Skip to main content

View Diary: Catholic Church silent on child rape, taking to the streets over 'intrinsically evil' birth control (314 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Again, that's not the debate now (0+ / 0-)

    You can scream otherwise but government intrusion is at the heart of this debate. You don't win minds and hearts with insults.

    Look, don't get mad at me because the debate is going your way. I'm sorry your debating skills are weak.

    BTW, the morons who run the media actually have a bigger audience than you and MB. I would think you would want to make a better argument than the media are run bu morons.

    Just sayin'.

    •  So your advice (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      happymisanthropy

      is to let them win?

      •  No, frame the debate better and mobilize (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Markoff Chaney

        We can't just sit here and call the CC names in hopes they will back off.

        Where are all the women and groups that support their health in this? You'd think the PP issue would have somehow mobilized more women on the front.

        •  And this is an attempt at that, no? (0+ / 0-)
          frame the debate better
          I'm not sure it is the best way to go either, but at least it is an attempt.
        •  Have you noticed that we've been engaged in... (6+ / 0-)

          ...this debate since before this particular diary appeared? PP should be out in front on this. But, in the minds of many people they are demonized. Look at the legislation attacking them that has passed in the most recent 12 months. And, when we were supporting PP here during much of that time, there was always a group on hand to inform us that this was a bad idea, that it was a "distraction" from "real" issues, that reproductive freedom was a tangent that was occupying too much of our time.

          The issue here is that the Church wants to stick its nose into secular business. It isn't just saying that its affiliated organizations should not be covered by the Obama rule; it wants to dictate that this rule not cover anyone. Once again, the Holy Father and his brethren are trying to impose Church doctrine not only on Catholic women who ignore it but on the rest of us. And they are doing so not from any pinnacle of moral authority but rather from a position deep in stench.

          Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

          by Meteor Blades on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 10:56:05 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  i'm actually not mad at you (11+ / 0-)

      and I'm not mad at our piss-poor media--it's sucked and has been run by morons (and they very much are) for as long as I've been an adult (12 yrs now) and probably longer. I'm not interested in the "debate." I don't care if they think it's "intrusion." They, in the businesses they run in the secular sphere, already provide birth control. They're already required to in 28 states. They've already sued and lost. They've barely let out a whine. Until now.

      The debate is moronic. We're debating birth control with people who want to ban it. For everyone. We're debating birth control with men who aren't even allowed to have sex. And we're supposed to worry about "media framing"?

      Fine. Government intrusion? Catholic Charities got 780 million dollars in fiscal year 2010. Next year, they can get nothing. Fair?

      [insert pithy sigline here]

      by terrypinder on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 10:05:07 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  But you have to counter better to win. (0+ / 0-)

        I agree with you that arguing about contraceptives is stupid in the 21st century. However, the deeper issue - for a lot of people - is that does the government have the right to force you to do things against your beliefs. For example, does the government have the right to stop you from marrying someone? And in this case, does the government have the right to force organizations to do anything that's against their beliefs? I'm not equating the two but government intrusion is at the heart of this and a lot of things.

        That's the debate right now.

        •  The answer is a resounding yes. Otherwise... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          koosah, Calamity Jean

          ....to offer a single example, people of color would still have separate drinking fountains and enter restaurants through the back door.

          Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

          by Meteor Blades on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 10:58:20 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Should a person get out of a traffic ticket (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Calamity Jean

          if their religious beliefs include not wearing seat belts? Dumb example, yes, but in truth the government does have control over religious institutions when it comes to their interaction with secular society, whether we're talking about having to follow health and safety rules when serving food to the homeless, zoning regulations when planning an expansion of their facilities, or even regulations on when and how long they can ring their bells if they're in a residential area. And churches still have to pay FICA and other payroll taxes for their secular employees, such as office administrators.

          Now to try to end the wars we ask our gay and straight soldiers to fight. -- Chris Hayes (modified)

          by Cali Scribe on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 11:23:06 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  the govt. has forced religions to comply with law (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          koosah, Meteor Blades, Calamity Jean

          many times. I believe Jehovah's witnesses cannot prevent their children from getting life-saving health measures-the adults can say no, but not the kids.

          I don't remember which Native American church is not allowed to use peyote, even though its been part of their culture for hundreds of years.

          the government doesn't allow polygamy, so will stop you from marrying two people at one time.

          The Church can opt out of offering health insurance, (and then pay a penalty) or they can offer it within the guidelines of the law.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site