DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Birth control rant
Pages:   ... [61]
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 1503, (reverse)
AuthorThread
02/09/2012 10:26:12 PM · #1
Ok this has been building for a while....so I have got to get this off my chest.

First of all, I am not Catholic....I almost became catholic many moons ago. (as Grogg would say) I am bringing up Obamacare again. The Catholic schools, charities, hospitals, etc. have to supply birth control to their patrons. The 1st Amendment of the constitution is the freedom to practice your religion.

Like I said, I am not catholic, but it infuriates me that our current administration just tramples the constitutution and our rights. I am so furious about this that I dunno what else to say..

If Obama were the only candidate I would do a write in with my own name....
02/09/2012 10:39:19 PM · #2
Everyone's making it sound like priests have to go out buy birth control pills.

They're just talking about not restricting the health care of church employees. Some religions don't believe in any surgery at all. Should they not cover surgery in their employees' health plans?

Freedom of religion, yes. Government enforcing religious restrictions? No.
02/09/2012 10:41:08 PM · #3
Originally posted by cowboy221977:

The 1st Amendment of the constitution is the freedom to practice your religion... it infuriates me that our current administration just tramples the constitutution and our rights.

Umm... your constitutional right to practice religion ends with you. It does not extend to imposing your belief on employees, neighbors or even your children. Polygamy, ritual sacrifice, and illegal drugs are already banned regardless of religious belief, and if your child's life is endangered by a curable medical condition, you could be held liable for withholding treatment in all but a few states. The Supreme Court ruled in 1944 that, "the right to practice religion freely does not include the right to expose the community or the child to communicable disease or the latter to ill-health or death. Parents may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow they are free, in identical circumstances, to make martyrs of their children before they have reached the age of full legal discretion when they can make that choice for themselves." A cleaning lady working at a Catholic hospital does not give up HER healthcare rights for your beliefs, and 99% of Catholic women already use birth control, so your righteous indignation is a farce.
02/09/2012 10:44:56 PM · #4
Originally posted by posthumous:

Some religions don't believe in any surgery at all. Should they not cover surgery in their employees' health plans?

The Bible clearly prohibits mixing blood, so these same people should be absolutely outraged that Catholic hospitals must have the capability to perform blood transfusions. "Oh, the horror of government trampling our beliefs!"

Message edited by author 2012-02-09 22:45:31.
02/10/2012 05:39:09 AM · #5
Originally posted by cowboy221977:


...Like I said, I am not catholic, but it infuriates me that our current administration just tramples the constitutution and our rights. I am so furious about this that I dunno what else to say..

.


Actually they are doing nothing of the sort, they are merely saying that this type of prescription is to be covered.

No one is forcing catholics to take the pill... beside it would be a good test that would demonstrate if the congregation is indeed adhering to the rules of the church regarding birth control.

Ray
02/10/2012 06:10:20 AM · #6
Originally posted by cowboy221977:

Like I said, I am not catholic, but it infuriates me that our current administration just tramples the constitutution and our rights. I am so furious about this that I dunno what else to say..


You wanna talk about rights?

Where the hell does *any* priest get off telling *any* woman what she can or can't do with her body.

Get a grip!
02/10/2012 06:16:55 AM · #7
Unbelievable post, have i slipped back in time or what.
02/10/2012 06:27:41 AM · #8
Originally posted by jagar:

Unbelievable post, have i slipped back in time or what.


I know, right? //www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZijLQGH1v0

eta: language makes it nsfw.

Message edited by author 2012-02-10 06:29:25.
02/10/2012 07:23:02 AM · #9
Catholics should be able to practice their religon any they choose fit.....oh and scalvert there are some American indian tribes that can use paote...(an illegal drug)
02/10/2012 07:29:28 AM · #10
Originally posted by cowboy221977:

Catholics should be able to practice their religon any they choose fit.....oh and scalvert there are some American indian tribes that can use paote...(an illegal drug)


And they can. No one is telling Catholics to go out and get birth control.
02/10/2012 11:25:10 AM · #11
It seems the the Hawaii plan is a reasonable compromise. Like it or not (and the DPC faithful here do not), religion is afforded special privilege under the constitution. I don't have a particular problem with birth control, but I do understand the view that this is an undermining of religious freedom and first amendment rights. I don't blame the priests for getting upset about it at all.

