Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

GO TO BOARDS


Should religious institutions pay for their employee's contraception policies?

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Polaritie

Recruiter

02-22-2012

My opinion. Either all organizations have to or none of them do. No exemptions for specific religions. I'm sick and tired of christianity being handed exemptions to the law. (Hell, there was a case where someone got sick long term and lost their job because they worked for a religious organization, even though any other organization would have been fined for wrongful dismissal. There's not even a remotely valid religious reason for that)

I can't believe that people are saying the government should allow catholics to be exempt from laws they don't like as part of "religious freedom". Religious freedom in the US means the government doesn't single out religions for any reason. Yet there's an incessant barrage of demands for christianity to be exempted from the law, for laws to be passed to codify christian beliefs (gay marriage always seems to be opposed on the grounds of "God prohibits it" which is hardly an acceptable basis for law under the 1st amendment)...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Uccisore

Senior Member

02-22-2012

Quote:
Polaritie:
My opinion. Either all organizations have to or none of them do. No exemptions for specific religions. I'm sick and tired of christianity being handed exemptions to the law. (Hell, there was a case where someone got sick long term and lost their job because they worked for a religious organization, even though any other organization would have been fined for wrongful dismissal. There's not even a remotely valid religious reason for that)

I can't believe that people are saying the government should allow catholics to be exempt from laws they don't like as part of "religious freedom". Religious freedom in the US means the government doesn't single out religions for any reason. Yet there's an incessant barrage of demands for christianity to be exempted from the law, for laws to be passed to codify christian beliefs (gay marriage always seems to be opposed on the grounds of "God prohibits it" which is hardly an acceptable basis for law under the 1st amendment)...



Catholics being exempt from laws has nothing to do with anything- the existence of laws that force people to violate their conscience does.

Suppose there was a company that sold something you and many other people have a moral objection to- machine guns, abortion pills, Bibles, rap albums, I don't know you...but something you find immoral, anyway.

Suppose further that the Government passed a law saying you were FORCED to buy these things. Obviously you and many other people would object. Some of those people would be objecting for religious reasons, probably.

Ideally, nobody should be forced to buy contraception for themselves or anybody else. IT just so happens that it's a religious group opposing this particular violation of the Constitution. Maybe some other year it will be a secular group having their rights violated. Don't let your apparent bias against religion cloud what the real issue is, eh?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Uccisore

Senior Member

02-22-2012

Quote:
Worstcase:
Again you are taking things too literally. I would elaborate upon this further if I felt like it, but getting formalist thinkers to think outside their norm takes more time then it really is worth the bother. So instead, I will ask but one simply question. When you read my quote, did you hear a whooshing noise as the point flew over your head?


You do understand that us "English as a Primary Language" folks are actually doing you a favor by trying to muddle through your convoluted, poorly written **** and actually give you a reply, right? For somebody that can't construct a decent sentence, you should be a little more polite when it turns out other people can't understand you.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dobagoh

Member

02-22-2012

Quote:
Uccisore:
Catholics being exempt from laws has nothing to do with anything- the existence of laws that force people to violate their conscience does.

Suppose there was a company that sold something you and many other people have a moral objection to- machine guns, abortion pills, Bibles, rap albums, I don't know you...but something you find immoral, anyway.

Suppose further that the Government passed a law saying you were FORCED to buy these things. Obviously you and many other people would object. Some of those people would be objecting for religious reasons, probably.

Ideally, nobody should be forced to buy contraception for themselves or anybody else. IT just so happens that it's a religious group opposing this particular violation of the Constitution. Maybe some other year it will be a secular group having their rights violated. Don't let your apparent bias against religion cloud what the real issue is, eh?


Nobody is being forced to buy contraceptives, or even use them. Your argument is invalid. What do you think the difference in price is between an insurance plan that offers coverage for BC and one that doesn't? Five cents a year?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Elan Tedronai

Senior Member

02-22-2012

Doesn't matter what the cost is. It doesn't even matter if it's free. The church shouldn't be forced to support it. You do realize that religious freedom allows some students to not say the pledge of allegiance in school? What does it cost for them to say it?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dobagoh

Member

02-22-2012

Quote:
Elan Tedronai:
Doesn't matter what the cost is. It doesn't even matter if it's free. The church shouldn't be forced to support it. You do realize that religious freedom allows some students to not say the pledge of allegiance in school? What does it cost for them to say it?


No it doesn't. This is'nt about freedom of religion, it's about subjugating women's rights.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Elan Tedronai

Senior Member

02-22-2012

Horse ****. Religious institutions are not taking anything away from a woman by refusing to buy her birth control.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Uccisore

Senior Member

02-22-2012

Quote:
Dobagoh:
Nobody is being forced to buy contraceptives, or even use them. Your argument is invalid. What do you think the difference in price is between an insurance plan that offers coverage for BC and one that doesn't? Five cents a year?


Doesn't matter. If the Church doesn't want to buy it, they shouldn't have to. Hell, even if it's free, they shouldn't have to support a company that provides it, or do anything to make it accessible to their employees.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Uccisore

Senior Member

02-22-2012

Quote:
Dobagoh:
No it doesn't. This is'nt about freedom of religion, it's about subjugating women's rights.


Women who choose to work for the Catholic Church, which has made their position on birth control perfectly ****ing clear for the past 1500 year or so.
Women, hell, all people, willingly choose to give up some of their rights when they participate in any religion. That doesn't justify the State violating the first amendment.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dobagoh

Member

02-22-2012

Quote:
Uccisore:
Women who choose to work for the Catholic Church, which has made their position on birth control perfectly ****ing clear for the past 1500 year or so.
Women, hell, all people, willingly choose to give up some of their rights when they participate in any religion. That doesn't justify the State violating the first amendment.


Yes it does. The state can violate the first amendment any time it wants as long as it's serving an important state concern, like public health and women's rights.