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.

 

Priest Warns Obama: Better Knock the Catholic Church Out NOW

page: 19
35
<< 16  17  18    20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by MisticRebel
 



I AM PRO CHOICE, stick that in your pipe and smoke it, I am 100% pro choice & right wingers can bow down and well.. you get the idea, I stand against right wingers, every last one of them, others stand against them too like ANONYMOUS.


Tell us how you really feel!


I’m sure right wingers across the globe are shaking in their boots in fear of the intellectual beat down you will give them.




Never too late to stand your ground - Revolution begins In you - In me - Revolution! Set yourself free Who are they to tell you what to do?
The stage is not set, the road is not chosen Your fate not preordained They are losing control - every step of your way.


Pro-Lifers are standing their ground too. Enough of the selfish, evil infanticide! It’s gone on far too long. Enough of the “anything goes” mentality displayed by twisted secularists who are destroying morality in this country.

There is a divide in this country on important issues and things are coming to a head…no doubt.

edit on 14-3-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrChuck
Perfect! The government should just give away OCPs. Now the Catholic Church doesn't have to be forced into your opinions and beliefs. I think this is a good compromise.


Catholic Hospitals hire employees for their professional qualifications - - not their religious beliefs.

Religious belief is being forced on these employees hired for their professional qualifications. It is the Catholic Church that is forcing their opinions and beliefs on the employees - - not the other way around.

Someone had a weakness for religion - - when they allowed this to be OK. Something needs to be legally changed to correct this.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by IronArm
I made the desision to have sex, knowing full well what could happen, and I had to do what was nessesary to facilitate my child and his life. Evaluate risk, and wager your life on it. Quite simple really.


Well great. My daughter did the same thing. Abstinence fails - - because humans are a natural born sexual species.

My daughter took the responsibility seriously - as did you.

How does that help the unwanted/uncared for children who get recycled through a "generational culture" of latchkey kids and irresponsible parenting?

I support 100% any and all ways to prevent adding more kids to this "generational culture". Hopefully the government can also encourage production and use of male contraceptives.





Or to be blunt, men should learn to be real men of virture and integrity, keeping it in their pants till they are grown enough to be fathers, and women need to be ladies and keep their legs shut. Our socialtal breakdown is so despirately obvious. As for the kids that have poor parents or no parents, mayhaps we need to teach kids how to behave properly, rather than feeding them "Teen Mom" and "Jersey Shore" for their upbringing yes?

Its not the gov'ts fault that people are like this. Its our forebearers and people who begat us, and the generation that we live in and the next one to follow need to learn how to have self-control as well as moral structure.

Does it seem fair that we should be tax-laden because there are easy men who take home easy women?

No. They can pay for their own one-way.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by IronArm
Or to be blunt, men should learn to be real men of virture and integrity, keeping it in their pants till they are grown enough to be fathers, and women need to be ladies and keep their legs shut.


And in what century since the beginning of time has that happened?


Its not the gov'ts fault that people are like this.


So we should just keeping voicing blame and let rampant irresponsible unplanned children to keep recycling that culture?

The cost of free preventative pregnancy - - - - is minimal compared to the cost of perpetuating a culture of irresponsibility.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by colbe

Originally posted by proteus33
reply to post by seabag
 
good catolic church wants to have its say fine we are a country og free speach and religious freedom and i am not a fan of obama by any means but if they are gonna start making threats i think now is the time to make catholic corporation pay taxes on every dollar they take in.the whole reason they against contraception and aboration is because if people aint popping outnewbabies all the time then their profit base drops. they are a company just like ptl. they have lots of hospitals and they even have a huge bank that lends money to countries for XXX sake.




Your comments are ignorant and false proteus. The Catholic Church was threatened by Obama not the other way around.

For the 15th time....

The Catholic Church is the true faith not a company, their desire to be loving, to be Christlike is evidenced now for two centuries in places called orphanages, schools and hospitals worldwide and something called Catholic Charities.

Correction, abortion and contraception have always been a grave sin. You don't believe so you attack the Church. It's been a teaching for 2000
years and earlier in the Old Covenant.

You are going against God and more stupidity, to call birth, a new life
a money maker, bogus. You want the self gratification with no consequences.

Advise for pro-aborts, get right with God, your soul is at stake.


may the Two Hearts J+M keep you safe,


colbe


Here we go spreading untruths.