Principles are always harder to understand when the specific issue seems trivial. Birth control seems to be a non-issue in the United States. But the very same principle would apply if we changed it to, say, abortion. Does the protection of conscious become clearer if the issue was whether a Catholic institution were required to pay for an abortion? (It may also make it clearer to realize that some very large organizations (not necessarily religious only) more or less act as their own insurance companies. They aren't just paying premiums to a third party insurer. They ARE the insurer.)

Message edited by author 2012-02-10 11:29:20.
02/10/2012 11:36:48 AM · #12
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

It seems the the Hawaii plan is a reasonable compromise. Like it or not (and the DPC faithful here do not), religion is afforded special privilege under the constitution. I don't have a particular problem with birth control, but I do understand the view that this is an undermining of religious freedom and first amendment rights. I don't blame the priests for getting upset about it at all.

Principles are always harder to understand when the specific issue seems trivial. Birth control seems to be a non-issue in the United States. But the very same principle would apply if we changed it to, say, abortion. Does the protection of conscious become clearer if the issue was whether a Catholic institution were required to pay for an abortion? (It may also make it clearer to realize that some very large organizations (not necessarily religious only) more or less act as their own insurance companies. They aren't just paying premiums to a third party insurer. They ARE the insurer.)


I don't think that should make any difference. The thing is, if I was a nurse and got a job at Lady of Lourdes Hospital, but I wasn't Catholic and wanted birth control, why shouldn't I be able to get it? Are you telling me that adding one more prescription to the prescription plan really increases the premiums that much? And realistically, how many Catholics really follow the rules anyway? Trust me, I grew up in a Catholic household, in a neighborhood full of Catholics. And as teenagers they were all having sex and using birth control. Hypocrisy at it's finest is what this whole boo hoo is about.
02/10/2012 11:41:55 AM · #13
Originally posted by cowboy221977:

Catholics should be able to practice their religon any they choose fit.....oh and scalvert there are some American indian tribes that can use paote...(an illegal drug)

Tell you what Cowboy... go out and stone some adulterers to death and then try claiming your 1st amendment right to practice religion as a defense. See how far that gets you.

And the Indian thing... seriously? Native American tribes have considerable power to form their own governments and laws within their lands because of TREATIES recognizing their sovereignty. They can hunt whales, use eagle feathers, build casinos, trade tobacco and do plenty of other things you can't, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with your Constitutional rights.
02/10/2012 11:53:57 AM · #14
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Does the protection of conscious become clearer if the issue was whether a Catholic institution were required to pay for an abortion?

No, it doesn't. Insurance offered by companies run by Christian Scientists still have to cover surgery, and Jews pay taxes that may subsidize pig farms. If you don't approve of something, you don't have to use it, but your right to practice religion is not a license to restrict or direct someone else's life.
02/10/2012 12:05:34 PM · #15
Originally posted by Kelli:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

It seems the the Hawaii plan is a reasonable compromise. Like it or not (and the DPC faithful here do not), religion is afforded special privilege under the constitution. I don't have a particular problem with birth control, but I do understand the view that this is an undermining of religious freedom and first amendment rights. I don't blame the priests for getting upset about it at all.

Principles are always harder to understand when the specific issue seems trivial. Birth control seems to be a non-issue in the United States. But the very same principle would apply if we changed it to, say, abortion. Does the protection of conscious become clearer if the issue was whether a Catholic institution were required to pay for an abortion? (It may also make it clearer to realize that some very large organizations (not necessarily religious only) more or less act as their own insurance companies. They aren't just paying premiums to a third party insurer. They ARE the insurer.)


I don't think that should make any difference. The thing is, if I was a nurse and got a job at Lady of Lourdes Hospital, but I wasn't Catholic and wanted birth control, why shouldn't I be able to get it? Are you telling me that adding one more prescription to the prescription plan really increases the premiums that much? And realistically, how many Catholics really follow the rules anyway? Trust me, I grew up in a Catholic household, in a neighborhood full of Catholics. And as teenagers they were all having sex and using birth control. Hypocrisy at it's finest is what this whole boo hoo is about.


Your points are irrelevant Kelli. Nobody that I know of is saying this is an issue of premiums. I agree it wouldn't change the premium costs much at all. As to the lack of adherents among Catholics, this is also beside the point. It doesn't make it cease to become a longstanding tenet of Catholic practice just because many people choose to ignore it.

Finally, you presented a hypothetical nurse and asked why she shouldn't be able to get birth control. She can easily get it, she just has to pay for it. If she can't pay for it, there are institutions that will give it to her. Nobody is preventing her for getting birth control. The catholic diocese would not be paying for it out of conscious.
02/10/2012 12:08:57 PM · #16
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Does the protection of conscious become clearer if the issue was whether a Catholic institution were required to pay for an abortion?

No, it doesn't. Insurance offered by companies run by Christian Scientists still have to cover surgery, and Jews pay taxes that may subsidize pig farms. If you don't approve of something, you don't have to use it, but your right to practice religion is not a license to restrict or direct someone else's life.


It isn't restricting or directing someone's life one bit. Are you telling me that someone couldn't get birth control at all if they happened to work for a catholic hospital? Are you telling me Planned Parenthood wouldn't be happy to help if the patient couldn't afford it?

The Christian Scientist issue is an interesting point. The Jews and pigs is totally irrelevant.
02/10/2012 12:14:22 PM · #17
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Does the protection of conscious become clearer if the issue was whether a Catholic institution were required to pay for an abortion?

No, it doesn't. Insurance offered by companies run by Christian Scientists still have to cover surgery, and Jews pay taxes that may subsidize pig farms. If you don't approve of something, you don't have to use it, but your right to practice religion is not a license to restrict or direct someone else's life.


It isn't restricting or directing someone's life one bit. Are you telling me that someone couldn't get birth control at all if they happened to work for a catholic hospital? Are you telling me Planned Parenthood wouldn't be happy to help if the patient couldn't afford it?

The Christian Scientist issue is an interesting point. The Jews and pigs is totally irrelevant.


But it is. Any nurse who believes she's going to be denied basic care (and face it, birth control is basic care) would choose to work somewhere that covers what she needs. Therefore, you're only going to get Catholics who actually do follow "the rules" to work in these places. Basically, you've just segregated hospitals based on their religion. For the record, Lady of Lourdes is a real hospital around here and there are many more. I know people that quit that hospital just for those reasons. Medical care should have nothing to do with religion.

And btw - A majority of Catholics (58 percent) support the contraception mandate generally. While Catholic Church teaching proscribes the use of artificial birth control to avoid conception, 98 percent of Catholics use contraception, according to separate surveys. ... from here... //www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/07/catholics-support-contraception-mandate_n_1261046.html

Message edited by author 2012-02-10 12:23:23.
02/10/2012 12:24:34 PM · #18
Originally posted by Kelli:

But it is. Any nurse who believes she's going to be denied basic care (and face it, birth control is basic care) would choose to work somewhere that covers what she needs. Therefore, you're only going to get Catholics who actually do follow "the rules" to work in these places. Basically, you've just segregated hospitals based on their religion. For the record, Lady of Lourdes is a real hospital around here and there are many more. I know people that quit that hospital just for those reasons. Medical care should have nothing to do with religion.


I can tell you for years of experience in hospitals (many Catholic) this is nowhere near the truth. The fact is the idea that Catholic institutions don't have to pay for birth control is the status quo. No such segregation that you worry about exists as a consequence. I am open to evidence to the contrary.

Message edited by author 2012-02-10 12:28:22.
02/10/2012 12:28:01 PM · #19
I was looking into the Christian Scientist issue because I have to knowledge about it and found an interesting tidbit. Did you know the Amish are exempted from the required insurance mandated by "Obamacare" (just faster to use that moniker than the real name)? I had no idea, but it's an example of the privilege of religious freedom in the face of mandated laws concerning health care.

I also suspect that Christian Scientist organizations have ways around providing insurance to employees (or the vast majority don't want it because the are...Christian Scientists). I'll have to ask Shannon to provide me proof that they are, in fact, required by some court ruling to do so.

Message edited by author 2012-02-10 12:30:08.
02/10/2012 12:32:07 PM · #20
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

It isn't restricting or directing someone's life one bit. Are you telling me that someone couldn't get birth control at all if they happened to work for a catholic hospital?

So a young mother is trying to make ends meet, and the only job available is making sandwiches at the local Chick-Fil-A... Turns out the restaurant chain is owned by a deeply religious person who doesn't believe in birth control and ignores that 99% percent of people in his church use it anyway, so the health plan doesn't offer any form of birth control. That owner is absolutely restricting/directing/incurring a cost on the employee to satisfy his own personal belief (which, incidentally, may be a complete fantasy). The owner later becomes even more deeply religious and cuts the health plan to holistic medicine only or converts to Judaism and requires employees to use only Jewish hospitals, the closest being 300 miles away. Suppose your boss decides witch doctors or faith healing is the way to go? Does your belief override the health or beliefs of your employees? The US Supreme Court has already ruled it doesn't.
02/10/2012 12:33:01 PM · #21
Originally posted by Kelli:

...98 percent of Catholics use contraception, according to separate surveys. ... from here... //www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/07/catholics-support-contraception-mandate_n_1261046.html


I'll have to quibble and say I'm pretty sure 98% would be a high number for any group. Can you provide the survey? Otherwise this is just a line from Huffington Post (a bastion of journalism).
02/10/2012 12:37:05 PM · #22
Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

It isn't restricting or directing someone's life one bit. Are you telling me that someone couldn't get birth control at all if they happened to work for a catholic hospital?

So a young mother is trying to make ends meet, and the only job available is making sandwiches at the local Chick-Fil-A... Turns out the restaurant chain is owned by a deeply religious person who doesn't believe in birth control and ignores that 99% percent of people in his church use it anyway, so the health plan doesn't offer any form of birth control. That owner is absolutely restricting/directing/incurring a cost on the employee to satisfy his own personal belief (which, incidentally, may be a complete fantasy). The owner later becomes even more deeply religious and cuts the health plan to holistic medicine only or converts to Judaism and requires employees to use only Jewish hospitals, the closest being 300 miles away. Suppose your boss decides witch doctors or faith healing is the way to go? Does your belief override the health or beliefs of your employees? The US Supreme Court has already ruled it doesn't.


Nobody I'm aware of is arguing that Chick-fil-A owners, catholic or otherwise fall under the same protection. You are moving the goal post.

If it were Our Lady of Grace Chick-Fil-A, it might be different. Also, picking a fast food chain example was probably counterproductive. It seems like those employees are struggling to get ANY health insurance, let alone birth control coverage.
02/10/2012 12:38:29 PM · #23
It sounds like Obama is going to back off anyway, so the status quo will prevail.
02/10/2012 12:40:39 PM · #24
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by Kelli:

...98 percent of Catholics use contraception, according to separate surveys. ... from here... //www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/07/catholics-support-contraception-mandate_n_1261046.html


I'll have to quibble and say I'm pretty sure 98% would be a high number for any group. Can you provide the survey? Otherwise this is just a line from Huffington Post (a bastion of journalism).


Is this better? //www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/13/us-contraceptives-religion-idUSTRE73C7W020110413
02/10/2012 12:44:18 PM · #25
Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Nobody I'm aware of is arguing that Chick-fil-A owners, catholic or otherwise fall under the same protection. If it were Our Lady of Grace Chick-Fil-A, it might be different.

It basically is (although not Catholic). Chick-Fil-A has been sued for firing employees who refuse to participate in employee prayer, and contributes millions to religious causes.
Pages:   ... [61]
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 12:24:52 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 12:24:52 PM EDT.