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.

 

EWTN (Catholic TV Network) Sues Obama Admin Over Mandate

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by negativenihil
But this is ATS - best/fastest way to net a load of S&F -

Have you seen how many stars and flags I have?
It's not like I need to troll for more.
It's not like they are worth anything. You can't buy anything with them ... they are just 'there'.

post an anti-Obama thread and ignore facts.

Bud ... it's the pro-obama-no-matter-what shills who ignore the fact that he tried to
plow right over the 1st Amendment in order to get left wing votes for 2012.




posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Well what was considered unconstitutional to the catholics, was not to their non-catholic employees. Like I said, either hire only true caltholics in their institutions or be prepared to compromise. Although, they didn't, they forced the hand of the President, and are controlling a massive amount of non-catholic's rights.UNCONSTITUTIONAL to who?



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by negativenihil
 
Thanks.



And, um, no. I don't think I will. Not because I didn't write especially well, but I wrote under my actual name and the link provides an email and I'd rather you not have that info.

I don't trust, you.


Uh huh. Right.

How stupid do you have to be to use your REAL NAME as a username on the internet? I've seen you pull this before in other threads - "Oh I can't show you this - It's got my real name!". You must have been awful dense back then.

How about this - Copy and paste your rants into a PM and just tell me the domain name of the site you were on.
(But c'mon... we both know there are no anti-bush rants written by you, so think up a new excuse)

(Let's just be clear - I don't believe you for one second. At least I know people like FlyersFan have been consistently pulling for the right wing over the years.)



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by negativenihil
 

Hello, again. We spent on a little time together on a thread that was dealing with this subject just a little while ago, remember? You raised the same point there that you're raising here, that Bush had the same law in his administration.

I pointed out that they were nowhere near the same. The EEOC regulations under Bush allowed an exemption. To get out of that contraception coverage all the employer had to do was not cover prescription drugs or not offer insurance.

Under Obama's plan there is no exemption, do it or pay a fine.

I got the impression that you understood that there was a significant difference, but now you're saying (again) that the difference doesn't exist. Did I not explain it clearly enough last time? Did you forget? I really don't want to believe that you're saying something that you know to be false.

What happened?



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by beezzer
 



Actually, this soluion works


Yes it does...that is all that needs to be said.

Hence....point for Obama.


I'm listening to multiple conservative talk shows right now just tripping over themselves just trying their hardest to come up with some negative on this...it's hilarious. They can't just say "good job Obama...thanks for listening".

You can't even say that...can you?

Not really. Because I don't agree with his overall healthcare plan.



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952

I got the impression that you understood that there was a significant difference, but now you're saying (again) that the difference doesn't exist. Did I not explain it clearly enough last time? Did you forget? I really don't want to believe that you're saying something that you know to be false.

What happened?


What happened is you're imagining some sort of in-depth conversation with me.

You wrote your reply towing the line, and I replied with a quote from my article, and then moved on - never actually responding to your wall of text reply (or even seeing it till I looked back at the thread now).

Edited to add:

And here come the PMs! I love it when the trolls lack the testicular fortitude to say things in public!

edit on 10-2-2012 by negativenihil because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-2-2012 by negativenihil because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by negativenihil
 

Thanks for reminding me that I can get wordy. I'll try to improve.

Now that you've see my reply, do you still think the EEOC and Obamacare regulations are basically the same?

(Oh and for the record, the U2Us aren't coming from me.)



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Obama's compromise does all that it needs to do. It takes the "sin" of providing contraceptives out of the hands of religious organizations and puts in in the hands of insurance companies. Employees of Catholic hospitals (even Catholic women) will still have access to "free" contraception, but the CEO won't have to pay for it.


I'm VERY happy with this compromise.

edit on 2/10/2012 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   
Sorry I haven't read everybody's posts yet...so if this is a rehash, I'm sorry. But I have to tell you folks one thing- I keep hearing that song "Every sperm is sacred" from Monty Python's Meaning Of Life. There's more than enough religious fanatics as it is without them spawning ever more from an unending fountain of .... well, at least the woman would be able to turn off HER faucet, at least!



