And the laws of the country include a document called the US Constitution. In that document, Catholics are guaranteed the right to practice their religion without the government dictating how they do so.

Congratulations...guess what...Catholics remain free to NOT use contraception.

Problem solved.

Maybe in your simplistic world.

Okay, I don't get it. If Catholics remain free to choose to not use contraception then what is the big deal?

Okay, I don't get it. If Catholics remain free to choose to not use contraception then what is the big deal?

Nothing, remember you're having a debate with a self-described fool.

Da Noid, maybe we should educate poor little Fool's to Nancy Reagan's platform ... uhhhhh Fool's JUST SAY NO! Then you'll never have to worry about contraception. Of course, I think you're probably hearing that little word more so than saying it!

By Mr. Santorum's line of reasoning, if I am Jewish it should be illegal for me to be drafted into the Armed Forces (if a draft is ever reinstated) because the Army serves bacon for breakfast.

Fool's Gold: This is not a Catholic country, and Rick may not choose which Constitutional Amendments that he wishes to follow. His right to follow the dictates of conscience end at his body, not mine.

Again, if you do business in this country, you follow the country's rules.

Not quite, noid.

Catholic doctrine teaches that anyone who assists in an abortion- up to and including paying for one- is subject to excommunication.

Forcing practicing Catholics to fund birth control that includes abortifacients violates their religious freedom- by forcing them to assist in abortions.

There has been one challenge to the law- I confess I do not remember the state- brought by a private individual who was granted a stay by a federal court. Such stays are only granted if the Judge believes he will find for the party seeking the stay.

This is not the first time Obama has taken on religion. He has lost before- a nine to nothing decision in a case brought against the Lutheran church.

He's going to lose this one, as well.

If the Catholic Church is running a BUSINESS that offers INSURANCE, then they have to comply with all of the laws that others do.

Crikey nojoe! Nobody is telling them to BUY it. They are just saying their insurance plan needs to COVER it. Get a grip already!

Oh ... and what about those Catholics on Medicaid where birth control has been covered for years .... Should they feel less "Catholic" now? And all those Catholic taxpayers that have been paying taxes that contribute to Medicaid ... since they've been "forced" to fund it .. .are they less "Catholic" now as well?

Found the link

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/07/27/colorado-employer-wins-early-round-on-birth-control/

Injunctions like this don't get handed down unless the Court thinks the seeker will prevail.

This goes down as a violation of the First Amendment Free Exercise provision.

no Joe: "Catholic doctrine" when it's not based on the Bible is really just "Papal Policy" and is subject to change with a new Pope. Like the old joke goes "What happened to all those Catholics who went to hell for eating meat on Friday?"

BrianB.....panders to the muslims how/??????

And the laws of the country include a document called the US Constitution. In that document, Catholics are guaranteed the right to practice their religion without the government dictating how they do so.

That is not how it works. Catholic businesses have to play by the same rule book as everyone else. Plain and simple.

Arguing with the extreme religious right fanatics. That is foolish. Abortions, birth control are fine in Italy, why not here? No one has been excommunicated. Well, except the nun in Australia who turned in a pedophile priest. But that was rescinded on the bishop's death bead and now the nun is a saint.

Ms. no jo - the article specified, "On Friday, U.S. District Court Judge John Kane issued a preliminary injunction keeping the government from penalizing Hercules Industries while the company’s lawsuit proceeds."

Respectfully, this preliminary injunction is NOT a final decision nor does it imply that the Court thinks the plaintiff will prevail. It appears to be simply protecting the rights of the complaintant and making sure that Hercules Indistries is not subject to paying fines (for now) as a punishment for not following the law they are seeking relief from.

The rational for that is since the law the plaintiff is seeking relief from gives a fine as a punishment and they are not yet "found guilty", it would be inappropriate for them to be punished in advance of the decision. This also prevents the issue of the government having to reimburse the company if it is determined that they are entitled to an exclusion.

NO WHERE in the article did it imply the plaintiff was going to prevail, nor was the judge quoted in any context except to say "Kane noted that his order doesn’t keep the government from enforcing the mandate against anyone else." This statement by Judge Kane further supports that the injunction is simply to make sure the plaintiff is given the benefit of the doubt while the court case proceeds.

Your interpretation that "This goes down as a violation of the First Amendment Free Exercise provision" is at best very speculative and completely unsupported at this point.

I'll also point out that Hercules Industries is NOT a Church. So the case of Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC is probably not applicable (and that addressed a specific hiring/firing issue).

No joe--I'm Catholic. The Church Guys are wrong on this one. They need to listen to the Nuns that actually deal with the realities on the ground.

Catholic doctrine teaches that anyone who assists in an abortion- up to and including paying for one- is subject to excommunication.

Big deal. I hear the parties in hell are much better than that other place. I can't believe people still believe and are afraid of this crap.

This is not the first time Obama has taken on religion. He has lost before- a nine to nothing decision in a case brought against the Lutheran church.

He's going to lose this one, as well.

To a group of pedophiles? Give me a break. You want to pray to a sky fairy, that's your right, but keep your phony ass religions out of politics.

Don't have to worry about sharia law, Catholics are stepping up nicely.

Hey Papists, it's the 21st century not the 13th.

Have you got those pedo-priests under control yet?

Julia - if you are interested, view these. This is why I say he panders to the Muslims...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_889oBKkNU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hi-V_ilJu0w&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se5zvGF6u9g&feature=related

Just from youtube. You decide.

NOJO,

Your distinction of the different types of contraceptives to make your case is not what Santorum was saying. He was stating that Catholics who run businesses and provide birth control in their heath plans are sinners!!

For god sake woman, I thought you were an intelligent person but now I know you are nothing but a Pharisee blinded to the full message of the faith both you and I share.

Free will

Obama is a Christian. He is respectful of Muslims, among other religious faiths.However, this has nothing to do with the ACA's requirement that women's birth control be covered by insurance companies. Some religions, like Christian Science, do not believe that we should use medicine or have procedures like IV treatment for dehydration. Should a business with owners who are Christian Scientists be forced to cover procedures or medications that go against their religious beliefs? Yes, because they chose to have a business in this country and are subject to our laws. We really open a can of worms when we give one religious faith preferential treatment over another's at the expense of women's health care (or men's, for that matter).

I really wish these Republican hypocrites would knock it off with the fake outrage.

Fool's Gold, Fundamental Later Day Saints members say that plural marriage is in their religious beliefs. So is that now OK with you? Rastafarians say smoking weed is a sacrament. So is that now OK with you. Muslims have plural marriages back home is that now OK here? In some religions you can marry a 10 year old girl. So is that now OK with you? For more than 700 years, at Grishneshwar Temple in western India’s Maharashtra state, parents have asked clerics to drop their infants from a 50-foot tower. Ok with you? Some Muslims say Allah calls them to Jihad, IS that OK? Do we have to ban the eating of beef because the Hindus say gods tell them it's wrong? What about pork? a big no no with the Jews and Muslims.

Just another example of Republicans wanting less government involvement in our lives.

Oh, wait a minute! Pardon me, I think Republicans just went for big government. :)

'Course we all the the real truth. Democrats want to use Government to help the People, Republicans want to use Government to control the People.

Actions speak louder than words folks.

Phine,

I did reply to your first post. It is inside the collasped thread starting with Fesity.

I brought out the catechism charts again.LOL

Yes, it is all about free will ,full knowledge and full intention.

I wish you well and deep peace my friend.

Amusing, the Right posters are making a case for Sharia Law. HA!

No Jo - "Forcing practicing Catholics to fund birth control that includes abortifacients violates their religious freedom- by forcing them to assist in abortions." That is really a stretch.

No one is forcing practicing Catholics to fund birth control just because insurance policies offer it, any more than you are funding my chemotherapy when you don't have cancer. I am paying for it with my premiums, just as you are paying for your medical treatments that I don't need with your premiums. You guys are just searching for something to whine about.

Id love to host blackcatwhitecat's trip to my unit's VSO here on the Afghan-Pak border and show him/her what Sharia Law really is. All those using this "Catch Phrase" feel so strongly in their flimsy comparisons to Christian ideals.

Find me the most staunch Baptist or Evangelical and I will show you someone who doesnt even touch what Sharia is or how its metered out by supporters of this brand of Islam. Sharia means inflicting bodily harm or judgment of death to violators of the Haddiths of the Quran. There is NO middle ground.

Ya ya, I know youll all say thats whats next with Western Christianity. Well do yourself a favor and read the New Testament. Those that actually follow those precepts should do anything but. I cannot guarantee that people will but they should. The NT is essentially the guide to peace, love and tolerance. All those that think Christianity is based on a violent, malicious book have most certainly found all their reference material in the OT only.

Islams version of the NT is more violent and sanctions killing. Essentially kill or convert. There is NOTHING even remotely in the Bibles NT that condones anything but dying for your faith, unlike the Haddith which wants you to take a few infidels with you when you go. Find another metaphor please, your comparisons are not applicable.

All have any Scientists run a test that Republicans skulls are thicker than Democrats?

We already know by watching Fox Entertainment that they are less informed

But I really think with thick skulls - there is very little room for cognitive thinking - ergo the brain is squashed

Just a theory - however - some of the silly right wing posts I read here might just bear me out

Speaking of Paul Ryan and Ayn Rand the atheist, which I've known, but I just learned that Ayn Rand was pro-choice, and anti-war. So it looks like Paul Ryan and his "personhood" BS was contrary to his idol.

