VaultNetwork.netVault Network Boards
Author Topic: Catholic Church pushes to deny contraceptives, in opposition to 98% of US Christians [Locked]
Brother_Tempus  3 stars
Title: Patriot
Posts: 985
Registered: 2001-1-9 08:07:00
legged posted:

It'samazing how much history I ignore because it make my argument irrelevant



fixed for accuracy

If one looks at the real history of the internet and government interference/management of it, one can make the argument that government retarded the growth of the internet and the related technologies that came from it for 30 years

 

-----signature-----
You win ACF, dude - Osmenthe
BT is usually right - Onslaught
i think we need more BT on page 1 - FighterUSAF
Yep, BT is right - Aerlinthian
Got guns & ammo? Food? Precious metals?
notmforce2k  4 stars
Posts: 1,209
Registered: 2011-10-9 09:37:34
Whatever helps you sleep at night.

So hey, since you feel like being so chatty and confrontational today, maybe you can get around to ONE of the threads you ran away from me on? Just one, take your pick. I don't wanna make you do too much work.
notmforce2k  4 stars
Posts: 1,209
Registered: 2011-10-9 09:37:34
Brother_Tempus posted:

levgre posted:

. But in the case of contraception, you have a few higher ups in the church refusing basic medical access to the majority, both Christians and non-Christians alike.



I whine on the internet from the comfort of my own home with benefits awarded to me from my voluntary service to the government I hate and try to compare the influence of the church with the enforceable law of the US government. I have time to make these illogical, sympathy-garnering statements because my candidate was predictably curbstomped AGAIN, so I am going to pass the next few years by editing posts and trolling people. Have I mentioned what a good investment gold is?

Reporting to you live from the place I hate but would never consider leaving,
BT.



ftfy.
Ah-Schoo  4 stars
Title: Fuzzy Caterpillar of Friendliness
Posts: 3,034
Registered: 2000-8-11 09:05:29
notmforce2k posted:

Brother_Tempus posted:

levgre posted:

. But in the case of contraception, you have a few higher ups in the church refusing basic medical access to the majority, both Christians and non-Christians alike.



I whine on the internet from the comfort of my own home with benefits awarded to me from my voluntary service to the government I hate and try to compare the influence of the church with the enforceable law of the US government. I have time to make these illogical, sympathy-garnering statements because my candidate was predictably curbstomped AGAIN, so I am going to pass the next few years by editing posts and trolling people. Have I mentioned what a good investment gold is?

Reporting to you live from the place I hate but would never consider leaving,
BT.



ftfy.

Bam!

 

-----signature-----
.
Opinion = fact. Anecdote = proof. Political label more important than either of those.
Welcome to ACF, where debate goes to die.
.
"fascist totalitarian secular progressive Zionist intellectually challenged Christian puppets." - Aerlinthina
faefrost  1 star
Posts: 70
Registered: 2000-4-27 21:34:34
I love how you all once again jump all over religion in general and Catholics in particular, and yet somehow still fail to grasp the key issue here.

Can the government exert a direct level of control by executive fiat that it is both clearly and directly forbidden to do by the constitution, and that the SCOTUS has expressly said they cannot do (in several unanimous decisions).

Whether or not contraception is a good idea is somewhat irrelevant. The key question is whether or not the government. In particular un-elected bureaucratic portions of it, can simply override the constitutional protections and the limits on government in support of a "good idea", without following the full legislative procedure and getting the states to ratify such changes

Remember, what they are seeking to change or bypass by regulatory fiat is the same constitutional protection that grants you your guaranteed freedom of speech. So what next? The department of Health and Human Services declares stupid people can no longer talk or post on the internet in order to protect the health of the rest of us. (studies have shown that stupid internet trolls lead to elevated blood pressure, which in turn leads to heart attacks. THESE DEADLY STUPID PEOPLE MUST BE STOPPED!)

In our system of government it requires that something be more that simply a good idea in order for it to be imposed on an individual or a group. There are protections and these protections cannot be violated in that way that this rule is seeking to do.

 

-----signature-----
"ou're not just a regular moron
You were designed to be a moron!"
jonus156  3 stars
Posts: 906
Registered: 2005-10-12 11:53:45
BritonGuy posted:

Abstinence works though. You can't argue that. No sex, no babies or STDs.



but..... you mean....... i have to stop f****** thats unpossible Im supposed to "pray on the alter of marriage 3-4 times a week"
i.... i cant afford to pay for 20 kids Im not the duggers.

