Santorum is a lunatic, Part 10,568

[Wisconsin+17]

Hrm? Given that Obama is forcing Catholics to pay for abortion and contraception - Santorum's spot on here.

If the Obama administration had any respect for religious freedom - then they would back off. Instead, they've been so gracious as to give the church a years 'grace'.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nor does it mean that the women were even Catholic at the time when they used birth control. If you ever used birth control at any point of your life  you count.

Terrible statistic btw. I would like to see the numbers for practicing Catholic women as a whole presently using contraception. I would highly suspect that they are a minority.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most Catholic institutions do take faith into consideration and try to hire faithful Catholics. This requirement would also apply to nuns who work for various Catholic charities. Terrible optics for Obama not doing the standard opt out clause - where those wishing for a conscience exemption can simply choose not to participate.

I'm not sure why the government should require people to purchase elective coverage. No one has any medical need for contraception.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes they are. They prevent implantation, not contraception. You take them after contraception in order to procure an early term abortion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

By the time you take them - the egg has already been fertilized. They take effect after, not before conception.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If that were the case you would take them before having sex. We don't call it the 'morning before' pill, do we?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's the whole purpose of the pill.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

When you define personhood - as Santorum does, as beginning with contraception - then yes, it procures an early term abortion.

[Wisconsin+17]

For what? Santorum's position - or the fact that the morning after pill prevents implantation?

You already said so yourself.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Like I said, I'm a practicing Catholic. I see refusal to pay for contraception as part of my faith. Obama wants me to pay - he's welcome to have me arrested and thrown into jail.

But we all know that forcing people to pay for the things that you want is part of liberal democracy.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Sorry to bust your bubble. I'm not Teddy.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Thank you for playing. You admit that it prevents implantation, I have a problem with that because I believe that personhood begins at conception.

This is altogether a completely different issue from actual contraceptives (things like condoms), which are prohibited by the Church for use by practicing Catholics.

If people don't want to be Catholic - the solution is really simple. Don't be a Catholic. By the same token, the state should not infringe on the free exercise of Catholic religious beliefs, as Obama is doing here.

That people are justifying Obama's edicts strikes me as self-serving. Rather than paying for contraception that they use, they would rather force the majority of the tax paying population (which has no use or desire for contraception), into payment.

If contraception is so wonderful, then people should have no problems paying for it as necessary. I have no problem with people choosing contraception, but I do have a problem paying for other people to use it when I do not use it or need it myself.

[Wisconsin+17]

Hey politico - they'll probably question whether she was actually a woman now.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, and? Why should I be paying for it? I get along just fine without contraception. You want filet mignon every night - great. Does that justify me paying for the steaks?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The point being that the morning after pill prevents implantation. You admitted this was so and asked if that was the reason I was against it. You are correct. It is also the reason that Santorum has come out against it too.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm sure the same was said after Dred Scott. Sure, they didn't hit a home run, but they did reach the warning track.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Obama.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's not just hospital workers. It applies to everyone without exception.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you're best reply is a Hobbesian choice? No, this only works if you believe that contraception reduces the incidence of abortion AND if you believe that the ends justify the means. First, your premise is flawed, secondly, even if contraception reduced abortion, it still wouldn't be justified.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nobody is pro choice out of pragmatism. If that were so you wouldn't have to force people to cover abortion and contraception. People are pro choice out of idealism - the desire to shape the world to fit themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So it's ok to demolish a building when you don't know if there's someone inside? That's not very good logic.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So if I were to walk up, mug you, kill you, strip your body and sell the organs to save the lives of 5 others - that's no different then if you died from a heart attack?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah, so because it's a losing proposition means that they shouldn't fight it. Rubbish. The constitution guarantees freedom of religion, and protects the rights of Catholics to not pay for contraception.

If Obama wants to ram it through- the constitution also guarantees the right of the people to expel and remove officials who have exceeded their constitutional authority.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you believe that forcing everyone to pay for contraception is helping people pay their own bills? Rubbish. Let people make their own decisions - not the state, and you'll see that they will be better off than if you force them to pay the state to make decisions contrary to the well being of the people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Actually, we're saving tens of millions of American women money. You realize that there are plenty of American women who do not want/use/need contraception?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why don't we pay for boob jobs, nose jobs too? That's prohibitively expensive elective medicine that would benefit millions of American women.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well duh. If you work for the Catholic church - shouldn't you expect to follow what the Catholic church teaches?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And what is that total compared to the total number of women? 10 percent? 20 percent? Do you believe it's right to raid their pocketbooks in order to help the others for elective medicine?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Didn't 50+ percent of Catholics vote Democrat last election? Remind me, how many elections have the Democrats won when they failed to win a majority of Catholics.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sure, not paying for contraception is a winning issue. You want contraception - you pay for it. Oh, and btw - all you democrat men - why is your woman having to pay for her contraception? Shouldn't you be paying for it so that she doesn't have to rely on the state? Or are we paying for her contraception because you can't be bothered to look after her?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Just preaching to non-Catholics would deprive them of the 'exemption'. Obama has already said that the Church has a year to comply. The Church has replied saying that they will not comply with the unconstitutional mandate. That means we can tell Obama to stick it where the sun don't shine.

