Thread: The Catholic Church's Fortnight of Freedom

Let me start by saying I have been a Catholic my whole life. I'm not a Church basher nor do I think they are perfect.

I wonder how the church gets off, however, in giving sermons going on about the health care mandate being a persecution of their beliefs. First of all, I have never felt persecuted. I know one can say it's subjective, but I have never been stopped from being Catholic, denied anything for it, or told I can't worship as a Catholic. That to me is persecution. The healthcare mandate requiring contraception by all employers is simply a part of the law that was deemed to be in the interest of public health. That, I realize, is a matter of opinion, but my point being I have hard time feeling persecuted.

Second, they argue they are consciencous objectors. But they recieve federal tax dollars for their charities. They don't pay taxes on their buildings or income. They are being subsidized in a way most of us aren't. About the only taxes they pay are sales taxes, and I bet depending on who or where they buy from, they can get those waved often times as well. So is it not hypocrisy to say it's against my morals to pay for somoene else's birth control yet accept the tax dollars of Athiest, Jews, Protestants, and others who may morally object to your teachings?

And I'm not just picking on the Catholic Church here. I mean I paid for a war I didn't want to, but no one is giving me my contributions back. I'm paying highways and roads I will never drive on or use. I'm paying for subsidies for goods I don't buy or use. I'm paying subsidies for products I wish we didn't use. So why don't I get to object? I'll tell you why, because in a society, in ANY society, no matter whether it's as socialist as it can be or as caplitalistic as it can be, we are here because we can't accomplish the same economic state on our own. And the result is we pay for things we don't like, find gross, amoral, and think are stupid.

Not sure why I posted that here, maybe I should've just sent it in a letter to my priest...?

Originally Posted by Gdawg007

Let me start by saying I have been a Catholic my whole life. I'm not a Church basher nor do I think they are perfect.

I wonder how the church gets off, however, in giving sermons going on about the health care mandate being a persecution of their beliefs. First of all, I have never felt persecuted. I know one can say it's subjective, but I have never been stopped from being Catholic, denied anything for it, or told I can't worship as a Catholic. That to me is persecution. The healthcare mandate requiring contraception by all employers is simply a part of the law that was deemed to be in the interest of public health. That, I realize, is a matter of opinion, but my point being I have hard time feeling persecuted.

Second, they argue they are consciencous objectors. But they recieve federal tax dollars for their charities. They don't pay taxes on their buildings or income. They are being subsidized in a way most of us aren't. About the only taxes they pay are sales taxes, and I bet depending on who or where they buy from, they can get those waved often times as well. So is it not hypocrisy to say it's against my morals to pay for somoene else's birth control yet accept the tax dollars of Athiest, Jews, Protestants, and others who may morally object to your teachings?

And I'm not just picking on the Catholic Church here. I mean I paid for a war I didn't want to, but no one is giving me my contributions back. I'm paying highways and roads I will never drive on or use. I'm paying for subsidies for goods I don't buy or use. I'm paying subsidies for products I wish we didn't use. So why don't I get to object? I'll tell you why, because in a society, in ANY society, no matter whether it's as socialist as it can be or as caplitalistic as it can be, we are here because we can't accomplish the same economic state on our own. And the result is we pay for things we don't like, find gross, amoral, and think are stupid.

Not sure why I posted that here, maybe I should've just sent it in a letter to my priest...?

I expect they're opposed to Obama & his legislation anyway, and they just like having the religious card to play.

They want to keep all of the money so that they can buy fancy robes with it.

The Catholic Church doesn't want to pay for something that it considers a mortal sin. That seems to me a reasonable position.

Originally Posted by Gdawg007

I wonder how the church gets off, however, in giving sermons going on about the health care mandate being a persecution of their beliefs. First of all, I have never felt persecuted. I know one can say it's subjective, but I have never been stopped from being Catholic, denied anything for it, or told I can't worship as a Catholic. That to me is persecution. The healthcare mandate requiring contraception by all employers is simply a part of the law that was deemed to be in the interest of public health. That, I realize, is a matter of opinion, but my point being I have hard time feeling persecuted.

It's an act of aggression by the state against employers that don't want to pay for that stuff. Whether you personally feel persecuted by or not doesn't matter. I don't feel personally persecuted when Obama bombs Pakistani children, but it's still an act of aggression.