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

Dear Benevolent Heretic,

I'm glad you like the compromise, because (not surprisingly, see my signature) I don't understand it. Under the compromise, a Church run institution will have to buy an insurance plan, the plan will have to have contraception, and the church will have to pay for the plan.

How is this a compromise?



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Here's my position on this issue. I don't know who I think is right or wrong. That's why I keep asking FlyersFan such ridiculous questions. I'm trying to find out whose rights are being violated here, if anyone's.

Because if you can't nail down whose rights are being violated and who is responsible for the actions of others in the religion and who HAS the right in the first place, I don't see how we can determine whose rights count.


I have been trying to understand both sides of the issue because I do have such strong feelings about the first amendment. But these are questions that I'm still unclear on. (My guesses in parenthesis)

Individuals have freedom of religion.
Do organizations? (no - except churches)
Do Hospitals? (no)

Women have a right to comprehensive health care.
Is making contraception unavailable through normal channels discrimination? (yes)

On sin:
Can an organization sin? (no)
If the Catholics' position is that they don't want to participate because contraception is a sin, who is the sinner?
Who will God punish?
Wouldn't each Catholic individual be responsible for using or not using contraception? (yes)

reply to post by charles1952
 



Originally posted by charles1952
How is this a compromise?


As I understand it, birth control will not be available in the plan provided to organizations who have a legitimate religious exception. However, the insurance company will provide contraception to any employee of the company that wants it. So, the hospital is not paying for the birth control, but Catholic employees would have access to it if they wanted.



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

Dear Benevolent Heretic,

I appreciate the serious thought you're giving this and I'd like to walk along with you for awhile. Please allow me to start with the second half of your comments:

As I understand it, birth control will not be available in the plan provided to organizations who have a legitimate religious exception.
This is one place where I get confused. I was under the impression that every policy in the country had to cover contraception. If Catholic hospitals can buy plans for their employees that don't cover contraception, then the Church has won and Obama has completely reversed himself in a few days.

I'd like to offer some comments on your other questions, though.

Individuals have freedom of religion.
Do organizations? (no - except churches)
Do Hospitals? (no)
I don't even think churches do. Only individuals, as individuals, or gathered together.


Women have a right to comprehensive health care.
Is making contraception unavailable through normal channels discrimination? (yes)
Here we must part company for a bit. Yes it is good for people to have health care, but a right? Like a First Amendment right? No. And even if they did have such a right, that's not the question. Do they have the right to make people violate their long held, and widely recognized, religious beliefs to pay for that right? Really, no.


Can an organization sin? (no)
If the Catholics' position is that they don't want to participate because contraception is a sin, who is the sinner?
Who will God punish?
Wouldn't each Catholic individual be responsible for using or not using contraception? (yes)
Well, now we're talking about the Church's position on sin, not really a legal question, but no, an organization cannot sin, but the people leading it and making decisions for it can. And voting to use the Organization's funds to support contraception would be a sin. Who will God punish? I don't understand, He punishes sinners. Each individual is responsible if they use, supply, or facilitate contraception.

So, if you're concerned about rights, it seems like the Bishop's position for you.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Feb, 10 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   
I am not Catholic but I am a Christian and read the same bible.

I know for a fact their sins will be forgiven so force them anyway.



Just joking, I am on the fence though. I have no idea who to support.
If anything the government should supply contraception themselves to everyone for free (of course taxes would go up which would mean Catholics would pay for it).
edit on 2/10/2012 by ashtonhz8907 because: (no reason given)

edit on 2/10/2012 by ashtonhz8907 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
I was under the impression that every policy in the country had to cover contraception.


With the new rule, Obama introduced a religious exemption. Organizations can apply for an exemption and get a policy that does NOT cover contraception.



If Catholic hospitals can buy plans for their employees that don't cover contraception, then the Church has won and Obama has completely reversed himself in a few days.


It was a compromise (or as he calls it, "an accommodation"). The religious hospital doesn't have to pay for contraception, but the people that work there (including the Catholic people) have access to "free" contraception, which is what he wanted in the first place. Both win. That's what compromise is.