Speaking of which, we refer to an egg, or an embryo, or a fetus, etc. in the various stages of development for a reason. If an egg was a person, why would we in our language have made this distinction all this time, and not refer to the egg as a person?

And since when is incest -- typically repeated rape of a minor -- in which there is a high rate of deformity not an exception? Already women in border states are going across the border for the morning after pill and other treatments. Lovely, a new back alley already.

"Hey kids, do you know what time it is?"

"It's WHACKADOODLE ROADSHOW time!!!!!!"

Didn't Santorum also say that Romney was the worst republican to get the nomination?

The "big deal" is that many people, regardless of their particular religious persuasions, think that their beliefs reflect the laws of God.

The operative word here is 'THINK'. We are all free to think anything we like about a supreme being, but we are not free to impose our beliefs on others. Religion is based on beliefs, not facts.

As usual, Santorum is talking out his behind. No one is being forced to use contraception, but neither should we be denied it if we want to use it. In a world of almost 7 billion people, it is sheer insanity to procreate irresponsibly.

The idea that Catholics are being forced to sin is laughable! What about the injunction against divorce...yet how many divorced and remarried Catholics are there in the U.S.? The vast majority of American Catholics use contraception. They'd be stupid not to. End of story.

Folks, would you make it law that all US citizens must eat pig?

Making people provide or participate in something they believe is totally wrong is exactly the same thing, o great tolerant ones!

The only time government should step in is if someone is truely injured without cause.

no joe, no bo, nj

Not quite, noid.

Catholic doctrine teaches that anyone who assists in an abortion- up to and including paying for one- is subject to excommunication.

Forcing practicing Catholics to fund birth control that includes abortifacients violates their religious freedom- by forcing them to assist in abortions.

So, let me get this straight. If I give my daughter some money and she goes out and gets an abortion with it, then in the eyes of the Church I'm as guilty as she is? That's like saying that if I buy a gun for someone, then he goes out and murders somebody, I'm as guilty of murder as he is.

No wonder I left the Church years ago!

Didn't Santorum also say that Romney was the worst republican to get the nomination?

You know he did. But Romney pulling to even and ahead in the polls that aren't over sampling Democrats and minorities that makes Obama look even weaker.

Jim,

I'm not catholic, but if you just gave money to your daughter without knowing what she was doing with it, that is not an issue, but if you gave money to her for an abortion, for them and most Christians this would be participating in the sin.

Pretty much Christians are to submit to government, but not to the point it causes them to do something that is clearly not God's will.

Anything that you do that is not God's will, is sin.

DB Akron

Folks, would you make it law that all US citizens must eat pig?

How about that old rule that Catholics couldn't eat meat on Fridays, DB? What happened to that holiest of injunctions?

Making people provide or participate in something they believe is totally wrong is exactly the same thing, o great tolerant ones!

Yet it's fine to force a woman who has been raped--or even force a child who has been raped by her father--to bear a child? Something tells me you are not a woman.

Who forces Catholics to provide contraceptives or take them? Where does your employer get the right to decide your health care? The law requires insurance companies to cover contraceptives.

The only time government should step in is if someone is truely injured without cause.

That's a hypocritical statement when you have laws on the books in several states that MANDATE a woman must have an ultrasound, at her own expense, before she can have a legal abortion.

This argument is crap! What Obama did was establish a baseline of the minimum services should be covered in a health plan. The Catholic church hires other, non-Catholic, people; at what point does it infringe on their religious freedom if they desire a service, not prohibited by their religion, from their health plan but cannot get it simply because a Catholic organization is providing it?

Following the reasoning of many of the objectors here, a Christian Science organization would only have to provide prayer service as treatment in its health plans. Now I don't dispute their right to choose for themselves the right to refuse medical treatment based on their religion but they do not have the right to refuse it for anyone else!

You have got to be kidding me. This is about as crazy as it gets. Rick SAntorum is talking about the wrong party when it comes to shoving their beliefs down your throat. It's the Republican party trying to take away women's right, voters right's and shove their religion down our throats.

This man is a kook and should be embarrassed. I am embarrassed for him.

I am catholic I know a lot of Catholics . guess what they use contraception.

Ok, let me ask this. If a Catholic Church is running a business, and hires non-Catholics, and does not think its insurance company should cover contraception for its non-Catholic employees - should this business also not do business with anyone taking birth control? Seems to me, if it's a sin to "pay" via insurance for women to be on the pill, it must also be a sin to benefit from female customers who are on the pill.

By this logic, a Catholic hospital should not serve women who are on the pill, because by accepting payment from them, either directly or through their insurance company, they are benefitting from this person who is committing this sin.

If Ricky wants to talk about sin...he might want to start with his wife, who lived with a man in sin for years. The man she lived with was the pediatrician who delivered her.

What did Jesus say about that mote in your brother's eye, Ricky?

Not quite, noid.

Catholic doctrine teaches that anyone who assists in an abortion- up to and including paying for one- is subject to excommunication.

Forcing practicing Catholics to fund birth control that includes abortifacients violates their religious freedom- by forcing them to assist in abortions.

By that reasoning, I hereby call upon all Jews and Muslims to refuse to pay taxes so long as our Armed Forces continue to serve bacon for breakfast!

I also hereby call upon all Hindus to refuse to pay taxes so long as our Armed Forces serve hamburgers!

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

So, that's the argument? If I'm forced to provide coverage for contraception I am as guilty as if I use the contraceptive myself? Do you guys hear yourselves making this argument?

Are gun manufacturers liable because James Egan Holmes shot up that movie theater?

Is RJR/Nabisco liable when your father gets lung cancer and dies after smoking a pack a day for 30 years?

Is BMW liable if I commit a hit-and-run on my way home tonight?

I guess in the mind of the Catholic Church and "No Joe", the answer is "yes".

I wish Santorum would go away. He represents the big-government moral police aspect of the Republican party that independents like me can't stand. I'm so glad he didn't get the parties nomination...

Yeah, "Obama is making them take birth control"......rolls eyes.

Is that all you've got.

The Vatican and the senior members of the American Catholic hierarchy have no idea what actually matters to practicing Catholics and what doesn't matter. I'm including surrogates like Santorum, who is probably a member of Opus Dei, and someone who has no idea of how most American Catholics view the turn that the official Vatican line has taken over the past 15 years. Most American Catholics are okay with the use of birth control. They however don't agree with the gradual return of elements of the Latin mass and the Inquisition-like tactics that the church seems to be using to bully people who disagree with the changes.

I'd say the vast majority of American Catholics who do make it to mass on a frequent basis grew up with Vatican II and are uncomfortable with the changes that have been made. First, the new English translation is awkward. It does make some sense if you have taken a Latin-based language like Spanish or French, but it still is an inelegant translation. The changes that Vatican II allowed - greater participation by the laity in the church service and parish administration, more inclusion of lay women in the church, and an open more accessible approach are what kept many American parishes going. Most parishes couldn't find enough altar servers if it was boys-only. I also don't picture many men volunteering their time to do mailing, work in the parish office, and staff the breakfasts like many women do.

What is destroying the American church is the return to secrecy and lack of openness. Its commitment to social justice and helping the local communities has also suffered. All the American Catholic hierarchy cares about is itself. How many millions have the various archdioceses paid out to protect pedophile priests who should be rotting in jail for what they did. How many schools and hospitals have been sold and closed to pay for the settlements and the extravagant lifestyles of the archbishops, bishops, monsignors, and their staffs? This is the main problem of the church, not fighting to inhibit access to birth control for women.

Doesn't the bible say that one should obey the law of the land? So how is it a sin in that case?

None of this makes sense. Just a bunch of whiny bible thumpers crying because they can't have their way. Here in Kansas the state house is actually bringing in pastors for a "policy building seminar". Now you whiny fools - what's more incorrect in regards to the Constitution? Forcing your religion on me or forcing a religion to obey the law?

Maybe you would like for the government to allow you to start sacrificing animals again? How about those religions that do other, more heinous acts? You want to allow those too? Dear women, how does being oppressed again sound? I don't hear any of you crying "injustice!!" when Phelps isn't allowed to express his religious views at a soldiers funeral...

John Doe-2437959

Doesn't the bible say that one should obey the law of the land?

I'm not religious, but I don't think that's what the bible says. I think it says something about obeying God's laws (or something like that).

Keep in mind, Jesus was a revolutionary that was actively working against the law of the land in his time.

Some of you are totally missing the point by being hateful instead of intelligent. The serious point here is that the government is invading freedom of religion. If you choose to ignore that then when it is against you, just shut up and accept your communism peacefully. We are heading that direction, and i'm not simply blaming Obama, or the democrats either. Both sides in the end give us more laws, more regulations, and at the same time give us more taxes, fines, and other costs added in.

When I went to high school we paid alot less taxes, yet we didnt need to do fundraisers for the school, or pay for sanitizer, or kleenex. And the point isnt whether or not we should so please refrain from that. The point is our schools were rich and didnt need it. So here we are now with the same resources in our land water and air, more people, more taxes and we have alot less to show for it. Where is the money going???

I saw a news caster pointing out that we have many times the number of laws socialist U.S.S.R. did, and they seem to be getting us to simply accept it as long as they give us an excuse for each new law.