Second, they argue they are consciencous objectors. But they recieve federal tax dollars for their charities. They don't pay taxes on their buildings or income. They are being subsidized in a way most of us aren't. About the only taxes they pay are sales taxes, and I bet depending on who or where they buy from, they can get those waved often times as well. So is it not hypocrisy to say it's against my morals to pay for somoene else's birth control yet accept the tax dollars of Athiest, Jews, Protestants, and others who may morally object to your teachings?

Then the solution would be to abolish whatever subsidies you think they're getting, not to compound the aggression with more aggression. It is true that the Church hierarchy has always been too ready to flirt with the state. Now it's coming back to bite them because the state was never their friend. But aggression is aggression; two wrongs don't make a right.

And I'm not just picking on the Catholic Church here. I mean I paid for a war I didn't want to, but no one is giving me my contributions back. I'm paying highways and roads I will never drive on or use. I'm paying for subsidies for goods I don't buy or use. I'm paying subsidies for products I wish we didn't use. So why don't I get to object? I'll tell you why, because in a society, in ANY society, no matter whether it's as socialist as it can be or as caplitalistic as it can be, we are here because we can't accomplish the same economic state on our own. And the result is we pay for things we don't like, find gross, amoral, and think are stupid.

You should get to object. The wars are evil, as the Church has said. You should oppose your money being stolen from you for unjust wars, just as you should oppose it going to somebody's abortifacients.

Originally Posted by Blackrook

The Catholic Church doesn't want to pay for something that it considers a mortal sin. That seems to me a reasonable position.

It didn't seem to have a problem paying for war, which actually violates their pro-life position, so I don't see it as an issue.

And I recongnize they don't WANT to pay for it, but as I said, athiests don't want to pay for Catholic charities, so why should they? We don't have the right to not pay for things we don't want with our tax dollars, that's just an ideal some people seemed to think was possible while at the same time, living in a society. It's not, that's the plain truth. You will always pay for things you detest in a society, no one has ever found a way around it including those of us who live in the US.

Originally Posted by AbsoluteVoluntarist

It's an act of aggression by the state against employers that don't want to pay for that stuff. Whether you personally feel persecuted by or not doesn't matter. I don't feel personally persecuted when Obama bombs Pakistani children, but it's still an act of aggression.

Um, it's not quite the same level of aggression as bombing Pakistani children, but I agree. All laws require compliance to be enforced.

Then the solution would be to abolish whatever subsidies you think they're getting, not to compound the aggression with more aggression. It is true that the Church hierarchy has always been too ready to flirt with the state. Now it's coming back to bite them because the state was never their friend. But aggression is aggression; two wrongs don't make a right.





You should get to object. The wars are evil, as the Church has said. You should oppose your money being stolen from you for unjust wars, just as you should oppose it going to somebody's abortifacients.

And so where does it end? Should I oppose paying for the highway you use to get to work because it's amoral for me to pay for something I don't use? If you keep doing this tit for tat, we will all be paying for nothing but ourselves, and at that point, we will not be able to afford all the trappings that make us a super power...it's a downward spiral.

I do not think anyone should have to pay for the legalisation of state murder.
If the Christain hosptials, schools, and shelters began to shut their doors and stop providing it's services to the American public. I think America would have greater concerns, therefore when Christianity goes such a long in providing for the welfare of the American people it's opinion on what it believes to be detrimental to the American people should also go a long way.

Originally Posted by Gdawg007

And so where does it end? Should I oppose paying for the highway you use to get to work because it's amoral for me to pay for something I don't use? If you keep doing this tit for tat, we will all be paying for nothing but ourselves, and at that point, we will not be able to afford all the trappings that make us a super power...it's a downward spiral.

You don't need the state to use tax money to pay for highways. There are private highways even today.

Originally Posted by AbsoluteVoluntarist

You don't need the state to use tax money to pay for highways. There are private highways even today.

Yes, I live near one. E470 in Denver is wonderful. No one ever uses it. Do you know why? It doesn't really go anywhere people need to go, but even much more important, it COSTS money. People would rather wait in traffic becuase it's FREE, even though I bet they are spending more money idling their cars. So what does this tell you about private highways? Oh also, E470 is way behind it's profit projections.

I don't have a problem with private highways, but the public does. And there is no way you could make enough money at it to justify all the roads we have now. So you would effectively disconnect societies, cities, towns, farmers, and a whole host of Americans from where they live and work. They would wind up in poverty or moving into cities where private highways would be profitable. So essentially, private highways would act like mass transit once did, creating dense population centers and alienating those who live outside of them. If that's the America you want, that's fine with me. The country and farming is over rated. But just realize you would alter America drastically.