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.

 

The Birth Control Controversy

page: 10
11
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by mastahunta
The 1st amendment is not a tool for religious Fascists to use as a dictating implement.

The 1st amendment is there to protect religious liberties from people like you who want to impose your own morals on others. Kinda funny, considering that is exactly what people like you complain that the other side does.

This thread =

edit on 3/4/2012 by FlyersFan because: typo




posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by mastahunta
How is it the companies business what people do with their bodies... The Catholic school does not
own the employee.


This has been explained a dozen times on this board.

The 1st Amendment promises religious freedom, that includes religious freedom for Catholics.
The Catholic church believes it is a sin to participate IN ANY MANNER in birth control.
That includes providing it for others to use. That includes assisting them to use it.
Therefore, they cannot pay for birth control for others. It's against their religion.

People voluntarily work for a Catholic church hospital or school.
If they are so obsessed with obtaining free birth control, they can go work elsewhere.
Or they can still work for the Catholic church hospital or school but get their birth control
at any corner gas station or drug store or planned parent hood or other clinic.
It's pretty darn cheap and easily obtained.

Free birth control is not a 'right'. Birth control is a commodity.
Freedom of religion is a constitutional right.

As for the title of your thread - 'the birth control controversy' - the only people making this
a controversy are those who are trying to ignore the 1st Amendment rights of the
Catholics in this country. The 1st Amendment and the Catholic church are very clear
on this and are on solid ground legally with it.




edit on 3/4/2012 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:03 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Awesome post. I love how he has no response about the Catholic hospital closing. If I was a Catholic hospital, DONATING MY TIME AND MONEY FOR FREE, and I had to deal with ungrateful dbags trying to fourth reich me, I would absolutely shut down. People like the O.P. don't deserve all the millions of hours those nuns put in caring for sick people for FREE. They should pay the going rate, who gives a crap if they are poor. No money, no bed! Charity is for religious Fascists!



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muttley2012
if I want birth control, you have no right to imposes your belief system upon my person.

If I was a Catholic employer YOU would have no right to impose YOUR belief system on me.
You would not be able to impose your belief system on me to force me to go against my faith.
It's my First Amendment right.


Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
My main problem with this is that no one seems to be explaining to the Catholic church how incredibly wrong they are to take that stance toward birth control.

It's none of our business. Onanism is one of their beliefs. They can believe what they want.
If people don't like it .. and if they want free birth control .. they should just work elsewhere.


Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
that makes it okay for Catholic institutions to deny anyone in their employ, even non-Catholics, access to it?

The Catholic church is not denying anyone access to birth control. That's beyond silly. They are saying they won't pay for it because they can't .. it's against their religion. Just about anyone in this country can go into a gas station and buy a 25 cent condom .. or get free/reduced price birth control at planned parenthood, or a clinic, or buy some in a drug store, or go to any doctor not in a Catholic hospital and get it. To say that the Catholic church is denying people access is absolutely wrong.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by iamconcerned
I love how he has no response about the Catholic hospital closing.

Catholic church hospitals are traditionally built in the the poorest sections of cities or in places that are hardest hit economically. The ERs are used by the lower income people of the city .. and a lot of the time the hospital doesnt get paid. The purpose of the Church hospitals are that they are to be run in a CATHOLIC IDENTITY and help provide relief to people. If you take away their Catholic identity, they can not run. It's just that simple.

So people want to shut down the Catholic church hospitals because they don't give employees free birth control pills. Those that want to do this should be made to go explain to the people in the cities why their hospitals are being shut down .. all because the hospital doesn't want to give employees BC pills.

This is very partisan and very selfish on the part of those who are trying to force the Catholic church to pay for birth control for employees. Those Catholic church hospitals and schools do a lot of good ... but all that doesn't matter to those who want to force them to go against their religion. The Catholic church hospitals and schools WILL NOT OPERATE if they are forced to go against their faith .. the whole reason those hospitals and schools are open is because they are to be run with a Catholic identity. Take that away, and they will not run.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:16 AM
link   
if my insurance company doesn't provide coverage for birth control, I would probably just visit one of the planned parenthood clinics (which is paid for with tax money), if I found out I was making too much money, well, I would have to pay out of pocket if I could.....and claim it as a tax deduction at the end of the year......leaving a little bit of a gap in my contribution to the gov't for the other tax payers to pick up. if I couldn't afford it, well, I'd have to go without it, and would probably end up getting pregnant, and the taxpayer may end up paying even more through child care subsidies, food stamps, child healthcare, ect....or well, it's quite possible that I would have to quit working to take care of the little tyke, and again, the taxpayers would end up having to pick up the slack of the loss of revenue of me not having a job would produce in the gov't budgets!!!

so, just how would you like to pay????
because any which way you go, you are gonna pay!!!

and on a side note, have kid after kid after kid ISN'T HEALTHY FOR A WOMEN'S BODY!!!
so, religion or no, if you are against a women using birth control and wishing to push that belief on society, you are endangering women's health!!!!

oh, ya, and many of these religious believers would also be willing to tell you that the women should be "obedient" to the husband!!! which if one was to take seriously, one would have to admit....
NOT HAVING SEX ISN'T AN OPTION THAT A BELIEVING WOMEN IS TO MAKE!!
it, like everything else, it up to the men!!!
which is why so many women just aren't believers, at least when it comes to birth control, or their "God Given" position in society!!!