Well, now we're talking about the Church's position on sin, not really a legal question,


I know. I am trying to understand the religious aspect of it AS WELL AS the legal aspect. Because in this case, they are both relevant. I'm trying to be respectful of religious freedom ...

But as I said, I'm happy with the deal that was made. I'm sorry if you don't understand it.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Individuals have freedom of religion. Do organizations? (no - except churches) Do Hospitals? (no)

Churches have freedom of religion. The Catholic Hospitals, orphanages, etc are all part of the church. Therefore, they have freedom of religion. The whole point of those places even existing is that they are part of the Church and they are outreaches from the Church. Ditto Methodist and Jewish and _______ (fill in religion of choice) hospitals, clinics, schools ... whatever. It's all part of the Church that has the name over the door.


Women have a right to comprehensive health care.
Is making contraception unavailable through normal channels discrimination? (yes)

- "Health Care' isn't a right. It's a commodity. It's not on the same level as the Constitutional rights.
(that's just an unpleasant fact ... it's a commodity for sale)
- No one was denied health care. No one. All their health care benefits are still in place, minus
FREE birth control pills. Those are still available to them in ways other than being paid for by the employer.
- Personal responsibility. If someone so desperately wants free birth control pills paid for by the employer, instead of just picking up free birth control pills at the local clinics which are widely available or paying for it themselves, then they should use their common sense and work for someone who can provide it. The Catholic Church simply can not.


On sin: Can an organization sin? (no)

That's your opinion and not shared by most of Christianity. Considering that you don't believe in God... do you believe that anyone can sin at all?
A 'sin' is something done by a human of their own free will that is in contradiction to God and what He'd want. If there is no god then there isn't any sin as far as an athiest would be concerned. Right? (or is that wrong? ... I'm thinking that's right ... ?? )

Since this is a religious area of questions - The bible (for those that believe in it) shows clearly that God holds organizations responsible - en masse - for the 'sins' commited by some the people in it. He punishes 'all of Israel' .. He punishes 'all of Israels enemies' .. He causes the 'nations' to anguish ... He choses his favorites 'Israel is the chosen people' ... etc etc. So it is the belief of the Catholics that sin debt is shared. Buddhists have a similar view on bad karma. Innocent people can pay off other people's 'bad karma'. The Catholics and the Buddhists both believe in victim souls who get stuck footing the 'sin bill' for others. (that's what Jesus did ... paid for the sins of others with His own suffering)

“And he shall give Israel up because of the sins of Jeroboam, who did sin, and who made Israel to sin” (1st Kings 14:16)

“Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD...” (Numbers 31:16).

"What sorrow awaits the world, because it tempts people to sin. Temptations are inevitable, but what sorrow awaits the person who does the tempting" - Matthew 18:7

Luke 17:1 Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to sin are bound to come, but woe to that person through whom they come."

Matthew 18:6 - (Jesus speaking) "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."

I could pull quotes all day. But you get the picture. Entire groups of people are held accountable by the Christian God for the sins of some of them in their group, and He holds accountable those who lead others to sin. Sort of like - all Americans are held accountable by the world for the stupid things the POTUS does, even if they didn't vote for him.


If the Catholics' position is that they don't want to participate because contraception is a sin, who is the sinner? Who will God punish?

See the first post ... Catholic belief in SIN ... Catholics (and I'm pretty sure most Christians) believe that if you cause someone else to sin, then you are guilty of that sin as well. Leading others to sin makes you culpable of that sin. Therefore God punishes both - either in this life or the next. That is the belief. A few biblical references on damnation for those leading others to sin for those who want it - Genesis 3:1,5 ; 1st Kings 21:25; Job 2:9;


Wouldn't each Catholic individual be responsible for using or not using contraception? (yes)

Sure. And, according to the Catholic belief, Catholics who don't use it but who participate in making it available to anyone else (See opening post - sin) are held accountable for helping that person to 'sin'.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by negativenihil
Last I checked - Hospitals aren't churches, and churches aren't hospitals.

Wrong. Best check again.

