• 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

Read again. Slowly this time.

Nope; I wasted time just going back a page to your following comment, which is what I responded to. This isn't a fact; it's an opinion:

"And rape victims should not go to Catholic hospitals, because Jesus thinks that when you dress sexy and drink tequila you get what you deserve. The only morning after pill you need, sweetheart, is prayer."
 
Obama must be either insane, taking on a voting block that makes up some 28% of the electorate, or he is just conceeded enough to think that he can dictate to the Church.

What say you?


j-mac[/FONT][/LEFT]

Didn't read the whole thread, but another point to this is the church better be careful as it gets closer to election time about political action from the pulpit. There are limits as to what church leaders can do if the church is a 503-c and doesn't pay taxes.
 
Obama must be either insane, taking on a voting block that makes up some 28% of the electorate, or he is just conceeded enough to think that he can dictate to the Church.

What say you?


j-mac[/FONT][/LEFT]



We have 73,000,000 Catholics in this country including me.......We should all band together and get Hussein Obama out.
 
He's not fighting an electorate that comprises 28% of the population. You shouldn't assume that 100% of Catholics are dumb enough to be against birth control. Most of them know it's a good thing. I dated two Catholic girls before my wife, both were on birth control. My wife is catholic, she's on birth control. She has 5 female Catholic cousins, above the age of 15, all on birth control, though two of them say it is more of a female thing rather than for actual birth control purposes. All of their parents know and are fine with them being on it.

Obama didn't ask them to do something that all of them find objectionable. Only a few idiots find it objectionable to use birth control.


Planned Parenthood poll: Voters side with Obama over Romney on birth-control mandate - The Hill's Healthwatch

Oh, wait--so you're calling all those who disagree with your POV "idiots"?

How disrespectful.
 
We have 73,000,000 Catholics in this country including me.......We should all band together and get Hussein Obama out.

So the government can't tell you want to do . . . . but you can shove the government around, eh?

What are you guys going to do - pick a fight, build a ring and go at it? I remember being disgusted with Obama's "get in their face" attitude last election - and I just see that same attiude coming from some (not all!) Catholics over this issue.

How this group of certain Catholics might band together and 'get Hussein Obama' (as you put it) - like ALL OTHER Catholic based activities could mar the religious sect for many years to come.

I hear Catholics complain they're constantly being attacked: but then they give new reason to disaprove of how they conduct theirselves as a religious group.

So other than ganging up on the president as if he's behaved worse than any other president against the catholic faith - have any ideas as to how to approach 'this issue' if there's an approach at all?

From what I've gathered: a lot of Catholics don't care that much because a large number of them voted for him to begin with even WITH his pro-choice views (etc) . . . and also considering that many Catholics use birth control regardless of what the church says . . . I really don't think the majority of Catholics care enough to put forward any effort.
 
Last edited:
I guess whether a "sleeping giant" has been awakened remains to be seen. But I thought yesterday about "First they came for the Jews..." [Yes, I know that this isn't the most correct quote: Martin Niemöller - Wikiquote ], and then I read today about Huckabee's saying at CPAC that "Today we are all Catholics."

The larger issue isn't about Catholics; it's about the Constitutional guarantee of religious freedom. At least in my opinion.
 
Obama must be either insane, taking on a voting block that makes up some 28% of the electorate, or he is just conceeded enough to think that he can dictate to the Church.

What say you?


j-mac[/FONT][/LEFT]

LOL.....the OVERWHELMING majority of Catholics disagree with the church's position on contraceptives. You obviously have very little understanding of most Catholics.
 
LOL.....the OVERWHELMING majority of Catholics disagree with the church's position on contraceptives. You obviously have very little understanding of most Catholics.

Contraception isn't the issue here. The issue is constitutional, and what Obama is doing, is forcing PRIVATE insurance companies to provide free contraceptives. Thing is, the president has NO RIGHT to do that!

Can you defend Obama's unconstitutional stances? Better yet, Obama?
 
Where does this "Attack on Religion" Cr@p come from....seriously. It's a damn law meant to help people...ALL people. No one is singling out your religion, and in fact steps were taken to put exemptions in place to avoid this expected mess...but it was apparently not enough. Now, to keep the God Squad happy...further steps have been taken. Deal with it...Catholics are not the United States of America, and in fact are asking to be exempted completely from it...if only.