There is a old saying that is true. Put a toad in hot water and it will jump out, put it in cool water and slowly heat it and it will stay in the water until its dead. We were also once told I believe by schwartzkof that they could make this country communist without firing a single bullet. They are succeeding by doing it a tiny bit at a time. We let them sneak in our religious freedom because its not my religion so who cares, they sneak in our freedom of speech, its not words i agree with so I dont care, etc. In the meantime they get us to fight each other over race, sexual oreintation, religion, immigration, etc. C'mon they are the filthy rich who have money in every country, like they care what country you are from, all they care about is can they get money out of you. Look at bill clinton and the cigarette taxes. He basically said smoking is bad for you, and its killing you. But as long as I can get money out of you its ok for you to die smoking. He didnt care about the health issue or he would have simply made it illegal, but he did massivly increase the taxes.

And the whole time we fight about being a dem or a republican. If we dont quit fighting each other soon, its going to be too late.

I believe contraception should be used. I also believe that individual employers should not be forced to buy insurance that covers it if it goes against their beliefs. I think that's basically all Santorum was saying. This whole debate could easily go away with allowing all insurance companies to have an opt-out for b/c coverage. If b/c coverage is that important to you, you simply get a job with another employer. The same way you would if you wanted to make more money, or extra vacation time, or whatever.

And yes, the bible does say obey the laws of the land, but first obey God's laws, so if the laws are directly going against God's laws, then you obey God first.

Religeon is nothing but a crutch for weak minds and feeble morals.

They need to hold on to doctrine in order to operate their life in a responsible manner.

Most adults that do not practice any religeon already know this and operate their lifes with their own set of morals that do not infringe upon others.

Also the religeous right has no authority over my mind, body and I'd just as well keep it that way.

So keep your hands out of public policy because your rights end, when it affects my rights.

Katy, what if you are a woman who works as a nurse in a Catholic hospital, but you are not Catholic? Why should your employer decide your insurance benefits for you, based on their religion? If you read some of the other comments here, you can see plenty of examples of how ugly that could get. Meanwhile, Viagra is covered.

No one should have to be denied already scare employment opportunities because of their religious beliefs regarding a private matter such as contraception. A woman's healthcare choices should be between her and her doctor.

Where in the bible does it say contraceptive use is a sin?

Santorum says government forcing Catholics to sin

OK, who forgot to lock this loons door last night?

According to religion and religious beliefs, all people are born into sin. It is an individuals choice to do right or wrong in this world. No one can force them. Well, except those in the middle east and Hitler.

Just end church and religion, then you will end all this hate, bigotry and wars created by them.

Wake the fuk up sheeple. Religion is a sham ran by deadbeat people/charlatans that have created their own personal welfare offices (church) and lives and feed off your money and ignorance.

TAX all church and religions in America and end their free ride.

This whole arguement -- "Religious Freedom" is just another manufactured wedge issue to carve out a specific demographic.

Anyone with 2 brain cells to rub together knows that the best way to gin up the right wing base is to start a PR campaign focused on guns or religion and how Obama is against both.

This is a red herring that has ZERO to do with actual religious freedom, and in this case, simply a way for someone as irrelevant as Santorum to get a little attention. Oh, and Mrs. Santorum's former husband was not just a pediatrician, he was an extremely active abortion provider. Hm.

Fools Gold-- he pokes them in the eye

I would say that is alot better than where their priests want to poke them.

It is funny to me how people do not want Sharia Law, but they are ok with Catholic Law.

"Former presidential hopeful Rick Santorum said Wednesday that President Barack Obama is "directly assaulting" religious freedom and that his administration has implemented policies that force Catholics to abandon their faith."

This guy is making a joke I hope. Since when do catholics disaprove of sin when their own priest go after children and are hiddne by the pope and his group. If these folks can get to heaven by going after kids..I do not want to be in the same place. AS for their claims of religious freedom..it seems to be more against women and their rights..not the church.

ATry this on for size the Catholic Church spoefically has been distating to the non-catholics in this country for over 60 years. As an example if you were in public schools in many locations (I cant say all because I didn't attend every school in this country) prior to Vatican II and for a long period after the SCHOOL Lunch progra (in public schools) never served meat on Fridays most Fridays they served nasty fish sticks or greasy cheese pizza where I went to school - this is probably why I hate fish to this day.

My point being Catholic, Jewish, Protestant, Atheist - our beliefs are just that our individual beliefs, if I want to use birth control the beliefs of someone else should not impede my ability, nor should I be forced to use birth control if it conflicts with my beliefs.

The next arguement we will see is taxpayers should not have to pay for medicaid if it covers birth control, and since the businesses that provide insurance to their em[ployees can deduct the insurance from their business taxes (its part of thier payroll costs) than essentially the taxpayers are footing the bill for birthcontrol at companies now - so will catholics want to opt out of paying taxes? Lets face it taxpayers in this country have been supporting the birthcontrol costs for the vast majority of the insured for years.

PRE-conception contraception doesn't seem to be the problem, it's abortion used as birth control, RU486, etc.

Sorry, tempus, but Santorum and Paul Ryan are Catholics who are against all forms of female contraception. This goes beyond abortion, way beyond.

Santorum's wife gave birth at age 48 to their severely disabled little girl. I think that is the greater sin, to willfully ignore the health of your child by getting pregnant way beyond an age that is medically advisable. They should have stopped having sexual relations if they didn't want to risk having disabled children at her age. Isn't that the Catholic position?

Santorum, a/k/a Mr. Frothy, truly believes in the 16th Century teachings of the Catholic Church. Among them, that women are to be subservient to men, that life begins before conception and the infallibility of the Catholic Church. Of course he could not answer how President Obama violates the First Amendment protections for religious organizations, that would require a brain which can think.

ZOMBIES for ROMNEY/RYAN 2012 !!!

@kaybeetoys, I've stopped trying to follow Mr. Santorum, but Sen. Ryan is definitely against abortion as contraception, abortion included in funding for women's health, transporting underage across state lines for abortion, partial-birth abortion, etc. Never heard ANYTHING from Ryan against pre-conception birth control ( the pill etc).

Mr. Santorum seems to be against even the pill. If he was a little older, he would recall that in the 70s people started finding out Catholics in Germany COULD use the pill. I don't know a single Catholic who has NOT used birth control while being very pro-life /anti-abortion...except Mr. Santorum.

Keep talking Rick! You're the greatest thing going for the Obama campaign!

Obama/Biden 2012

This is a completly ridiculous line of argument on every level imaginable:

--The Catholic Church doesn't give a d@mn about religous freedom unless it's their own. They Consider all other faiths to be heretical--still Today in the 21st Century. They've killed countless millions of people who even dared to Think that there was some other possibility of salvation other than the Infallable Catholic way.
--The Church wants all the protections of civil law while they continually ignore and abuse--On Purpose, as a matter of principle--the very same. It's time to get with the program.
--The Church is Not a Business and a Business cannot be a Religion. So the question is moot. Just as a Business is not a Person, it also cannot have Freedom of conscience. Period. Follow the Law or be Punished.

And anyway, Elvis died on this day so that your sin would be forgiven. that makes it all OK.

Jim, leaving the Church doesn't absolve your sin, sadly. We will all be accountable for how we treat God's creation. Killing a baby in the womb is simply murder and against the Commandments.

Dirp, it is NOT hard to figure out how the HHS mandate violates the First Amendment. But of course, the sheepling will uphold ALL of their "leader's" inane and diabolical acts. Finally, the Church is infallible in matters of dogma of which there are only a few. Get YOUR facts straight before posting. Talk about zombies!

Hmm, Linda. I don't recall anything in the ten commandments about abortion or birth control. The moment life begins is a matter of opinion.

Do you realize there are women carrying fetuses that will be born dead due to severe deformities? Do you really believe a woman should be forced to carry such a fetus to term?

Abortion is legal in the U.S. You don't have to have an abortion if you feel it's against your principles, but it is not your right to force any woman to bear a child. This is not Nazi Germany.

Obamacare emphasizes government control and central planning. The law empowers a panel of 15 unelected government officials, called the Independent Payment Advisory Board, to make changes to the Medicare program that will reduce Medicare spending: primarily paying doctors and hospitals less, as is done with the Medicaid program. Over time, liberal health-policy types hope that IPAB can be used to introduce rationing into Medicare, using the panel to determine what types of procedures and treatments that Medicare will and will not pay for.

I wonder if liberals have contemplated what life will be like when a conservative president is in charge of hiring those fifteen unelected members of the Independent Payment Advisory Board? After all this group of 15 unelected government officials have over sight and supreme power over all of ObamaCare, not just Medicare.

I wonder if Rick would support the Muslim opposition to a law declaring that women may be forced to reveal their faces in public for purposes of identification.

I'm an ex-Catholic, some members of my family still believe. Roman catholics in the UK (with a tiny minority as an exception) are in favour of contraception, progressive application of faith and a more charity and community orientated manner.

I once worked in a catholic school (as a supply science teacher), and was given an OHP sheet with the lesson instructions I had to read out. The lesson title was "IVF and Childbirth". This is part of our national curriculum, but at the bottom of the page in red writing, I had to read out:

"The Catholic church does not condone the use of In Vitro Fertilisation, as it is interference with the natural law of God and his divine will. This lesson is only provided to make you aware that it exists and explain the method."

I read it (and felt sick having to) and wished I'd added my sarcastic addendum upon finishing it: "Because god hates infertile women".

