Skip to main content

View Diary: Where were the bishops when Troy Davis died? (264 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I am not religious, but I do care what they say (12+ / 0-)

    Because what they say hurts people. I will speak out about the evil they do with their hypocrisy and arrogance.

    The GOP is the party of mammon. They mock what Jesus taught.

    by freelunch on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 10:14:10 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  If they say it within the walls of their church, (16+ / 0-)

      I don't care.

      My point is that once they interject themselves into my life, I WILL start caring about what they say. And that's what they've done.

      They did it in 2004 when they denied Kerry communion, they do it all the time.

      Then, when called on it, act like, hey, it's just what god told us.

      And it's bullshit. They're a political organization. That's all. There's nothing holy about them.

      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

      by BoiseBlue on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 10:18:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  They do it at this time ... (0+ / 0-)

        ... because in their opinion you are interjecting yourself in THEIR life. You (i.e. the secular state) are demanding that they actively provide contraception to all their employees via health care plans.

        This undermines their own teaching. YOU try to force them to be hypocrites - to condemn contraception and simultaneously give it out for free.

        You are messing with their freedom of religion.

        I don't think this battle is a particular wise choice of limited church resources - but the bishops are correct on the facts.

        The Catholic Church has a long history of beeing persecuted - especially in English speaking countries. They are wary and defensive in this regard, and rightly so.

        A secular state that tries to suppress or even redefine Catholic teaching should expect them to oppose this. Loudly.

        •  That is such bullshit (12+ / 0-)

          Do you actually believe any of that?

          You know what? If they don't want to be subjected to American laws, they can sell their hospitals and universities to secular organizations and be done with it.

          They are not correct on the facts, and neither are you. I do not oppose the Catholic Church's stance on contraception. I think it's fucking stupid and archaic, but it's fine with me if Catholics want to follow that teaching.

          What they DON'T get to do is hire non-Catholics and dictate to them what they can and cannot use for their own health benefits.

          Obama and I are not running into Catholic Churches and shoving the pill down all the ladies' throats.

          Educate yourself. Here's a hint: your church is not an objective source of news.

          P.S. I am not a crackpot.

          by BoiseBlue on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 11:24:25 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  how should I call this? (0+ / 0-)
            You know what? If they don't want to be subjected to American laws, they can sell their hospitals and universities to secular organizations and be done with it.
            This isn't about hospitals and universities. This isn't about practicing medicine or education. It is about ALL employees.  In your opinion the church is not allowed to employ people, which means it is not allowed to exist at all.

            This argument of yours is dishonest and malicious. It is a variation of the "of you don't like this great country, just leave it" we keep hearing from other quarters as reaction to any critique.

            •  The church is allowed to employ people (4+ / 0-)

              They're not allowed to dictate the lives of those people.

              Your arguments are so strange. I can't believe you really believe this stuff.

              P.S. I am not a crackpot.

              by BoiseBlue on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 11:59:20 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  dictate? (0+ / 0-)

                Dictate? Where is the coercive element?

                Nobody is forced to do anything? The Church just refuses to provide contraception for free.

                Nobody prevents Church employees to go and buy contraception on their own funds.

            •  Wrong. (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ChadmanFL, Debby

              The rules are only for enterprises. All church employees and all church school employees are exempt from this rule of the church chooses. The bishops have you completely confused.

              The GOP is the party of mammon. They mock what Jesus taught.

              by freelunch on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 12:07:49 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  And Remember (4+ / 0-)

              the organization that runs the hospitals is fine with having insurance companies provide the coverage.  It's only the bishops and the uber-Catholics who still object.  

              The Church has made a distinct right turn in the last 30 years, wiping out most of the good done by Vatican II, beginning with banning birth control against the opinion of most of the Church at the time.  The abomination of a liturgy just introduced is a clear example as is this hissy fit by the same men who looked the other way when children were being raped.

              •  the organization that runs the hospitals (0+ / 0-)

                is not responsible for the mission of the church.

                They run hospitals.

                It is the Bishops whose job is to maintain the consistency and correctness of teaching.

                •  There is only one answer to that: (7+ / 0-)

                  Bullshit!  To continue to argue with you would be a waste of my time.  I know who you are - I've known since the 1st time I went to Cathecism classes, and was told not to bother to pray for my deeply loved ex-Catholic grandfather, because he was damned.  I know it's not true, I knew it then, but that was the word from the official voice in my 6 year old world.  You like to play games with people's lives - argue tiny points of theology and think you are the smartest guy in the room.  

                  Guess what, asshole?  Vanity is one of the deadly sins.

                •  The hospitals are not religious organizations. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Debby, alizard

                  Deal with it. The hospitals are enterprises. They get billions in government funds. I would be quite happy to cut off all of the hospitals and colleges that do not want to follow the rules.

                  The GOP is the party of mammon. They mock what Jesus taught.

                  by freelunch on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 02:33:16 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  How about a deal with the churches. If you want (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    BoiseBlue, Debby, alizard

                    exemptions from the requirements, give up your tax exempt  status.

                    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy;the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness

                    by CTMET on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 03:44:31 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

          •  oh, and, fwiw (0+ / 0-)

            you also try to make this into a veiled Ultramontanism accusation, one of the hallmakrs of anti-catholic propaganda.

            "If they don't want to be subjected to American laws" - yeah, they are not patriotic enough, not of US, they are THEM.

            Ick.

        •  If you write this to explain "their" POV (11+ / 0-)

          then I can just barely tolerate the post.  If this represents your own point of view, then I say to you, respectfully, you're full of shit.  

          My tax dollars go to support murder in Afghanistan, Iraq, and right here at home. Where's the outrage over MY religious freedom?  "Religious freedom" doesn't have anything to do with it...that's a right-wing meme, one that is ignorant about the role of government in a pluralistic society.  It's also a lie, I might add.

          Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

          by Big River Bandido on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 11:36:29 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Judging from this poster's other comments in (0+ / 0-)

            this diary, it appears to be a sincerely held belief.

            P.S. I am not a crackpot.

            by BoiseBlue on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 11:42:07 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  To which I would reply (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              RadGal70, Brooke In Seattle, Debby

              Once Catholic "teachings" (and Garry Wills destroys the very notion that any of this "debate" is legitimate) get debated as points of civil law, what a right-wing Catholic calls "religious freedom" is nothing more than an attempt to force his religion down another person's throat.  

              That user's rant is akin to the Morality Police.  

              Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

              by Big River Bandido on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 11:47:12 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  did you actually read what I wrote? (0+ / 0-)

                what kind of my argument is faulty?

                Or do you just not like its conclusions?

              •  or, to be more clear (0+ / 0-)

                your "Catholic teaching should not be a point of civil law" is actually the mirror of my own - Civil law should not attempt to define Catholic teaching.

                But if you force a Church to act in a certain way as a matter of daily business, you automatically preclude it from teaching a prohibition of that act.

                •  Bullshit (0+ / 0-)

                  There has been no attempt, none, anywhere, to "define Catholic teaching".  That is a lie.

                  Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

                  by Big River Bandido on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 12:54:05 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  as I explained... (1+ / 1-)
                    Recommended by:
                    CTMET
                    Hidden by:
                    Big River Bandido

                    A mandate for the church to provide contraception to its employees for free is exactly that.

                    Regardless how often you call this bullshit.

                    As I explained before.

                    Which you did not discuss but "counter" with a blatant assertion and name-calling.

                    •  That is an outright lie. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      freelunch

                      And I'm hide-rating you for it.  

                      The President's position calls for insurers, not the Church to pay for contraception. To somehow twist that into a "religious freedom" argument is not only fatuous, it's echoes the dishonesty of the Far Reich.  

                      Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

                      by Big River Bandido on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 01:49:57 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  you are not supposed to HR over disagreement (0+ / 0-)

                        ... but I won't return the favor.

                        I wasn't talking about the president's compromise.

                        Your original claim was "There has been no attempt, none, anywhere, to "define Catholic teaching".  

                        Which I refuted by counterexample.

                        That's a whole different beast. The health care mandate is a few months older than the current compromise.

                        The compromise is much harder to classify. Basically, it tries to circumvent the issue, but is not fully effective in it. To be effective it needed not to shift the cost "to the insurer" (which is nonsense - it will still be paid out of the same premiums) but to the one making the decision to use contraception.

                        If you doubt that answer a simple question: will the plans "without contraception" be respectively cheaper to honestly reflect the difference?

                    •  The church is not providing contraceptives (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Big River Bandido, Debby

                      That is the lie the bishops are spreading.

                      That is the lie that you are repeating.

                      The insurance company is covering contraceptives.

                      The hospitals and universities are not churches.

                      The bishops cannot be trusted.

                      Clearly you have been hoodwinked by them.

                      The GOP is the party of mammon. They mock what Jesus taught.

                      by freelunch on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 02:35:22 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  formula compromise (0+ / 0-)

                        In the end the insurance company is paid by the employer.

                        So the employer pays the contraception.

                        And while hospitals and (arguably) universities are not churches, the church has many employees outside of that.

                        Universites, btw, insofar as they serve a religious purpose, are part of the church's core mission and must be regarded as such.

                        •  Two points about your errors (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          alizard

                          The church is not required to offer any  contraception coverage to any direct church employees. You keep falsely implying that they must.

                          As far as I am concerned, any organization that takes federal money for services that it is providing needs to follow the rules of the federal government. No church is allowed to collect money for religious purposes from the government, but any related services can fairly be considered non religious if a portion of the funding comes (and hospitals and universities certainly get a huge share) from the government.

                          If the programs are so tightly tied to the religion, they must give up their federal funding for those programs.

                          The GOP is the party of mammon. They mock what Jesus taught.

                          by freelunch on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 02:49:31 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  hmm. Do you have any source for that? (0+ / 0-)

                            From all the texts I've read - including Obama's remarks on the issue - my undrestanding was that ALL (insured) women would get free contraception, regardless of employer.

                            If the employer doesn't want to provide for it, it will be provided by the insurer "at no cost".

                            The latter of course beeing nonsensical - the insurer will necessarily account it against the premiums he gets - either from that particular plan, or from all insured.

                            Which, by the way, would effectively prevent religious institutions to run their own or have affiliated insurers, that mostly cater to them.

                          •  Insurance companies have rules to follow (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            alizard

                            Churches don't set rules for insurance companies.

                            USA Today says:

                            The issue has heated up since Jan. 20, when Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius issued a final rule requiring that all women have access to free preventive care services, including contraceptives. The rule includes an exemption for churches and houses of worship, but not for other religious institutions such as hospitals, universities and charities.
                            You were misinformed and misunderstood what Obama said.

                            The GOP is the party of mammon. They mock what Jesus taught.

                            by freelunch on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 03:58:11 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Then they can quit taking my tax money. (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          alizard

                          If a university or a hospital wants to be solely a religious institution, wants to follow out its mission, then it can quit taking public money. There's the compromise. They can quit claiming to do "charity" if they want to keep getting paid for it by the state.

                          Twenty years from now, you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. Throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. --Mark Twain

                          by Debby on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 08:17:23 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                    •  Uprated for the wrong HR,but I don't agree (0+ / 0-)

                      The church is not being asked to make people use contraception, only to support those who are weak and have sinned by having sex for pleasure only. I don't think pregnancy is meant to be punishment for sin. I don't think the Catholic Church (by doctrine) even even says pregnancy  is punishment for sin. However they seem to act like they wish it was punishment for sin.

                      (IANAT) - I am not a theologin.... or even a Catholic.  

                      The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy;the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness

                      by CTMET on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 03:50:54 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

        •  My dear (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lcj98, Brooke In Seattle, Debby

          I will speak to this, and I'm one who gets accused around here of overdefending the church all the time.  