In my opinion this issue has been pushed to the forefront by people who have lost the vast majority of Obama Bashing talking points...somewhat desperate in my opinion.
 
We have 73,000,000 Catholics in this country including me.......We should all band together and get Hussein Obama out.

Well I am one of those as well and please leave me out of your conspiracy.
 
Are you really a catholic? :shock:

Born and raised. 12 years of Catholic school. Married in a Catholic church and both my kids baptized in the same. My wife even taught catechism classes for a few years.
 
Are you really a catholic? :shock:

Here we go...I love it when you guys start the whole "Judging" thing. "But, he's not a TRUE Christian"...Those Mormons are a Cult...."Obamas a Muslim"....Only My religion knows GOD....All you do is make it painfully clear to those who actually respect each other that your faith is flawed.

No wonder as we become more civilized, religion falls to the wayside....By the way, Is a child molesting priest...REALLY Catholic?
 
Where does this "Attack on Religion" Cr@p come from....seriously. It's a damn law meant to help people...ALL people. No one is singling out your religion, and in fact steps were taken to put exemptions in place to avoid this expected mess...but it was apparently not enough. Now, to keep the God Squad happy...further steps have been taken. Deal with it...Catholics are not the United States of America, and in fact are asking to be exempted completely from it...if only.

In my opinion this issue has been pushed to the forefront by people who have lost the vast majority of Obama Bashing talking points...somewhat desperate in my opinion.

Sounds like you hate the constitution. ;)
 
Born and raised. 12 years of Catholic school. Married in a Catholic church and both my kids baptized in the same. My wife even taught catechism classes for a few years.

Wonderfull! Now, do you support Obama?
 
Here we go...I love it when you guys start the whole "Judging" thing. "But, he's not a TRUE Christian"...Those Mormons are a Cult...."Obamas a Muslim"....Only My religion knows GOD

I never said that...and never thought of saying that. I was only starting a conversation with a fellow Catholic.

....All you do is make it painfully clear to those who actually respect each other that your faith is flawed.

I didn't so anything that would cause that though. ;)

No wonder as we become more civilized, religion falls to the wayside.

Every great nation that is, or has become secular, has failed.

By the way, Is a child molesting priest...REALLY Catholic?

That preist isn't catholic in the eyes of God, and the eyes of Rome.



But you know what, it is foolish of you to assume something before I even said it. Now who's judging?
 
Sounds like you hate the constitution. ;)

So silly to try this ploy. It has often been seen on the Internet that to find God in the Constitution, all one has to do is read it, and see how often the Framers used the words "God," or "Creator," "Jesus," or "Lord." Except for one notable instance, however, none of these words ever appears in the Constitution, neither the original nor in any of the Amendments. The notable exception is found in the Signatory section, where the date is written thusly: "Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven". The use of the word "Lord" here is not a religious reference, however. This was a common way of expressing the date, in both religious and secular contexts. This lack of any these words does not mean that the Framers were not spiritual people, any more than the use of the word Lord means that they were. What this lack of these words is expositive of is not a love for or disdain for religion, but the feeling that the new government should not involve itself in matters of religion. In fact, the original Constitution bars any religious test to hold any federal office in the United States.
As for the separation clause, The phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson wrote that the first ammendement erected a wall of separation between the church and the state (James Madison said it "drew a line," but it is Jefferson's term that sticks with us today). The phrase is commonly thought to mean that the government should not establish, support, or otherwise involve itself in any religion. I fail to see how this issue applies, as the only involvement here is a Federal Law...and in fact to avoid supporting any one religion, they cannot make exceptions.
 
I never said that...and never thought of saying that. I was only starting a conversation with a fellow Catholic.



I didn't so anything that would cause that though. ;)



Every great nation that is, or has become secular, has failed.



That preist isn't catholic in the eyes of God, and the eyes of Rome.



But you know what, it is foolish of you to assume something before I even said it. Now who's judging?