No one is suggesting any individual should be forced to have an abortion, or use any form of contraception. None of us are going to sneak into religious people's rooms at night and slide condoms onto a guys manhood or spike the womens juice with the pill! This is about health insurance coverage, and what SHOULD be a part of all of them.

Santorum is a particularly zealous and unpleasant guy; and frankly, even if I didn't know who Ryan was before, the mere fact that Santorum supports him would be enough for me already chalk that one up as a loss!

So Ricky I do not favor either Obuma or Romney but is the health care plan forcing the birth control pill down the peoples throat? Do you think that it is necessary for any faith to breed like rabbits? The insurance plan can be made to pay for birth control but this is not the middle ages and women are not just baby machines they are human beings that should not be forced to breed!!!!!

turin-996443:

The serious point here is that the government is invading freedom of religion.

Actually, in this case it is upholding freedom of religion by stopping the Catholic Church from imposing its doctrine on people who would rather not follow it.

Sorry, but if your religion mandates that you obstruct other people from exercising their freedom of religion, then it's your religion, not the law, that's going against the Constitution.

Just because birth control is covered by insurance, does not mean that the good little catholic boys and girls have to use it, so how is providing coverage for non-catholics infringing on their religious rights? Catholics don't rule and are not the masters of everyone else.

I was once told by a friend of mine who was going through religious training to be a pastor that the bible was merely a book of "stories" that tell people how they should live a moral life. It was written, not by God or Jesus, but by many of his alleged apostles. No one can prove who actually wrote much of the bible...the Catholics revamped it to their way of thinking many years ago, as did many other religions. The bible is merely a book, much like Emily Post's book on manners --- it gives us a blueprint on how to live a just and moral life, hopefully without sin. There's NOTHING in the book that says birth control is a sin; heck, they didn't even KNOW about birth control in 600 B.C.! Everyone who reads the bible, including many different religions, each have their own spin on what the bible is actually saying.....it's mere perception and what you, as an individual, read into it. Again, it is NOT a book written by God or Jesus.....and I doubt if there's anyone alive today who can verify that or disprove it. As my friend said, if you try to live your live in a morale way and try to keep the Ten Commandments to the best of your abilities, you will be given the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. However, since I've never been there, or even close, I couldn't swear by that. I can HOPE that's the situation, but I don't think anyone's around to verify it at this point.

So, for Santorum to say what he says is ridiculous.....NO religion can force their people to be completely without sin....heck, even the Catholic religion isn't totally without sin (look at their leaders and the problems they are having with molestations in the church). A religion can tell you how they THINK you should live, but it's totally up to you....and when you get to those Pearly Gates (and, hopefully, they'll be there), how you lived your life on earth is between you and the man with the keys. It isn't up to the Pope, the Saints, or whomever....it's only up to you to answer for your sins or lack thereof. But, I'd like to be a fly on the wall of those gates when Santorum tries to talk his way into heaven.....interesting thought!!

turin-996443

Some of you are totally missing the point by being hateful instead of intelligent. The serious point here is that the government is invading freedom of religion.

Some of us are looking at the law instead of buying what Santorum (I just cannot even type that word any more without laughing) says.

The Catholic Church does not have to provide anything approaching abortion care for anyone. The businesses owned by the Catholic Church and in which the Catholic Church is invested have to provide insurance, and that insurance is required to offer people the option of birth control (not abortions) without any additional fee. People are free to get this coverage, or free not to get this coverage. It is an offer, only--it is not required by anyone.

Thus, the Catholic Church is only highly indirectly (the insurance company is required to provide birth control on request as part of their overall coverage--the Church isn't required to directly reimburse) providing birth control to its employees if the employees choose to get it. The Catholic Church does not get to impose its beliefs on people simply because those people happen to be employed by a business which happens to be owned by or invested in by the Catholic Church.

Let us say that the Catholic Church is not required to do this--well, then, they will be paying money to the people whom they employ. Those people will be able to purchase birth control if they want. By supplying money to those people, the Catholic Church is again indirectly supplying birth control to people.

The Catholic Church right now is trying very hard to obfuscate the fact that in the not too distant past, little boys who complained of being sexually molested by priests were castrated. No, that's not a joke. It happened mostly in Europe, but I believe that there were a few cases here in the US. If the Catholic Church is allowed to enforce its doctrines on everyone--that is the kind of thing that they are known to do. Castrate boys who complain of molestation, imprison women who don't obey their families and use them as slave labor (Ireland, quite recently), "forgive" priests through internal processes for sexual misconduct and move them between churches because they have confessed and repented (over and over--here in the US), and so forth.

If the Catholic Church had a fine history of treating people fairly, then I might take them seriously. But, left to their own devices and allowed to practice their faith without interference, they do these things: castrate, enslave, and empower their elite to rape at will.

Most people who are Catholic are lovely people, the nuns are particularly lovely (well, those that don't like to physically abuse small children), most parish priests are nice enough--but when you get to the Opus Dei elite and the higher levels of the clergy and up to the levels of policy at the Vatican, you aren't talking about nice people any more.

A religion that kicks up a fuss about their secular employees being allowed access to insurance that permits them birth control--while simultaneously persecuting nuns who were instrumental in exposing the network of priest abusers (it was a small network, but given that it operated "unmolested," a tremendous number of children were abused) and trying desperately to restrict or eliminate their power so that they cannot do that again--is not one that deserves to be taken seriously.

Many religions have tenets that are "violated" by the government--there are churches that forbid medical care (particularly the exchange of bodily fluids and vaccinations), there are churches that forbid interracial or inter-religious marriage, there are churches that forbid the eating of certain meats or any meats, there are churches that encourage members to mess with rattlesnakes or to partake of hallucingens, there are churches that encourage male members to copulate with pre-teen girls . . . there are religions that do not prosecute the members of their faith who sexually abuse small children but "confess" and "repent."

Our government sees to it that we can have medical care if we want, that we can marry across "race" lines or between religions if we want, that we can eat foods that we want, that dangerous animals and drugs are restricted, and that child abusers are prosecuted. The churches are free to excommunicate anyone that they want because they are voluntary organizations--but they cannot break certain secular laws without punishment.

One cannot allow a religion to arbitrarily create its own rules and to exempt its members from government control--unless we want a First Church of Prosperity (and I don't doubt that there is one) exempting its faithful from paying taxes, allowing its members to steal from the poor and elderly, to sexually abuse small children, and to take any drugs they want.

"Religious freedom" is a concept that is easily abused by church elders who can count on their clueless faithful to support them.

Why aren't the Health insurance companies agreeing with Catholics and demanding that they should not have to pay for contraceptives? It should save them big$$$$.

HC insurers have been paying for BC for years. They know and probably have statistical studies showing that it saves money in the long term.

If the catholics do not want to pay for BC, they should be able to have a plan that does not cover BC, but it would cost them more. Simple solution.

So the majority of the population is concerned with the economy... and Republicans are STILL talking about condoms.

Keep it up, GOP. You are winning over independents left and right. No really, you are... honest. There is nothing independent voters are more concerned about than "condoms". *face-palm*

Oh, by the by, the Catholic Church is perfectly free to divest itself of all these businesses and/or to stop providing health care. If the Catholic Church wanted, it might apply for (and probably get) permission not to directly provide health insurance any more and to allow its employees to buy it through a state-run exchange.

I'm kind of wondering how Romneycare handled this--given that Massachusetts is a largely Catholic state. I don't remember the Catholic Church kicking up a fuss in Massachusetts--so I think that perhaps this is a lot of hooey mostly to support the Republican platform. Perhaps Republicans have promised to put limits on the amount of money that the church has to pay out in reparations.

But, yes--someone needs to look up the history of the Catholic Church and Romneycare (which is what we used to call Obamacare before it was Obamacare). Anyone?

Kathy,

In that case, you would have three choices. One, you could find a job at another hospital which provide b/c health insurance. Two, you could buy your own b/c. Three, maybe a deal could be made with the insurance company where people could buy riders to their policies that would include b/c. See, nobody's stopping you from using b/c.

Now, just so I don't get accused of playing favorites, on the reverse side, the hospital also has a couple of choices. One, they can close down so they don't have to pay for what they don't believe in. Or, they could make all their full-time employees part-time and just have a larger staff, so they wouldn't be mandated to provide insurance.

See, there are always choices.

As for viagara being covered, it's pretty stupid. However, I could be wrong, but I don't think there's a federal law mandating that it be covered.

Seems some of you question my comment about it not being a sin. Here you go you bible thumpers that seem to know everything except the bible in which you claim to believe in.

Romans 13:1-7

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except by God's appointment, and the authorities that exist have been instituted by God. 2 So the person who resists such authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will incur judgment 3 (for rulers cause no fear for good conduct but for bad). Do you desire not to fear authority? Do good and you will receive its commendation, 4 for it is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be in fear, for it does not bear the sword in vain. It is God's servant to administer retribution on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of the wrath of the authorities but also because of your conscience. 6 For this reason you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants devoted to governing. 7 Pay everyone what is owed: taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.

I'm not even religious and I knew this one. Of course I had to look up the full verse however, the point is valid and still stands.

Now, just so I don't get accused of playing favorites, on the reverse side, the hospital also has a couple of choices.

Just out of curiosity, how does a Catholic hospital justify hiring and/or employing divorced people? What about employees who co-habit without benefit of marriage?

