Conservative anti-abortion religiouns are not being coerced into having nor are they paying for legal abortion. It is a legal medical procedure as is hip surgery. If conservative religious organizations can create a dogma around women and abortion then claim their religious freedom allows them to abolish abortion's legality what comes next: creating a dogma that prohibits contraceptives ............. oh....... wait that ship's already sailed.
When your mission statements read like these evangelical statements religious law becomes public law.
“Evangelicals believe that government is a gift from God for the common good. Good governance creates the conditions in which human beings fulfill their responsibilities as God’s image bearers and as stewards of God’s creation.” (Mission statement of the National Association of Evangelicals)
"Focus on the Family affirms the importance of social responsibility, supporting government institutions and protecting them against destructive social influences. God has ordained all social institutions, including the government, for the benefit of mankind and as a reflection of His divine nature. The Supreme Court's imposition of the doctrine of separation of church and state distorts the Founding Father's recognition of our unequivocally Christian nation and the protection of religious freedom for all faiths." (“Focus on the Family”position statement on Church and State)
According to the Biblical Christian worldview, human government was instituted by God to protect our unalienable rights from our own selfish tendencies. (Statement on the role of government from:All About GOD Ministries, Inc)
It is up to Christians to “restore once again to America a biblically based legal system that protects all human life from conception to natural death,” (Cultural Impact Team Resource Manuel)
Both sides of the political question do not involve coercion in some form. One side only is using their religious freedom to bludgeon all women into carrying every pregnancy to term.
Abortion is a 1st Amendment issue.
Where do you get these ideas? You're hanging out with some strange people. I'm a straight white guy and I insist on some sort of birth control. And I like that there's plenty of places to poke my dick besides just the vagina. And I think abortion should be legal even after birth, until the age of 18, say. For some it should be mandatory. And I like sex education, because I want a woman who knows what she's doing. Breaking in newbies is a chore. I never understood Islam's notion of 72 virgins being a reward. Sounds like a lot of work to me.
So if the Supreme Court’s recent decision in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poor had gone the other way— and some think that New York and Philadelphia may re-litigate— then in that scenario, the Sisters would NOT have been legally coerced to pay for contraceptives in their health care? Is that your position?
just correcting your misinterpretation of what it means to be straight and white. We love birth control and having options on where we can poke. Just sayin'Whatever point you tried to make got drowned by your defensiveness. Care to respond to the words I actually wrote and not the words that exist solely in your head?
If you look at a job as something an employer does for you as charity or the goodness of their little Catholic hearts or your payment as charity or a gift then yes the money belongs to the Sisters and if the government says they have to pay for your contraceptives they are being forced .
However working is a contract written or unwritten between you and the employer and the salary is yours for doing the work you agreed to do. The health insurance is part of the salary. It was something you and the employer agreed upon as part of the payment for working. It is not a gift. It is part of the agreement or contract you and the Sisters arrived at before you started work. What you choose to have the health insurance pay for is your business since it is part of your contract. It does not belong to the Sisters. It is your health insurance and your salary. The Sisters are not being forced to pay for anything since it is not their money. The Little Sisters are cloaking their moral disapproval in the 1st Amendment.
“ Moral disapproval alone is an improper basis on which to deny rights. Fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” Vaughn Wallace, Judge 9th Circuit Court
just correcting your misinterpretation
Your “charity” argument is a meaningless distraction from the core argument: do businesses have any right to determine what benefits they offer? You know full well that the government coerces those businesses who don’t agree with either federal or local practices, and in the case of the Little Sisters two states were attempting to force the Sisters to abide by federal standards for businesses. The Court instead recognized an alternate form of “moral disapproval” protected by freedom of religion and found in favor of the Sisters.
Certainly you don’t cherish the notion that “moral disapproval” also has coercive aspects.
Your “charity” argument is a meaningless distraction from the core argument: do businesses have any right to determine what benefits they offer? You know full well that the government coerces those businesses who don’t agree with either federal or local practices, and in the case of the Little Sisters two states were attempting to force the Sisters to abide by federal standards for businesses. The Court instead recognized an alternate form of “moral disapproval” protected by freedom of religion and found in favor of the Sisters.
Certainly you don’t cherish the notion that “moral disapproval” also has coercive aspects.
no, Straw Man. What I got is having to correct you....So all you have is defensiveness?
"....... in the case of the Little Sisters two states were attempting to force the Sisters to abide by federal standards for businesses."
Federal standards are laws. You are saying if a business (and Little Sisters of the Poor had hired people to carry out the business aspects of the order) doesn't agree with a federal law for businesses it's OK to refuse to abide by the law?
You can kid yourself if you please, but all I did was to point out that coercion goes both ways.Forced-birthers have zero standing to whine about government coercion.
I agree. The only right an unborn child should have is to be wantedSo: I do not subscribe to any moral values placed on fetuses. I do not place any societal value to a fetus (or I should say outside of the respective person(s) intimately involved with a given fetus. Clearly they value and cherish, to which I certainly say bless!). I do not buy into the arbirtrary nature of “heartbeats” and “brainwaves.” We end human life - actual real on the planet persons - every day via any number of decisions based on factors other than “heartbeats and brain waves.”
I do not care when “life” begins, as I have stated - a fetus has no intrinsic value to a society outside of what the carriers of that fetus wish it to have.
So where does this leave us? Why should I ever agree to allow anyone control or say in my own body? What is the justification for this massive intrusion into my privacy when anyone threatens to ban abortion?
Sadly, over 100,000* kids in the US available for adoption show that they dont get that either. So it's ludicrous IMO to encourage women that cant afford or arent prepared for a child to produce another unnecessarily.I agree. The only right an unborn child should have is to be wanted
Some of those anti choice fanatics should have been forced to take a walk around Romanian orphanages during their hay days. Or at least be forced to watch the movie "Children Underground"Sadly, over 100,000* kids in the US available for adoption show that they dont get that either. So it's ludicrous IMO to encourage women that cant afford or arent prepared for a child to produce another unnecessarily.
(*That's not in 'foster care,' that # is over 400,000)
Religious freedom was also legally upheld by the Supreme Court.
IMO, procreation has no place in societal law, it is an individual Right left to each individual Woman.Then it’s weird you took action to specifically do that.
I’m Pro-Choice: Change My Mind Without Calling Me A Baby Killer
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?