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: 13
11
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Do any other "businesses" similar to Catholicism, allow me to be tax exempt and refuse my employees their basic rights? apparently i can at least have the luxury of refusing them job benefits.


I should start a religion, what a wonderful profit margin.
i could claim something like, my god dosnt allow you to be happy.
so i can fire people when they are [s]getting paid to much[/s] er.... smile to much.
edit on 4-3-2012 by Bisman because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by mastahunta
Obumbo the Muslim Illegal Immigrant created an Opt out measure. They don't have to pay for
it, the entire insurance pool pays for it. And I'll have you know, the church already pays for
all kinds of procedures because they participate in insurance. Their money is not segregated
and keep track of when claims are paid, that is simple the bottom line truth due to the massive
nature of pooling.


Ummmm... Typical of Kool-aid drinking liberals, your entire position on this is based solely in emotion. You really are not as educated on this topic as you'd like to portray, and that excerpt is the perfect example.

Here is an article that might help you, regarding your incorrect statement above. (But, I doubt it)

Self Insured Complicate Health Deal


The Obama administration thought it had found a way to ease mounting objections to a requirement in the new health care act that all employers — including religiously affiliated hospitals and universities — offer coverage for birth control to women free of charge.

It would make the insurers cover the costs, rather than the organizations themselves.

But the administration announced the compromise plan before it had figured out how to address one conspicuous point: Like most large employers, many religiously affiliated organizations choose to insure themselves rather than hire an outside company to assume the risk.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Artephius Abraxas Helios
Most women take birth control to control and regulate their menstruation cycles,

That's simply not true. 'MOST' women use birth control not to get pregnant.
The lighter menstration cycle is a happy side effect of using the pill.
Sometimes the pill is used for reasons other than birth control .. but not 'most' of the time.

The issue at hand is whether or not religious institutions should have the right to impose their religious views on their employees

Wrong. You got it backwards. The issue at hand is whether or not people like you are imposing YOUR beliefs on the Catholic Church and ignorning the first amendment rights of the Catholic church. The Church is not imposing it's religious views on anyone ... it is following it's religious beliefs as is it's Constitutional right. People who work at Catholic Church hospitals or schools can get birth control elsewhere or they can work elsewhere.

reducing the issue to fornication is ridiculous. Ridiculous, but typical of the right wing. .

Actually, from what I'm reading here, the left wing is trying to reduce the issue from a Constitutional one to a fornicating for free one. Again .. you got it backwards. The right is upholding the Constitution. The left is trying to get people to boink without consequence and trying to get people of faith to pay for it even though they don't agree with it.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
That's simply not true. 'MOST' women use birth control not to get pregnant.
The lighter menstration cycle is a happy side effect of using the pill.
Sometimes the pill is used for reasons other than birth control .. but not 'most' of the time.


So, you know a majority of women in this country and their use of birth control then, eh? Care to provide proof of this statement that "most women use birth control not to get pregnant"?



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bisman
Do any other "businesses" similar to Catholicism, allow me to be tax exempt and refuse my employees their basic rights? apparently i can at least have the luxury of refusing them job benefits.


Why do you people continue to use this blatant lie to try to convince others of your position? Or do you believe the lie, yourself?

No one is being "refused their basic right" to use contraceptives. The religious organizations, as employer, just don't want to pay for it. There is a huge difference.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   
of course they arent refusing to. im saying they are trying to refuse. that is the fight they are putting on.
not "paying" for it is the speech they are using. in the end its one belief imposing their beliefs upon another.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   


So, you know a majority of women in this country and their use of birth control then, eh? Care to provide proof of this statement that "most women use birth control not to get pregnant"?


I would argue that the proof is the name


I seriously doubt many studies are done concerning the primary use for birth control considering the obvious. I think you have a tall mountain to climb in order to argue your point and burden of proof would lie within your court.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Believer101
Care to provide proof of this statement that "most women use birth control not to get pregnant"?

You didn't just say that ... did you?

Read what you posted .... why would a woman use a BIRTH CONTROL pill?
What is it called? A BIRTH CONTROL pill. It's called that for a reason. DUH!
Sure there are other things it can be used for .. but it is the BIRTH CONTROL pill.
Know why? Because it's the primary function for 'the BIRTH CONTROL pill'.
That's what it's used for 'most'.
Seriously .... you are so funny ....



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bisman
in the end its one belief imposing their beliefs upon another.

It's YOU trying to impose YOUR beliefs on the Catholic church .. which has it's beliefs
protected by the First Amendment. The Catholic church is not imposing any beliefs
on anyone. They aren't stopping anyone from going out and getting their birth control.
To say they are .. is simply wrong.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Bisman
 


Ok. Here's a very simple example you can follow. You and I are standing in line at Starbucks (I don't go there, but being the liberal you are, I'm making an assumption here), I ask you to pay for my coffee and you refuse. Even though I can still purchase and consume the coffee, with my own money, can I say you are "refusing me my right to that cup of coffee"?

No. And it is a lie to say so.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Believer101

Originally posted by FlyersFan
That's simply not true. 'MOST' women use birth control not to get pregnant.
The lighter menstration cycle is a happy side effect of using the pill.
Sometimes the pill is used for reasons other than birth control .. but not 'most' of the time.


So, you know a majority of women in this country and their use of birth control then, eh? Care to provide proof of this statement that "most women use birth control not to get pregnant"?