Tsk, tsk... they must have a lot of sinners working in those places! And they pay them plenty!

Note to self: Go to Jewish hospital... ;)

Kathy-467503

You do realize Viagra was developed for heart and circulatory conditions, right? In fact, there are women that take it. Most prescriptions for Viagra are for that exact purpose - heart and circulatory conditions. Wouldn't it suck if you were one of them and found out a medication you need isn't covered by insurance due to "personal opinions" on it's other use?

Wouldn't it suck to be a woman with PCOS, endomitriosis, hormone imbalance, or many other painful (some very severe also) conditions that require birth control to be used? I know you agree with this point, however, it's more for the other *cough* intelligent people here.

DiDi 376564

The Bible is GOD'S WORD, and to become acquainted with it is to become acquainted with GOD HIMSELF! The true and living GOD who created all things desires to reveal HIMSELF to each of us in a very beautiful and wonderful way. As you open your Bible...open your heart also......and let the GOD who brought the Bible into existence speak to you!

The English word "Bible" comes from the Greek word "biblia" which means "collection of writings" or "biblios", which means "book". Early copies were made on papyrus, a writing material made from the pith of the papyrus plant. This tall, reed-like water plant was found in abundance both in the Nile region of Egypt, and in Syria. In fact, large quantities of papyrus were sent through Syrian port of Byblos, and it is thought by some that this is where the Greek word for "book" got its name. The English word "paper" finds its beginning from the word "papyrus".

For years, the word "Bible" has come to mean the sacred book accepted by Christians as inspired record of GOD'S revelation of HIMSELF and HIS WILL to mankind. To differentiate between the Bible and other so called sacred books of other religion, the word "HOLY" is used before it; thus, THE HOLY BIBLE.

GOD used forty men over a period of some 1600 years and 60 generations to bring the BIBLE into existence.....These men wrote by means of DIVINE, not, human inspiration. Please read the following scriptures:

...2nd PETER 1 v 20 & 21 ...."as they were moved by THE HOLY GHOST"..

...2ND TIMOTHY 3 v 16..."All scripture is given by inspiration of GOD"...

...ACTS 1 v 16..."Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which THE HOLY GHOST by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas.

Here Peter, the spokesman, is referring to the writings of David (PSALM 41 v 9) concerning the betrayal of JESUS by Judas, hundreds of years before that event actually took place. David had no understanding of this event, but what he wrote, he wrote by THE HOLY GHOST

...ACTS 3 v 18..."But those things, which GOD before had shewed by the mouth of all the prophets, that CHRIST should suffer, he hath so fulfilled"............Peter preached after he and John healed a lame man...........Peter reminded the Jewish crowd (who should all possess an understanding of the Old Testament,, because from the time a Jewish child is old enough to understand, he is taught the law and the prophets) that GOD had shown by the mouth of all his prophets that Christ should suffer. Hundreds of years before JESUS suffered at Calvary, many of the prophets spoke of the pain HE would endure and the price HE pay for our salvation.........Read PSALM 22......ISAIAH 53.....two examples.THESE PROPHETS SPOKE AND WROTE AS THE HOLY SPIRIT MOVED UPON THEM......

The bible was written by various men over many centuries, not by a supreme being. It is filled with contradictions and inaccuracies. It is a valuable text, but it is just a book.

I will say no more. If you are not ready to know the truth, you will not be able to hear the truth.

...............DiDi 376564.........

...THERE IS ONLY (1) ONE GOD AND HIS NAME IS JESUS CHRIST...let us examine the scripture:

MATTHEW 28 v 19...refers to Father, Son & Holy Ghost......Does this mean there are three separate and distinct persons in the GODHEAD??? NO with a capital N, they refer to three offices, roles, or relationship to humanity

.....JOHN 5 v 7...Does the bible use the word three in reference to GOD?............ONLY ONE VERSE IN THE ENTIRE BIBLE DOES SO......(JOHN 5:7)..IT SPEAKS OF THE FATHER, THE WORD (instead of SON), AND THE HOLY GHOST, and it concludes by saying, ...THESE THREE ARE ONE.

Does the bible use the word ONE (1) in reference to GOD??? Yes, yes, yes, many times for examples, see ZECHARIAH 14:9.........MALACHI 2:10.......MATTHEW 23:9.......MARK 12:29, 32............JOHN 8:41.......JOHN 10:30.......ROMANS 3:30......1st CORINTHIANS 8:4......GALATIANS 3:20......1st TIMOTHY 2:5......JAMES 2:19.

Can, the mystery of the GODHEAD be understood??? Yes, yes, yes...see ROMANS 1:20.........COLOSSIANS 2:9........1st TIMOTHY 3:16

Has the Christian only one (1) HEAVENLY FATHER........Oh yes! MATTHEW 23:9

Then why did JESUS say to Phillip, "He that hath seen me hath seen the FATHER" (JOHN 14:9)???...Because JESUS is the express image of GOD'S person........HEBREWS 1:3.....The Greek word for person in this verse literally means "substance".

Does the Bible say that all the GODHEAD is revealed in one person???...Yes, yes, yes....in JESUS CHRIST..... 2nd CORINTHIANS 4:4........COLOSSIANS 1:19.......COLOSSIANS 2:9, ...... HEBREWS 1:3

Is the mystery of the DEITY hidden from some people ??? Yes, yes, yes see LUKE 10 v 21---22

Who is the FATHER???? The FATHER is the one (1) GOD, particularly as revealed in parental relationship to humanity.........see DEUTERONOMY 32:6........MALACHI 2:10

Where was GOD the FATHER while JESUS was on earth????....The FATHER was in CHRIST.......JOHN 14:10--11.......2ndCORINTHIANS 5:19........HE WAS ALSO IN HEAVEN, FOR GOD IS OMNIPRESENT.

Did the prophet Isaiah say that JESUS would be the FATHER???Yes, yes, yes.....ISAIAH 9:6 HE IS CALLED "THE EVERLASTING FATHER"............ISAIAH 63:16

When GOD said, "Let us make man in our image".....(GENESIS 1:26)....was HE speaking to another person in the GODHEAD??? NO, no, no...ISAIAH 44:24........MALACHI 2:10.

How many qualities were in CHRIST???....ALL.....COLOSSIANS 2:9.

How may we see GOD who sent JESUS into the world???....By seeing JESUS.......JOHN 12:44---45.................JOHN 14:9.................

Does the Bible say that JESUS is THE ALMIGHTY......REVELATION 1 v 8:

I AM ALPHA AND OMEGA, THE BEGINNING AND THE ENDING, SAITH THE LORD, WHICH IS, AND WHICH WAS, AND WHICH IS TO COME, THE ALMIGHTY.

Does the devil believe in more than one (1) GOD.....No.. ...JAMES 2:19..

THOU BELIEVEST THAT THERE IS ONE GOD; THOU DOEST WELL; THE DEVILS ALSO BELIEVE AND TREMBLE.

Does the Bible say that GOD, who is the WORD, was made flesh???...Yes...JOHN 1:1..........JOHN 1:14......

For what purpose was GOD manifested in the flesh????.....TO SAVE SINNERS.......HEBREWS 2:9.........HEBREWS 2:14

Was GOD manifested in the flesh???...Yes....1st TIMOTHY 3:16

AND WITHOUT CONTROVERSY GREAT IS THE MYSTERY OF GODLINESS, GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH, JUSTIFIED IN THE SPIRIT, SEEN OF ANGELS, PREACHED UNTO GENTILES, BELIEVED ON IN THIS WORLD, RECEIVED UP IN GLORY.

Could JESUS have been on earth and in heaven at the same time??? Yes, yes yes,.......JOHN 3:13

AND NO MAN HATH ASCENDED UP TO HEAVEN, BUT HE THAT CAME DOWN FROM HEAVEN, EVEN THE SON OF MAN WHICH IS IN HEAVEN.

The Bible says that GOD is coming back with all HIS saints (ZACHARIAH 14:5) and also that JESUS is coming back with all HIS saints...(1st THESSALONIANS 3:13).......Are two coming back??? NO-No-No......ONLY ONE (1) IS COMING BACK.....OUR GREAT GOD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST..................TITUS 2:13

LOOKING FOR THAT BLESSED HOPE, AND GLORIOUS APPEARANCE OF THE GREAT GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST:

DB - How do you know what God's will is? Hearing voices again? Santorum and all of you religious nuts out there have an ever decreasing relevance in people's life anymore. Keep it to yourself.

God Bless America - Save if for church. Tho dost take up way too much room with tho proselytizing. You hath bored this Jew to tears.

What a crock. believe in a great spirit if you think that give you meaning to your life. But be advised that Santorum is pandering to your beliefs. What a huckster.

No one is being DENIED the use of contraception. Stop with that dramatic language. They are being asked to pay for it themselves. Are a few boxes of condoms really something that your employer just HAS to pay for? Seriously? If you need to get it on with a different guy every few days and want to call it your "health," then that is your business, not the responsibility of your employer, and definitely not the responsibility of a Catholic employer.

wow, 2.93 has quite a penchant for manufactured moralizing. It's almost evangelical.

Priests who abused children need to be in jail. They can repent all they want, they are still on the Down escalator on The Big Day. The Bishops who knew, should also be doing hard time. clean up your own crime problem, then lecture to others.

