It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Christianity & Hobby Lobby

page: 11
17
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 08:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: windword

And I wonder what HL would do if one of their UNMARRIED employees turned up pregnant. Like the teacher in the Catholic school who was fired for being pregnant and single.

This can of worms is huge.
BTW, I totally agree with you on the differentiation between "abortion" and "contraception." A fertilized egg that does not implant is not a "baby". It is a cluster of cells. Preventing implantation is not, therefore, an "abortifacient."

(Which is the correct spelling, folks. ABORTIFACIENT. Just so you all know.)

a·bor·ti·fa·cient
əˌbôrtəˈfāSHənt/Submit
MEDICINE
adjective
1.
(chiefly of a drug) causing abortion.
noun
1.
an abortifacient drug.


Call me pedantic. BUT - Women have used everything from turtle shells to apricot kernels to prevent pregnancy. It's been going on forEVER.

Examples include brewer's yeast,[7] vitamin C, bitter melon,[8] wild carrot, blue cohosh, pennyroyal, nutmeg, mugwort, slippery elm, papaya, vervain, common rue, ergot, saffron and tansy. Animal studies have shown that pomegranate may be an effective abortifacient.[2][9]

Wiki entry



here is the last word on abortifacients

www.lifenews.com...




A recently revised web-based fact sheet[1] published by the HHS Office of Women’s Health appears to contradict FDA labeling on emergency contraception pills (levonorgestrel, also known as “Plan B,” “Plan B One-Step,” “Next Choice” and the “morning-after pill”). FDA labeling[2] indicates that emergency contraception can end the life of a developing human embryo by preventing implantation.

The FDA notes, “Plan B One-Step is believed to act as an emergency contraceptive principally by preventing ovulation or fertilization (by altering tubal transport of sperm and/or ova). In addition, it may inhibit implantation (by altering the endometrium).”

In other words, the drug may prevent a living, developing human embryo from implanting in the womb, thus ending the life of the embryo. Because that information is a key concern for any women with pro-life conscience concerns, it must be presented to allow women fully informed consent in making their medical choices.


the FDA's own words.

and here is where all the disinfo comes from;
cnsnews.com...



(CNSNews.com) – Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Kathleen Sebelius claimed in a congressional hearing on Thursday that the new HHS regulation that requires all health-care plans in the United States to cover sterilziations and all FDA-approved contraceptives will not require the plans to cover any abortifacients, which cause the death of a human embyro.

However, all FDA-approved contraceptives include emergency contraceptives such as Plan B and Ella (Ulipristal), which do in fact cause the death of human embryos



edit on 3119547831pm2014 by tsingtao because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 08:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Annee

and I was a member of one of those fundamentalist pentecostal church for quite a few years. I have a pretty good idea what their beliefs are.
Some of the people who are supporting this decision obviously don't believe the same!


I honestly think some people are just anti-feminism and support anything that takes power away from women.

When I was young (teen) I actually considered becoming a minister. Over the years (many) I was on a quest to find "truth". I'm just too practical/logical to not wear pants, be submissive to my husband, believe stuff that doesn't make sense, wear unfitting spiritual underwear, and talking in tongues definitely not for me.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: NavyDoc

but then we might have to pay an extra 50 cents for that big mac so the employees making it can earn a living wage!!
can't have that now can we??
It's much better to have half the population dependent on the gov't for their needs! Makes them more submissive!!

Our land is only the "Land of the Free" as long as the people are for the most part self sufficient!
This is the result of us allowing that self sufficiency to escape from too many hands.

It was really quite easy for Al-Qaeda to gain a strong foothold into Afghanistan. The country was poorer than poor! And they had plenty of money to throw around and buy their acceptance. And starving people will accept alot for a slice of bread! I kind of think that history teaches us that lesson. Improvished people are easy pickings for the religious. Just open up the charity for them and they will accept whatever you tell them for some food!

The people who are complaining about this decision aren't the people dependent on the gov't for their daily bread. They are those who are doing their best to be responsible. They are looking at what has been for decades the primary source to meet their healthcare needs- Employer subsidized insurance!