He wants to bring the brownshirts down to close everything 'Catholic', he's welcome to try.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Then provide proof of such. The indignation is neither faux, nor right wing either. Plenty of Dims, including Sen. Casey have petitioned Obama to rescind the executive order.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, and MA isn't TX. If MA wants to embrace Romney and communism, they will bear the consequences.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's not single payer, sir. It's an individual mandate. Everyone is required to pay for contraception.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It covers any and all church employees who are involved in these institutions. There, again are nuns that are falling under the mandate. There is significant overlap between those employed by the Church and by these institutions. Not to mention the fact that the law is outright unconstitutional in restricting religious freedoms guaranteed by the constitution.

The Church has already said that we are not going to comply.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, not so. Contraceptive use has increased the abortion rate. Abortions today are far higher than they were in the past. Contraception is not perfect, and when contraception fails, couples are far more likely to undertake Abortion.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The rate today is 10x what it was. Dr. Nathanson himself has testified before congress that doctors prior to legalization performed illegal abortions much the same as they do now. What has changed is that there is significant government support for abortion and the entire industry and legalization has opened the floodgates.

As for complications - do you really want to enter this debate? There are plenty of complications arising from legal clinics which in most states are not required to undertake inspections commenserate with their status as surgical clinics.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Then why are you forcing people who disagree with you to fund things that you believe in? Isn't that contrary to pragmatism? It squares up straight with idealism.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It kills unborn children.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Just like killing an infant is not the same as killing an adolescent.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So when does life begin? Where is this bright line between ok and not ok to kill?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So what you are saying is that devout Catholics have no place in American society? If you want to throw out the constitution -  be my guest. But don't be surprised when the United States don't follow along with you.

You want a society where everyone pays for contraception, and for health care - it's called Canada. I hear they are taking applications...

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, it does. The abortion rate now is 10x what it was in the 60s. Contraception is more common now than before.

If contraception was actually preventing abortion - we would expect to see the opposite. Like I said - contraceptives fail. When they fail, people are more likely to have an abortion. People are also more likely to engage in risky behaviour when they think there are fewer consequences. Abortion is the safety net of contraception.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And you're comfortable making a life or death decision here based on that uncertainty? I'm not. If we don't know then we shouldn't be doing them.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Agreed here.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They were never done in back alleys. They were done by DRs in clinics prior to legalization. Doctors like Nathanson who did plenty under both regimes testified to this fact.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Quite false. Abortion even in a 'safe' setting is riskier than the alternatives. Rather then making the mother safer - the mother is better off giving birth.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why does that matter? Do you believe that a more developed fetus is a person, but a lesser developed one is not?

If there's not bright line - then there's nothing yucky about abortion through all nine months.

See - I think you do have a bright line. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So what, pray tell is a real abortion? When does the child become a child that you can abort?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And the name of that law of the land - the constitution.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And the law of the land says that such a requirement is unconstitutional. So the law of the land takes precedence. You are right that I am required to follow the higher law - the law that says that I have every right to practice my religion free from this constraint.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's what the US constitution says.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, you leave. If you want to break the constitution then you don't belong in America. Go to Canada or elsewhere. Constitution > you.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What does the constitution say? Constitution says that this would be regarded as murder and he would be rightfully charged and arrested if proven. That same constitution says that exercise of religion shall not be infringed.

That includes requiring religious people to act against their conscience and pay for contraception. So tough noogies.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It was built by the Church, run by the Church, and they are just as free to practice their religion as anyone else in America.

Again, the constitution takes precendent over whatever laws Obama dumps on us. The constitution protects us and our natural rights.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Already explained why not.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

First amendment to the constitution - the right to free exercise of religion shall not be infringed. Requiring people to buy contraception contradicts free exercise.   

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Couple things here. National defense is a constitutional obligation of the government. Providing contraception? No. The government does have the power to fund the military that does not exist for many. many other things that the government does. Again, going back to the constitution.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because it's logical? Arguing that the constitution can mean whatever you want it to mean renders the constitution meaningless.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Nonsense. Unconstitutional legislation is just as unconstitutional the day it was issued as the day it is struck down.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do you believe that human nature has changed significantly in 200 years? They put checks and balances there for a reason.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Absolutely - which is why I go back to it, an unconstitutional law is just that, unconstitutional. Any violation gets wound back to when the law was issued.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not sure why you regard me as a 'friend' of the 'economic elites'. I just happen to observe that these elites tend not to like things that constrain them, like the constitution.