article--Obama's final word, Catholics must provide abortion drugs

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Some women use them for health reasons and their intent is not to prevent nor end pregnancy.

Not abortifacients. And if you are talking about artificial contraceptives, it isn't even for birth control, so any claim that it about health is misleading.

There are other solutions, but even if those are not researched and hormones are prescribed instead, they are not birth control. This is specifically to allow folks to have unprotected sex, hopefully without pregnancy, but if that doesn't work, there's the abortifacients.

(The whole thing reminds me of the girl whose mother took her to the doctor because of acne. The lazy doctor simply wanted to give the girl birth control and claiming to the girl's mother that it was *necessary*. To which the wise mother asked what the doctor gave the boy patients who came to him with bad skin. The doctor was just using the skin problem as an excuse to but the girl on birth control. The mother wasn't fooled.) There are other solutions to women's health problems, but even so, the HHS Mandate is about birth control and not for health purposes. Few are fooled. Birth Control isn't about health and neither is abortion--early or later on.
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,132
13,198
✟1,090,735.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
That whole pitchfork crusade thing would only work if there was a significantly smaller number of people with equal (probably more) "skin in the game" who wouldn't launch a counter crusade promoting the opposite opinion.

In the case of contraceptive access, I am sure that the people who wanted affordable contraception and were willing to march for it would outnumber the 'religious freedom" crusaders many times over.

There are of course exceptions.

Big, expensive, misleading advertising campaigns can help the minority win. For example, the vast majority of Americans, and even the majority of NRA members, recognize the eminent common sense in establishing sensible background checks for gun owners--but big money used to broadcast blatant lies (and buy politicians) tilted the balance in favor of lunacy.

The other exception, of course, is when big business wants one thing and the people want another. The Supreme Court has helped big businesses' "money votes" bury everyday people's "poll votes..."

But even that doesn't always work. Most local and state chambers of commerce have come out in favor of immigration reform, but the chances of it passing the House are probably about 1 in 10. Even Wal-Mart wants immigration reform---but there's somebody out there with mega-millions behind him who doesn't want it and isn't opposed to funding the likes of Bachmann and Paul.
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Gee, I have noticed that y'all keep talking solely about "contraception". However that is only PART of the HHS Mandate. The HHS Mandate requires folks to pay for others abortifacients (drugs intended to cause early abortions), birth control, and sterilizations. It's not about health.

The one part of the Mandate that Evangelical HobbyLobby is fighting against (because their Faith does not allow the taking of innocent life) is the one requiring them to provide drugs that cause early abortions and actually harm women's health. And of course, the Catholic Church is opposed to all three parts.
 
Upvote 0

Wolseley

Beaucoup-Diên-Cai-Dāu
Feb 5, 2002
21,133
5,624
63
By the shores of Gitchee-Goomee
✟276,960.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think the only way to have the change that people want to see in the government is to elect the members to your state House of Representatives and Senators to ensure that the electoral college votes for the state that you vote in will vote for the president with the views that you share.

But all that does is perpetuate the problem. Once you elect a Republican or a Democrat to any public office----district court judge, county drain commissioner, dog catcher----they become part of the the system; and the system is there to make sure that if they want to rise in office and actually be re-elected, then they'll do things "the way we do them here". Rebels and housecleaners and reformers never make it that high; the election system has been manipulated to make sure that they don't. All you're ever going to get is a Republican or a Democrat "Company Man".

So the only way to get the message across is violence? Seems odd, since at its heart, we are preaching nonviolence. Nonviolence towards the unborn and born.

I don't like it, either. But I'm just laying it out there as I see it: that's reality. You aren't going to change anything in Washington without a major, major upheaval; they're too well entrenched up there. And we continue to let them get away with it.

That whole pitchfork crusade thing would only work if there was a significantly smaller number of people with equal (probably more) "skin in the game" who wouldn't launch a counter crusade promoting the opposite opinion.

Possibly; but what I think is more likely to happen is that Obama and our congresscreatures will continue to dither around with the economy until it reaches the snapping point and collapses. When there are shortages of gasoline, heating oil, prescription drugs, and food, when the mail system breaks down, and when the Gringo Dollar becomes next to worthless, I suspect you're liable to see a lot more people on the "get rid of every one of these scumbags" side than you are the opposing opinion side.

People aren't hungry enough yet. Let people start to get hungry....or cold....or unable to buy anything, while the congresscreatures continue to enjoy a lifestyle that would make Louis XVI look like a pauper, and you'll see movement.