Wooowww... did you even watch the video? Better yet... read the dag on title of the thread?!



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by IronArm
Or to be blunt, men should learn to be real men of virture and integrity, keeping it in their pants till they are grown enough to be fathers, and women need to be ladies and keep their legs shut.


And in what century since the beginning of time has that happened?


Its not the gov'ts fault that people are like this.


So we should just keeping voicing blame and let rampant irresponsible unplanned children to keep recycling that culture?

The cost of free preventative pregnancy - - - - is minimal compared to the cost of perpetuating a culture of irresponsibility.


Perhaps actually resolving the issue within the bowels of our civilzation rather than patching it over, citing "cost issues" to be a more relevant movement? People rant about changing history (ie...womens movement, equal rights...etc) why not do another change for the betterment of human course? Rather than be nihlistic, be securing a more efficient, more tight-knit humanity of moral standards.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by OhZone
 



We either fund abortion and contraceptives now

or

Welfare and prision care later.

Just a little Logic is needed.


Following your logic, we should begin killing fat people and smokers now so our healthcare costs are cheaper in the future. Looking at this logically, it’s easy to see that these two groups are going to require millions more in healthcare treatment in the future than the rest of us, right?

Logic, huh?



Fat people and smokers are not the subject of this thread.
You may have a point tho.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by IronArm

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by IronArm
reply to post by seabag
 


Thats just it. You hit the nail on the head.


Or - - you can look beyond the immediate right now ME ME ME - - and see the bigger picture.

I support Free Government supported Everything for prevention of any more unwanted and or uncared for children.

No one should have a child they are not ready for or in a position to raise and provide for.

I support Any and Every government supported incentive to prevent that.

The cost is prohibitive - - - compared to the cost of providing for living children who become the "true victims" of the system.

Unless we say - - - "who cares about the children" - - who didn't ask to be born - - to parents that are not able for various reasons to actually raise them into responsible adults.



Or don't have sex unless you are prepared to pay for the consequenses of your actions. You failed to see the point of my post. Being responsible would entail abstenince in lu of the lack of ability to raise a child. Pay the time for the crime, as it were.

If you can't raise a child, don't pursue the actions that result in needing to do so.


Or don't drive a car unless you're prepared to pay the consequences.
Or walk across a street unless you're prepared to pay the consequences.
Or ride a bike unless you're prepared to pay the consequences.

Oh wait, health insurance covers all of that in the event that something happens that you're not prepared for.

edit on 14-3-2012 by SilentKillah because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   
"Worldwide overpopulation is the greatest risk to public health that we have ever encountered. The single obstacle to solving this problem is not money or the lack of acceptable family planning choices, but the opposition by a small group of extreme reactionaries now in control of the Roman Catholic Church. Uncounted numbers of people are denied access to contraception and abortion by the political machinations of a pope who is, by the dogma of his religion, unable to change his mind."

www.population-security.org...

"The National Catholic Reporter, a major national Catholic weekly newspaper, published a most revealing report in its December 29, 1989 issue. Doug Wead, special assistant to President Bush, was interviewed and quoted as saying: "He [President Bush] has been more sensitive and more accessible to the needs of the Catholic Church than any president I know of in American history." Wead indicated he felt that Bush's relationship with the American Catholic leadership was much closer than Reagan's had been: "We want the Church to feel loved and wanted, and we want them to have input." This relationship was maintained through five U.S. cardinals: Bernard Law, Joseph Bernardin, Edmund Szoka, John O'Connor, and James Hickey."

www.population-security.org...

This whole page discusses the Influence of the Vatican on US politics.
As is this one:

Why is the Vatican a threat to Americans?
www.population-security.org...



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by SilentKillah

Originally posted by IronArm

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by IronArm
reply to post by seabag
 


Thats just it. You hit the nail on the head.


Or - - you can look beyond the immediate right now ME ME ME - - and see the bigger picture.

I support Free Government supported Everything for prevention of any more unwanted and or uncared for children.

No one should have a child they are not ready for or in a position to raise and provide for.

I support Any and Every government supported incentive to prevent that.

The cost is prohibitive - - - compared to the cost of providing for living children who become the "true victims" of the system.

Unless we say - - - "who cares about the children" - - who didn't ask to be born - - to parents that are not able for various reasons to actually raise them into responsible adults.