And this is what I have observed from the religous right:
They seem to be against abortion- regardless of the risk to the mother.
They are continually speaking out against the safety net, planned parenthood, birth control in general, the minimum wage, unions, working mothers, divorce, ect.
Well I am sorry but if that birth control pill is what is keeping the women working and keeping the family above the proverty line why in the world would one want to make it more difficult for her to get it?
You want to know what I think??
They don't want her working!
They don't want the gov't helping that family out either!
They want her dependent on the husband! And if he can't provide enough for the family they want to be there to save the day!!
for the same reason Al-Qaeda set up shop in the poorest hellhole in the world!!
Dependency=Servitude!






puts new meaning to "land of the free" (stuff) doesn't it?



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: FlyersFan

Heya...
you know that only about half of "fertilized eggs" implant into the uterus, right?

In fact, the way "birth control pills" work is to trick the body into thinking it is already pregnant (using hormones).
That's how IUDs work also.
The uterus thinks there's already something there - so, no, nothing else is going to implant here.

How Birth Control Methods Prevent Pregnancy

Hormonal
Prevents ovulation
Thickens mucus at the cervix so sperm cannot pass through
Changes the environment of the uterus and fallopian tubes to prevent fertilization and to prevent implantation if fertilization occurs



Intrauterine device (IUD)

The progestin released by the hormonal IUD prevents fertilization by making the mucus in the cervix thick and sticky, so sperm can't get through to the uterus. The progestin and IUD change the uterine lining, preventing implantation in the rare case that fertilization occurs.

The copper in the copper IUD is toxic to sperm. It causes changes in the uterus and fallopian tubes that kill sperm. The IUD changes the uterine lining, which prevents implantation in the rare case that fertilization occurs.


So, is killing the sperm also considered an abortifacient?
I'm pretty sure that's how the RCC sees it.
But the thing is - preventing the cells (fertilized ovum with sperm) from gaining a "foothold" is what contraceptives do...and also what IUDs do - and the Ella and Plan B.

The RUwhatever pill is different. I can see them (HL) denying that - but the others? Well, in my opinion, they are simply "birth control methods." Get to it before it's planted...




old people die, shall we kill people when they get old?



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 09:03 PM
link   
How do you end something by preventing it from happening?

This is really reaching for straws.

That is ridiculous. It's no different then catching sperm in a condom.


edit on 16-7-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
How do you end something by preventing it from happening?





time machines!



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 09:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsingtao

originally posted by: Annee
How do you end something by preventing it from happening?





time machines!


you made me laugh.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 04:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

your explanations sound like a whacked out new ager.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 04:58 AM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar
We don't want to see our loved one's health endangered because the option to use birth control has been taken away from them! We don't want them having so many babies that it effects their health and well being. We don't want them living in forced proverty because of someone's religious views!
And we have a valid reason to have this concern!
I know you shouldn't have to pay for.....

do not try to feed me the cock and bull that your poor children can not afford contraceptives.
if you carried and raised children that are too stupid to figure out how to afford contraceptives (rubbers still cost $0.75 in the truck stop bathroom) then let me send you some money for their sterilization.

not one of them works at hobby lobby.

nor the cock and bull that they will have so many babies that it will cause them health problems.
again if you carried and raised children that are too stupid......

And now we are forcing your brilliant children to live in poverty because of some CEO's religious views?

If your thinking processes are any indication of the intelligence level of your children, then I will send some money for that sterilization.

Get real, those pathetic whining what if situations are so obtuse and far fetched that they are paranoid hallucinations. What if through the evolutionary process, humans lose their great toe. Will we stop playing soccer?
Your suggested scenarios are so improbable that they could be used in a comedy routine.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 05:34 AM
link   

edit on 17/7/2014 by spirited75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 05:52 AM
link   
a reply to: tsingtao

should we force a mother with young ones to risk her life by getting pregnant and carrying a child that the doctors could conceivably kill her if she tries to carry it??

And don't come up with the idea that she shouldn't have sex if that is the case!!
the religions don't actually allow the women to make that choice unless of course the husband desires her to give her that choice!

besides some of her family's income is going to ensure that the unfortunates of the world can have a healthy active sex life! The insurance companies are covering viagra to ensure that the old men can have a healthy sex life! So I don't want to hear about how the middle class women should just be denying her husband sex if she doesn't want to have a child at the present time!! Having kid after kid without spacing them apart is UNHEALTHY!





Family God has ordained the family as the foundational institution of human society. It is composed of persons related to one another by marriage, blood or adoption. Marriage is the uniting of one man and one woman in covenant commitment for a lifetime. ... The husband and wife are of equal worth before God, since both are created in God's image. A husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church. He has the God-given responsibility to provide for, to protect, and to lead his family. A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ. She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation... Children, from the moment of conception, are a blessing and heritage from the Lord. Parents are to demonstrate to their children God's pattern for marriage.

www.sbc.net...


A baptist preacher was on tv a few years ago and was asked what "A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ" meant.
His answer was something like " well it means that if the husband doesn't want her working then she shouldn't be working!"
So well now that we are giving business owners the right run their business as their religion dictates I suppose that the employers can now go to the women in their businesses and ask them to bring permission slips written by their husbands in giving their wives permission to worik??



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: spirited75
1 My kids are adults and they are not married because they have been taught not only by me but by life experience that becoming a parent without the income to provide can be quite painful!! They know first hand just how screwed a man is if things don't work out with the mother of their baby!!
2 My kids are not poor!! If they were this wouldn't be an issue would it?? They'd get all the healthcare, food, housing, and birth control they needed!!!
3. They work 40 or more hours every week! We wouldn't even have to have this discussion if the danged employers would pay decent salaries so those poor people needed to run to the gov't and convince them to take your money to supply the needs their paychecks can't!!

Both Annee and me are old enough to remember the days before the pill came out. And, here is a true story from my childhood.
We'd go to my grandmother's house at least once a year. And I would play with some of the neighbor kids there. The family that lived next door to her consisted of a stay at home mom, a father who was a lawyer, and well six kids! Every Sunday they would load up in the car and go to church. Well shortly after the sixth baby was born the husband came home one day and gathered his things and just moved out!! He had been having an affair with his secretary and well was much happier with her I guess! House was probably alot quieter!!

Large families were quite common back then. And are really quite infeasible now economically. In most families both husband and wife have to work, you know those employers I spoke of earlier and their desire to make more profit and all..

I also have a few women in my family tree with the words "died in chidbirth" connected with them. It's a fact and if you look up the statistics you will find that the number of yearly deaths because of childbirth is increasing at the present time for some reason..

Condoms are the least effective method of birth control there is! Matter of fact I was advised by my doctor that if I chose to use it make sure I use another method along with it. So while you call me and my kids stupid consider this:
you appear quite dumb to me also!!!

Again I repeat!!
The "poor" have no problem whatsoever to obtain birth control! or food or housing or other types of medical care!
It's those who the gov't doesn't see qualified as being poor. Some can be very skilled in occupations are vary much needed in our society! And, I am willing to bet you don't have the smarts to do what they are doing!

And I am not dumb enough to believe that this will stop at just hobby lobby or just those four methods of birth control! matter of fact it has already extended to other companies and ALL birth control..








edit on 17-7-2014 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: Annee

your explanations sound like a whacked out new ager.


Those who spout out stuff like this need to take a reflective look at themselves.

Your sanctimonious is showing.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 09:36 AM
link   
I am specially impressed with the actions of the house republicans yesterday.
They voted down a bill which would have effectively reversed the courts decision and had the employees insurance to again cover contraceptives. Then proposed a bill which would "allow" a woman to buy her contraceptives out of her own pocket.

You have really got to love the amount of "liberty" which this bill would give to a woman. They will let her not only pay for the insurance she gets through her employer but will also let her pay for something which her insurance should cover.
Does this mean men should also be allowed to pay for their own prostate exams? After all women don't have those, do they? So why should her insurance pay for his problems?

I know all about the "religous aspects" of this case, I am just waiting for the response when a female boss raises this question?

Could this whole question about contraceptives really be based in the idea of a male's control over a female and all the things which this entails?



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 09:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar

Both Annee and me are old enough to remember the days before the pill came out.



I remember a lot of things. The "good old days" is just selective memory.

Babies being ripped away from their teen mothers and put up for adoption without their consent or even getting to see the baby.

Unwed mothers being thrown out in the street, disowned by their family.

Husbands beating women for getting pregnant again, cuz you know it's all their fault.

Back alley abortions.

Yes, I remember the horrors before women had means to control reproduction.