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by dawnstar
 


I love how women with multiple kids on social services claim that the root of their problems was access to contraceptives. I also love how you hold these social services as a weapon against me, telling me i'm stucking paying for your ass either way, so might as well be for the pill. But yet you couldn't spare 25 cents for a condom for him, or 20$ a month for pills for yourself, but you found 100$ a month for cigs and 100$ a month for booze. But hey, not to worry, after they get the unions and social security decimated, single moms on benefits is the next axe to fall. Count on it.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:52 AM
link   
reply to post by iamconcerned
 


I'm 50+ years old...don't need birth control...
I have a husband and three kids which we raised mostly on our own.....you didn't pay for them...
yes, there have been times when I couldn't take the pill, health reasons, wanted to tie the tubes, but family couldn't afford it.....which is why I have three children...
I don't drink...
yes I smoke, but I probably don't eat as much as you, so I save money that way!!!

as far as this:
"But yet you couldn't spare 25 cents for a condom for him"

I'll just refer to to this:

"oh, ya, and many of these religious believers would also be willing to tell you that the women should be "obedient" to the husband!!! which if one was to take seriously, one would have to admit....
NOT HAVING SEX ISN'T AN OPTION THAT A BELIEVING WOMEN IS TO MAKE!!
it, like everything else, it up to the men!!! "

as far as the social service monster...
ya, go ahead and decimate it!! I want to see that happen in my lifetime!!! I think it's around 50%, really think it's more, of the revenues that are coming into the hospitals and doctor's offices in my area are coming in through the various forms of gov't programs!!! ya, take it away!! let's see what that does to the economy!!!
and, I'm as sure that you will disagree, but there are alot of hardworking families out there that are also relying on those programs!!! ya, go ahead kill the programs, I would love to have all those contented hard workers become discontented and begin demanding a living wage!!! I'd love to see the employers have to pay us...me....more money, and well, it'll be fun to watch the corporate profits fall and stock market drop like a rock as the economy adjusts to having to actually pay wages people can live on and do without the backdoor subsidizing of companies payroll!! and, I would love to see those upper management's salaries drop down to a more realistic level! I would love to see the health insurance premiums drop like a rock as they struggle to build up a customer base! I would love to see the rent drop to a level that is affordable!!
ya, kill the social service!! please!!!

but, I bet if you, or anyone actually would look with a little foresight into the problem, you wouldn't want that..since in so many ways, you are profiting by it!

now that we got that all out in the open, want to discuss the one point that was made in the post that is the most valid??
HAVING BABY AFTER BABY IS NOT HEALTHY FOR A WOMEN'S BODY!! therefore, there is a genuine health benefit to the birth control!!! it's not all about silly girls acting irresponsibly!
you just want to make it out to be.....

by the way, blood transfusions go against some people's religions also...should we take those out of health coverage also?



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by nunya13
 


Are you just looking for an argument, for the sake of arguing? Maybe you should click on my "Posts in Thread" option and read what I've already written about that, before continuing that line.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 07:39 AM
link   
they're not providing "free" healthcare either, not any more than any other hospital out there that is recieving gov't funds....

www.stjosephtowson.com...

there is clearly a button on that page that leads you to another page that will take your payment!!!

and, I am almost willing to bet that in some way or another, there is money going into the hospital through a gov't grant here and there.....if I find one, I'll let you know!!!


found this:



Medicare and Medicaid account for one-half of the funding to religiously affiliated hospitals.5 Religious hospitals also enjoy certain benefits like tax exempt status, lowcost financing through government bond programs, and in some areas, use of municipal buildings.6 Hospital Mergers and Sales  Between 1990 and 2001 there were 171 mergers between Catholic hospitals and secular

lsrj.org...



and from the same source:




Under the Religious and Ethical Directives for Catholic Health Care Services, Catholic hospitals will not provide contraception, sterilization, most infertility treatments, condom distribution for AIDS prevention, or abortion services. Directive 48 goes so far as to say no medical care can be provided to a woman with an extrauterine pregnancy that could be construed as abortion.


