Media silent over freedom of religion (the contraception mandate)

Take this quote from Newsbusters who have been doing an astounding job uncovering the horrible bias in the networks that you all call news but leave Fox out as a real news station. Really now? I think Fox News has been talking about this story for about a full two weeks before any of these channels have been!

After 19 days of controversy, CBS Evening News on Tuesday finally got around to covering the growing dispute between the Obama administration, who wants to impose a mandate for sterilizations and birth control on religious institutions, and the Catholic Church and its allies, who see it as a violation of religious liberty. All of the Big Three networks' evening newscasts on Tuesday covered the issue.

newsbusters.org...

Washington Post Journalist said this:

Washington Post political writer Melinda Henneberger shockingly stated, Wednesday, that "maybe the Founders were wrong" to guarantee religious liberty. Henneberger appeared on Hardball to discuss the Obama administration's decision to force the Catholic Church to provide birth control in health care.

newsbusters.org...

I just find it shocking that the disgusting creatures that we call news channels would not cover this HUGE story in the middle of a presidential election, and a controversy that COULD very well cost the President his very job and turn around the GOP elections!

reply to post by jjf3rd77
The left talking points have been this, if you accept government funds, then you sacrifice your beliefs and are under government mandate.

Which shows that 1) government does not care about catholic beliefs, 2) government is trying to replace religious tenent with its own.

No one has yet to answer MY comparrison to government funded islamic schools in America where religious doctrine is held.

This, in my humble opinion, will be a key reason why Obama will lose in November.

To many of the younger generation the Catholic Churches obstinante position on contraception and abortion is a symptom of why they don't like the Church, not why they don't like Obama or the establishment. It barely registers as a thing to be angry about to me, and my anger would be directed at the Catholic Church rather than the government. To others in my generation contraceptives and abortions are a fact of life, not a hindrance to religious observance; Obamas administration may or may not be right in an abstract manner to force the Catholics into this corner, but the scientific consensus would remind us teenagers are going to copulate like rabbits and it's better to prevent unwanted pregnancies than lament their destruction.

Contraceptives or abortions, it's not contraceptives and abortions. The Catholic Church decries both as unholy.

The Catholic church is behind the times, threatening the well-being of those I'd call my peers. Maybe they're just going to have to come along with the rest of society, kicking and screaming like the spoiled child they would want to convert.

reply to post by Sachyriel
You are not being forced to become catholic.

Yet catholics (under Obama) are being forced to become secular.

And you don't see a problem with this.

Then, I could force any religion to break their religious tenents, if I wanted, because I felt they were meaningless, according to you.

Don't assume ALL young people will be ok with this. I am 22 and while not even a christian I am a conservative and want limited government control on everything. I know many far right christians who also hate this and finally realize Obama's true colors. This goes over the line where religious rights is concerned.

reply to post by Sachyriel


Devout Christians aren't usually the ones running around having babies with everyone they see, that's a liberal mentality.

The really religious ones, the ones you claim are "behind the times," usually wait to have sex until after marriage, and then stick to that one person. I'm not talking about politicians here, just your normal everyday christian wholesome family!

Christians shouldn't be forced to bow down to horny liberals

reply to post by jjf3rd77
I see the liberals supporting this government intrusion into religion, yet, I wonder how many would be screaming if a religious president wanted to introduce religion into secular institutions?

Originally posted by jjf3rd77
reply to post by Sachyriel

 

Devout Christians aren't usually the ones running around having babies with everyone they see, that's a liberal mentality.

The really religious ones, the ones you claim are "behind the times," usually wait to have sex until after marriage, and then stick to that one person. I'm not talking about politicians here, just your normal everyday christian wholesome family!

Christians shouldn't be forced to bow down to horny liberals

I think you are whitewashing the facts with a religious mentality. Teenagers will disregard religious techings to have sex, if the religious teachings say no condoms, then no condoms it is.