If you don't like chocolate ice cream, don't eat it. if you don't like homosexuality, don't be gay. Simple solution.

It is funny, because you take it seriously, and the fact that you are trying to paint a picture of morality that is a joke--your Faith is the most immoral one of all. Americans were great because they were good? But it was a fundamentally Protestant ethic that America followed.

The Catholic Church would love nothing more to go back to the 16th century and stay there. When they could kill people without impunity for whatever definition of heresy they wanted to make up at the time. I'm sure you're longing for a return of the Inquisition now, aren't ya? Deep down inside you're really a Jesuit at heart, I'm thinking. How's that flat earth theory working out for you these days?

Fairy tales are great, for little kids who don't know any better and illiterate peasants. Once people could read, the gig was finished for the Church. There couldn't be any more creative interpretation of the Bible.

What year was this big flood? When did the story of Noah take place again? There were other people alive on Earth who didn't live in Greater Palestine for tens of thousands of years before anyone ever heard of Noah, and none of them reported a big flood that killed everyone.

I think we're done here.

Selah

The Catholic faith is WHAT IT IS. IT DOES NOT CHANGE.

Actually, it does change. No more fish on Friday, no limbo to name a couple examples.

The real problem with the Catholic church is that it has not changed enough. The hard and fast rule that priests cannot marry has lead to a serious shortage in the pulpit. Why do you think Catholic bishops shuffled all those pedophile priests around? They couldn't afford to lose anyone. Is anyone going into the priesthood anymore, here in the U.S.?

Any institution made by man--including religion-- either changes and evolves or it dies out. We are not still worshipping the sun. The Catholic church is rotting from within and will die of its own accord.

Santorum is not a Christian. Deeds speak louder than words. His voting record in the senate contradicts the teachings of the four Gospels. He also breaks the commandment "do unto others as you would have them do to you" almost every time he opens his mouth in public.

you're Mel Gibson's dad aren't you?

you haven't presented a fact yet. you've presented a fairy tale. The problem is you don't know the answer to the question. The Bible is conclusive that the age of the Earth is only 6000 years. And yet, that's patently false.

If there is a God (there isn't), and if your religion is worth a nickel--those priests can repent for 500 years, they will still be in Hell. Break a Commandment=Fail. I don't want anyones head--I want them in prison for the Crimes they have committed. And then I want them drawn and quartered, or whipped with a cat-o-nine tails, or even burned alive at the stake. Then we can put their heads on sticks and put them at the entrances of churches.
I'm neither impressed nor intrigued by people who attempt to be pithy by quoting De Tocqueville and the like. Learn to present a few actual facts rather than interpretations of philosophy. I get tired of correcting self-important chuckleheads.

Whether the catholics like it or not, as long as they receive federal funding, they are just as much responsible for staying within the federal guidelines to receive those funds just like each and every other organisation that applies for and receives them. It's simple, no one is forcing them to beg the government for those fundings. If they don't like the prerequisites, then don't apply.

There is no freedom of religion to disobey labor laws. If your church wants to run a private business, it has to adhere to the law.

End of story.

Toasty, then government is god, Not God.

Governments do not live forever, so, clearly they cannot be god, but many try to be god. Any government that tries to become god becomes extinct.

Matthew

They are all but requiring the employer to provide the means to do so. That is really no different than being an accessory to a crime.

They are all but requiring the employer to provide the means to do so. That is really no different than being an accessory to a crime.

A crime? This is not about crime. Crime is breaking laws. This about sin. Further, this about sin as defined by the Catholic church. Over many centuries, that definition of sin has been subject to change.

For instance, it is obviously OK now for Catholic priests to abuse young boys. The Catholic church covered it up and refused to punish priests for it. But it is a crime, it is against the laws of the US and the courts punished priests for it.

Religion vs law? I prefer law!

If you don't want to take birth control.......DON'T !!!!!

Is it okay to fund Viagra and not birth control?

Matt, Eric, and ilk... you guys are missing the point. If they believe that is sinful to use contraception (can't say I get that, but it's what they believe), then they should want nothing to do with it. The government should not force them to be affiliated with something to find sinful. Besides, it's not like simple contraceptives are hard to get... or even expensive. Hell, I can get them at my local Walgreens!

Think of it like the government forcing a teen abstinence group to hand out condoms at their meetings.

Good analogy Noryc.

Another way of looking at it is, think if there was a law that would not allow employer's to pay for health insurance that covers contraception.

Or, if employers were forced to fund the churches that their employees attended. Wouldn't be so happy about that would you?

When he forces the Muslims to eat Pork then it will be fair. This President is against any thing American. His Military can't stand him. He takes credit for anything he had nothing to do with and what he has done wrong he blames someone else. He leaks information and his officers can't stand him. It is time for a grown up to resume the office. You America haters go some where like Iran and fit right in.

Noryc, it's not the same thing. These churches are in business, employ many people, many who are not Catholic, and they are bound by the insurance rules of all businesses. They can not pick and choose what can be covered to whom. This is such a non-argument it makes me sick. Thank God I'm an athiest.

Noryc, except that your comparison is a false one. Abstinence groups are not employers, they are groups of people that get together and discuss abstinence.

Providing health insurance for employees is a requirement or providing them money to allow them to get their own insurance. If I work for a Jehovah's Witness who doesn't believe in modern medicine that doesn't mean they can not provide means of health insurance based upon those beliefs. They are not mine. They don't have to have their own or they can just hire other Jehovah's Witnesses.

A Catholic business similarly cannot pick and choose what parts of insurance they want to provide to their employees. The insurance companies are providing the service.

This isn't a war on religion. Religion is doing just fine. Pretty sure there is no shortage of churches in our nation. This is providing a minimum standard of care for employees. And that is a good thing. Regardless of what many religions choose to believe prayer doesn't cure cancer. Or prevent pregnancy or anything like that.

Let's face it...the Catholic Church has NEVER been very big on religious freedom...as Martin Luther could have told you.

So next we will let the Holy Rollers decide that god provides and people do not really need medication at all because if it is gods will then he will heal them.

Pllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaassssssssssssssssssssseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

@Noryc, your example, making a teen abstinence group hand out condoms is not the same example.

It would be, the insurance company for the employees of the teen group provide free condoms. The teens don't have to hand them out, or use them, they are just available.

Either way you go, Obama isn't making people "sin". He doesn't control other people.

Can't wait to see the looks on liberal faces when they realize that the 15 unelected government officials of the Independent Payment Advisory Board that comprise the supreme power over what does and does not get paid under the ObamaCare law can be appointed by a conservative president. Can you just imagine all the political fun the creation of a board like that will produce?

Rick-3416939,

How would that be different from the unelected employees of insurance companies who currently make those decisions for you?

The fact that most of you are missing here is that these Catholic Institutions are SELF INSURED. So yes, this mandate would force Catholics to provide something they (either rightly or wrongly by YOUR opinion) deem a sin.

The Government is attempting to implement a law that forces a certain set of religious to act contrary to their belief. Everyone here that is bashing the Catholics for that are only doing so because birth control is not against your moral beliefs.

That shouldn't matter. What we need to do is for everyone to think about how they would feel if the government forced you to do something that was against your moral convictions.

It is rather ironic how so many hear are screaming "Separation of Church and State!!" "Wall of separation!!!" when they rage against the Church, but then turn right around and have no problem with the Gov't telling a Church that it has to provide a service that goes against the very core of its teachings.

So I ask you, where is this separation you speak of? Yes, these institutions exist in our business sector as hospitals, schools, colleges, charities, adoption agencies, etc...How dare Christians do what they feel their God has told them or live by the laws they believe he set for them.

What you all are saying is..., "It's ok to believe what you want on Sunday inside the walls of your Church, but once you leave, you have to forget it all."

The Church is not telling you that you can't use contraception. They acknowledge your free will to do so. They are telling you that they believe it is a sin and they do not want to be an active part in it.

M4ogre,

if they are getting federal funds then they need to follow the rules like very one else.

The Government is attempting to implement a law that forces a certain set of religious to act contrary to their belief

and by providing something does not mean that they have to act contrary to their belief.

DB Akron

They are all but requiring the employer to provide the means to do so. That is really no different than being an accessory to a crime.

So allowing a means to obtain an item, that will be used in something you don't agree with, is an "accessory to a crime"? Really? You sure about that?

Is a gun shop owner an "accessory to a crime"? They provide the means to obtain an item that is used in crimminal activity.

Let's take a popular Republican quote, and apply it here: "Condoms don't have sinful sex, people do"

Think of it like the government forcing a teen abstinence group to hand out condoms at their meetings.

Again... condoms don't have sex, people do.

You can still be abstinent and hold a condom. It is only a piece of rubber, not a magical mind-control device.

M4Ogre:

What we need to do is for everyone to think about how they would feel if the government forced you to do something that was against your moral convictions.

If the "thing that was against my moral convictions" was to NOT interfere with someone else's life choices, I think I would have to get over it.

I like the way you think, Ash.

Thinking and logic are hard to find these days. When you throw religion into the mix, you can kiss rationality goodbye.

I think he should be forced to use contraception. Not for religious reasons, just for the health of the gene pool.

I think he needs to go back and check to see what the Bible says about contraception.

(HINT: Nothing)

Noid

You're right, no one is going to make them use it. HOWEVER, there is now Government mandate that a person must pay for it (however indirectly you want to draw the comparison). That is enough in the mind of the Catholic Church to say that their Constitutional rights are being trampled. Unfortunately it's not a personal choice at this point.