if you want to claim that no money should flow from the gov't to the healthcare industry, that is fine and dandy!! couldn't agree more!!
but it is....lots of it, so the poor can afford it, so new machines can be developed, and then more so that the hospitals can buy them. for the training of healthcare professionals, for new buildings....and on and on!!!
just because some don't believe in any type of birth control shouldn't mean that women should accept second rate healthcare!! if a person has a extrauterine pregnancy that isn't treated, well, that is endangering the woman isn't it?? so, what is being said is that my tax money can be used to provide a ton of drugs to teens to alter their brains and go suicidal/homicidal and go through a school shooting up classmates....
but it might not be able to be used to save some woman's life is she happened to have a life threatening pregnancy because she committed the great "sin" of having sex....maybe even with her husband!!

sorry, don't buy it!!! let's just let me keep my tax money and the healthcare system can just make due without it!!!







edit on 4-3-2012 by dawnstar because: found this:

edit on 4-3-2012 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by WTFover
reply to post by Muttley2012
 


If a mod needs to remove this, then fine. But, I can only reply...

Please....


This comes down to individual rights, a person can decide to use birth control or not.
If they have religious reasons not to, they won't... I really can hardly believe you are
trying to frame it this way.
I really can't belive you don't get the jest of your own thread.

Its not about religious people being able to choose weather to use a contraseptive, it is about being forced to pay for contraseptive in there insurance premiums when they don't belive in it which also means that if someone finds out they don't cover contraseptives in there insurance they don't have to work there.

Do you get it or are you going to flame me with some more of your hate filled ridicule. There is no debate here, if someone disagrees with you they are "right wing fascist's or religious selots" it doesn't take much to figure out what you are and why you are here.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   
If the Catholic church doesn't want others to impose their beliefs on them, they shouldn't impose their religion on others. It's as simple as that. If they have the right to impose, people have the right to impose on them. What's fair is fair. What's fowl is fowl.

BC is not abortifacients, it does not cause an abortion.

In order to have an abortion, a woman must be pregnant first.

Just another age old lie by religious nut jobs.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Maybe it's been mentioned before, but everyone including those protecting the religious freedom of the Catholic Church should know that birth control and other sterilization methods are allowed if it is done for a medical purpose. If the BC is prescribed because of PCOS, than by the Church's own standards and Canon Law that is allowed. If a woman has a tumor on her Fallopian tubes and they must be removed to save her life....another form of sterilization, than it's allowed.

This is not about religious freedom. This is about a sect group of politicians trying to gain the vote of conservative Catholics and Christians who clearly do not understand the Catholic Code. And any Bishop or Priest against birth control and speaking out against it has chosen to select what parts of the Catholic by laws to listen to for political convenience.

This was the very thing that Sandra Fluke was talking about when mentioning the friend with PCOS. This isn't about random women who sleep around, it's about a real medical need for birth control. Anyone who believes this is just about sex is simply not listening, doing the research, and falling prey to the propaganda.

We're so focused on birth control right now no one is paying attention to the things that matter like the economy and other issues that are clearly much more important.
edit on 3/4/2012 by MissDirtySouth because: word choice, clarity, grammar



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:36 AM
link   
You're all so busy debating the pros and cons of the rule that you are missing the entire issue.

You now have a federal beauracracy that operates thousands of miles from my home dictating to me, my family and my business how to conduct our relationship with a completely private service provider (insurance company) in regard to a product that really has nothing to do with the public sphere.

THAT IS ILLEGAL, and once this truth is established then the birth control issue becomes moot.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by WTFover
But, the fact is, no matter how many "reasons" you dream up, that pesky little First Amendment just keeps getting in your way.

That is the heart of the issue and all the Sandra Flukes in the world won't change it.


What are you on about?

The 1st amendment is not a tool for religious Fascists to use as a dictating implement.
That is a bologna cover so zealots can inflict morality upon others.

I think it is pretty pathetic using the constitution as an excuse to restrict liberty.


Nor is it a tool for secular fascists to force Chrisitans to pay for choices in birth control. It is a fact that The Pill has abortifacient properties and can actually cause abortion while the woman is not even aware she has conceived. Either way, if you expect Christian colleges to pick up the tab, or you expect the govt(which is the taxpayers) to pay for it, then you are demanding that some people who disagree with abortion pay for your stuff.

Again, if you're reading about CHEMICAL ABORTIONS for the first time, this may surprise, or even shock you. Most Americans are not aware that the Pill and other chemical "contraceptives" cause millions of "non-surgical" abortions each year in the early weeks of pregnancy. If you are using the Pill, Depo-Provera or Norplant, you need to know the truth about how these products work.