However, when you say the people who 'wait till marriage to have sex' you're missing the point. I'm talking about those who were brought up religiously to not use condoms and have sex before marriage anyways.

Should they be burdened with child because they're refused contraceptives or abortions? Sure, but "keep your legs closed" doesn't work on teenagers.

Horny Liberals nothing these are real people, children who are coming to terms with raging hormones and I wasn't talking politicians either. How many horny teenagers are going to have to deal with easily-prevented pregnancies because of their families insistence on following Catholicism, but their own small sins of not wanting to wait to feel good?

Devout Christians aren't usually the ones running around having babies with everyone they see, that's a liberal mentality.

There is a reason for the stereotypical catholic schoolgirl being naughty. It's not a common thing, but women get horny and women can lack self-control.

'Devout Christian's a fallacious strawman, Catholics stand in the way of cheap and reliable access to medical supplies that can let people be sexually active at the drop of a hat without dealing with consequences they aren't ready to handle. No child is born a catholic, they are merely pushed into it.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

I see the liberals supporting this government intrusion into religion, yet, I wonder how many would be screaming if a religious president wanted to introduce religion into secular institutions?

That would certainly fire up the red horns of the liberal media. They would go crazy

Imagine if the government forced Muslims to remove their hijabs! The media wouldn't back that!

reply to post by beezzer


Well no one is forcing them to continue providing religiously-motivated medical care. You can have a medical facility and you can have a religious facility, but mixing the two leads to a conflict of interest.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77That would certainly fire up the red horns of the liberal media. They would go crazy

Imagine if the government forced Muslims to remove their hijabs! The media would back that!

I know I'm butting in a bit here but recently the Government of Canada said that for identification photos Muslims must remove face coverings to have their photo taken. It's not a permanent removal, they can wear them elsewhere but for ID photos the full face is needed to be shown.

There are reasons for religious restrictions when facing a secular institution.

Originally posted by Sachyriel


However, when you say the people who 'wait till marriage to have sex' you're missing the point. I'm talking about those who were brought up religiously to not use condoms and have sex before marriage anyways.

Who the heck does that???!!! If you are a devout religious christian no matter if you are a teenager or not you will have the mental capacity to wait. You won't ever think about having sex, because they see it as a dirty sin before marriage. There are still many Christians like this especially in the south. Christian teenagers and college kids are some of the strongest people I know and I go to a christian school.

Originally posted by Sachyriel
reply to post by beezzer

 

Well no one is forcing them to continue providing religiously-motivated medical care. You can have a medical facility and you can have a religious facility, but mixing the two leads to a conflict of interest.

How so?
Are you saying that religious standards are no different than secular standards?

And who determines the standards?

(Hint; it's the government)

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

The left talking points have been this, if you accept government funds, then you sacrifice your beliefs and are under government mandate.

Which shows that 1) government does not care about catholic beliefs, 2) government is trying to replace religious tenent with its own.

No one has yet to answer MY comparrison to government funded islamic schools in America where religious doctrine is held.

This, in my humble opinion, will be a key reason why Obama will lose in November.

What if in my religion, I have to sacrifice a person every day. The government won't let me do this, therefore it is preventing me from practicing my religion. SO the government doesn't allow freedom of religion??

You guys are ridiculous, if you don't like it, theres no one forcing you to stay.

Originally posted by andersensrm

What if in my religion, I have to sacrifice a person every day. The government won't let me do this, therefore it is preventing me from practicing my religion. SO the government doesn't allow freedom of religion??

You guys are ridiculous, if you don't like it, theres no one forcing you to stay.

Poor comeback, back in the days these religious were mainstream, as declared by the gov't religious sacrifices were common and legal! Some cultures they still are!

The great thing about this country, is that if we don't like something, with passion, money, and most likely the Church backing you, you can get a law infringing on religious beliefs like this changed! So we don't have to leave.

You want the Christian Religion to just give up and leave??? How desperate are you to silence the freedom of religion?

Originally posted by andersensrm

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by jjf3rd77

 

The left talking points have been this, if you accept government funds, then you sacrifice your beliefs and are under government mandate.

