About this 'Religious Exclusion'

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by br0kenrabbit (12820 posts) -

You know...the Catholics don't want to provide birth control in their health-care plans. It's going to the Supreme Court and people around here are launching lawsuits.

I was just thinking...if the Catholics get a pass on birth control, do Jehovas Witnesses get a pass on covering blood transfusions? What if your employer is one of those against childhood vaccinations? Where does it end?

#2 Posted by HuggyBear1020 (456 posts) -

@br0kenrabbit: It begins and ends at birth control. You're using disease prevention and life-saving procedures to compare it to, like apples to oranges.

#3 Posted by br0kenrabbit (12820 posts) -

Actually, I'm up a bit further in the hierarchy looking at the legal ramifications of 'RELIGIOUS exclusion'. This is what the court will be looking at, not the actual medical issue.

#4 Posted by thegerg (14828 posts) -

Seems OK to me. If you don't like one plan being offered just buy another.

#5 Posted by Aljosa23 (24716 posts) -

Naw, religious exclusion is only valid if Evangelical Christians do it. Bonus points if it's for discriminating against gays.

#6 Edited by HuggyBear1020 (456 posts) -

Will legalizing marijuana lead to the legalization of more dangerous drugs? Will legalizing gay marriage lead to legalizing marriage between an adult and a child? Even from a legal standpoint it's all still apples to oranges.

#7 Posted by br0kenrabbit (12820 posts) -

Will legalizing marijuana lead to the legalization of more dangerous drugs? Will legalizing gay marriage lead to legalizing marriage between an adult and a child? Even from a legal standpoint it's all still apples to oranges.

The case isn't being made that "we don't want to buy birth control", it's being made that "you're forcing us to go against our religious values". Legal arguments are quite specific.

#8 Posted by HuggyBear1020 (456 posts) -

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

#9 Edited by ShadowsDemon (10126 posts) -

In all honesty I'd say it's impossible to see where it will end..if it does.

#10 Edited by br0kenrabbit (12820 posts) -

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

It's obviously going over your head: it's not a slippery slope if what's ruled on is general religious exclusion. That would mean anytime someone has a moral issue with whatever is provided in Health-Care they can claim a religious exclusion.

Again, they're not ruling on Birth Control but on Religious Exclusion.

#11 Posted by Makhaidos (1613 posts) -

Access to birth control has a direct and proven correlation to fewer abortions (duh); Catholics should be all over birth control. If they don't want to abide by the law, they can hand over their tax exempt status.

#12 Posted by Makhaidos (1613 posts) -

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

#13 Posted by foxhound_fox (87623 posts) -

Why is the government mandating anything relating to religion in the first place? Separation of church and state.

#14 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (3775 posts) -

no, people against birth control just need to stfu and stop being so sexually repressed.

#15 Posted by Aljosa23 (24716 posts) -

Why is the government mandating anything relating to religion in the first place? Separation of church and state.

Why not? Religion already influences politics.

#16 Posted by thegerg (14828 posts) -

Why is the government mandating anything relating to religion in the first place? Separation of church and state.

They're not mandating anything relating to religion. WTF are you on about?

#17 Posted by HuggyBear1020 (456 posts) -

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence, which again is why contraception isn't a life-saving procedure.

#18 Edited by HuggyBear1020 (456 posts) -

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

It's obviously going over your head: it's not a slippery slope if what's ruled on is general religious exclusion. That would mean anytime someone has a moral issue with whatever is provided in Health-Care they can claim a religious exclusion.

Again, they're not ruling on Birth Control but on Religious Exclusion.

The problem I see is that there are people who work for a catholic organization who do not agree with the tenants of the catholic faith. I'm not catholic, I don't agree with their practice, and therefore I choose not to work for a catholic organization. BAM! Problem solved. Same goes for any other religious group. They can't force their beliefs on you if you don't associate with them.

#19 Posted by thegerg (14828 posts) -

@Makhaidos said:

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence, which again is why contraception isn't a life-saving procedure.

Haha, no. Maybe you need to look up the definition of the word "rape."

Ignorance FTL.

#20 Edited by HuggyBear1020 (456 posts) -
@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:

@Makhaidos said:

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence, which again is why contraception isn't a life-saving procedure.

Haha, no. Maybe you need to look up the definition of the word "rape."

Ignorance FTL.

Wow you are so smart. Abortion and contraception are 2 separate issues. And just because you are "on the pill" doesn't mean you can't get pregnant. My wife has gotten pregnant twice while "on the pill".

#21 Posted by br0kenrabbit (12820 posts) -

@br0kenrabbit said:

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

It's obviously going over your head: it's not a slippery slope if what's ruled on is general religious exclusion. That would mean anytime someone has a moral issue with whatever is provided in Health-Care they can claim a religious exclusion.