I find this whole argument silly and hypocritical. There are plenty of laws that prevent the free practice of religion in this country. After all, I can't sacrifice virgins to the raging Volcano gods, or slaughter a goat and burn it on a pyre in my back yard. The Catholic Church just happens to have the benefit of being the loudest player in the game, and the Republicans will do anything to stand against the President.

Wrecked

There have been studies (mostly ignored so far) that are showing that the birth control hormones are causing many women's reproductive problems later in life.

How reproduction practices and procedures need some very serious reivew and change. I have my wife's experiences as proof.

I am for selective breading. contraception is a must.

Really Santorum!!? They didn't give you a speaking part at the convention and this is your way of trying to look relevant.

Wrecked inWA

I think he should be forced to use contraception. Not for religious reasons, just for the health of the gene pool.

AMEN!!

Wrecked

There have been studies (mostly ignored so far) that are showing that the birth control hormones are causing many women's reproductive problems later in life.

How reproduction practices and procedures need some very serious reivew and change. I have my wife's experiences as proof.

That may well be true, DB. But until men start taking total responsibility for birth control (in another universe, maybe...) women will be forced to choose between getting pregnant perhaps as often as 20 times during their reproductive years, or using some form of birth control. The medical establishment would be working a lot harder to find safe hormonal contraception if it were men taking it instead of women.

You can take that to the bank.

Kaybeetoys (the mall is not the same without you)

But until men start taking total responsibility for birth control

If you're with a "man" who doesn't take responsibility for using birth control, then maybe you should tell them no and move on to someone else. If you don't want to get pregnant "as often as 20 times" then don't have sex with people who don't use birth control. Once again the modern American mentality takes over. We want things, but not the consequences of our actions.

There's only been one documented case of someone spontaneously becoming pregnant, and even that's up for debate (but please FSM, not here). You have just as much responsibilty to say 'no' as the man has to make sure that he covers the willy. And if he has a problem with that, then he's not a real man.

Only force you to provide it to others....

Gede, that "man" happens to be my husband. I have been absolutely faithful for the entirety of our marriage, more than 20 years now.

I guess I could have been telling him "no" for all these years. I guess I could have forced him to wear a condom for all the times except when we conceived our children. I guess we could limit ourselves to twice a month, during 'safe' times.

Somehow, I don't think he would be very happy with that. But to each his own, I suppose.

He seems like a real man to me. :)

Kaybee,

Sorry, didn't mean to offend. My point was basically that reproductive responsibility is a two way street. I see way too many examples of "men" who flatly refuse to exercise any kind of personal responsibility, and fail to take responsibility for their actions. They are not real men. You are completely right, though. There should be a male equivelent to the female hormonal options.

Congratulations on your 20 years of marriage.

I bet the devil made you buy that dress. : )

Devil in a Blue Dress - what a great movie.

You know we're all aging ourselves by knowing who Flip Wilson is! Great line, Brenda! :)

Flip Wilson made me do it. LOL

Brenda

Obama made it easier for you to do what you want, and is making others help you do so.

Doing what God wants you to do or what he doesn't want to do is YOUR Choice. Don't Drag others into helping you to do what God doesn't want you to do!

I bet what Brenda was wearing when she wrote that is a sin. There is a 15 member board of unelected government officials called the Independent Payment Advisory Board that wields supreme power over what does or does not get paid under the ObamaCare law. I bet liberals have yet to realize that when a Republican is in the White House, they get to fill that board. That should turn ObamaCare into a political football in a hurry.

Rick-3416939,

So basically, you're telling us that we should be scared that Republican appointees to the board will push for less coverage?

Welp, I guess it's in our best interests to make sure that doesn't happen, then.

Doing what God wants you to do or what he doesn't want to do is YOUR Choice. Don't Drag others into helping you to do what God doesn't want you to do!

DB, if you're hearing the voice of god, you'd better up your meds or get to the ER stat! :)

I was a promiscuous idiot in college,...which was during the Reagan years. Since Bill Clinton and Barack Obama - I've been married and faithful to my husband.

By Santorum 'logic' Reagan made me a slut and Clinton made me a saint. That ought to make some heads explode!

lol

No one denies that and that is not the issue.

Santorum is one of the very few who can actually make Robme look intelligent by comparison.

No small feat. It's damage control time at the RNC. Those guys deserve a raise in pay. They've been and are going to be very busy as this election campaign rolls along. lol, this stuff is killing me.

Yes...Mr. Santorum hearily endorses fellow Catholic Paul Ryan...a man whose political philosophy, he says, is inspired by the same Ayn Rand who once called faith "the worst curse of mankind, as the exact antithesis and enemy of thought."

And, Mr. Marvelous Ryan says 'your rights come from God and Nature'......NOT the Government!

Go figure, 'cause I can't.......since this seems to leave out that big Government Document.....The Constitution!

And, Mr. Marvelous Ryan says 'your rights come from God and Nature'

Still can't get rid of the nasty bile taste that comment induced. Was glad to see Melissa Harris-Perry take him to task on in her weekend show.

I missed the MHP take-down, RedDevPS......

I would have loved it 'cause thats the craziest thing I've heard.....well maybe not the craziest, but one of the craziest!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46979745/#48636835

For you Chilled - Ryan ain't no Jefferson. Rather, he is a greedy Rand-ist.

Not from PA but totally agree, and I love coffee, too. Go Cards!

coffeelover,

I remember what a college professor told me at the Catholic college I attended. Birth control pills was first on the market in about 1965. Looking at birth records since the late 60's there is no difference between the birthrate among catholics and other Christian denominations.

Catholic families make the same decisions as any other families about the number of children they hope to have.

Paul Ryan and his love affair with the writings of Athiest Ayn Rand (whose name was really Alisa Rosenbaum) are as ridiculous and disengenuous as she was. She opposed government and any government plan that helped the poor or middle class, calling them parasites and moochers. Although she particularly despised medicare and social security, Paul Ryan (and the other Randists) forgot to mention that when she became ill and old, she collected medicare and social security, but under the name Ann O'Connor. That pretty much makes everything she stood for a hypocritical lie, which Paul Ryan seems ready to aspire to in the Romney Ryan candidacy.

coffee lover

You have no idea how many people who used contraceptives or even abortions, and now feel guilt over what they were doing.

I'm not against contraception, but to certain forms I am now opposed.

New life begins at conception and is alive for 3 - 7 days before it attaches to the uterus. What the chemical contraception does is make the uterus unsuitable for this life to attach to it or remain attached to the uterus and continue to live/develop.

I think this is wrong to do this. But that doesn't mean that there should be a law against these forms of contraception at this point, but out of a good conscience I don't think I should be forced to provide something or the means to acquire something that I feel is wrong.

@ DB,

You already do provide the means to acquire something you feel is wrong. You have health insurance and pay your premiums. So do other people. Those premiums go into a pool of money to pay out medical bills of all individuals who use that same insurance company. So it is highly likely that some portion of the premiums you have paid have gone to fund contraception as well as abortion or any other medical procedure you disagree with. That is simply how insurance works. Insurance is basically the definition of collectivism. Everyone pays a little into a pool and we pull from that pool when we need it. Some pay a little more if they use more and others pay less, but no matter how much you pay it all goes back into that pool.

Well coffeelover, then I must surmise that the Church and your faith is an embarrassment as well because Mr. Santorum has not stated anything contrary to Church teaching.

I would suggest you need to reassess your faith and see just how far outside of communion you really are.

Sick Rantorem is a waste of oxygen and a good case for euthenasia. Somebody send a drone after the peice if $hit.

I would suggest you need to reassess your faith and see just how far outside of communion you really are.

Whoa...there's a heavy dose of sanctimony for you.

DB Akron:

I don't think I should be forced to provide something or the means to acquire something that I feel is wrong.

You're not forced to do anything. You are always free to make the choice not to employ people in a capacity that requires the provision of health insurance.

I have been against every war since the second world war. I am also against sending hundreds of billions in cash and deadly weapons to the Jewish state of Israel; None the less, I am forced to pay taxes that support these two things that go against everything I believe. That is the price we pay for being part of a community and citizens of a nation.

M4Ogre
I still think of the Catholic church as my church. There are definitely things about the church that disturb me, the child sex scandal being the biggest one.
As for how far outside of communion I am? That's between me and my God.

New life begins at conception and is alive for 3 - 7 days before it attaches to the uterus. What the chemical contraception does is make the uterus unsuitable for this life to attach to it or remain attached to the uterus and continue to live/develop.

Wrong definition of "conception", that refers to the implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterus, not the instance of fertilization, and certainly not the sex act itself. But you did get one thing right, some types of chemical contraception do prevent that implantation - but that's precisely why they are "contra-ceptives", they prevent conception. Other contraceptives, including spermicidal chemicals, prevent fertilization thus also prevent conception.

The Bible defines "conception" even later, when the woman feels the "quickening in her womb", that is, when she becomes aware that she is pregnant and has conceived.

Wear rubber gloves, a face mask, and a clothes pin on your nose when you do .. it is a messy dumpster dive search.

George B

ROFLMAO. Thank you John Stewart.

From the article above:

"What Paul Ryan stands for in conservative circles and in the media and in this country, for those who know him, is someone who is willing to challenge the status quo and have bold ideas to confront the problems of this country in a truthful fashion," Santorum said.

Mr. Santorum just lied.

It sickens me to death thinking that this is where we have arrived at as a nation. This isn't an argument about the right of Freedom of Speech. Mr. Santorum is defending his right to LIE.

Rick, your 15 minutes of fame is up. The bill is due on your behavior here on Earth. Now go get youself a double order of Chick-Fil-A and and enjoy the diarrhea.

Salud.

If this nation were to ever reinstate the draft, would it be illegal to draft a Jew because the Army serves bacon for breakfast?

Da Noid: Of course the Bible says "Though shalt not kill", so Santorum should also consider a military draft to be an example of forcing Catholics to sin.

That religion about not paying taxes--that must be Romney's true religion.

Must be the Mormon religion about not paying taxes, and the military draft, because Romney dodged both.

Da noid, that is an irrelevant comparison because you would not have to eat the bacon. Now if they drafted Jews and forced them to eat it then yes, yes it would be illegal.

M4Ogre,

If you choose to interpret "offering health coverage when insurance companies are required to cover birth control" as being sinful, that is nobody's problem but yours.

To force someone to do something that is against their moral convictions should be everyones concern, not just the poor person on the pointy end of the spear.

If it's against your moral convictions NOT to interfere with other people's life choices, that's too bad. You still don't get to do it.

In a second.

gman, exactly

good comment!

Hey, I've kind of given up on today's religions so if you could let me know how this Tomato Plant thing works I may be interested. LOL!

Just wanted to put my 2 cents in with the Wiccan Reed (paraphrased)
"Do whatever you will... As long as you hurt no-one or yourself"

I also like the idea of Tomato Plant worship... much better tasting than those dry communion wafers! :)

I'll see all the sane people in hell, I suppose...

First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--because I was not a Jew;

Then they came for the Catholics, and I did not speak out--because I was not a Catholic;

Then they came for the trade unions , and I did not speak out--because I was not a trade unionist;

Then they came for the Protestant Church., and I did not speak out--because I was not the Protestant Church;

Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak out for me.

--Martin Niemoller

Whether or not you agree with Catholic teaching, this unprecedented attack on religious liberty should concern everyone. The problem is that so many of you harbor so much anger and ill will towards the Church, that you are cheering this erosion of the rights given us by our Creator and guaranteed by the first amendment.

It is a sad day indeed.

M4Ogre I agree with you..

MrRed, You missed the point, Major religious groups thed to stand the test of time, where your Tomato religion has not.

Muslims have the right to practis their religion. The Problem that arisees is that Shariah Law is both Rligious, and Govermental Law. The Religious part is fine, and is afforded the same rights as any other religion. However the Govenmental law part conflicts with our Constitution, and Federal, State and Local laws. You can not have different laws for different people.

As for Cancer Treatment, I personally don't believe that Chemo, or most of the current cancer treatments are good for the person. There are plenty of optional treatments offered in Europe, Asia for example that offer benifits as well. Not to mention prevention which is much better then fighting a disease. Who is to say which is the best way to fight cancer, (except for the Obamacare board) that will tell us the only way to do it, if you are valueable enough in thier eyes).Jehova witnesses should have that right, I have not heard of a case they got AIDS, or hepitits a/b from a transfusion. Let people take responsibility for thier lives. Even some hospitals encourage Prayer, because they have found it helps the paients. The point is when do you take away life support from a person? And what constutes Death? It is easier to tell when live begins then when it ends.

Look at all the Czars Abama appoited. Tax evaders, criminals, and the lot. We could use some morality in Washington. Romney/Ryan would at least be a improvement over what we now have.

That is not possible. One ca be right or neither can be right, but two opposing beliefs can not both be right. There is one truth. Whether it's what you believe or what he believes, they cannot both be right.

But that is the problem with beliefs. Some believe that it is ok to kill someone to take what is not theirs. or because another person doen't think the way you do. Some believe it is ok to lie about onother, just because he may be diffeent. It is not the believing but what the belief is that is what is important.

Rick S is the reason I know longer attend Mass- every Parish has a couple of R Santorums: always feeling they are "better" than the rest of the flock. Wish I was a fly on the wall in his house, or maybe not. . .

By the by, if the Church is going to preach Political Policy--TAX "EM.

Will homeland security be doing pregnancy tests on women leaving the country to make sure they do not get abortions while out of the country?

If you have a miscarriage while out of the country will you need to provide a doctor's excuse in order to re-enter?

The problem is the State has no right to try to force Churches to purchase birthcontol thrugh Insurance plans. The american public is free to quit their jobs if they don't like the teaching of the instution they work for. Since they choose that place of employment, they didn't seem to care about the detail of the insurance coverage at the time. Pepople can work for Hustler, or Playboy if they want that type of coverage, Or better yet they can start their own religion, and build Colleges to go work for.

To think this religious nut was running for president.... gives you something to think about once these zealots establish themselves in position and pretend to speak for the majority of us !!!!!

It is the church doctrine that he menioned. While it is true each person believes differently, they joined the church because they must believe in the majority of the teachings. Not all Liberials believe in same sex marriage, but they must believe in most of the liberial teaching if they consider themselves liberials. Just the same for when live begins. some believe at concetion, some believe apon delivering the baby (counting that no doctor is try to perfom an abortion.). The Catholic Church doesn't believe in contraceptives. It is their right. If a person doen't believe then they don't have to join.

shhhhhhhh this is about Church and state?????holding hands with the tea party oh that would be you??

Relevant because people need to understand that President's have more direct influence on these issues (Supreme Court nominees, International Gag Rule executive ordres etc), than they have on the economy, gas prices etc.

Why not talk about the slow growth of the economy caused by the GOP/TP's refusal to support any and all improvement initiatives? Gotta hand it to the GOP - first they blow up the economy, then they refuse to lend a hand to mop up the mess.

Devdoc12able: Why don't you write to Santorum and ask him to stop talking? Don't get me wrong, I'd love it if the media would ignore guys like Santorum but surely the Republicans would cry liberal media bias if they did.

How ironic! NBCnews gives front-page coverage to Rick Santorum's anti-Obama views and somehow it's not relevant because it's not slamming Obama on the economy.

Some of you right-wingers should really go back and re-read George Orwell's "1984". It's relevant to the Republican party of late.

Alan , I agree and it's not bad reading.

It's relevant because the Catholic Church says Obama is more pro-life than Romney.

It's relevant because Romney's VP pick believes a fertilized egg has all the rights of a born child--although he also believes government cannot afford to feed America's hungry children--because we have defense contractors we have to feed!

It's relevant because one faith cannot impose its values on people of other faiths or no faith--and when any Church gets into politics, they are by law to lose their tax exempt status.

It's relevant because ours is a Constitution based on separation of Church and State--something the right conveniently chooses to forget every time they yell for the Constitution. but in utter disregard of what's in it.

Failed economy??? You're on drugs.

Churches are very much involved in politics. that needs to stop, then this conversation would be mote.

Dee Turner, you could not be more wrong. Obama believes that Abortion is fine and dandy, where has the Catholic Church believes it is Sin. Obama believes in same sex marriage, the Catholic Church beleves it is Sin. The Catholic Church and Obama are totally oppisite in thier views. Romney has the same view in these matters.

Second your view of "Seperation of Church and State". This is only one sided. The State shall make no laws govening the establishment of religion. So the State can make no laws that govern the churches. However the Churches can endever to make, repeal, or change state laws. So it is the Churches right (and duty) to get it's members involved in state matters, Maybe if they did the politicans would be a little more honest. So when Obama wanted to force the Churches to purchase birthcontrol insurance policys that was illegal, and infringed on the rights of the church. Of course every person is free to purchase any insurance policy covering anything they want.

When you say the Catholic Church believes, you really mean that a German who lives in Italy and a few dozen other foreign citizens who happen to be members of an exclusive society believe. For example, the overwhelming majority of American Catholics apparently are fine with birth control and practice it. You would prefer that their rights to do so be infringed by the Pope and his College of Cardinals?

If their rights are infringed, they have the freedom to leave the church, unlike Musliems that would give them a death sentance. No one is forceing them to stay. That is the problem here, People want the rights but not the obugations of the group. Gays don't like religion, but they wnat the religous right of Marriage. Sudo-Catholics want the title but not the responsibilities of the Catholic Chirch. I will agree that most people in a church don't believe in it, but just want the social status of it. Just like the Democrats court the Black vote, but try to keep them hooked on government programs, when it is not election time. If they don't like the Pope then Leave, it is simple as that. You can look at Wisconsin to see when given the opertunity to leave the Union, workers will do so, becuase they are given a choice, (funny how you want women to get paid for by someone else for their right to choose, but you don't believe in Parients rights to choose the school for their children, or the rights of workers to choose if they want to join a union.

And about relevance, why not ask all these rich people that you claim create jobs, where the jobs are. They have had years of reduced taxes that (was suppose to create jobs, where are they if this reduced taxes were given them?) Where are they? I haven't seen one, so the trickle down all these years was just that trickle down do do. It's time people do what we are about to do now, raise the taxes on the wealthy and give choice to it's people instead of telling them what they can and can't do as women. Stop the disgraceful so called Christian disrespect of the President. Christians don't do that, so there must be another lie in the plate.

I disagree, the more Ricky talks, the more likely Obama wins big.