          There ain't no freedom of religion question about the contraception issue.  Never was.  That is so much horsesh*t.  Even when the question was raised during V2 and during the writing of Humanae, it wasn't about freedom of religion.  Go read about the Crowley Report and what Zalba had to say to Patty Crowley.  Go read what John Courtney Murray, SJ had to say to Cushing, and what Cushing did.  Go read about Jack Egan's trip to Vatican II and the discussion of religious liberty.  

          No doubt there have been anti-Catholic persecutions in history.  Go read about Bishop "Dagger John" Hughes for a little of that in American history.  Which is all the more reason why American Catholics should speak loudly, to see that they never, ever do unto others what was done to them by the Know-Nothings.

          Instead, sadly, we see the bishops, and some, but certainly not all, of their flock engaging in the same type of attacks on the liberty of others.  And being so foolish as to think they can get in bed with the fundies and not get f*cked.

          So if you're going to cry "victim" over that, well, just go.

          If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

          by marykk on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 11:44:07 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  this issue (0+ / 0-)

            was not known at either V2 or writing of Humanae Vitae. I don't really understand your argument.

            The point is that the state tries to force the church to distribute for free (and thus, implicitly endorse) contraceptives; thus undermining its own teachings on that matter.

            That IS a freedom of religion issue.

            (and, fwiw, your comcast links are broken)

            •  Let me guess (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ChadmanFL

              you're another trad.  You attend our Lady of Perpetual Misery, where you wear a veil every Sunday, speak Latin, and homeschool the kiddies lest they be tainted with (perish the thought) modernity.

              Go forth and read.

              http://archives.nd.edu/...

              http://www.op.org/...

              http://bcm.bc.edu/...

              If you think you're too small to be effective, you've never been in the dark with a mosquito.

              by marykk on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 12:13:09 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  your links are all about contraception (0+ / 0-)

                ... and the catholic teaching about it.

                But the current issue isn't.

                It is about the US trying to modify to teachings.

                Thats one hell of a difference.

                I have no particular opinion on the theological groundings of the Church's stance on contraception, and consider the whole thing somewhat lacking reality.

                But that's not the point. Religious Freedom means it is not the Job of Congress to have a say in that matter.

                And the moment Congress forces the Church to change its teaching by actively voiding a part of it through its own (forced) actions, Congress is in the business of defining Church teachings.

                Which is a bad idea.

            •  You are repeating lies (0+ / 0-)

              You are misrepresenting the rules.

              You are repeating the lies the bishops tell.

              You are not trustworthy.

              The GOP is the party of mammon. They mock what Jesus taught.

              by freelunch on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 02:36:22 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  Seriously tempted to HR this comment (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Matt Z

          for the "freedom of religion" lie it contains.  And it IS a lie.  

          Shirley Chisholm was right. Our Republic is in deep trouble.

          by Big River Bandido on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 11:48:28 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  The oppressors whine when they cannot oppress (6+ / 0-)

          Yes, the Catholic Church was oppressed in England. It had earned that oppression, not by the way it treated Henry, but by the hundreds of years of high-handed behavior before that.

          This has nothing to do with freedom of religion. The bishops are running enterprises. They already provide such drugs in many states. The whole thing is an attempt to grab power, power that their own parishioners refuse to give them.

          The GOP is the party of mammon. They mock what Jesus taught.

          by freelunch on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 12:06:51 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Yes. 2004 (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sb, foresterbob, Matt Z, alizard

        People who were part of Ratsinger's faction before he became Pope launched a frontal attack on Catholic politicians who did not legislatively oppose Roe v. Wade and its aftermath. It doesn't matter that 12 years of Dem and Republican policy had begun to reduce the rate of abortions per pregnancies, and the rate of both pregnancies and sexual activity among teenagers. If the didn't do it by assaulting doctor-patient privacy, this faction supported them.

        At the same time, it was silent or next to silent about the aggressive pursuit of war, about torture, about the treatment of unindicted prisoners.

        I blame Ratzinger and always will.

        Have you heard? The vice president's gone mad. - Bob Dylan, 1966

        by textus on Sun Feb 19, 2012 at 11:20:28 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site