 

-----signature-----
This thread begs the question: do the "women" of ACF use a funnel to get that much sand in their vagina or do they just slide around the beach like an angry Roomba? -deadcactus-
"I could go for some cock"--cute_but_stupid
Cawlin  4 stars
Posts: 1,759
Registered: 2005-2-22 07:58:42
faefrost posted:

I love how you all once again jump all over religion in general and Catholics in particular, and yet somehow still fail to grasp the key issue here.

Can the government exert a direct level of control by executive fiat that it is both clearly and directly forbidden to do by the constitution, and that the SCOTUS has expressly said they cannot do (in several unanimous decisions).

Whether or not contraception is a good idea is somewhat irrelevant. The key question is whether or not the government. In particular un-elected bureaucratic portions of it, can simply override the constitutional protections and the limits on government in support of a "good idea", without following the full legislative procedure and getting the states to ratify such changes

Remember, what they are seeking to change or bypass by regulatory fiat is the same constitutional protection that grants you your guaranteed freedom of speech. So what next? The department of Health and Human Services declares stupid people can no longer talk or post on the internet in order to protect the health of the rest of us. (studies have shown that stupid internet trolls lead to elevated blood pressure, which in turn leads to heart attacks. THESE DEADLY STUPID PEOPLE MUST BE STOPPED!)

In our system of government it requires that something be more that simply a good idea in order for it to be imposed on an individual or a group. There are protections and these protections cannot be violated in that way that this rule is seeking to do.



I appreciate your perspective here and the implications of the slippery slope and all that it carries. HOWEVER, this is not mandating that everyone USE contraception, nor is it mandating that NOBODY use it. This is only mandating that it is financially covered by health insurance. It's a simple issue of mandating coverage. There are legit medical reasons for contraception, and sorting between those and the other merely "resonsible" reasons to use contraception would probably cost more in administration and unwanted pregnancies than simply covering it would cost.

Additionally, this is another "moral outrage" issue that is right along the lines of opposition to gay marriage. As such, it is reasonable to do away with it in my opinion.

Really, ANYTHING can be argued to be a slippery slope, and of course it's all about where we draw the lines and when or if we step across them. I feel pretty safe and confident that this would not lead us down that slippery slope.

 

-----signature-----
If ignorance were painful, half the posters here would be on morphine drips.
Everyone playing WoW knows everything about playing two classes: 1) their own and 2) Hunters
JD_HOGG  4 stars
Posts: 2,846
Registered: 2008-3-18 08:04:21
jonus156 posted:

BritonGuy posted:

Abstinence works though. You can't argue that. No sex, no babies or STDs.



but..... you mean....... i have to stop f****** thats unpossible Im supposed to "pray on the alter of marriage 3-4 times a week"
i.... i cant afford to pay for 20 kids Im not the duggers.



Go forth and multiply or GTFO of church.
Jesus.Christ..  1 star
Posts: 165
Registered: 2011-5-20 16:21:16
Jezza_Belle posted:

ikkoikki posted:

Yeah well 98% of Christians aren't Christians at all, they're faux-Christians who only pretend to be Christians when its convenient but sin like crazy whenever the they fancy.

My work colleague never has sex, and has a girlfriend who he won't live with and won't have sex with until they're married. THAT'S a christian.



you seem to have forgotten that Jesus died for our sins.



Damn straight.

 

-----signature-----
Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.
Hawkson  4 stars
Title: I AM AN ASSASSIN (SHH)
Posts: 1,791
Registered: 2001-10-23 22:57:09
jonus156 posted:

BritonGuy posted:

Abstinence works though. You can't argue that. No sex, no babies or STDs.



but..... you mean....... i have to stop f****** thats unpossible Im supposed to "pray on the alter of marriage 3-4 times a week"
i.... i cant afford to pay for 20 kids Im not the duggers.



It's too bad that the Duggars can't stop F****** long enough to kill themselves and their kids.

 

-----signature-----
Hawkson, Esq.
Nothing is true, everything is permitted.

VaultNetwork.net is an independently operated community forum and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or technically based on IGN, GameSpy, FilePlanet, GameStats, or the former IGN/GameSpy Vault Network.
References to VaultNetwork.net mean this site/domain. VNBoards-style presentation is a visual homage only. By using this site, you agree to the forum rules.