At no point did I single you out in any way....in fact I'm pretty sure I used the phrase "You Guys", inferring to any thinking person that I was commenting on a group-think phenomenon, rather than an individual.
That you assume I was debasing you, simply because I used your own quote in my reply says more about the validity of my statement than anything else. And yes, I judge...it's part of my religion.
 
Yikes. Try to keep up. No 'rule'... the so called Obama rule.

Yes, and wouldn't until 2014, so one has to wonder why try this stunt now? I know, because it is an election year, and Barry is worried. It's a diversion.

And this is the last time I'm going to say this....


Ha, ha...You say this like you have some real authority there, internet tough guy....heh, heh...


the majority of Catholic women use contraceptives. Regardless of some archaic rule book and old celibate men.

Whether they do or not is not the point. Don't you understand, it isn't about that. It IS about government, namely Obama ignoring, and trampling the constitution, and religious freedom.

Good for you, getting more than one perspective, I aways encourage that.


I try to fit a little comedy in my life...MSNBC provides that nicely.

Exactly. So, for-profit hospitals and universities who hire people from all religions should provide proper health care coverage. And let everyone decide for themselves.

Three things on this.

1. If you don't like the benefits offered at your job, you don't have to work there.

2. Contraceptives are widely available, no one is going to be without if they don't get it for free.

3. They can decide. But they shouldn't be making the church pay for that decision.

Please, please, please... when you don't have a clue, when you don't know what the hell you are talking about... DON'T POST. It's embarrassing.

Since 1967, Notre Dame has been governed by a Board of Trustees, and not directly by the leadership of Holy Cross.


Jesus, can you be a little honest here? Why didn't you include the rest of the small paragraph?

Here is what you left out so people can openly see your dishonesty so early on...

"The university is governed by two groups, the Board of Fellows and the Board of Trustees.[14] The Fellows of the University are a group of six Holy Cross religious and six lay members who have final say over the operation of the university. The fellows vote on potential Trustees and sign off on all major decisions by that body. The trustees select the president from the United States Province of the Congregation of Holy Cross."


And try to wrap your head around this... 9,684 -- That is the number of contraceptive sterilization procedures performed at Catholic Hospitals (2000-2003)

Lots of other than Catholic hospitals in that link...got anything else?

The point is, Catholics don't care, Catholic Doctors don't care, this is about Obama and some hyper-partisan priests NOT MAINSTREAM CATHOLICS making a big deal to bring up ABORTIONS... whooooooooo, ahhhhhhhhh

We shall see, won't we?

j-mac
 
I'll try to find a better source, but for now :

Christian Health Share Ministries' Exempt from ObamaCare - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com


Basically what I'm getting is "non-profit" should not have to follow the healthcare law and therefore shouldn't have to follow the condom/birth control part of it either. However, hospitals and other "profit" organizations owned by the church will have to abide by the Healthcare law.

So this applies more to the grey area. Not directly on the church, but on its activites. Fair enough. The Non-profit portion will not have to conform.
 
So this applies more to the grey area. Not directly on the church, but on its activites. Fair enough. The Non-profit portion will not have to conform.


If that be the case, and seperation of church and state are the be all, end all in liberal doctrine, then let's also have a ban on democrat politicans speeching from the pulpit then eh? what do ya say?


j-mac
 
If that be the case, and seperation of church and state are the be all, end all in liberal doctrine, then let's also have a ban on democrat politicans speeching from the pulpit then eh? what do ya say?


j-mac

The law applies to all 503c3 organizations, no exemptions for any lean:

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations


Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.

On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition.



The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations
 
If that be the case, and seperation of church and state are the be all, end all in liberal doctrine, then let's also have a ban on democrat politicans speeching from the pulpit then eh? what do ya say?


j-mac

I don't see it that way.

Either way, the whole arguement should not exist this should not be forced on the American people. But it won't go away.

If the church has a for profit center, then it is going to have to abide by the rules.

Once you take their money, you take their rules.
 
I don't see it that way.

Either way, the whole arguement should not exist this should not be forced on the American people. But it won't go away.

If the church has a for profit center, then it is going to have to abide by the rules.

Once you take their money, you take their rules.

I know of none. Do you?
 
Back
Top Bottom