CATHOLIC hospitals are part of the CATHOLIC church. Just because it isn't in a stained glass building doesn't make it any less of The Church then what happens in a building with stained glass. The Catholic hospitals, Catholic schools, Catholic Orphanages are all part of the CATHOLIC Church and an outreach from the Catholic Church itself.


Where are the posts where you and Beez point out how horrible it is that these churches get federal funding?
Please defend my tax dollars subsidizing these "churches" that are treated as hospitals by the tax code?

They can practice their religion all they like if they start using the free market to survive instead of stealing from me in order to stay in business.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 07:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Still
Where are the posts where you and Beez point out how horrible it is that these churches get federal funding?

I don't think it's horrible at all. (You'll have to check with Beezzer for his opinion.) These outreaches are usually set up in the most dire neighborhoods. If they were to close down, then millions of people would suffer. If the government feels that it is good to help these Catholic ERs help poor Americans .. then great. Our government DOES help faith-based groups help other Americans.

[qutoe] They can practice their religion all they like if they start using the free market to survive instead of stealing from me in order to stay in business.
If you want these places to close ... fine. You can tell the poor people in the inner cities why they no longer get free health care at the emergency rooms ... and you can tell them why they have no place to go. Good luck with that.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 08:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Still
Where are the posts where you and Beez point out how horrible it is that these churches get federal funding?

I don't think it's horrible at all. (You'll have to check with Beezzer for his opinion.) These outreaches are usually set up in the most dire neighborhoods. If they were to close down, then millions of people would suffer. If the government feels that it is good to help these Catholic ERs help poor Americans .. then great. Our government DOES help faith-based groups help other Americans.


That is pretty anti-American and extremely twisted to suggest that MY TAX dollars should fund what you call an "outreach program" that gets to pick and choose which treatments are inline with their religious dogma. My Satanic Hospital prescribes oral sex to cure Migraines. When can I count on you protesting the fact that we cannot get your tax dollars to pay for it?



If you want these places to close ... fine. You can tell the poor people in the inner cities why they no longer get free health care at the emergency rooms ... and you can tell them why they have no place to go. Good luck with that.


You are just making things up now. I am comparing hospitals to hospitals. You have somehow interjected free healthcare clinics into the argument for no reason at all other than to attempt to have an argument that is not actually based on reality or the conversation.
edit on 11-2-2012 by Still because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Churches have freedom of religion. The Catholic Hospitals, orphanages, etc are all part of the church.


I hear you saying that, but I don't know if that's legally true. Churches provide a very specific service to the people. But hospitals provide medical care, regardless of their affiliation. They are not under the umbrella of a church, IMO. I have yet to understand how providing birth control to a hospital's employees is prohibiting ANYONE the free exercise of religion. What it prohibits is the control of the employees.



Considering that you don't believe in God... do you believe that anyone can sin at all?


Absolutely. Anyone who has a moral code can sin against it. My question was how do Catholics view it? According to Catholic law, can a whole organization sin? And if so, who does God punish? And you answered them. Thank you.




Sin
a : an offense against religious or moral law


But like I said, I'm good with the accommodation by Obama. Are you? Thanks for your patience.



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Still
You are just making things up now.

Nope. Like it or not .. and obviously you and whoever gave you a star (BH
) don't like it ... it's true.

American Magazine

... Moreover, consistent with their missions, Catholic hospitals were often built in poor neighborhoods. Medicaid cutbacks and an increasing burden of care for undocumented immigrants meant even less income; the financial stress proved too much. Yet it is possible to hold one’s own without selling one’s soul. In other places during this era of managed care, Catholic and non-Catholic hospital systems still serve the poor and flourish ...


Google up just about any Catholic hospital information and you will see that they are traditionally built to 'help the poor' or built in 'poor neighborhoods' or built in inner cities ... that's just a fact.

Bon Secours Health Care System

In 1881, the Sisters of Bon Secours arrived in the United States where they continued their work of visiting the poor, the sick and the dying in their homes. Over time, they built a multi-state network of hospitals, long-term care facilities and healthcare services. All preserved the Bon Secours Catholic tradition of providing quality care, especially to the poor and the sick.


America's News Wire - on how all types of hospital closures are hurting the poor



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join