Again, I don't like it, because usually what you get with something like that is vastly more unstable than what you set out to improve; but if people get hungry, they get irrational. Irrational people in large numbers is not a good thing. Now, maybe I'm off the mark, and none of this will ever take place. I sincerely hope that I'm wrong.

But I don't think so. We're teetering on the brink, and the politicians continue to pretend nothing will ever catch up with us. Nations that get too far into debt usually end up evaporating from existance.
 
Upvote 0

QueSi

Well-Known Member
Jan 15, 2013
1,511
41
Mississippi
✟2,027.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
Wolseley said:
But all that does is perpetuate the problem. Once you elect a Republican or a Democrat to any public office----district court judge, county drain commissioner, dog catcher----they become part of the the system; and the system is there to make sure that if they want to rise in office and actually be re-elected, then they'll do things "the way we do them here". Rebels and housecleaners and reformers never make it that high; the election system has been manipulated to make sure that they don't. All you're ever going to get is a Republican or a Democrat "Company Man".

It does not perpetuate the problem if good people are elected. Yes, some will be swayed, but others will not and will stand their ground for what the populous that elected them stands for.
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,132
13,198
✟1,090,735.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It does not perpetuate the problem if good people are elected. Yes, some will be swayed, but others will not and will stand their ground for what the populous that elected them stands for.

I wonder how many people would vote for the candidate who said: "Sure, I'm against birth control and gay marriage. I'm also against Social Security and Medicare. I'm against taking away tax breaks from companies that moved your jobs overseas. I'm against consumer banking protections--as a matter of fact, I'm against ALL consumer protections period.

I think we should make your kids' schools safer by following the NRA's suggestion of putting volunteers with guns in the schools...

But hey, we don't need to do background checks on them. It would violate their privacy."

Is what other people do in their bedrooms important enough to you to vote for someone like that?

If so, I guess I was born with a busybody deficiency, because no way would I ever vote for a candidate like that.
 
Upvote 0

QueSi

Well-Known Member
Jan 15, 2013
1,511
41
Mississippi
✟2,027.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Single
Fantine said:
I wonder how many people would vote for the candidate who said: "Sure, I'm against birth control and gay marriage. I'm also against Social Security and Medicare. I'm against taking away tax breaks from companies that moved your jobs overseas. I'm against consumer banking protections--as a matter of fact, I'm against ALL consumer protections period.

I think we should make your kids' schools safer by following the NRA's suggestion of putting volunteers with guns in the schools...

But hey, we don't need to do background checks on them. It would violate their privacy."

Is what other people do in their bedrooms important enough to you to vote for someone like that?

If so, I guess I was born with a busybody deficiency, because no way would I ever vote for a candidate like that.

It depends what they are doing in their bedroom I suppose.
 
Upvote 0

S.ilvio

Newbie
Jul 16, 2011
40,473
3,955
Dublin
✟341,922.00
Country
Ireland
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Demonstrations won't do it, elections won't do it, letters to your congresscreature won't do it. The town hall meetings that preceeded this abomination made it clear that they will simply ignore what the people want, and they'll do whatever they want to

I agree with you there mate. Its the same over here. Street demonstrations have no effect on the Political elites...
 
Upvote 0

TheOtherHockeyMom

Contributor
Jul 9, 2008
5,935
274
✟14,889.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Gee, I have noticed that y'all keep talking solely about "contraception". However that is only PART of the HHS Mandate. The HHS Mandate requires folks to pay for others abortifacients (drugs intended to cause early abortions), birth control, and sterilizations. It's not about health.

The one part of the Mandate that Evangelical HobbyLobby is fighting against (because their Faith does not allow the taking of innocent life) is the one requiring them to provide drugs that cause early abortions and actually harm women's health. And of course, the Catholic Church is opposed to all three parts.

What specific drug are you speaking of?
 
Upvote 0

Wolseley

Beaucoup-Diên-Cai-Dāu
Feb 5, 2002
21,133
5,624
63
By the shores of Gitchee-Goomee
✟276,960.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I wonder how many people would vote for the candidate who said: "Sure, I'm against birth control and gay marriage.

I would agree with him there.

I'm also against Social Security and Medicare.

I'm not in agreement with him there, although I do say that both programs need to be refined and made solvent again---but you can't do that until you can get the criminal political thieves to stop dipping their greedy fingers into the kitty every time they want to fund another $90 million-dollar junket to a whorehouse in Colombia.

I'm against taking away tax breaks from companies that moved your jobs overseas.

