Birth control rant - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

02/10/2012 12:46:39 PM · #26

Originally posted by scalvert:

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.

And they have had signs saying they're closed on Sundays for "Gods day of rest".

Strikeslip

Canon EOS-5D

02/10/2012 12:46:41 PM · #27

Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.

02/10/2012 01:05:40 PM · #28

Originally posted by Kelli:

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

Yes. Somewhat. The actual study would be best. I did find a PolitFact site that looked into it and is generally supportive of the study although they did say this: "The more relevant Guttmacher statistic would be use of "highly effective" methods of contraception covered by the new rule, such as the pill, IUDs and sterilization, among sexually active women who don�t want to become pregnant � 68 percent for Catholic women and 69 percent for all women."

Still 70% is 70%, but, like I said, none of this matters to the case at hand.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

02/10/2012 01:07:32 PM · #29

Originally posted by scalvert:

Meh. I'm not making that argument so I'll just leave it as irrelevant. I doubt "basically" is going to cut it in legal and constitutional matters.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

02/10/2012 01:11:53 PM · #30

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

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.

They also don't pay freakin' taxes and have a nasty habit of generating a lot of under-the-table income by only accepting cash for work they do outside their communities. Sooner or later their privilege of religious freedom that exempts them from the same world we have to deal with is going to come crashing down.

//www.guttmacher.org/pubs/Religion-and-Contraceptive-Use.pdf

02/10/2012 01:13:40 PM · #31

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by Kelli:

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

Yes. Somewhat. The actual study would be best. I did find a PolitFact site that looked into it and is generally supportive of the study although they did say this: "The more relevant Guttmacher statistic would be use of "highly effective" methods of contraception covered by the new rule, such as the pill, IUDs and sterilization, among sexually active women who don�t want to become pregnant � 68 percent for Catholic women and 69 percent for all women."

Still 70% is 70%, but, like I said, none of this matters to the case at hand.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

02/10/2012 01:15:38 PM · #32

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Still 70% is 70%, but, like I said, none of this matters to the case at hand.

Yeah, but isn't it odd that the catholics wanna tell others what to do when their own is so thoroughly against their ridiculous dogma.

I think if a court were to see accurate statistics, they might just uphold a decision against the catholic church if it was trying to restrict non-catholic employees of benefits.

02/10/2012 01:33:09 PM · #33

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Still 70% is 70%, but, like I said, none of this matters to the case at hand.

Yeah, but isn't it odd that the catholics wanna tell others what to do when their own is so thoroughly against their ridiculous dogma.

I think if a court were to see accurate statistics, they might just uphold a decision against the catholic church if it was trying to restrict non-catholic employees of benefits.

They aren't doing that Jeb (and anybody else making the claim). They aren't saying you can't use birth control if you work for us. They are just saying they aren't paying for it. There is a fundamental distinction and I would agree with you if it were the former.

And before we bring up any "can't afford it" scenarios. The pill is either $4 or $9 for a month at Target.

Message edited by author 2012-02-10 13:37:43.

02/10/2012 01:40:22 PM · #34

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Still 70% is 70%, but, like I said, none of this matters to the case at hand.

Yeah, but isn't it odd that the catholics wanna tell others what to do when their own is so thoroughly against their ridiculous dogma.

I think if a court were to see accurate statistics, they might just uphold a decision against the catholic church if it was trying to restrict non-catholic employees of benefits.

They aren't doing that Jeb (and anybody else making the claim). They aren't saying you can't use birth control if you work for us. They are just saying they aren't paying for it. There is a fundamental distinction and I would agree with you if it were the former.

And before we bring up any "can't afford it" scenarios. The pill is either $4 or $9 for a month at Target.

Damn. Where were those prices back when I needed it. When I took the pill, it wasn't covered and it was $35 a month. And back then I was making $3.35/hour.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

02/10/2012 02:06:28 PM · #35

Originally posted by Kelli:

Damn. Where were those prices back when I needed it. When I took the pill, it wasn't covered and it was $35 a month. And back then I was making $3.35/hour.

I hear ya. I remember it was $20 month for Jenn when I was living off loans in med school. So maybe instead of going after the Catholics, we should just go after the drug companies!

Message edited by author 2012-02-10 14:06:42.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

02/10/2012 02:36:56 PM · #36

Originally posted by Kelli:

Damn. Where were those prices back when I needed it. When I took the pill, it wasn't covered and it was $35 a month. And back then I was making $3.35/hour.

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I hear ya. I remember it was $20 month for Jenn when I was living off loans in med school. So maybe instead of going after the Catholics, we should just go after the drug companies!

LOL!!! I hear that!

02/10/2012 02:44:20 PM · #37

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

They aren't saying you can't use birth control if you work for us. They are just saying they aren't paying for it. There is a fundamental distinction and I would agree with you if it were the former.

Sounds very much like the former, Doc. "Under the new plan, religiously affiliated universities and hospitals will not be forced to offer contraception coverage to their employees. Insurers will be required, however, to offer complete coverage free of charge to any women who work at such institutions.... Female employees at churches themselves will have no guarantee of any contraception coverage -- a continuation of current law." So now they don't have to pay for it, and... "I think (Obama's) punting, just kicking the can down the road," Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenkis told CNN. "He's hasn't really addressed our concerns. I think the only thing to do is... to take back the whole thing."

Meanwhile, "Published polls show a slight majority of U.S. Catholics actually favored the administration's original proposed rule."

02/10/2012 02:53:08 PM · #38

I'm honestly confused at your post and what it represents. The status quo under the new proposal, the old way, the new new way or someone's wishful thinking?

As I said previously, I'm comfortable with the Hawaii plan which allows such institutions to not pay for birth control, but needs to inform women where they can get it (as I understand).

02/10/2012 03:01:06 PM · #39

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

I'm honestly confused at your post and what it represents.

In simple terms: under the compromise, churches and religious groups do not have to pay for birth control coverage, and the bishop says that doesn't address their concerns (the opposite of your claim, "They aren't saying you can't use birth control if you work for us. They are just saying they aren't paying for it.").

Message edited by author 2012-02-10 15:14:24.

02/10/2012 03:24:10 PM · #40

Heh! Love this article... //www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/02/10/obama_riled_up_republicans_on_contraception_and_then_delivers_a_knock_out_punch_.html

02/10/2012 03:47:37 PM · #41

Kelli, I think you are drinking the Kool-aid if you believe the narrative that this was good for Obama and bad for Republicans. I'm fully planning on voting for the Big O, but this was a gaffe that only alienated a typically supportive group and gave fuel for the Republicans on a number of fronts.

Glad it all looks to be working out, but I hope he doesn't do anything else as stupid between now and November.

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

02/10/2012 04:09:49 PM · #42

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Cherry. Thanks. ;D

I just thought the article as written was awesome. He may or may not have had it planned this way, but in the end people really do only remember the results. It's a done deal. When it comes to election time it will be about "if I elect a republican, I will lose this, this & this". And 50% of the population is women (or there abouts).

Strikeslip

Canon EOS-5D

02/10/2012 04:15:48 PM · #43

This thread is making me horny.

02/10/2012 04:28:02 PM · #44

Originally posted by Kelli:

When it comes to election time it will be about "if I elect a republican, I will lose this, this & this". And 50% of the population is women (or there abouts).

Candidate attitudes toward women's issues aren't soon forgotten, hence Gingrich's abysmal support among women voters. Intentional or not, Romney and others who went against this didn't do themselves any favors outside of an evangelical minority.

Whose rights are supposedly infringed?

02/10/2012 05:38:21 PM · #45

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM

02/10/2012 05:45:14 PM · #46

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by Kelli:
When it comes to election time it will be about "if I elect a republican, I will lose this, this & this". And 50% of the population is women (or there abouts).

Candidate attitudes toward women's issues aren't soon forgotten, hence Gingrich's abysmal support among women voters. Intentional or not, Romney and others who went against this didn't do themselves any favors outside of an evangelical minority.

It probably depends on how it is framed in the viewer's eye. Sure, not many people have strong feelings about birth control, but a big percentage of the population still identifies themselves as "religious" and the last two weeks were framed not as women's rights but religion's rights. So, like Kelli said, people may remember "if I elect a Democrat, I will lose this & this".

It will probably all be forgotten by November and Obama will win or lose based solely on which direction the unemployment rate is headed in the preceeding three months. Americans have a very short term memory.

RayEthier

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

02/10/2012 05:45:47 PM · #47

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

... 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.

...and I would agree with you on this one Doc...the issue is not one of premiums and it would not affect costs much. So why is the church in such a tizzy over this one. Paying for legal drugs, the last look I looked is not something that is addressed in the tenets of the church.

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

... 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.

... my point exactly... let the church preach about the sins of using birth control and deal with the purchase of drugs as they would any other prescribed item....Just because its sinful is no excuse to try to bypass existing rules and regulations.

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

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.

Good grief... consciousness... is this the same church that for years dealt internally with reported child abuse case... but I digress.

Ray

Pentax D-FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW

02/10/2012 05:52:25 PM · #48

You are bigger than that last remark Ray.

I don't really agree with you on much there. "Just because it's sinful" is exactly an excuse to bypass existing rules according to our constitution. No, it does not give the church carte blanche power, but it has been a longstanding constitutional right supported by the courts for the length of our republic. You may disagree with the specific issue and even with the larger principle, but they certainly have legal grounds upon which to complain.

K3Master

Pentax K-3

02/10/2012 05:59:46 PM · #49

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

There you go again with the "it's always been that way" argument. You LOVE that one :)