Which shows that 1) government does not care about catholic beliefs, 2) government is trying to replace religious tenent with its own.

No one has yet to answer MY comparrison to government funded islamic schools in America where religious doctrine is held.

This, in my humble opinion, will be a key reason why Obama will lose in November.

What if in my religion, I have to sacrifice a person every day. The government won't let me do this, therefore it is preventing me from practicing my religion. SO the government doesn't allow freedom of religion??

You guys are ridiculous, if you don't like it, theres no one forcing you to stay.

This is a rediculous straw-man assumption. What laws are the catholics breaking that deserve government intrusion?

Name one.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77

Originally posted by Sachyriel


However, when you say the people who 'wait till marriage to have sex' you're missing the point. I'm talking about those who were brought up religiously to not use condoms and have sex before marriage anyways.

Who the heck does that???!!! If you are a devout religious christian no matter if you are a teenager or not you will have the mental capacity to wait. You won't ever think about having sex, because they see it as a dirty sin before marriage. There are still many Christians like this especially in the south. Christian teenagers and college kids are some of the strongest people I know and I go to a christian school.

As much as I'd like to imply you're wrong what about the Christian or Catholics who get a divorce, what about those who drop about Catholicism all together?

Religion isn't the force you think it is, not all Christians are upfront about having sex before marriage.

While of course some are indeed abstinent til marriage I think the idea of a shotgun wedding could be left behind if we let kids have the access to condoms they're going to need.

Instead of sticking your head in the sand concernign the proven facts about teen pregnancy why not tell me why we should deny some access to condoms based on the fact they might wait for marriage without them?

Rather have them and not need them, than need them and not have them.

If your argument is that all christian and catholic teens wait til marriage to have sex and wait til marriage to have children, I'm sorry you are wrong. Some will wait, but they should not be the reason that some do not have access to potentially life-saving contraceptives. If no Christian or Catholic is perfect we can expect quite a few to start enjoying sex before marriage.

reply to post by beezzer


The point is, is theres a line. You can't just get whatever you want, because it says so in your religion. We live as a nation, and the nation is built of many religions and beliefs not just christianity. Government should have nothing to do with religion, however it seems to have everything to do with it. You can't even be a president unless you believe in god. Our government, which is a representation of our nation of people have deemed that a woman has a right to contraception, I don't understand what is so bad about this. If you don't use contraception, or don't believe in it, then you simply don't use it, you don't go on to ban it for everyone else. Thats the problem you push your beliefs onto everyone else and try to create anti abortion laws, so no your not breaking the laws, because your the ones creating them, so anyone who doesn't follow your way of life, is essentially breaking the law.

Hows that for religious freedom......

reply to post by beezzer


Well the Catholic Church should also share some of the responsibility for pregnant teenagers that are mislead by its doctrines of not using condoms. The Catholic church can preach all the abstinence it wants, we know that abstinence alone does not work. They are hurting people through their obstinate refusal to understand the societal value of contraception.

Their religious rights are not the right to choose the lifestyle of those who can't choose for themselves. The mistakes teenagers make are the mistakes teenagers make, but the Catholic Churches dogma makes those choices so dangerous it's important that if they are to be stopped, they are to be stopped with a firm hand before they ruin young womens lives.

reply to post by Sachyriel


If we don't want it to be, religion shouldn't be apart of our daily lives. It should be something that lies entirely outside the field of government and the rest of society. It ultimately comes down to what the individual wants to do, within the boundaries of the law. If you don't like something, then don't participate in it, but acting in a way to prevent people from doing it, because it lies outside of your belief is not up to you or anyone else. That is what freedom is about. The main problem with christianity is it uses more than it gives. It manipulates, it controls, and it takes. But nonetheless people are free to do whatever they want to do, it seems however people especially in religion want a double standard, and want people to do whatever they want, as long as it abides to the rules and laws of their religion. That is not freedom of religion.