that.

Also, the church only needs to have a healthcare plan that covers birth control, they don't have to actually go out and get the birth control and hand it out to employees.
 
TheNextEra said:
I'll just comment and say that if it is how you are saying it is, I would disagree with that and support getting that taken out.

However, if it is like how I am explaining it, I have no problem with for profit companies having to provide this.
Click to expand...


As far as your position I thank you for your honesty in response. I must ask though...What about say, Notre Dame? Should they have to comply?

j-mac
 
muciti said:
Why shouldnt they?
Click to expand...


How do you teach a class from a Catholic doctrine POV, then provide something like abortion, that goes against that doctrine? And government should stay out of that.



j-mac
 
j-mac said:
How do you teach a class from a Catholic doctrine POV, then provide something like abortion, that goes against that doctrine? And government should stay out of that.



j-mac
Click to expand...

Notre Dame, school or not, is a business. As a business it should be required to follow the same laws as everyone else. Your religious affilations should not dictate which laws you follow at all, ever.

If you want to have a conversation about whether health insurance should cover birth control we'd probably be having a different conversation and likely see closer to eye to eye. However, since everyone else is required to provide Notre Dame should too.
 
muciti said:
Notre Dame, school or not, is a business. As a business it should be required to follow the same laws as everyone else. Your religious affilations should not dictate which laws you follow at all, ever.

If you want to have a conversation about whether health insurance should cover birth control we'd probably be having a different conversation and likely see closer to eye to eye. However, since everyone else is required to provide Notre Dame should too.
Click to expand...



So, no more religious liberty in this country...I get it....


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
So, no more religious liberty in this country...I get it....


j-mac
Click to expand...

Catholics will NOT be forced to use birth control or have abortions.
 
sharon said:
Catholics will NOT be forced to use birth control or have abortions.
Click to expand...


Who said they would be? This isn't about that so why don't you stick to the real afront here?

j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Who said they would be? This isn't about that so why don't you stick to the real afront here?

j-mac
Click to expand...

And the real afront would be for religions to force their religion on employees. Be it the janitor or the doctor or the nurse.
 
Last edited:
TheNextEra said:
This is only for the profit companies that are partnered or owned by churches. If the church doesn't like it, get out of the public business and go back to being non-profit.

It's real simple, nobody is forcing them to be a profit company. When you go from non-profit to profit, the rules change on how you can deal and discriminate against the public.
Click to expand...


That is THE issue, isn't it?

No way in hell should taxpayers or the government be required (or even allowed) to finance the Catholic church forcing people, including married couples, to either never have sex or have babies they don't want - even if the Catholic church then will accept their unwanted babies for adoption at their highly profitable pregnancy-adoption centers.

WHY is the government giving money or assistance to the Catholic church or any Catholic for-profit business anyway? How is that even constitutional?
 
joko104 said:
That is THE issue, isn't it?

No way in hell should taxpayers or the government be required (or even allowed) to finance the Catholic church forcing people, including married couples, to either never have sex or have babies they don't want - even if the Catholic church then will accept their unwanted babies for adoption at their highly profitable pregnancy-adoption centers.

WHY is the government giving money or assistance to the Catholic church or any Catholic for-profit business anyway? How is that even constitutional?
Click to expand...

This is about tax exemptions and Federal funding for Catholic Health Association Corporation..

They don't want to pay what other hospital corporations pay claiming that the provide charity care.. However... they provide less than .05 % of their patients with charity care.

Theyhave been fighting this battle since 2003.......
 
bennymac5151 said:
This is an excellent illustration of where the federal government tends to undermine freedom. It also proves, in my view, that the true motive of those in power who support more welfare state programs has nothing to do with alleviating the plight of the poor, and everything to do with power. The Catholic Church has a rich history of providing many programs to aid the poor in this country, and it seems completely unnecessary to alienate this group over such an issue.

The issue is not whether or not contraceptives are good. The issue is the imposition of an arbitrary standard upon a group that simply finds compliance immoral. Whether or not they are correct is beside the point, because in a free society they have every right to hold those beliefs. Furthermore, those charities etc that the Catholic Church operates fit perfectly into the welfare state ideal, except the fact that they aren't done by the state. In other words, leftist leaders don't reap elective benefits from the Catholic Church helping the poor, so they have found a way to incentivize them to stop.
Click to expand...

No, this is the instance of for-profit corporation trying to use religion to give the special legal exemption.

NOTHING is being required of or restricted from THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
 
sharon said:
This is about tax exemptions and Federal funding for Catholic Health Association Corporation..

They don't want to pay what other hospital corporations pay claiming that the provide charity care.. However... they provide less than .05 % of their patients with charity care.

Theyhave been fighting this battle since 2003.......
Click to expand...

Since you wont quote your source for .05% I thought I would quote one that says differently. 13 Largest Non-Profit Hospital Systems By Number of Hospitals | Lists and Statistics
 
j-mac said:
As far as your position I thank you for your honesty in response. I must ask though...What about say, Notre Dame? Should they have to comply?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Yes, I do think Notre Dame should have to comply as well. Again, I really think this plan was not made to piss of Christians, I think it just wasn't well thought out at all. It's one of those good intention plans that when applied problems start to arise that were not looked at.
 
j-mac said:
How do you teach a class from a Catholic doctrine POV, then provide something like abortion, that goes against that doctrine? And government should stay out of that.

j-mac
Click to expand...


They can always go non-profit and not have to worry about it. But the almighty dollar speaks to the church instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom