ForumGarden

Pelosi Vows to Stand With Obama Against Catholic Church; Says Decision Forcing Catholics to Act Against Faith Was

Is this hypocritical ?

I mean... would you expect the Muslim faith to abandon Haalal meat for example.

Um, just because the insurance provider covers such things, the Catholic patients are required to use them.

Um, just because the insurance provider covers such things, the Catholic patients are required to use them
What does the above mean, LarsMac? I'm not understanding.

I do feel church organizations that preach against birth control specifically, like the Catholic Church, should be exempt & the gov't should pick up the cost of birth control for the patients who work for the Church. The gov't can't pay for abortion, it goes against the Hyde Amendment. I think it's crazy for the current administration to demand this, it seems to me it goes against 1st Amendment to force the Catholics on this particular issue. I want the current administration to be the next administration as well, & this "small" thing concerns me very much, as American Catholics were a big part of the phenomenon we callled "Reagan Democrats". Got to be careful with American Catholics, tread easy. It has been statistically proven American Catholics abort/use birth control the same as any American, but I wonder how touchy social conservatives may get regarding this.

AnneBoleyn;1383377 wrote: What does the above mean, LarsMac? I'm not understanding.

I do feel church organizations that preach against birth control specifically, like the Catholic Church, should be exempt & the gov't should pick up the cost of birth control for the patients who work for the Church. The gov't can't pay for abortion, it goes against the Hyde Amendment. I think it's crazy for the current administration to demand this, it seems to me it goes against 1st Amendment to force the Catholics on this particular issue. I want the current administration to be the next administration as well, & this "small" thing concerns me very much, as American Catholics were a big part of the phenomenon we callled "Reagan Democrats". Got to be careful with American Catholics, tread easy. It has been statistically proven American Catholics abort/use birth control the same as any American, but I wonder how touchy social conservatives may get regarding this.


I don't get how they can even demand this.

All religions have beliefs and If you are going to abide by one religions beliefs, surely you must do so to all.

Will they be demanding the same of circumcision within the Jewish faith ?

Will they be demanding the same of circumcision within the Jewish faith ?


Interesting you should say that. San Francisco recently considered a ban on circumcision, then let it drop. I was wondering how SF thought they could get away with that one. This bugs me because I have been an Obama supporter really sickened by his capitulation on so many things I hold dear; now that he is finally taking stands, must it be over this, which I believe goes against the 1st Amendment? I sincerely don't understand Obama. Hopefully, this will end soon, & he will capitulate yet again, finally for a reason I could sympathize with. I admire Pelosi, but nationwide she has problems in acceptance, & I'd hate to see her be part of a nationwide debate. She wins because she definitely represents SF, but was already used against other democrats running for congress in the last election where the tea party "took over".

My country drives me crazy. Sometimes I wish I had stayed in England, but probably, politically, that would have driven me nuts too (tho less so as you have "socialized" medicine, a big thing with me).

PS-Oscar, what are you doing up so late? Go to bed!!!!!!!!!!!!! : - )

I'm wondering what method that forces abortion is being talked about and who said the conscience of every catholic is exactly the same.

To LarsMac's post, I think he's saying simply because it's in the plan doesn't mean every woman has to use the contraception and that each person can exercise their own conscience.. Non-smoker's health plans cover sicknesses that are suffered mainly by smokers, they can't say I'm not a smoker so back that out and lower my cost, can they?

It's all group health insurance.

Too bad San Francisco walked away from that circumcision fight. Circumcision is a brutal and unnecessary ritual.

I agree with you re: circumcision, but I think we are kind of alone in that. It's a basic tenet of the Jewish faith, but yet it seems to have become the norm for almost all American males born after WWII. I don't understand how it became so popular for Xian families. Nietzsche must be right on this one!

SF tried to ban pet stores, too, & Happy Meals at McDonald's.

AnneBoleyn;1383380 wrote: PS-Oscar, what are you doing up so late? Go to bed!!!!!!!!!!!!! : - ) I'm a night owl Anne.

I'm a night owl Anne.


If it suits you, it suits me!

What is the punishment for refusing to obey this law? If it means that the hospital will be forced to close and the executives to face criminal charges, that's one thing (okay, two). But if it means that the hospitals would be refused federal funding, then I have no problem with it at all. The hospitals would simply make what ought to be a no-brainer decision to reject the federal funds and continue providing the care that their principles demand.

The Catholic church teaches that sterilization, artificial contraception and abortion are morally wrong and the Catholic bishops of the United States have argued that forcing a Catholic individual to purchase a health insurance plan that covers these things--or forcing a Catholic institution to provide such a plan--forces Catholics to act against their consciences and is a violation of the First Amendment right to free exercise of religion.What a load of garbage.

No one is forcing anyone to do anything. By the very same logic it can be said that catholicism "forces" people to not have the right to an abortion.

Ah yes, moral "standards"...Yes...

Religion has been quick to change their perception of "moral standards" to meet the demands of society from it's inception. The middle of that fact is more vile than misunderstanding and taking out of context the very definition of "first Amendment rights" which speaks volumes for the very argument itself.