I think that any American company that moves operations overseas should not only lose their tax breaks, they should get slapped with a great big fat tariff as well.

I'm against consumer banking protections--as a matter of fact, I'm against ALL consumer protections period.

I don't think anybody's advocating that, Fantine. Let's not go totally off the deep end. Simply because we oppose a bad piece of legislation that cannot be paid for, nor will it pay for itself, doesn't mean we want to throw away every piece of social legislation that's been passed over the last 150 years, you know.

I think we should make your kids' schools safer by following the NRA's suggestion of putting volunteers with guns in the schools.

As long as they're properly trained, I don't have a problem with that. But I think a better idea would be to have camous police in every school who are professional law enforcement officers. You make it sound like eveeryone who owns a gun for protection is a slavering, wild-eyed maniac thirsting for blood. 'Tain't so.

But hey, we don't need to do background checks on them. It would violate their privacy."

If we followed my suggestion and required everybody to be armed, we wouldn't need to worry about background checks.

Is what other people do in their bedrooms important enough to you to vote for someone like that?

Your ficticious candidate is a broad caricature, which fact I'm sure you're aware of. That having been said, I couldn't care less what other people do in their bedrooms, as long as I don't have to watch it, pay for it, approve of it, be involved in it, or have it taught to my children as being normal, beneficial, and desireable.

If so, I guess I was born with a busybody deficiency, because no way would I ever vote for a candidate like that.

I wouldn't either, but as I say, you're describing someone who is way, way, way extreme; you're not describing a conservative candidate, you're describing somebody more along the lines of a member of Occupy Wall Street, who says, "If you don't agree with me, then we might as well just chuck everything!"

Now, admittedly, I tend to go to extremes sometimes myself, like when I talk about armed rebellion being the only solution. But that just goes to show you how polarized we all are in this country, and how frustrated we are with the shape the country is in as well.

Ancient Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times."
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Cosmic Charlie

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated
Oct 14, 2003
15,434
2,343
✟67,546.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Ok, I hold an MBA from from the Carlson School of Management. I understand cost accounting and financial accounting methods of various type and implementation.

Now, it is not obvious to me how this method of implementing health insurance to workers involves the Church in "doing something against it's faith".

No accounting method with which I am familiar can reasonably be said to "force" the Church to be directly (or indirectly by any reasonable definition) to violate it's own precepts on reproductive theology.

Can someone, using accounting terminology and practice, explain how the Church can be said to be force to be involved in something it doesn't want to be involved in under this set of rules.

And please, don't use the words "accounting tricks", explain the accounting method you see as being "tricky"
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
What specific drug are you speaking of?

Plan B and of course there is Ella. They have 40 times the hormones of the normal Plan A oral contraceptive. They are specifically intended to terminate a pregnancy in the early stages.

And it is increasingly sad that many women have turned to Plan B as their Plan A in their effort to thwart nature.
 
Upvote 0

TheOtherHockeyMom

Contributor
Jul 9, 2008
5,935
274
✟14,889.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Plan B and of course there is Ella. They have 40 times the hormones of the normal Plan A oral contraceptive. They are specifically intended to terminate a pregnancy in the early stages.

And it is increasingly sad that many women have turned to Plan B as their Plan A in their effort to thwart nature.

Do you have a reference for that?

ETA: Just did some reading on WebMD and the article doesn't support your claim.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
What that these are abortifacients? Heck it's been ordered that even less than twelve year olds can now purchase the abortifacients without any doctor's knowledge and without the express knowledge of the parents. There's even bad jokes made about it. And there are documents showing studies about how bad these abortifacients are for children.

Here's one link:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/does-drug-ella-cause-abortions_626563.html

Here's a link to Crisis:

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/the-hhs-mandate-requires-you-to-pay-for-abortions
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

eastcoast_bsc

Veteran
Mar 29, 2005
19,296
10,781
Boston
✟394,442.00
Faith
Christian
Ok, I hold an MBA from from the Carlson School of Management. I understand cost accounting and financial accounting methods of various type and implementation.

Now, it is not obvious to me how this method of implementing health insurance to workers involves the Church in "doing something against it's faith".

No accounting method with which I am familiar can reasonably be said to "force" the Church to be directly (or indirectly by any reasonable definition) to violate it's own precepts on reproductive theology.

Can someone, using accounting terminology and practice, explain how the Church can be said to be force to be involved in something it doesn't want to be involved in under this set of rules.

And please, don't use the words "accounting tricks", explain the accounting method you see as being "tricky"


I also have a degree in accounting, and understand that economics and accounting rules can be used as a tool force someone into subjugation.

