Are Conservitives in favor of Sharia law?

[Openmind]

Nobody is having their rights violated by Catholic organizations who choose to carry insurance plans that do not offer "free" birth control.

It certainly means that the Catholic church treats women sexual health differently than men's sexual health. And yet, the consequences of not covering birth control are hugely greater than the consequences of not having an erection!
So, the Catholic Church is discriminating against its female employees which is a violation of women's right for equal treatment in the work place.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Nothing is free, someone has to pay for it. Whoever is using the birth control should be the one who has to pay for it, no one else.


If you can't afford to have children and you can't afford birth control... Here's a wacky idea... Don't have sex. At the very least learn how to have sex without risking pregnancy.


Every law is based on man-made dogma, even the ones you support.

so now your against Insurance....

you I don't favor Chemo...so no one gets Chemo paid for now...

its what I expect from your, only about me view of everything.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

It certainly means that the Catholic church treats women sexual health differently than men's sexual health. And yet, the consequences of not covering birth control are hugely greater than the consequences of not having an erection!
So, the Catholic Church is discriminating against its female employees which is a violation of women's right for equal treatment in the work place.

when has the catholic church ever cared about a woman anyway?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

I think you need to get some FACTUAL information re: the morning after pill!

Here is one short overview from the Mayo Clinic:



Even in the case where an egg has already been fertilized. . .as long as it is not implanted in the uterus, THERE IS NO PREGNANCY.

Next, you will want to outlaw masturbation of women's periods. . .because it wastes spermatozoids and eggs!

every sperm is perfect, every sperm is great!

The Republican parties slow march to the dark ages.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Pro lifers happy to see thousands of babies born so that they can die a horrible and unavoidable death just for the want of healthcare

Lewis Carroll would baulk at writing something as ridiculous as that

 

[Pandora]

I think you need to get some FACTUAL information re: the morning after pill!

Here is one short overview from the Mayo Clinic:



Even in the case where an egg has already been fertilized. . .as long as it is not implanted in the uterus, THERE IS NO PREGNANCY.

so forgive me if I do not share your view on the value of human life.



Why would anyone care if you masturbate? That is as dumb as the fake argument that Christians want to ban birth control.





Back to the topic….. Eat all the morning after pills you like and take all the birth control pills you want but don’t expect other people to fund it for you.



Why the hell isn't obama sending all these people who want free birth control to planned parenthood? They milk the system and our tax payers for millions under the banner that they deliver free birth control so why not send the women there instead of creating a new law forcing someone else to pay for their pills.


edited for content

 

[dogtowner]

Just a little reminder of the Catholic Bishops' morality stand:

is obamacare requiring viagra etal be given free of charge to the patient (and that all plan members will be picking up the tab for which is against their religion which puts in in violation of the 1st) ? no.

as I said before yu need to understand the issue instead of all this pointless diversion.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

So what is you hae to pay a tiny bit extra in tax to help your fellow man you Pharisee?

 

[dogtowner]

So what is you hae to pay a tiny bit extra in tax to help your fellow man you Pharisee?

what it is would be unconstitutional.

 

[cashmcall]

From what you have explained of your financial situation, NO ONE is asking you to pay for ANYTHING.

And this issue is NOT about abortion, but access to free birth control, especially for the women who need it the most: those who cannot afford to purchase it themselves, and who can even less afford to bring another child in this world.

By the way, I am not a big supporter (actually not at all) of Sharia law, but it is ALSO BASED on the "conscience" of the Muslims!

Daw is correct. . .very little difference between ANY laws based on religious beliefs (which are all manmade dogmas anyway!)

No the issue was about sharia law! you liberals are just running with the talking points of the day..(most consevatives believe in birth control) end of story..

 

[cashmcall]

You don't have to be Catholic to be alarmed when the government rides roughshod over the convictions of the faithful. There are plenty of non-religious reasons to object to the contraception mandate. It isn't necessary (birth control and abortion services are widely available to virtually anyone who wants them). It isn't economical (using insurance for routine expenses causes health-care spending to soar). It isn't constitutional (the government has no legitimate authority to micromanage Americans' health-care decisions, or to decide who should pay how much for what services.)

Yet nothing exemplifies ObamaCare's overreach like the birth-control mandate and its assault on conscience. The White House may see nothing wrong with trying to compel religious institutions and individuals to commit acts their faith forbids. Countless Americans clearly do. Birth control and health insurance have much to recommend them, but neither goes to the essence of American pluralism. Religious liberty.. on the other hand.. is the very first freedom in the Bill of Rights.

