Discussion for article #227949
TPM: One month ago, the Obama administration tweaked its birth control mandate to address concerns of religious nonprofits who said filling out a form to opt out of paying for contraceptives would still make them complicit in sin.
Of course it would, because Jesus specifically said, “Give unto God what is due to God and screw Caesar, especially if he’s a Democrat or helping people you don’t like.”
Or something like that.
32 Likes
Shorter religious groups: “Our imaginary father figure in the sky finds your sexy ways disgusting. Your sexy dirty steamy ways. Your tempestuous dirty sexy sexy hot dirty exciting sexy ways”
23 Likes
“Ave Maria believes that any action ‘specifically intended to prevent procreation’—including contraception and sterilization—is morally wrong,”
So females are not permitted to say 'No" when approached to have sex? My wife is a serious sinner!
15 Likes
“…a swath of lawsuits against birth control coverage…”
Because, according to conservatives, government exists to establish law to bolster the doctrine of a religious denomination, even if most members of the religious denomination disagree with the religion’s doctrine.
In other words, government must help clerics limit individual freedom.
35 Likes
Tax them all…tax the corporations, tax the churches, and tax the corrupt super pacs…
49 Likes
The proper thing to do is make churches include contraception in their insurance plans like every other big business. Their religious beliefs are wrong and should not be respected.
23 Likes
“Ave Maria believes that any action ‘specifically intended to prevent procreation’—including contraception and sterilization—is morally wrong,”
So I guess laws need crafted making it illegal for a man to withdraw from a woman before ejaculation?
14 Likes
Honestly, when religious organizations start to affect public policy, it’s time for them to start paying taxes.
66 Likes
Individual human beings should be free to personally live out their moral beliefs by not using birth control themselves, and by parenting as many children as their sexual activities produce. Should they feel moved to charitably invite a homeless person to live in their basement or something, they shouldn’t be expected to buy their house guest any contraceptives.
They should not be free to amplify their prejudice by wielding the power of an organization.
3 Likes
People need to bear in mind that this is all due, not to the First Amendment, but to a law that was passed as what was seen as a harmless pander to religious voters who equated not living in a theocracy (run by them, of course) with being persecuted.
32 Likes
Ahhh…the mean, misogynist sky friends…so first century…
9 Likes
That’s just the beginning.
These BuyBull creatures want to ban all birth control and abortions…And sex if the could figure out how.
3 Likes
My late mother told me way back in 1973 that the real goal of the forced-birth anti-abortionists was not simply to outlaw abortion. Their real goal was to make pregnancy the penalty for sex, and that they would do everything in their power to outlaw contraception.
At the time I thought her view was a bit extreme, but in subsequent years events have proven that she was 100% right.
28 Likes
Remember: every sperm is sacred.
8 Likes
The step between this and a sincere religious belief that employees should not be allowed to use their salaries to buy meat for consumption on fridays is not a big one.
11 Likes
blue
Of course your mom was right. Bertrand Russell and others writing early in the last century made this same observation.
Goes back at least as far as Aquinas and other misogynists.
7 Likes
" I Like your Christ. I do not like your Christians, they are so unlike your Christ. ~ Gandhi "
14 Likes
And illegal for a person to refuse sexual intercourse with any person which may result in procreation. The logical conclusion is that all women must accommodate all men at all times.
How far do they intend to go with this?
5 Likes
Exactly this, times a thousand.