Or don't have sex unless you are prepared to pay for the consequenses of your actions. You failed to see the point of my post. Being responsible would entail abstenince in lu of the lack of ability to raise a child. Pay the time for the crime, as it were.

If you can't raise a child, don't pursue the actions that result in needing to do so.


Or don't drive a car unless you're prepared to pay the consequences.
Or walk across a street unless you're prepared to pay the consequences.
Or ride a bike unless you're prepared to pay the consequences.

Oh wait, health insurance covers all of that in the event that something happens that you're not prepared for.

edit on 14-3-2012 by SilentKillah because: (no reason given)



Actually, your attempt at sarcasm only emphasises my point. You take your life into your own hands when you do any of those things correct? How the hell did we even survive for thousands of years before the whole "insurance" thing came about? Perhaps some effort needs to be made towards doing less stupid things. Should our gov't have to pay for a $500,000 life saving attempt for a man who decided to jump from roof to roof for fun? No, its stupid and irresponsible. If it is something that warrants protection from insurance and gov't assistance (firemen, police, etc) then it makes sense fiscally and otherwise.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrChuck
That means nobody would have children. Who is ever ready to have a child? Its a lifestyle change once you have a baby. Anyone can provide for their children if they really wanted to, single moms with multiple jobs are the greatest parents of all.

edit on 14-3-2012 by DrChuck because: (no reason given)


Well my wife and I actually wanted and tried to have our 3 children. I guess there would only be 3 children in the world.

It may be a lifestyle change for some, but not for others. Many women in their 20's still live with their parents and leave the child with their grandparents most of the time while they're out attempting to find a man to take care of them. I don't think they've changed their lifestyles from when they were teenagers.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
It's in the news today, signing up for Obama Care, you will be charged
a $1.00 surcharge to fund abortion.

The people in the near future who will take the "chip" also written into Obama Care even if they saw the evil of this surcharge before implantation, won't be bothered. Control, control, control....


www.lifenews.com...



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by IronArm
Actually, your attempt at sarcasm only emphasises my point.


Not really... insurance covers these. Sane people don't think "I'm going to get in an accident today" when they get into a car... just like sane women don't say "I'm going to get pregnant by a random guy" when they leave the club.


Originally posted by IronArm
You take your life into your own hands when you do any of those things correct?


Yes. But in the event that something happens while performing a risky activity such as driving, insurance will cover many of my medical expenses no?


Originally posted by IronArm
How the hell did we even survive for thousands of years before the whole "insurance" thing came about?


Simple... we didn't live in a world that revolved around rent, mortgages, car payments, taxes, etc. for thousands of years. Instead we lived in a world where you settle where you want to, grow your own crops alongside of a few neighbors, and enjoy life.


Originally posted by IronArm
Perhaps some effort needs to be made towards doing less stupid things. Should our gov't have to pay for a $500,000 life saving attempt for a man who decided to jump from roof to roof for fun? No, its stupid and irresponsible. If it is something that warrants protection from insurance and gov't assistance (firemen, police, etc) then it makes sense fiscally and otherwise.


This isn't an everyday activity for most people... however in most cases (i.e. kids doing such things), insurance covers it based on the medical records.

Sex however is a common occurrence in today's day and age for majority of the people in this country believe it or not.

I also believe that most insurance will cover drugs for HIV... also acquired from sex. I know mine does as I was reading the Benefit Plan yesterday.
edit on 14-3-2012 by SilentKillah because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-3-2012 by SilentKillah because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by colbe
It's in the news today, signing up for Obama Care, you will be charged
a $1.00 surcharge to fund abortion.

The people in the near future who will take the "chip" also written into Obama Care even if they saw the evil of this surcharge before implantation, won't be bothered. Control, control, control....


www.lifenews.com...


This "chip" that you keep bringing up has been discussed in another thread and it turns out to be "FALSE". It turns out that it was actually written into a different document in 2005 I think (President Obama wasn't president at the time whenever it was written) and the bill never passed. The current document has no such language that the other one did. I'm not doing the research... this isn't a thread for it. However you should since you're the spreader of LIES! Second time today... darn shame.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by IronArm
. . . moral standards.


I refuse to use or acknowledge the word moral. Ever since Bush took office its become the most over used and abused word in the English language.

Plus - - Christians seem to think they own it - - - and no one can have morals unless you are a Jesus believer.

Some animal societies behave ethically better then some Christians.

