No, it would be more like your employer offering you a Ferrari, but not letting the women get anything but station wagons, because they're women.
Jesus, Inc.
- Thread starter Tecumsehsbones
- Start date
No, it would be more like your employer offering you a Ferrari, but not letting the women get anything but station wagons, because they're women.
Station wagons can haul children; Ferraris are unsafe for mums!
The pill limits the number of potential consumers- bad for corporations.
The pill limits the number of potential consumers- bad for corporations.
BTW.... I'm all for the government staying out of people's religions, BUT, the government guarantees me religious freedom as an individual. It does not guarantee me the right to own a corporation, or employ people. It does not in any way shape or form guarantee that I get to carry my religious convictions forward onto those people. I don't have a lot of faith that the Supreme Court will do what's right and strike this down, but, it's what should happen.
In a world that is so terrified of Islam taking over, you would think that a basic practice of secularism in government and corporate policy would be second nature to enshrining the rights of everyone to not be at the whim of someone else's beliefs.
In a world that is so terrified of Islam taking over, you would think that a basic practice of secularism in government and corporate policy would be second nature to enshrining the rights of everyone to not be at the whim of someone else's beliefs.
Secularism says birth control is up to the individual. Many religions say they need to force their religious views on people who are not members.
Hardly... More like the employer willing to pay for your parking and one select demographic crying "you've trampled my rights because you aren't buying me a Ferrari"
By the way, I'm a little curious relative to exactly what the men are getting in this deal that women aren't?
Last edited:
No one is trying to force their religious beliefs on their employees. The employees are free to purchase any form of contraception, pay for an abortion, sterilization or any other procedure.
The employer (and owners of the company) are simply saying that the Federal Government can not force me to violate MY religious beliefs, and make me pay for something that absolutely violates my religious beliefs.
The employer (and owners of the company) are simply saying that the Federal Government can not force me to violate MY religious beliefs, and make me pay for something that absolutely violates my religious beliefs.
One would expect wrong. In my case, this one expects that the relatively simply and widely held belief in the scinetific community that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, is increasing in the atmosphere due to human emissions and that this will oikely raise the average temperature, possibly seriously.
This isn't so much of an issue in Canada, where we have the corpoate veil between teh shareholders and tyhe corporations. We don't havce the same idea of corporate personhood. A corporation could no more have religious beliefs than the building I'm sitting in could.
In terms of the US, I'd wager that there is a widely held, cross-party belief that corporations have too much power, and have co-opted, to some degree, the political process.
If Corporations can become people that should mean one vote and the people should also become qualified for all the tax perks that Corps presently have while the people are denied those same rights, like extra tax deductions on money spent.
BHO says everyone has to but ins. for it. How is that up to the individual? In other words BHO is forcing his beliefs on everyone; typical tyrant.
Mine (protestant) says if you want to, go ahead.
Christians support drone strikes on wedding parties in certain areas, is that a form of birth control?
You think Obama dictated the ACA himself?
You really don't know much about the American political process, do you?
Treatment for testicular cancer? Treatment for prostate cancer?
I'm fine with excluding OB/GYN care and contraception for women from insurance policies, if you're OK with excluding testicular cancer treatment, prostate cancer treatment, and d*ck-stiffener prescriptions.
Cut through the BS and the bottom-line on AGW indicates a direct link between humanity (read: the # of emitters) and the theory that the globe is warming.
PS - it ain't very warm these days in my neck of the woods
Are you saying that every possible form of contraceptive is an inalienable right?
btw - no one (ie. corporations) are preventing anyone from accessing whatever option they want.
Lastly, you still haven't addressed my question regarding to what women are being denied relative to men (remember the Ferrari vs station wagon example)
Didn't know that Obama's bronze level disregarded testicular/prostate cancer.
Who knew?
But if there were no more Walters how would we judge our correctness? The Walters are torch bearers, they hold the light because they can't be trusted to use screwdrivers.