The government decides what will be in FAFSA and what are GAAP.
But that aside. The Catholic church will be isolated and marginalized by the government and forced to either capitulate or face the consequences.

If the government wants to, they can take away their TAX status, which would financially cripple the church. We saw how the government put the Catholic church in a catch 22 regarding Gay adoption. The government makes the rules.

Obama hired Sebelius to be his Catholic stooge. She pretends to be Catholic and meanwhile she holds the church contempt.

People often use the term accounting tricks. I understand what they mean. They inherently understand that the church is under attack and need to assign reasons and blame.

POTUS knew what he was saying, when he made remarks recently in Ireland regarding the church. Under the guise of discussing sectarianism, he backhanded the Catholic church. I believe he also holds the church in contempt.
 
Upvote 0

Cosmic Charlie

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated
Oct 14, 2003
15,434
2,343
✟67,546.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I also have a degree in accounting, and understand that economics and accounting rules can be used as a tool force someone into subjugation.

The government decides what will be in FAFSA and what are GAAP.
But that aside. The Catholic church will be isolated and marginalized by the government and forced to either capitulate or face the consequences.

If the government wants to, they can take away their TAX status, which would financially cripple the church. We saw how the government put the Catholic church in a catch 22 regarding Gay adoption. The government makes the rules.

Obama hired Sebelius to be his Catholic stooge. She pretends to be Catholic and meanwhile she holds the church contempt.

People often use the term accounting tricks. I understand what they mean. They inherently understand that the church is under attack and need to assign reasons and blame.

POTUS knew what he was saying, when he made remarks recently in Ireland regarding the church. Under the guise of discussing sectarianism, he backhanded the Catholic church. I believe he also holds the church in contempt.

Hey East,

I know you're an accounting guy.

Explain to me how all this stuff you're claiming works to force the Church to pay for birth control .

Please enlighten me because I can't wrap my head around how monies paid to a vendor for services that aren't included in a contract means that you, as a contractor, are responsible for products provide by the vendor that you don't buy.
 
Upvote 0

TheOtherHockeyMom

Contributor
Jul 9, 2008
5,935
274
✟14,889.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
What that these are abortifacients? Heck it's been ordered that even less than twelve year olds can now purchase the abortifacients without any doctor's knowledge and without the express knowledge of the parents. There's even bad jokes made about it. And there are documents showing studies about how bad these abortifacients are for children.

Here's one link:

Does the Drug 'ella' Cause Abortions? | The Weekly Standard

Here's a link to Crisis:

The HHS Mandate Requires You to Pay for Abortions | Crisis Magazine

And here's a pair of links to studies showing that the morning after pill is not an abortificant...which was the question I was asking.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/201...g-after-pills-dont-cause-abortion-studies-say
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/h...antation-science-suggests.html?pagewanted=all

Looks like the research shows that Plan B is not an abortificant.
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
And here's a pair of links to studies showing that the morning after pill is not an abortificant...which was the question I was asking.
Morning-After Pills Don't Cause Abortion, Studies Say : Shots - Health News : NPR
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/h...antation-science-suggests.html?pagewanted=all

Looks like the research shows that Plan B is not an abortificant.

Looks like you failed to read the crisis article that showed that the people claiming that it wasn't abortifacients were Obama supporters as well as activists for the pro-abortion crowd...so the fact that they are trying to say that these abortifacients (yes, that's what the manufacturer notes) are not abortifacients is highly suspect. The article also notes that actual doctors noted that ella especially is more like RU-486 and does indeed prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. Also the fact that doctors are debating which of two definitions show the beginning of pregnancy 1) the fertilization of a female ovum and a male spermazoa and 2) implantation of the fertilized egg in the uterus. (Guess which definition the pro-abortion crowd want to use.)

Of course the fact that the Catholic Church also notes that these are abortifacients (drugs that cause an abortion) doesn't give you a clue that there is a little more to the story than your articles?

Oh well, at the Last Judgment when the aborted babes call out to God to avenge them (a la that scene in Revelations) at least I'll know that my hands will be clean. I agreed with the Church. I wasn't taken in by that faulty Times article.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

MikeK

Traditionalist Catholic
Feb 4, 2004
32,104
5,649
Wisconsin
✟90,821.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Of course the fact that the Catholic Church also notes that these are abortifacients (drugs that cause an abortion) doesn't give you a clue that there is a little more to the story than your articles?UOTE]

Where does the Church state that these specific drugs are abortifacients?
 
Upvote 0