I'm a woman and I definitely agree with Flyers Fan's statement. There are some women who found that The Pill helped them not get so sick during their cycle, but mostly it was started for the purpose of not getting preggie. I'm sure the average women who are not worried about getting pregnant won't use The Pill precisely because it tampers with the hormones. Surprisingly, not all women use chemicals to balance their hormones. Some women use a combination of diet and herbal/vitamin remedies and raw glandulars. Some women just deal with it and take Midol. Some women get acupuncture.
And apparently some women don't know or don't care that when they take The Pill they may still get preggie and miscarry and not even know it.
Also I'm inclined to question whether MD's actually prescribe The Pill to a woman exclusively to stop her from excessive cramping or if it started out as a way to avoid pregnancy and the doc said well just stay on it to control your menses till you decide to get preggie. Also, some women, once they stop with The Pill then cannot conceive and carry to term after many years of use.

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

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

edit on 4-3-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: oops typos



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by mastahunta
Someone else's sexual activity is not your realm to dictate,

The Catholic Church is not dictating the sexual activity of it's employees. But you sure do want to dictate the beliefs of the Catholic Church. THEY aren't the ones interfering in others lives or interfering with others Constitutional rights. But you are.


Well they can opt out - so are you happy?



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by WTFover
Typical of Kool-aid drinking liberals, your entire position on this is based solely in emotion. You really are not as educated on this topic as you'd like to portray, and that excerpt is the perfect example.


I'm not emotional in the slightest... As far as educated, neither are you tough shot




Here is an article that might help you, regarding your incorrect statement above. (But, I doubt it)


My statement in not correct in every case, neither is the tid bit you singled out in the article,
but you don't have the fortitude to offer that up do you? Typical Conservative, leaves out information
to tell the story they want to tell. The article states that for the institutions that are self funded,



“This policy will be developed collaboratively so that the ultimate outcome works for religious employers, their workers and the public,” an administration official said Wednesday.


So maybe you are mad because it is not a typical GOP, totalitarian my way or no way? Its not manly
enough so you are offended...





Self Insured Complicate Health Deal


The Obama administration thought it had found a way to ease mounting objections to a requirement in the new health care act that all employers — including religiously affiliated hospitals and universities — offer coverage for birth control to women free of charge.

It would make the insurers cover the costs, rather than the organizations themselves.

But the administration announced the compromise plan before it had figured out how to address one conspicuous point: Like most large employers, many religiously affiliated organizations choose to insure themselves rather than hire an outside company to assume the risk.


Like this



“The only serious issue left is self-insurance,” he said Wednesday on a conference call with reporters. “But the Obama administration has said it wants to work with these organizations so they’re not required to violate their conscience. I’m sure they mean that in good faith.”





I see you left out the portions which discussed the pertinent information following this section.
Lying by omission, the conservative mantra.
edit on 4-3-2012 by mastahunta because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by mastahunta

Well they can opt out - so are you happy?


That is completely ridiculous. Are you so naive as to believe Obama's BS on this? Do you honestly believe the insurance companies are just going to give that benefit to the insured? Seriously?

I know, I know... Obama said it, so it's must be true.
edit on 4-3-2012 by WTFover because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by mastahunta
 


Can you not understand the phrase you quoted, from a whitehouse official which specifically said "will be developed". Which means it is not at this time, which means there is no opt out. An "opt out" is impossible for a self insured organization, Einstein, and that is what the article expresses.

God you are about the most disingenuous person I've ever run into on ATS.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by WTFover

Originally posted by mastahunta

Well they can opt out - so are you happy?


That is completely ridiculous. Are you so naive as to believe Obama's BS on this? Do you honestly believe the insurance companies are just going to give that benefit to the insured? Seriously?

I know, I know... Obama said it, so it's must be true.
edit on 4-3-2012 by WTFover because: (no reason given)


Do you honestly thinks money in insurance pools are segregated in boxes so the money doesn't
intermingle? If you have ever had insurance, your premium has covered the disbursement
for an abortion at some point...



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

Originally posted by WTFover
reply to post by mastahunta
 


Can you not understand the phrase you quoted, from a whitehouse official which specifically said "will be developed". Which means it is not at this time, which means there is no opt out. An "opt out" is impossible for a self insured organization, Einstein, and that is what the article expresses.

God you are about the most disingenuous person I've ever run into on ATS.


Well clearly they are going to have engineer something now aren't they? The article expresses that
there is a bind and that the administration feels the pressure to address it.

this is what they said, specifically, talk about being disingenuous

“This policy will be developed collaboratively so that the ultimate outcome works for religious employers, their workers and the public,”

I guess being a right winger, you have problems with collaboration
edit on 4-3-2012 by mastahunta because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by WTFover

I know, I know... Obama said it, so it's must be true.
edit on 4-3-2012 by WTFover because: (no reason given)


I know, fox news says it, so it must be true



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by mastahunta

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?


Its another typical right wing way to instill their Fascist ideas on America,
just like Citizens Untied. Constitution is toilet paper to be used like toilet
paper I guess.


Wrong.

Ignoring the First Amendment and forcing religious people to ignore their religion in violation of Constitutional guarantees is the LEFT wing method of installing their Fascist ideas on America.

Here's a novel idea - don't like their rules on what insurance covers? Go to a different school. Work for a different employer. Buy your own damned independent insurance.

Instead, Fascists will try to employ force to impose THEIR ideas on the unwilling.



posted on Mar, 4 2012 @ 09:05 PM
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.


Yes, it DOES come down to individual rights - as opposed to governmental edict. When the government has the power to force Catholics to violate their beliefs, they also have the power to force Atheists to violate theirs.

That's the whole reason the First Amendment clause prohibiting governmental interference in religious matters was emplaced.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join