Catholic Church ready to declare war on Obama

[Grumps 3,704]

This has been EEOC policy for years. Why didn't George W Bush do anything about this infringment on religious freedom? I checked the Political Forums history for the outrage during W 's presidency over this. Titan or Tmike did not have one post.

Oh, the outrage now though......

I apologize but I got lost...what has been EEOC policy for years?

[Grumps 3,704]

This has been EEOC policy for years. Why didn't George W Bush do anything about this infringment on religious freedom? I checked the Political Forums history for the outrage during W 's presidency over this. Titan or Tmike did not have one post.

Well why don't you start another thread about that right now.

Oh and I checked the history of you, Tex & RR's outrage over Obama's horrendous, humongous, outlandish budget deficits and couldn't find a single post.

I'm outraged that Republicans keep insisting on ridiculously low tax rates for the wealthy, low cap gains rates, the elimination of estate taxes and profilgate defense spending in face of budget crisis. How's that? Knowledgeable folks know the biggest reason for the increased deficits under Obama isn't increase spending, but reduced revenue from the biggest economic crisis since the great depression. That includes very few Republicans, apparently.

Now, arnaldo's post was on topic-- yours was not. So why don't you follow your own advice and start a thread about it?

The wealthy already pay a higher tax rate and you know it. We have a thread discussing the capital gains rates so I will not rehash it. I absolutely think that estate taxes are unfair...I don't see what right the gov't has to take someone's property just because they die. Please explain the rationale behind the estate tax. I say cut defense spending along with everything else to balance the budget...I'd rather China take possession of the U.S. via winning a war against our depleted military vs. us just giving China the country as payment of our astronomical debt. Where can I see the numbers showing revenue vs. spending. I'd like to see that...I clearly am not knowledgeable but you knew that already.

By the way, none of this changes the fact that the Obama administration is putting the hypothetical right to healthcare ahead of the constitutional right to freedom of religious expression.

[Tigermike 3,035]

This has been EEOC policy for years. Why didn't George W Bush do anything about this infringment on religious freedom? I checked the Political Forums history for the outrage during W 's presidency over this. Titan or Tmike did not have one post.

Well why don't you start another thread about that right now.

Oh and I checked the history of you, Tex & RR's outrage over Obama's horrendous, humongous, outlandish budget deficits and couldn't find a single post.

I'm outraged that Republicans keep insisting on ridiculously low tax rates for the wealthy, low cap gains rates, the elimination of estate taxes and profilgate defense spending in face of budget crisis. How's that? Knowledgeable folks know the biggest reason for the increased deficits under Obama isn't increase spending, but reduced revenue from the biggest economic crisis since the great depression. That includes very few Republicans, apparently.

Now, arnaldo's post was on topic-- yours was not. So why don't you follow your own advice and start a thread about it?

And you really believe that $hit. Still can't bring yourself to acknowledge Obama has been an abject failure for this country can you.

What was the deficit when Obama took office? What is the deficit now? How much has it increased since he took office?

If you could have one superpower, what would it be?

[jj3jordan 2,055]

This has been EEOC policy for years. Why didn't George W Bush do anything about this infringment on religious freedom? I checked the Political Forums history for the outrage during W 's presidency over this. Titan or Tmike did not have one post.

Well why don't you start another thread about that right now.

Oh and I checked the history of you, Tex & RR's outrage over Obama's horrendous, humongous, outlandish budget deficits and couldn't find a single post.

I'm outraged that Republicans keep insisting on ridiculously low tax rates for the wealthy, low cap gains rates, the elimination of estate taxes and profilgate defense spending in face of budget crisis. How's that? Knowledgeable folks know the biggest reason for the increased deficits under Obama isn't increase spending, but reduced revenue from the biggest economic crisis since the great depression. That includes very few Republicans, apparently.

Now, arnaldo's post was on topic-- yours was not. So why don't you follow your own advice and start a thread about it?

No sir, Arnie is not on topic, as usual.

The thread is not about Bush, but Arnie cannot seem to discuss anything without bringing up Bush. The Catholic church did not declare war on Bush. If you want to know why, ask them.

[autigeremt 6,643]

I'm outraged that Democrats think it's ok to support the government intrusion into the daily life of the American people through the muse of "Womens Rights" or "Minority Rights", or healthcare, etc. A line in the sand has been drawn and we will not go away. This country wasn't created in the likeness of socialism, and I will defend liberty and freedom until my last breath.

[BamaGrad03 0]

I still wonder why people think it is constitutional for the government to force a private entity to provide contraception - be it religious or not.

The line in the article above that mentions how certain groups in this country treat pregnancy as if it were a disease is very poignant. I've often gotten the feeling that Obama feels this way.

[Grumps 3,704]

I still wonder why people think it is constitutional for the government to force a private entity to provide contraception - be it religious or not.

The line in the article above that mentions how certain groups in this country treat pregnancy as if it were a disease is very poignant. I've often gotten the feeling that Obama feels this way.

I don't think Obama sees pregnancy as a disease, I think he sees it as a political tool.

"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

--Voltaire

"I agree that you should have the First Amendment right to freedom of religious expression, but I'll laugh hysterically while my beloved President Obama and his cronies take it from you."

--The liberals on this board

[arnaldoabru 11]

While we are on the subject, I didn't not realize the Catholic Church was for the spreading of AIDS

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

[AURaptor 1,125]

While we are on the subject, I didn't not realize the Catholic Church was for the spreading of AIDS

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

It isn't, and you're an idiot.