 

[Gipper]

You don't have to be Catholic to be alarmed when the government rides roughshod over the convictions of the faithful. There are plenty of non-religious reasons to object to the contraception mandate. It isn't necessary (birth control and abortion services are widely available to virtually anyone who wants them). It isn't economical (using insurance for routine expenses causes health-care spending to soar). It isn't constitutional (the government has no legitimate authority to micromanage Americans' health-care decisions, or to decide who should pay how much for what services.)

Yet nothing exemplifies ObamaCare's overreach like the birth-control mandate and its assault on conscience. The White House may see nothing wrong with trying to compel religious institutions and individuals to commit acts their faith forbids. Countless Americans clearly do. Birth control and health insurance have much to recommend them, but neither goes to the essence of American pluralism. Religious liberty.. on the other hand.. is the very first freedom in the Bill of Rights.

There is no question that BO's actions are unconstitutional, but he could careless about the Constitution. He does not believe it prevents him from doing whatever he wishes. And, apparently many on the Left agree with him.

The Left loves the idea of a dictator whose power is unconstrained....as long as the dictator is a leftist.

Hey...that is another TRUISM!!!

 

[Openmind]

is obamacare requiring viagra etal be given free of charge to the patient (and that all plan members will be picking up the tab for which is against their religion which puts in in violation of the 1st) ? no.

as I said before yu need to understand the issue instead of all this pointless diversion.

I do understand the issue. . . YOU don't seem to, so obsess are you with bashing anything Obama does!

I presented you with factual information re: the first amendment, the establishment clause and the exercise clause. NOTHING Obama has done was against the first amendment.

And, the Catholic Church referring to "morality" about covering birth control for their employees WHO CHOOSE TO TAKE IT (not forcing anyone to take it) is ridiculous in view of their support and willingness to cover VIAGRA.

If you can't see that, if you can't even recognize that it is plain hypocrisy and a direct attack on women's right to choose, you are blind and you should have lived 50 years ago. . .in fact, if you have YOUR WAY, you MAY force everyone (especially women) to live as they did 50 years ago.

This is an issue of what is right and what is wrong. And refusing to cover birth control for women, when happily covering Viagra is WRONG.

 

[Openmind]

. so forgive me if I do not share your view on the value of human life.



Why would anyone care if you masturbate? That is as dumb as the fake argument that Christians want to ban birth control.





Back to the topic….. Eat all the morning after pills you like and take all the birth control pills you want but don’t expect other people to fund it for you.



Why the hell isn't obama sending all these people who want free birth control to planned parenthood? They milk the system and our tax payers for millions under the banner that they deliver free birth control so why not send the women there instead of creating a new law forcing someone else to pay for their pills.

The first paragraph of your post is offensive and a direct attack on this poster.

It is also too ridiculous to make a big deal out of it.

edited for content

 

[dogtowner]

I do understand the issue. . . YOU don't seem to, so obsess are you with bashing anything Obama does!

I presented you with factual information re: the first amendment, the establishment clause and the exercise clause. NOTHING Obama has done was against the first amendment.

And, the Catholic Church referring to "morality" about covering birth control for their employees WHO CHOOSE TO TAKE IT (not forcing anyone to take it) is ridiculous in view of their support and willingness to cover VIAGRA.

If you can't see that, if you can't even recognize that it is plain hypocrisy and a direct attack on women's right to choose, you are blind and you should have lived 50 years ago. . .in fact, if you have YOUR WAY, you MAY force everyone (especially women) to live as they did 50 years ago.

This is an issue of what is right and what is wrong. And refusing to cover birth control for women, when happily covering Viagra is WRONG.

The question is NOT whether women in the plan take it or do not (that's up to them) its whether the rest in the equation are forced to subsidize what is against their faith.

Were you aware that Viagra is indicated for matters other than the obvious ? Might just explain the reference in our snip regarding its use.

Sildenafil is also available in other strengths for treating high blood pressure in the lungs (pulmonary arterial hypertension). Do not substitute one form of this drug for the other.

http://fubini.swarthmore.edu/~WS30/WS30F1998/viagra.html
and its not just for men

For too long, sexual disorders in women have been ignored by the American medical establishment. Ironically, Viagra, a drug intended for use in men, has had the effect of bringing female sexual dysfunction to the forefront of discussion in the medical community. As doctors begin to explore the potential use of Viagra in women, investigators are re-examining what constitutes female sexual dysfunction. In so doing, myriad issues relating to gender bias in the way we perceive sex have begun to surface. Since there is virtually no academic literature which discusses the effects Viagra has and will have on women, this report is meant to bring together many of the ideas which have begun to surface in popular media circles. When examined as a collective, perceptions of this drug and its use in women speak volumes about larger social issues in America.