Guadaloop474 said:
Atheist Billboard taken down
Guadaloop474 said:
The HHS Mandate on Catholic organizations and private businesses is a direct frontal assault by the US government on our freedom of religion in this country, so yes, here is your reminder...
Dr. Watson said:Guadaloop474 said:
The HHS Mandate on Catholic organizations and private businesses is a direct frontal assault by the US government on our freedom of religion in this country, so yes, here is your reminder...
Good grief. They bent over backwards to accommodate religious beliefs in religious organizations while still providing individual choice. But that still wasn't enough.
Meanwhile, an atheist billboard that is not insulting in any way must be torn down.
AstroAg17 said:
What was their old username?
Baloney on both. Individual choice would be to opt to work for a religious charity like the Little Sisters of the Poor with the understanding that the order's beliefs prevents them from paying for certain aspects in a health care package that would likely be there if one would opt for different employer.Dr. Watson said:Guadaloop474 said:
The HHS Mandate on Catholic organizations and private businesses is a direct frontal assault by the US government on our freedom of religion in this country, so yes, here is your reminder...
Good grief. They bent over backwards to accommodate religious beliefs in religious organizations while still providing individual choice. But that still wasn't enough.
Meanwhile, an atheist billboard that is not insulting in any way must be torn down.
Only conjecture on my part but a thread Bust Up started on the Baseball Other Board might be the cause for a time out.schmendeler said:
I'd like to know what is up with the username change
BS! They are still fighting to force Nuns to provide contraception to their employees.Dr. Watson said:Guadaloop474 said:
The HHS Mandate on Catholic organizations and private businesses is a direct frontal assault by the US government on our freedom of religion in this country, so yes, here is your reminder...
Good grief. They bent over backwards to accommodate religious beliefs in religious organizations while still providing individual choice. But that still wasn't enough.
Meanwhile, an atheist billboard that is not insulting in any way must be torn down.
Do you think that these people who did not like the sign did anything wrong?Quote:
The billboard was taken down after several residents threatened to stop doing business at the gas station and store, whose space the advertising company used for the signage.
UTExan said:
What a shame. Usually it is the secular/leftist bloc which engages in such censorship.
and when prescribed for medical reasons unrelated to contraception, Catholic organizations have no problem supporting it; and even Catholic Religious organizations currently exempted still support this when prescribed to correct a medical problem.Dr. Watson said:
Contraception is important for many women beyond just the sexual component. So it's not out of line to have that covered like any other medication (it would be smart to have it covered even if the only thing it did was prevent pregnancy, but that's another discussion).
Dr. Watson said:
As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.
That is cooperation. There should be NO ACTION required by the organization. NONE!Dr. Watson said:
The compromise offered would have completely separated the contraception aspect from the insurance provided by a religious institution. All the organization had to do was fill out a form saying they weren't going to provide contraception. That's it. But oh, the horror.
Dr. Watson said:UTExan said:
What a shame. Usually it is the secular/leftist bloc which engages in such censorship.
No, it isn't. The religious majority in communities is just usually quieter about ostracizing minority positions.
Sq16Aggie2006 said:Dr. Watson said:
As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.
What if religious clergy owns a business?
Ah, unless the law is on the "wrong side of history"? Then it's a bull**** law right?Dr. Watson said:Sq16Aggie2006 said:Dr. Watson said:
As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.
What if religious clergy owns a business?
If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
This is the biggest BS response!Dr. Watson said:Sq16Aggie2006 said:Dr. Watson said:
As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.
What if religious clergy owns a business?
If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
Sq16Aggie2006 said:Ah, unless the law is on the "wrong side of history"? Then it's a bull**** law right?Dr. Watson said:Sq16Aggie2006 said:Dr. Watson said:
As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.
What if religious clergy owns a business?
If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
Dad-O-Lot said:This is the biggest BS response!Dr. Watson said:Sq16Aggie2006 said:Dr. Watson said:
As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.
What if religious clergy owns a business?
If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
This is the exact problem!
Laws being passed which require people violate their deeply-held religious beliefs. You really think a business owner should just say, "oh well, they passed a law, now I need to make a choice; either violate my religious beliefs, or shut down my business".
No, that's crap!
Kind of hard to only hire orthodox Catholics due to that pesky Civil Rights Act which established protected classes. You're mistaking two different issues; 1 having religious clergy forced to offer their employees abortifacients and contraception through their insurance package; 2 those employees being able to go to the store and buy a pack of rubbers. 1 is certainly the business of the company owner; 2 certainly isn't.schmendeler said:
I'd think that if the employees were good catholics, then it doesn't matter that the business offers contraceptives. if there are no takers, then it's moot. if there are non-catholics who work for them, then it shouldn't be any business of the business what they use their medical benefits for. or no?
This is your most annoying shell, the "the law states" shell. We're not here to debate verbiage of laws on the books; that's a very short discussion. Imagine two years ago having a debate about gay marriage, with our side just repeating the verbiage of DOMA, it's childish.Dr. Watson said:Sq16Aggie2006 said:Ah, unless the law is on the "wrong side of history"? Then it's a bull**** law right?Dr. Watson said:Sq16Aggie2006 said:Dr. Watson said:
As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.
What if religious clergy owns a business?
If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
Where are you getting that from? If a business owner violates the law and is caught, their business will be punished.
Read the "Religious Freedom Restoration Act". There is already a two-step process for addressing this.Dr. Watson said:Dad-O-Lot said:This is the biggest BS response!Dr. Watson said:Sq16Aggie2006 said:Dr. Watson said:
As private individuals, they can hold to any belief they want. Their business is not subject to the same laws as their person. If religion is really their primary purpose in business, they should reorganize as a religious nonprofit.
What if religious clergy owns a business?
If the business is for-profit, they have to abide by the law.
This is the exact problem!
Laws being passed which require people violate their deeply-held religious beliefs. You really think a business owner should just say, "oh well, they passed a law, now I need to make a choice; either violate my religious beliefs, or shut down my business".
No, that's crap!
What if a business owner "deeply-holds" that any and all taxes and safety regulations are a violation of their religious beliefs? Should they be allowed to avoid paying taxes or follow OSHA regulations?
What is the compelling government interest?Quote:Quote:
Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 - Prohibits any agency, department, or official of the United States or any State (the government) from substantially burdening a person's exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except that the government may burden a person's exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person: (1) furthers a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.