Comments about ‘Religious organizations 'disappointed' by latest offer on birth control mandate’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Feb. 2 2013 9:50 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
wrz
Ogden, UT

@lowtherb1:
"... since the federal government funds abortions, and you, I assume, pay federal taxes, are you participating in abortions?"

Certainly, taxes go for things we would like to see our money go for. But this issue is about requiring a religion to provide money (insurance) for something that goes against the religion's principles and teachings. There is a significant difference.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

Baccus0902,
Why do you write “Ammendments” to make it appear I have misspelled the word when the word does not appear in my comment?

you do not dispute my claim BO is attacking our constitutional rights – you just complain about the bill of rights (we wouldn’t need amendments if they had it right the first time), and previous occupants of the WH as you worshipfully praise BO.

Pagan,
One need not be a religious organization to defend religious convictions.

Split hairs as much as you like, you still have zero evidence that I am against birth control for women...
Where have I said they should not get it? All I’ve said is religious employers should not be forced to violate their religious convictions to buy it for them.

Furry,
Insurance companies do NOT provide it, they are the intermediaries between the PAYERS – employers and employees, and providers. Employers are still being forced to PAY for it no matter how BO parses words.

Hank Pym,
Nothing is preventing women from choosing to buy birth control

worf
Mcallen, TX

Paying for birth control, and abortions should be voluntary. Just that simple.

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

@ The Truth,
It is fascinating how we can see the same person or object but see something or somebody completely different.

The first Obama Administration was extremelly frustrating to people like me, leftist, liberal and Christian, because it seemed to us that President Obama was always going out of his way to reach political compromises with the Republican dominated Congress, to always get a resounding "NO!" from them.

The majority of this country supports President Obama. Why is that? Perhaps because most people see the President with the same lenses I see him.

Going back to the issue of religious not been happy. Well, is not all religions and not the majority of people who attend church.

Baccus0902
Leesburg, VA

@ Lost in DC
Baccus0902,
"Why do you write “Ammendments” to make it appear I have misspelled the word when the word does not appear in my comment?"
Just because it tickles me :)

My dear friend, I don't whorship President Obama. But, I like him a lot. I think he is perhaps the most decent, caring and honest man that have been the President of the United States in a long, long time. Do I agree with him 100%? NO!

I am no saint. But the study of religion, all of them, is my favorite pass time. In my research of different philosophies, I have concluded that Christ and his teachings are the most beautiful, easy and practical teachings for the individuals and society.

I believe in free enterprise and free agency. Yet, I think a Laisses Faire economic system is repugnantly unfair,is the equivalent of social darwinism. Therefore, I reject the actions of the Republican Party.

Free agency, rights and responsibilities should be equal for all people in society. All workers should be entitled to universal Health Care. It should be up to their principles how they manage their health. Not the employer and not the state.

EnosEugenius
Shenandoah, IA

A lot of people appear to be missing the point, and therefore are ignorant in their accusations and insensitive in their statements justifying what THEY view as an "acceptable" compromise. The issue is not about birth control per se; it's being forced to pay for it. It is completely true that a Catholic (or other religious) employer can't keep its male employees from buying "male birth control," but the issue is not control over others, it's freedom of religious and moral choice. If I as an employer am against birth control of any kind, due to my religious convictions, I can't prevent my employees from using it, but I shouldn't be forced to pay for it -- and that goes for BOTH male and female methods. The difference between this and war actions is that individuals do not participate in war; governments do. I have no control over whether we fight or invade another country; that is a governmental decision. However, contraception and other elective medical procedures and decisions are individual decisions. Your arguments are invalid.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments