Catholic Bishops Oppose Compromise on Birth-Control

[Intense]

Health insurance is to protect those major things you can't afford to go wrong.

If my girlfriend gets pregnant, that would be a major thing we can't afford to go wrong right now.

Do you buy full coverage auto insurance with no deductible? How about extended warranties? What if the government told you to get those things? I think leaving out minor expenses make people more responsible for their general health.

How is that anywhere near comparable? The government is not forcing anyone to buy birth control, or coverage that will include birth control. The law merely requires that employers not interfere to prevent the insurance company from making the option available. I can choose to buy car insurance that will cover many things, or I can choose to buy insurance that only covers a few things. The health care law will open up those options to choose for all people.

[quiote]You were the one whining to a mod about an entire group of people. I consider that a rant. Own it.

[/QUOTE]
So you think the money to cover contraceptives just manifests out of thin air, or the Tooth Faery creates it? How about you start buying your own condoms. Talk about a cheap date.

 

[Luissa]

Um abortion is regulated in most states. And I thought the right didn't like regulations when it came to their rights?

I don't advocate making abortion Illegal at all. I advocate alternative options. It's the Mothers choice within reason Luissa, by that I mean that Even Rights are Regulated, in a Free Society, by the consent of the Super Majority. Abortion on Demand, is Genocide, legal or not.

Are you asking me personally or making general statements on projection? What makes you think I would go along with anything from either side without question in the first place? Tell me of Any proclaimed Right that is limitless? There is nothing not subject to Government Interpretation and Regulation.

From my perspective, generally speaking, what you do with your own Person, is Rightly your business. I would use the art of persuasion to influence you against an Abortion, Not a Government Mandate. Your body is your own. Now, the repeated cost and association with my or Anyone Else's tax money, funding repeated abortions as a form of primary birth control, I personally find against Conscience, that, and a big cash cow for the clinics. It is Mass Genocide. Look at the numbers.

Look up how many people have more than one abortion, and or how many use it as primary birth control.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Well it has gotten worse than we ever dreamed.

The U S Army told military chaplains not to read a letter from an Archbishop in which he expressed disapproval of the Administrations new policies....


The Army said Tuesday that a request for chaplains not to read a letter in Sunday Mass that expressed disapproval of a new regulation in the Obama administration's health care law was not an attempt to "censor," but rather a cautionary move to preserve "military order and discipline."

Read more: Army Defends Chaplain Intervention Over Letter Criticizing Contraceptive Mandate | Fox News

 

[Intense]

Um abortion is regulated in most states. And I thought the right didn't like regulations when it came to their rights?

Are you asking me personally or making general statements on projection? What makes you think I would go along with anything from either side without question in the first place? Tell me of Any proclaimed Right that is limitless? There is nothing not subject to Government Interpretation and Regulation.

From my perspective, generally speaking, what you do with your own Person, is Rightly your business. I would use the art of persuasion to influence you against an Abortion, Not a Government Mandate. Your body is your own. Now, the repeated cost and association with my or Anyone Else's tax money, funding repeated abortions as a form of primary birth control, I personally find against Conscience, that, and a big cash cow for the clinics. It is Mass Genocide. Look at the numbers.

Look up how many people have more than one abortion, and or how many use it as primary birth control.

I've posted links on a few times.
Vital Statistics of New York State

New York State 2009
Previous Abortions
None 47,332
1 27,646
2 16,356
3 8,220
4 3,930
5+ 4,342

http://www.health.ny.gov/statistics/vital_statistics/2009/table19.htm

 

[Intense]

Well it has gotten worse than we ever dreamed.

The U S Army told military chaplains not to read a letter from an Archbishop in which he expressed disapproval of the Administrations new policies....


The Army said Tuesday that a request for chaplains not to read a letter in Sunday Mass that expressed disapproval of a new regulation in the Obama administration's health care law was not an attempt to "censor," but rather a cautionary move to preserve "military order and discipline."

Read more: Army Defends Chaplain Intervention Over Letter Criticizing Contraceptive Mandate | Fox News

When are they not about censorship and control of the Media?

 

[Luissa]

So by that one assume the majority are not using it as birth control? That is what it looks like to me.

 

[saveliberty]

If my girlfriend gets pregnant, that would be a major thing we can't afford to go wrong right now.

How is that anywhere near comparable? The government is not forcing anyone to buy birth control, or coverage that will include birth control. The law merely requires that employers not interfere to prevent the insurance company from making the option available. I can choose to buy car insurance that will cover many things, or I can choose to buy insurance that only covers a few things. The health care law will open up those options to choose for all people.

Can't afford a pregnancy? Here's your choices:

1. Don't have sex with your girlfriend.
2. Make sure you buy birth control.
3. Make sure your employer sponsored health plan covers it.

The government certainly IS forcing someone to buy birth control. Pretty much what this entire thread is about. Where you been?

 

[Luissa]

If my girlfriend gets pregnant, that would be a major thing we can't afford to go wrong right now.

How is that anywhere near comparable? The government is not forcing anyone to buy birth control, or coverage that will include birth control. The law merely requires that employers not interfere to prevent the insurance company from making the option available. I can choose to buy car insurance that will cover many things, or I can choose to buy insurance that only covers a few things. The health care law will open up those options to choose for all people.

Can't afford a pregnancy? Here's your choices:

1. Don't have sex with your girlfriend.
2. Make sure you buy birth control.
3. Make sure your employer sponsored health plan covers it.

The government certainly IS forcing someone to buy birth control. Pretty much what this entire thread is about. Where you been?

NO, this thread is about the right having no problem with employers discriminating against women. This would be all fine and dandy if these employers didnt have health plans that covered elective men's services.
I also think that is interesting that no women who are for them covering birth control were invited to be heard at the hearings today. All it was, was a bunch of men bitching about being discriminated against. Weird, huh?

 

[Intense]

So by that one assume the majority are not using it as birth control? That is what it looks like to me.

That figure is New York State, 2009. I am going to make a wild guess here that if you add each category, the total surpasses the First Time Abortions Group. I would think that each category is exclusive, meaning if you were found in the 5 Time+ Abortion Category, you would not be listed in the 4 Time or 3 Time, or 2 Time, or 1 Time Previous Abortion Category simultaneously. That's how I would interpret it, unless instructed otherwise. Just a Thought. Still, that's allot of women flooding the clinics.

 

[Intense]

If my girlfriend gets pregnant, that would be a major thing we can't afford to go wrong right now.

How is that anywhere near comparable? The government is not forcing anyone to buy birth control, or coverage that will include birth control. The law merely requires that employers not interfere to prevent the insurance company from making the option available. I can choose to buy car insurance that will cover many things, or I can choose to buy insurance that only covers a few things. The health care law will open up those options to choose for all people.

Can't afford a pregnancy? Here's your choices:

1. Don't have sex with your girlfriend.
2. Make sure you buy birth control.
3. Make sure your employer sponsored health plan covers it.

The government certainly IS forcing someone to buy birth control. Pretty much what this entire thread is about. Where you been?

NO, this thread is about the right having no problem with employers discriminating against women. This would be all fine and dandy if these employers didnt have health plans that covered elective men's services.
I also think that is interesting that no women who are for them covering birth control were invited to be heard at the hearings today. All it was, was a bunch of men bitching about being discriminated against. Weird, huh?

I think your account is a bit biased. I know plenty of Women that are Right to Life. I don't think I know one Dad that does not take a back seat to his woman's affections, when it comes to raising the kid's either. I bet that goes back to Adam.

 

[Luissa]

Women who have had no previous abortion, or just one equals 74,978
While the others add up to 32,848.

 

[Intense]

If my girlfriend gets pregnant, that would be a major thing we can't afford to go wrong right now.

How is that anywhere near comparable? The government is not forcing anyone to buy birth control, or coverage that will include birth control. The law merely requires that employers not interfere to prevent the insurance company from making the option available. I can choose to buy car insurance that will cover many things, or I can choose to buy insurance that only covers a few things. The health care law will open up those options to choose for all people.

Can't afford a pregnancy? Here's your choices:

1. Don't have sex with your girlfriend.
2. Make sure you buy birth control.
3. Make sure your employer sponsored health plan covers it.

The government certainly IS forcing someone to buy birth control. Pretty much what this entire thread is about. Where you been?

Here's the rub. I think the Left is using this issue to distract from all of the Great Pretender's failings. Media Matters, the White House Public Relations Firm and their pay-offs (Pay-Hoffs) for one.

 

[Luissa]

Can't afford a pregnancy? Here's your choices:

1. Don't have sex with your girlfriend.
2. Make sure you buy birth control.
3. Make sure your employer sponsored health plan covers it.

The government certainly IS forcing someone to buy birth control. Pretty much what this entire thread is about. Where you been?

NO, this thread is about the right having no problem with employers discriminating against women. This would be all fine and dandy if these employers didnt have health plans that covered elective men's services.
I also think that is interesting that no women who are for them covering birth control were invited to be heard at the hearings today. All it was, was a bunch of men bitching about being discriminated against. Weird, huh?

I think your account is a bit biased. I know plenty of Women that are Right to Life. I don't think I know one Dad that does not take a back seat to his woman's affections, when it comes to raising the kid's either. I bet that goes back to Adam.

What are talking about?
This about women's opinion on abortion, this about birth control. How hard is that to get?

No women holding the opposite view on the birth control issue were allowed in the hearings today other than women who belong to the House of Rep. And these employers cover things like viagra and penile implants, which can also be considered elective.
That is not being biased, it is stating a fact.

 

[Intense]

Women who have had no previous abortion, or just one equals 74,978
While the others add up to 32,848.

The Link shows 47,332, first time abortions. Why would you include Second Time Abortions in your number?
Table 19: Induced Abortion Summary by Woman's Race/Ethnicity - New York State 2009

 

[Luissa]

Women who have had no previous abortion, or just one equals 74,978
While the others add up to 32,848.

The Link shows 47,332, first time abortions. Why would you include Second Time Abortions in your number?
Table 19: Induced Abortion Summary by Woman's Race/Ethnicity - New York State 2009

because I don't consider people having two abortions using abortions as their primary form of birth control, which is what you stated.

 

[GuyPinestra]

NO, this thread is about the right having no problem with employers discriminating against women. This would be all fine and dandy if these employers didnt have health plans that covered elective men's services.
I also think that is interesting that no women who are for them covering birth control were invited to be heard at the hearings today. All it was, was a bunch of men bitching about being discriminated against. Weird, huh?

Those 'hearings' were on the Constitutionality of the mandate, Luissa...

 

[Intense]

NO, this thread is about the right having no problem with employers discriminating against women. This would be all fine and dandy if these employers didnt have health plans that covered elective men's services.
I also think that is interesting that no women who are for them covering birth control were invited to be heard at the hearings today. All it was, was a bunch of men bitching about being discriminated against. Weird, huh?

I think your account is a bit biased. I know plenty of Women that are Right to Life. I don't think I know one Dad that does not take a back seat to his woman's affections, when it comes to raising the kid's either. I bet that goes back to Adam.

What are talking about?
This about women's opinion on abortion, this about birth control. How hard is that to get?

No women holding the opposite view on the birth control issue were allowed in the hearings today other than women who belong to the House of Rep. And these employers cover things like viagra and penile implants, which can also be considered elective.
That is not being biased, it is stating a fact.

My only point there is that there are plenty of Women that are pro life. In relation to Birth Control, We change at different points in our lives. Paternity is also allot easier to prove. I support Free Choice. I support Each of us buying our own, generally. They are ignored all the time by the Left. Yes, I agree, pro-choice women, should have been represented, which is more than usually comes from your side. I don't think Viagra and Penile Implants should be covered either. I do consider that Elective.

 

[saveliberty]

If my girlfriend gets pregnant, that would be a major thing we can't afford to go wrong right now.

How is that anywhere near comparable? The government is not forcing anyone to buy birth control, or coverage that will include birth control. The law merely requires that employers not interfere to prevent the insurance company from making the option available. I can choose to buy car insurance that will cover many things, or I can choose to buy insurance that only covers a few things. The health care law will open up those options to choose for all people.

Can't afford a pregnancy? Here's your choices:

1. Don't have sex with your girlfriend.
2. Make sure you buy birth control.
3. Make sure your employer sponsored health plan covers it.

The government certainly IS forcing someone to buy birth control. Pretty much what this entire thread is about. Where you been?

NO, this thread is about the right having no problem with employers discriminating against women. This would be all fine and dandy if these employers didnt have health plans that covered elective men's services.
I also think that is interesting that no women who are for them covering birth control were invited to be heard at the hearings today. All it was, was a bunch of men bitching about being discriminated against. Weird, huh?

No, its about the government trying to tell a religion it needs to change its moral compass. You are trying to reframe it. Since it is assumed that the women is having sex with a man that could result in a birth. I'd say it is equal and therefore not discrimination.

 

[Intense]

NO, this thread is about the right having no problem with employers discriminating against women. This would be all fine and dandy if these employers didnt have health plans that covered elective men's services.
I also think that is interesting that no women who are for them covering birth control were invited to be heard at the hearings today. All it was, was a bunch of men bitching about being discriminated against. Weird, huh?

Those 'hearings' were on the Constitutionality of the mandate, Luissa...

Agreed. Not that Obama needs to check on the Constitutionality of anything He supports.

 

[Luissa]

NO, this thread is about the right having no problem with employers discriminating against women. This would be all fine and dandy if these employers didnt have health plans that covered elective men's services.
I also think that is interesting that no women who are for them covering birth control were invited to be heard at the hearings today. All it was, was a bunch of men bitching about being discriminated against. Weird, huh?

Those 'hearings' were on the Constitutionality of the mandate, Luissa...

Your point?