And Women having no right to anything in her husbands name when he left her. If the house was in the mans name alone, he could legally throw her and the kids out.

When I divorced my husband (he was jealous of his own children and it was starting to affect them) --- he signed papers so I could have a credit card of my own. At the time I had no rights to credit because I was a stay at home mom. Because of the Woman's Rights movement this has changed and a lot more.


edit on 17-7-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

"Could this whole question about contraceptives really be based in the idea of a male's control over a female and all the things which this entails?"


That's my guess!!

"Husbands beating women for getting pregnant again, cuz you know it's all their fault. "

I've never heard of that one!! Wouldn't doubt it though!!
I did have a friend once though who came home from work with paycheck in hand and her husband wanted the check so he could go to the bar!! She wouldn't give it to him so he pushed her down the stairs and caused her to miscarry! To my surprise I have actually found some fundamentalist christians that tried to blame her for this. She should have just given him the check and starved her kids!!

" Then proposed a bill which would "allow" a woman to buy her contraceptives out of her own pocket. "

Here's an idea let's just eliminate all coverage for all preventive care!! I mean most of us wouldn't be able to get the treatment if one of those cancer screenings came back positive anyways without going horribly into debt so what good are they??
The problem is they don't see birth control as being valid health care. It's optional, we don't need it!!
Personally I think some of us ought to get together since I don't think this is going to stop here. The next step will be something like having a bunch of parents coming up and using the same process say that they don't want to provide health insurance coverage for their 16 year old girl if it includes birth control in it! And I don't believe that the Supreme Court can do anything but agree with them now. After all they can't really protect a corp's right to practice their religion and they used a constitutional right that was originally for people not businesses I don't think they could do anything else now than to say yes to them also! And I think that it might lead to the eventual removal of birth control from the policies. And well they've been hitting the federal programs all along and more than likely they will be cut in time.
So well I think some of us ought to get together and start collecting all the stories of where this attack on women's rights to control their reproduction had ended badly and start a website encouraging young women to just say no!! Things are getting too dangerous! Even now there women sitting in jail cells becuase they miscarried. There is no medical evidence that it was the result of anything they did wrong during the pregnancy but I guess none was needed!

It's time to start encouraging women young and old married and single to say no to sex! Unless of course they really want to have a baby!!
Have you ever read the side effects of viagra?? If men are desiring to have sex so much that they are willing to risk that to enjoy it!! Having their wife sit down with them and explain why she has decided not to let him might turn the tide!!


edit on 17-7-2014 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Annee

"Could this whole question about contraceptives really be based in the idea of a male's control over a female and all the things which



That statement is from Teamcommander, not me, but I agree. (Damn quotes
)

As I've previously stated, Fundamental Religion is oppressive of women in its make-up alone. It is also male dominant.

Just read any of the male vs female threads on ATS -- they give great perspective of how some men hate and fear strong, independent women in power.




edit on 17-7-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee
I need to correct one thing in my post though. When I said that there were women even now sitting jail cells I might have been wrong. There's been at least 40 cases where it was tried but not sure if any succeeded.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 10:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Annee

"Could this whole question about contraceptives really be based in the idea of a male's control over a female and all the things which


Just read any of the male vs female threads on ATS -- they give great perspective of how some men hate and fear strong, independent women in power.




If you are strong and independent then why not pay for your own B.C out of pocket instead of demanding a company pay for it?



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar

I did have a friend once though who came home from work with paycheck in hand and her husband wanted the check so he could go to the bar!! She wouldn't give it to him so he pushed her down the stairs and caused her to miscarry! To my surprise I have actually found some fundamentalist christians that tried to blame her for this. She should have just given him the check and starved her kids!!



Oh, forgot about that one: "He hit you? What did YOU do to upset him?

I remember in one of my early jobs I was threatened with firing just because I had a run in my nylons. People laugh today, they don't take it seriously. But it was, at that time he had the right to fire me for any reason he saw fit.

Remember keeping nylons in your desk drawer (if you had one). Or after pantyhose came out if you had a run in one leg, you'd cut it off and sew on a good leg from another pair that had the same problem?

Yeah, the " good old days".


---------------------

Would love to see how men reacted if Hobby Lobby took away a medical product or procedure they considered important to their manhood.
edit on 17-7-2014 by Annee because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join