Thread: Catholic backlash against the bishops ...

Originally Posted by Dan40

Bush is not up for reelection. If he was, he'd probably WIN. It would be the battle of the incompetent vs the unbelievably incompetent incumbent.

And this is not about what Catholics do or don't do. This is a govt ATTACK on religious freedom. And I'm neither Catholic, nor belong to ANY religion. But the incompetent fool obama is clearly attacking religious freedom.

Are churches required to pay for contraception? Are Catholics required to use contraception?

If not, your argument has no base (as usual).

Originally Posted by Dave1mo

How incredibly solipsistic...and misguided. You are free to "voluntarily" leave at any time if you don't like participating in a society.

Don't blow a gasket just because I'm tearing your arguments apart. It's no great trick for me because I've heard them all a hundred times.

The "why don't you leave" argument only applies if you assume that the state has just ownership over my property. It doesn't; it acquired it through conquest like every other state. Ergo, if anyone should leave my property, it's the state.

By the way, 90% of Catholics are paying for contraceptives anyway, because there's no Biblical or theological reason for the contraceptive ban as it is.

So if I'm already paying for porn, it's okay for Obama to issue a decree forcing the Church (or "church affiliated" whatever, tomato, tomahto) to pay for it for me?

Originally Posted by AbsoluteVoluntarist

Don't blow a gasket just because I'm tearing your arguments apart. It's no great trick for me because I've heard them all a hundred times.

The "why don't you leave" argument only applies if you assume that the state has just ownership over my property. It doesn't; it acquired it through conquest like every other state. Ergo, if anyone should leave my property, it's the state.



So if I'm already paying for porn, it's okay for Obama to issue a decree forcing the Church (or "church affiliated" whatever, tomato, tomahto) to pay for it for me?

Can you defend your property from the state?

Your version of "tearing apart arguments" is tossing up red herring arguments like comparing birth control to pornography. Yeah, you're great at debating.

Originally Posted by Dave1mo

Can you defend your property from the state?

What difference does that make? Might makes rights?

Your version of "tearing apart arguments" is tossing up red herring arguments like comparing birth control to pornography. Yeah, you're great at debating.

It's the perfect analogy. I could even argue that pornography is good for one's health and "society." High availability of pornography are correlated with reductions in rape and masturbation with a reduction in prostate cancer. Not to mention the reduction of stress. So obviously this is a public health and safety issue

Originally Posted by Dave1mo

Are churches required to pay for contraception? Are Catholics required to use contraception?

If not, your argument has no base (as usual).

If contraception and abortion are requirements of insurance coverage, then, YES they are REQUIRED to PAY for contraception and abortion. And since it IS required in the insurance coverage, and they ARE required to pay for it. Then it is an attack on religious freedom. A babbling idiot could deduce that.

obamalamaloopas can't figure it out, but babbling idiots could.

Originally Posted by Dan40

obamalamaloopas can't figure it out, but babbling idiots could.

It's not that they can't. It's that they don't want to.

Originally Posted by AbsoluteVoluntarist

It's not that they can't. It's that they don't want to.

Glad we can agree on something.

Originally Posted by AbsoluteVoluntarist

What difference does that make? Might makes rights?



It's the perfect analogy. I could even argue that pornography is good for one's health and "society." High availability of pornography are correlated with reductions in rape and masturbation with a reduction in prostate cancer. Not to mention the reduction of stress. So obviously this is a public health and safety issue

If you can't defend it, it's not "yours."

Please, provide me the peer-edited research that supports the assertions you're making about pornographic materials. Also, porn is free.

Originally Posted by Dan40

If contraception and abortion are requirements of insurance coverage, then, YES they are REQUIRED to PAY for contraception and abortion. And since it IS required in the insurance coverage, and they ARE required to pay for it. Then it is an attack on religious freedom. A babbling idiot could deduce that.

obamalamaloopas can't figure it out, but babbling idiots could.

But churches are exempt. A babbling idiot could comprehend that.

Originally Posted by Dave1mo

If you can't defend it, it's not "yours."

That means that all crime is justified so long as it's successful. I.e. might makes right.

Please, provide me the peer-edited research that supports the assertions you're making about pornographic materials. Also, porn is free.

Professional porn isn't free unless you pirate it. Are you saying that if I can prove to you that porn is correlated with rape reduction, the government should force some people to pay for other people's porn?