Is promoting human life against American law?

Not your business.

I'm just curious. Have you ever had health insurance that fell under California's insurance regulations?

Your obsessional interest in my life is noted - and dismissed.

Just get your fucking government out of our First Amendment Rights. Mmmk?

Have you ever paid state or federal taxes, which then went to support family planning services (including birth control) for women on Medicaid?

I'm curious how deep the injustice goes.
 
So that means if a woman gets an abortion through her insurance, her employer is paying at least part of the cost. And if her employer is the Catholic Church, then the Church is being forced to pay for abortions.

The Church itself is exempt from these regulations and they don't require plans to cover abortions.

But our hospitals, our schools, and a huge variety of other services that we provide are not exempt. You really want to pick up the tab for the millions of Americans that we help without asking you for money? Huh?

Get your government out of my religion.

You invited the government into your religion.
 
You take federal money, you can't bitch when the federal government tells you what rules you must follow to continue to get that money.

This is what happens when you invite the devil into your house.

The federal funding that the Catholic Church gets does not match the costs. In healthcare alone, the Church contributes $5.7 billion. Enjoy meeting those costs without our help. One in every six Americans requiring hospital treatment in this country is treated in a Catholic Hospitals. Many of those hospitals serve America's most vulnerable and poor.

Why is that?

Why are y'all happy to take our money but not allow us to practice our religion? Why do you not support the First Amendment?


You have three choices:

1) Don't hire non-Catholics.

2) Don't treat Medicaid or Medicare patients (a.k.a. "get government out of my Medicare").

3) Don't offer health insurance to employees and just pay the fine.
 
Last edited:
Sure seems that way....Obama wants to dictate and force the Catholic Church to kill (via providing contraception, abortion, sterilization, etc.) in order to preserve the "separation of church and state"....so says Al Sharpton today...

Get your religion out of my government.

get your government out of my religion....

You want to be a part of my government then you play by my governments rules. Be a Catholic, it doesnt matter to me.
 
Individual Catholics use birth control but suddenly they're against it?

Not to mention, these Catholic hospitals' pharmacies all carried birth control before. Why are they screaming about it now?

Because its President Obama.

When they stop taking federal money and when they pay taxes, I might feel a bit more charitable about them.

Naw.

Until they care as much about children as they do fetuses, they're just not on my radar. I really don't care what their pretending to be in a dither about.

Would be 'exception to the rule':

Conscience clause (medical) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Catholic Doctrine

The conscience clause is widely invoked in Catholic universities, hospitals, and agencies because the Catholic Church opposes abortion, contraceptives, sterilization, and embryonic stem cell treatments. Opponents of related FOCA legislation have interpreted the possible end of the conscience clause as a demand to either "do abortions or close."[7] Archbishop Dolan has said, "“In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences."[8] However, conscience clauses are sometimes interpreted differently and their use will often depend on the given context.[9]
 
Sure seems that way....Obama wants to dictate and force the Catholic Church to kill (via providing contraception, abortion, sterilization, etc.) in order to preserve the "separation of church and state"....so says Al Sharpton today...

Sharpton: Obama needs to dictate to the Catholic Church to maintain separation of church and state, or something « Hot Air

2-06-12

Someone has a very confused idea about the separation of church and state, and surprisingly, it’s the Reverend in this Morning Joe panel today. Working off of Peggy Noonan’s Wall Street Journal column from Saturday, Al Sharpton argues that Barack Obama had to dictate to the Catholic Church to violate its religious tenets in order to … preserve the separation of church and state?

Rev. Al Sharpton: No, I think you have to have the reverse argument, and that is if I want to seek employment and have employment in a church but that I disagree with the dogma and theology of the church, do I have the right to be protected by law? And I think that what the Obama administration is saying that you do not have to follow the tenets of a church organization to be an employee of a church.

Scarborough: Do you think this is a good decision?

Sharpton: If we are going to have a separation of church and state, we’re going to have a separation of church and state. Whether I would personally agree with the decision or not, the question is do I have a right to make that law?

This is an absurd perversion of the concept of separation of church and state. When Thomas Jefferson wrote that (it’s not found in American law), he meant that the church should not dictate to the State on law — and that the state should not dictate to the church on doctrine. Jefferson wanted to avoid establishing a state religion run by Parliament that had the power to manipulate the spiritual for the sake of the secular. That is exactly what Obama proposes to do in this case: dictate to the Catholic Church and its organizations that its doctrine on contraception, abortion, and sterilization are incorrect and force them to fund those practices that violate their most deeply held beliefs on the sanctity of life, all to satisfy Obama’s political needs.



So wait...it's Obama vs Sharpton and you're arguing in FAVOR of Sharpton?

LMAO.
What strange bedfellows you conservatives have nowadays.
 

Forum List

Back
Top