[arnaldoabru 11]

While we are on the subject, I didn't not realize the Catholic Church was for the spreading of AIDS

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

It isn't, and you're an idiot.

I thought condomns helped prevent the spread of HIV?

[BamaGrad03 0]

While we are on the subject, I didn't not realize the Catholic Church was for the spreading of AIDS

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

It isn't, and you're an idiot.

I thought condomns helped prevent the spread of HIV?

Not nearly as well as abstinence -- which has a 100% effective rate.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

While we are on the subject, I didn't not realize the Catholic Church was for the spreading of AIDS

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

Noted atheist and Harvard researcher says the Pope is correct on condoms in Africa

[TexasTiger 12,947]

While we are on the subject, I didn't not realize the Catholic Church was for the spreading of AIDS

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

It isn't, and you're an idiot.

I thought condomns helped prevent the spread of HIV?

Not nearly as well as abstinence -- which has a 100% effective rate.

No it doesn't.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

While we are on the subject, I didn't not realize the Catholic Church was for the spreading of AIDS

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

It isn't, and you're an idiot.

I thought condomns helped prevent the spread of HIV?

Not nearly as well as abstinence -- which has a 100% effective rate.

No it doesn't.

Well, in terms of the way in which condoms prevents the spread of HIV, it kinda does. No one was talking about the likes of blood transfusions, sharing needles or accidents in the hospital.

[Grumps 3,704]

While we are on the subject, I didn't not realize the Catholic Church was for the spreading of AIDS

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/17/pope-africa-condoms-aids

It isn't, and you're an idiot.

I thought condomns helped prevent the spread of HIV?

Not nearly as well as abstinence -- which has a 100% effective rate.

No it doesn't.

Well, in terms of the way in which condoms prevents the spread of HIV, it kinda does. No one was talking about the likes of blood transfusions, sharing needles or accidents in the hospital.

It is my opinion that abstinence from all behavior whereby HIV can be contracted will result in a 100% effective rate of HIV prevention. I suppose you could argue that a baby who gets HIV from his/her mother would be the exception. But for all practical purposes the rate would still be 100% (not that it matters.)

[arnaldoabru 11]

Doesn't birth control prevent abortion?

[TexasTiger 12,947]

I still wonder why people think it is constitutional for the government to force a private entity to provide contraception - be it religious or not.

The line in the article above that mentions how certain groups in this country treat pregnancy as if it were a disease is very poignant. I've often gotten the feeling that Obama feels this way.

This provision doesn't treat pregnancy as a disease, but rather as a medical condition requiring medical care.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Doesn't birth control prevent abortion?

"Do not do evil that good may come of it."

Why would you think that someone would think that it's ok to do one thing they believe is sinful in order to prevent another...not as a matter of last resort of being forced to choose, but willingly?

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I still wonder why people think it is constitutional for the government to force a private entity to provide contraception - be it religious or not.

The line in the article above that mentions how certain groups in this country treat pregnancy as if it were a disease is very poignant. I've often gotten the feeling that Obama feels this way.

This provision doesn't treat pregnancy as a disease, but rather as a medical condition requiring medical care.

I don't recall the Catholic Church being opposed to paying for pre-natal care.

[TexasTiger 12,947]

I still wonder why people think it is constitutional for the government to force a private entity to provide contraception - be it religious or not.

The line in the article above that mentions how certain groups in this country treat pregnancy as if it were a disease is very poignant. I've often gotten the feeling that Obama feels this way.

This provision doesn't treat pregnancy as a disease, but rather as a medical condition requiring medical care.

I don't recall the Catholic Church being opposed to paying for pre-natal care.

Non-sequitur

[TitanTiger 20,499]

I still wonder why people think it is constitutional for the government to force a private entity to provide contraception - be it religious or not.

The line in the article above that mentions how certain groups in this country treat pregnancy as if it were a disease is very poignant. I've often gotten the feeling that Obama feels this way.

This provision doesn't treat pregnancy as a disease, but rather as a medical condition requiring medical care.

I don't recall the Catholic Church being opposed to paying for pre-natal care.

Non-sequitur

You said the provision treats pregnancy as a "medical condition requiring medical care." That's exactly what the Church is all about providing.

[BamaGrad03 0]

I still wonder why people think it is constitutional for the government to force a private entity to provide contraception - be it religious or not.

The line in the article above that mentions how certain groups in this country treat pregnancy as if it were a disease is very poignant. I've often gotten the feeling that Obama feels this way.

This provision doesn't treat pregnancy as a disease, but rather as a medical condition requiring medical care.

Erectile Dysfunction is a medical condition, that doesn't mean it should be treated with taxpayer dollars. So is baldness.

But preventing pregnancy can be done non-medically.

[TexasTiger 12,947]

I still wonder why people think it is constitutional for the government to force a private entity to provide contraception - be it religious or not.

The line in the article above that mentions how certain groups in this country treat pregnancy as if it were a disease is very poignant. I've often gotten the feeling that Obama feels this way.

This provision doesn't treat pregnancy as a disease, but rather as a medical condition requiring medical care.

Erectile Dysfunction is a medical condition, that doesn't mean it should be treated with taxpayer dollars. So is baldness.

But preventing pregnancy can be done non-medically.

Non sequitur.

[Tigermike 3,035]

[arnaldoabru 11]

Doesn't birth control prevent abortion?

"Do not do evil that good may come of it."

Why would you think that someone would think that it's ok to do one thing they believe is sinful in order to prevent another...not as a matter of last resort of being forced to choose, but willingly?

Maybe that 98% that have used birth control confess their "sin" in onfessional