Anonymous wrote:And I take as genuine some people's belief that life begins at conception. That makes some forms of birth control a difficult call for them. It doesn't have to be about hatred toward women or the desire to control them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually this sudden burst of issues on this is because the economy is getting better and now it is not clear that the republicans can beat Obama on jobs 9the economy is doing a little better and it is possible by November will be doing much better) so instead they turn to the issues of abortion and contraception and try to swing votes in that way. The republicans can rely on the religious and others that hate women to join in the melee.

No the sudden burst of issues is because Obama's HHS issued a rule that requires religious organizations who have never paid for birth control to start doing so.

The [liberal, Carter-appointed] justice authored the majority opinion in the 1990 decision Employment Division v. Smith, a critical precedent to the birth control case, decreeing that religious liberty is insufficient grounds for being exempt from laws. The Supreme Court said Oregon may deny unemployment benefits to people who were fired for smoking peyote as part of a religious tradition, seeing as the drug was illegal in the state.

“To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself,” wrote the justice

Anonymous wrote:I believe that if men get prostate cancer, it is the will of the Lord for them to suffer and die and treating this condition interferes with the Lord's will. This affects me because I am part of an insurance group that offers unholy treatment for this condition, and I believe it is sinful to contradict His will yet my money pays for this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: And I take as genuine some people's belief that life begins at conception.

I don't, because almost all of them treat a miscarriage quite differently than they treat the birth of a child. When these people start holding funerals and writing obituaries for their 5-weeks-gestation miscarried "babies" (and they most certainly will soon!), same as they would for the tragedy of a 4-year-old who dies of leukemia, then I'll believe that they really think life begins at the moment of conception. In the meantime, it's abundantly clear that their chief unstated motive is to exert control over women's bodies and choices.

I had a burial for my 8 week gestation miscarriage, and mourned that child terribly. I honestly and truly believe that life begins at conception.

I haven't the slightest interest in controlling your choices that don't impact others....and ending the life of a child impacts that child. I am personally actually very pro-birth control...I think it prevents abortions, and is just a wonderful advance in people having control over their own reproductive lives, and I've used birth control myself. But I know that there are people who are opposed to it, and don't think they should be forced to pay for birth control when it violates their beliefs.

Shoiuld someone's religious belief trump the need for others to get help for a possible medical condition? If your religion tells you should have as many kids as your are blessed with, great, and if birth control was used ONLY to prevent pregnancy then I understand, but don't agree. However, I take the pill for a condition. If I had to pay full price for it, it would be a strain and I may have to skip a couple of months. That will impact my health and worsen my symptoms and condition.

So is it ok for me or other's to suffer because it goes agaisnt someone's religious beliefs?

So don't work for an institution that takes those beliefs seriously. Work for someone else.

And you call yourself a child of God? You are a good Christian who loves and cares for all? But really you don't care if women suffer because they can't afford a medication they need?

Anonymous wrote:Anti-abortion and anti-birth control are about getting votes for Republicans. Read Crazy for God by Frank Schaeffer. He was an insider in the Christian evangelical community and present at the meetings int the 1970s between Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and Republican leaders in which abortion was agreed to be an issue they could use to motivate evangelicals to deliver votes to Republicans. Abortion was not a national issue or much discussed out of theology and medical schools before the Moral Majority made it a political vote cow. This is also why Republicans, even when in control of every branch of the federal or state government, will not actually outlaw abortion- because it would kill the garaunteed vote cow. It is a tool of political manipulation, plain and simple.

Anonymous wrote:Anti-abortion and anti-birth control are about getting votes for Republicans. Read Crazy for God by Frank Schaeffer. He was an insider in the Christian evangelical community and present at the meetings int the 1970s between Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and Republican leaders in which abortion was agreed to be an issue they could use to motivate evangelicals to deliver votes to Republicans. Abortion was not a national issue or much discussed out of theology and medical schools before the Moral Majority made it a political vote cow. This is also why Republicans, even when in control of every branch of the federal or state government, will not actually outlaw abortion- because it would kill the garaunteed vote cow. It is a tool of political manipulation, plain and simple.

Anonymous wrote:IMO, the belief that a zygote or fetus should have equal rights is inherently about controlling and oppressing women. While it may be a "sincere" belief, it's a ridiculous one.

Anonymous wrote:1. contraceptive rights are not going anywhere, though you shouldn't make religious institutions violate their faith. there are good and bad results to society since the widespread availability and acceptance of contraceptives, but I'd argue more good than bad.

2. abortion is a completely different issue. opponents of abortion are interested in the welfare of the baby. they are not trying to trample women or hold women back. 50% of the babies are female, obviously.

Anonymous wrote:1. contraceptive rights are not going anywhere, though you shouldn't make religious institutions violate their faith. there are good and bad results to society since the widespread availability and acceptance of contraceptives, but I'd argue more good than bad.

2. abortion is a completely different issue. opponents of abortion are interested in the welfare of the baby. they are not trying to trample women or hold women back. 50% of the babies are female, obviously.