You do not need some invisible being outside yourself to live/believe/behave Ethically. And who's business is it to dictate "moral" to me? I'm very capable of choosing what I consider Ethical.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SilentKillah

Originally posted by colbe
It's in the news today, signing up for Obama Care, you will be charged
a $1.00 surcharge to fund abortion.

The people in the near future who will take the "chip" also written into Obama Care even if they saw the evil of this surcharge before implantation, won't be bothered. Control, control, control....


www.lifenews.com...


This "chip" that you keep bringing up has been discussed in another thread and it turns out to be "FALSE". It turns out that it was actually written into a different document in 2005 I think (President Obama wasn't president at the time whenever it was written) and the bill never passed. The current document has no such language that the other one did. I'm not doing the research... this isn't a thread for it. However you should since you're the spreader of LIES! Second time today... darn shame.


It sure is the thread for it, you don't want to hear it. You just said no to looking...you are closed.

That is HR 3200 Section 2521 Page 1001, paragraph 1 of Obamas health care.

The search group "Swopes" denies it, on investigation, they belong to
leftists, to Obama.

It's there in the writing, you refuse to believe. Herod, your guy, the
"chip" is nothing with his history. Wake up, this is your soul, it's eternal,
do not take the "chip."

Pray, pray, pray.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck
Perfect! The government should just give away OCPs. Now the Catholic Church doesn't have to be forced into your opinions and beliefs. I think this is a good compromise.


Catholic Hospitals hire employees for their professional qualifications - - not their religious beliefs.

Religious belief is being forced on these employees hired for their professional qualifications. It is the Catholic Church that is forcing their opinions and beliefs on the employees - - not the other way around.

Someone had a weakness for religion - - when they allowed this to be OK. Something needs to be legally changed to correct this.





Please tell me how the Catholic Church is forcing anyone to do anything. The employees are free to use contraceptives whenever they feel like. There is no violation of freedom here.

The Church is in its full rights to take no part in distribution of items that go against their belief, just as you are.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrChuck

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by DrChuck
Perfect! The government should just give away OCPs. Now the Catholic Church doesn't have to be forced into your opinions and beliefs. I think this is a good compromise.


Catholic Hospitals hire employees for their professional qualifications - - not their religious beliefs.

Religious belief is being forced on these employees hired for their professional qualifications. It is the Catholic Church that is forcing their opinions and beliefs on the employees - - not the other way around.

Someone had a weakness for religion - - when they allowed this to be OK. Something needs to be legally changed to correct this.





Please tell me how the Catholic Church is forcing anyone to do anything. The employees are free to use contraceptives whenever they feel like. There is no violation of freedom here.

The Church is in its full rights to take no part in distribution of items that go against their belief, just as you are.


Obama said "Fine - the insurance companies will provide it for free". The Catholic church still bitches.

Besides that Corporations are not churches. Corporations should have no right to religious belief. The fact that they do - - - is wrong.
edit on 14-3-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee


Obama said "Fine - the insurance companies will provide it for free". The Catholic church still bitches.

Besides that Corporations are not churches. Corporations should have no right to religious belief. The fact that they do - - - is wrong.
edit on 14-3-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



So you have a problem with the Catholic Church voicing its opinion, and you would like to dictate whether or not a corporation has no rights to religious belief.

Yet you see no problems with mandating/forcing someone against their will to provide a unnecessary medical treatment, even though their beliefs are against it.

The Catholic Church does not want to have any part of the birth control distribution as it goes against their beliefs. As stupid as it may sound to you, they consider birth control another form of murder, but that is their belief and their right to have that belief.

They are being forced to provide a mode of what they believe to be murder.

If this regulation passes it is a foundation to all beliefs being invalidated for the good of the economy.
I understand birth control is a good way to curb medical and social costs, but its more important that someone can freely participate or decline according to their beliefs. Freedom is more important than money.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrChuck
So you have a problem with the Catholic Church voicing its opinion, and you would like to dictate whether or not a corporation has no rights to religious belief.



I have a problem with religion mixed with a business/corporation.

It is illegal for them to hire only Catholics. Why is it legal for them to force their belief on employees that are not Catholic.

The 2 laws don't compute.

As I said - - - someone with a weakness for religion allowed something that shouldn't be.




top topics



 
35
<< 16  17  18    20  21 >>

log in

join