CHURCHES MUST PAY BIRTH CONTROL: COURT

Associated Press ^ | 10/20/06

[right-wingin_It]

Election Motivator... Thank you Liberals!

[SoothingDave]

ok, but does it have to be different sex marriage?

Take any two gay men or lesbian women. Lock them into a room. I don't care how long they stay in there, they aren't producing any children.

Railing against the way nature is, is juvenile.

do you suppose that they'd do even better with 3 or more parents?

Insert tab A into slot B. There is no such thing as a "third" parent.

SD

[netmilsmom]

Sorry about that.

[SoothingDave]

Thats their mistake. I would make it a function of all employees jobs that they set an example by living by the principles of that religion, and then hire only Catholics, or whatever religion it is. If a church is going to behave like any other business then of course they are going to be treated like any other business.

I can't argue with that. As I've said, the Church and its social services arms need to decide whom they really serve. If it's a smaller operation without gov't money, but with their souls and witness intact, it seems a no-brainer to me.

SD

[presidio9]

I must say you guys nailed this one directly on the head

Yes, well we've had 2000 years to get our act together. Keep in mind that the condom is as old as the pyramids, and that Christianity was the first major religious movement to treat women as equals.

[netmilsmom]

>>I am very pleased that you and others in your parish have been able to be treated without pills. I am also Catholic and I try to follow the laws of the Church. In 2002 I had 93 days when I was not having a period. I am on a specific pill because that the only one that works, so far. I am not saying this to put you or your advise down, but it does not fit everyone.<<

And I'm not saying any of this to put you down either but NPF doctors would find another treatment. The problem that I see is that doctors who are open to the hormones in BC pills take the easy way out. Sometimes they don't even think about other treatments.
Also, join the club of full time periods. It's not just you, many of us have had the same problem. It's not fun and my heart goes out to you. Truly.

[Talking_Mouse]

You have given some very good advise that many people do not know about birthcontol pills. I agree that everyone using any form of medication should be given a full pharmaceutical read-out, and they should READ IT.

I hope that most people will do at least a cursory web search, when facing a health problem. There is much information out there and culling the good websites from the bad is not always easy. However talking over the findings with a doctor often helps in narrowing down the willowing process. In the case of birthcontol pills, if one is apposed to abortion and sexually active one needs to know how the pill works (your point 2). The websearch, in this case, is essential, so that one know exactly how ones specific medication effects ones body and mind.

[Religion Moderator]

Drop the tagline.

[presidio9]

Why?

[the invisib1e hand]

hogwash. a time to obey man/a time to obey God.

[Religion Moderator]

It suggests violence, albeit sarcastically.

[presidio9]

It does nothing of the sort. Do you pay attention to current events, or are you strictly into religion?

Some nutball muslims in Somolia did exactly what I suggested a couple of weeks ago: They shot an innocent nun in the back because they thought the Pope had insulted Islam. Perhaps you didn't get the referrence.

[right-wingin_It]

Timelines... 2008 -- Force all Catholic Institutions (social services, hospitals) to provide contraception.
2010 -- Force all Catholic Insititutions to provide abortificant-contraception (ie. Plan B)
2012 -- Force all Catholic institutions to cover surgical abortion.
2014 -- Dismantle the Catholic Mass itself...Make faulty claims of the environmental hazards of incense, and Municipal Smoking Bans

Dont think it's comming!?...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4026537.stm

Church air is 'threat to health'

 

Candles can generate pollutants

Air inside churches may be a bigger health risk than that beside major roads, research suggests.

Church air was found to be considerably higher in carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons than air beside roads travelled by 45,000 vehicles daily.

It also had levels of tiny solid pollutants (PM10s) up to 20 times the European limits.

The study, by Maastricht University, The Netherlands, is published in the European Respiratory Journal.

This discovery is very worrying Dr Theo de Kok

The researchers say that December, with churches lighting up candles for Christmas, could be an especially dangerous month for the lungs.

It is now believed that respiratory health is increasingly at risk from so-called "indoor pollution" in the home, workplace and other enclosed spaces.

The Dutch team set out to examine the air quality in churches, as they are often poorly ventilated, with candles burning all day, and frequent use of incense. Both could, in principle, be expected to have some harmful effects.

[SAMS]

"The New York Catholic Conference is considering an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court"

Stop considering it & JUST DO IT!!

[fml]

True, but there are no rules that force someone to use Catholic or other religious social service groups.

[Hostage]

The reason is found in an awareness of 'spiritual' versus 'physical' ideals and standards. Most people choose to live each day forgetting that death is a certainty and is natural to the physical world they live in. As a consequence they neglect that which lives on after their death, the 'spirit'.

My wife is an MD that shared your point of view in the past. She was particularly incensed that the Church in Africa would not promote the use of condoms especially as HIV/AIDS is epidemic there.

She asked me the same question: How can one be against abortion yet not allow contraceptives? Especially when it would save so many lives?

The Church is a spiritual entity first. The Church has a higher standard by serving the spirit before it concerns the flesh. I think most everyone would agree that any Christian church that serves first the flesh and neglects the spirit is no longer a true Church.

The higher standard the Church promotes is monogamous, respectful and loving marriage. This standard when followed by society eliminates all problems associated with birth control and sexually transmitted disease.

What would happen to the Catholic Church or any Church if they gave up higher spiritual principles in favor of condoms, morning-after pills, abortion, euthanasia? How could any such organization lecture on the Christian spirit? They could not as they would cease to be a true Church.

So the Catholic Church has a choice, either cease to be a true Church or in a regulated legalistic environment such as USA healthcare, stop providing health insurance to employees.

[Scotswife]

"The unintended conseqence should be that the church must then stop paying for all health insurance."

that's exactly right.
The Church cannot be forced to provide a service to employees that they consider to be intrinsically evil.
It's like telling them they would have to pay for abortions.

[Scotswife]

"The Catholic church's stance on no contraceptives is confusing to me. How can one be against abortion yet not allow contraceptives? Contraceptives should be one acceptable tool used to help prevent unwanted pregnancies."



This should answer your question....

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

The Church is not against birth control using natural means...periodic abstinence during times of fertility.

[AmishDude]

The state cannot and will not "ban gay marriage".

It is simply the case that the state does not recognize any same sex union. But two men can dress in flowing white dresses, make endless vows to each other, have a reception, get gifts and nag each other into old age.

The only thing is that the state won't issue a license to them.

Gays used to do this all the time. They were called "commitment ceremonies" before the fascists in the homosexual rights movement decided that their psychoses wouldn't be assuaged unless the state were forced by judges to officially recognize such unions as marriages.

[absolootezer0]

biologically no, they can't be parents. but by that definition, you'd also have to tell every step parent on the planet that they are not a "parent."