Another way the Pill causes early abortions: If your tiny baby survives the ride down the fallopian tube to your womb, the Pill will almost always cause the endometrium (the lining of your uterus) to reject your child. Chemical reactions often cause the lining of your womb to become thin, shriveled and unable to support implantation of your newly conceived child


In her award winning study of women taking the earlier high dose Pills, Dutch gynecologist Dr. Nine Van der Vange showed "proof of ovulation based on ultrasound exams and hormonal indicators occurred in about 4.7% of the cycles studied." (Source: Sterns, Dr. David, "How the Pill and the IUD Work: Gambling with Life," American Life League, PO Box 1350, Stafford, VA 22555)

www.prolife.com...



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Hey and Google birth control pills, they cost like $36-$60 for a 3 month supply. This is not an insurance issue, insurance is for risk management. There is no risk management issue here. If you want pills then here is a radical idea....buy them, and skip some other nominal $12 a month expenditure if you have too. Like Starbucks or a days worth of cigarettes, or pack your lunch a two days a month, or drop HBO, or drop your phone's data plan, or keep the house heat at 67 instead of 70, you get the picture. Not a Federal issue. Not an insurance issue. Heck, not even an issue at all. You let the government distract you with details about how the take your liberty, never actually standing up for your liberty. Wake Up!!!



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by LibertyCrazy
You're all so busy debating the pros and cons of the rule that you are missing the entire issue.

You now have a federal beauracracy that operates thousands of miles from my home dictating to me, my family and my business how to conduct our relationship with a completely private service provider (insurance company) in regard to a product that really has nothing to do with the public sphere.

THAT IS ILLEGAL, and once this truth is established then the birth control issue becomes moot.


Yes, this is why the whole health care mandate is unConstitutional. The socialist proponents of it invoked the commerce clause as a way to justify it. The healthcare law is so wrong in so many ways, and more bureaucracy. This woman demanding other people pay for her stuff is just more entitlement consciousness. It was unheard of in the 70's when The Pill was taking hold in middle class America. Either you or your parents paid for it. The end.

But the entitlement class has taken so much root since then, with Planned Parenthood at the helm. And did you know that money from the Stimulus went to SIECUS and Planned Parenthood?

When administration officials are bragging about all those jobs “saved or created” by Obama’s stimulus program, they probably won’t mention the $387,000 grant to Planned Parenthood of Massachusetts, but residents of Fitchburg, Mass., don’t like what it means for their community:

hotair.com...

and another commentary I found at Free Republic states the Stimulus spending is permanent and that is why the admin can't get a budget, because this permanent Stimulus spending would show up.
Sneaky snakes...

edit on 4-3-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-3-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by hangedman13
 


I'm a little confused here on your statements about this woman you keep talking about. Are you referring to Ms. Fluke? If you are, then you really should go back and find out what you're talking about before spouting off about her priorities. Here, I'll give you a primer. Ms. Fluke has been speaking on behalf of a classmate who needed to be on the pill in order to treat cystic ovaries. That OTHER student could not afford the pill (because the Catholic university she attends will not cover it as part of their insurance plan) so she stopped taking it and subsequently developed a very large cyst on her ovary which then had to be removed. It is now likely that she will never be able to have children. Now that you know what Ms. Fluke's role is in this debate. Are you going to continue telling her what her priorities should be?

If birth control were a drug for men, this would NEVER be an issue.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
A catholic church University is an employer (business).
The teachers are their employees and so it include insurance policy in the employment pack. University offer insurance to students too.

The gov. say the Insurance companies MUST pay for contraception pills.

Do you think these universities/colleges/schools can opt out from any employment contracts under the law because their god says so? Of course not.

I m pretty sure these universities aren't free, private universities. People pay money to them to study there. Stop using religion talk here... ITS BUSINESS.

RESUME:
Gov says: Insurance companies need pay for contraception pills for their clients...
Insurance companies don't want because it means... they will lose money. Use a bunch religions arguments as excuse.
End of story.
edit on 4/3/12 by blackcube because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muttley2012

Originally posted by WTFover
But, the fact is, no matter how many "reasons" you dream up, that pesky little First Amendment just keeps getting in your way.

That is the heart of the issue and all the Sandra Flukes in the world won't change it.



What does the first amendment have to do with birth control?


Miss Fluke was complaining that Georgetown University does not include contraception in its health coverage for students. Georgetown University is a Catholic institution. Catholics don't believe in birth control. It's against their religion. So they don't want to dispense it. That's where the first amendment comes in. This is an issue about freedom of religion. This is not JUST about birth control, although people who think all religions are frivolous and annoying will try to slant it that way. The first amendment is really the bedrock of our society. It's what gives us the right to have different opinions and beliefs and thereby DISCUSS things instead of just have some supreme leader decide everything. Let's be REAL CAREFUL before we just toss it out. Sandra can get her pills somewhere else, I'm sure. She's a smart enterprising girl. After all, she IS a law student. Right?



new topics




 
11
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join