Again, they're not ruling on Birth Control but on Religious Exclusion.

The problem I see is that there are people who work for a catholic organization who do not agree with the tenants of the catholic faith. I'm not catholic, I don't agree with their practice, and therefore I choose not to work for a catholic organization. BAM! Problem solved. Same goes for any other religious group. They can't force their beliefs on you if you don't associate with them.

But the thing is, it's not just religious organizations that don't want to provide coverage. Hobby Lobby, an arts and crafts chain for crying out loud, is a plaintiff in the case for instance.

#22 Posted by Makhaidos (1613 posts) -

@Makhaidos said:

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence, which again is why contraception isn't a life-saving procedure.

And expecting people to adhere to abstinence-only is a joke, which again is why contraception is so important. It doesn't need to be a life-saving procedure (though, again, few things ruin your life more than an unwanted pregnancy) to be important or covered.

#23 Edited by thegerg (14828 posts) -

@huggybear1020 said:
@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:

@Makhaidos said:

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence, which again is why contraception isn't a life-saving procedure.

Haha, no. Maybe you need to look up the definition of the word "rape."

Ignorance FTL.

Wow you are so smart. Abortion and contraception are 2 separate issues. And just because you are "on the pill" doesn't mean you can't get pregnant. My wife has gotten pregnant twice while "on the pill".

That has nothing to do with the fact that your statement ("Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence") is simply incorrect. There's no reason to get upset just because you're called out on your bullshit.

#24 Edited by HuggyBear1020 (456 posts) -

@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:
@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:

@Makhaidos said:

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence, which again is why contraception isn't a life-saving procedure.

Haha, no. Maybe you need to look up the definition of the word "rape."

Ignorance FTL.

Wow you are so smart. Abortion and contraception are 2 separate issues. And just because you are "on the pill" doesn't mean you can't get pregnant. My wife has gotten pregnant twice while "on the pill".

That has nothing to do with the fact that your statement ("Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence") is simply incorrect. There's no reason to get upset just because you're called out on your bullshit.

If a woman never fornicates, she doesn't get pregnant. That isn't BS, that's a scientific fact. Rape is a separate issue. Sorry if logic and reason confuse you.

#25 Edited by Makhaidos (1613 posts) -

@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:
@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:

@Makhaidos said:

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence, which again is why contraception isn't a life-saving procedure.

Haha, no. Maybe you need to look up the definition of the word "rape."

Ignorance FTL.

Wow you are so smart. Abortion and contraception are 2 separate issues. And just because you are "on the pill" doesn't mean you can't get pregnant. My wife has gotten pregnant twice while "on the pill".

That has nothing to do with the fact that your statement ("Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence") is simply incorrect. There's no reason to get upset just because you're called out on your bullshit.

If a woman never fornicates, she doesn't get pregnant. That isn't BS, that's a scientific fact. Rape is a separate issue. Sorry if logic and reason confuse you.

Yes, let's tell women not to fornicate. That'll work, just like how it's worked for the past hundred years or so.

#26 Posted by Nibroc420 (13567 posts) -

@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:
@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:

@Makhaidos said:

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence, which again is why contraception isn't a life-saving procedure.

Haha, no. Maybe you need to look up the definition of the word "rape."

Ignorance FTL.

Wow you are so smart. Abortion and contraception are 2 separate issues. And just because you are "on the pill" doesn't mean you can't get pregnant. My wife has gotten pregnant twice while "on the pill".

That has nothing to do with the fact that your statement ("Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence") is simply incorrect. There's no reason to get upset just because you're called out on your bullshit.

If a woman never fornicates, she doesn't get pregnant. That isn't BS, that's a scientific fact. Rape is a separate issue. Sorry if logic and reason confuse you.

Technically he's right...

If you have sex, regardless of if it's consensual, it sort of means you're not abstaining.

#27 Edited by thegerg (14828 posts) -

@huggybear1020 said:

@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:
@thegerg said:

@huggybear1020 said:

@Makhaidos said:

@huggybear1020 said:

You yourself brought up the slippery slope argument of how theoretically one thing leads to another. Medical necessity trumps religious values. Birth control is not a life-saving procedure, whereas vaccinations and blood transfusions are. So, saying it's against your religious beliefs is fine as long as nobody's life is at stake.

There are few things that can fuck up your entire life more than an unwanted pregnancy.

Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence, which again is why contraception isn't a life-saving procedure.

Haha, no. Maybe you need to look up the definition of the word "rape."

Ignorance FTL.

Wow you are so smart. Abortion and contraception are 2 separate issues. And just because you are "on the pill" doesn't mean you can't get pregnant. My wife has gotten pregnant twice while "on the pill".

That has nothing to do with the fact that your statement ("Pregnancy is 100% preventable through abstinence") is simply incorrect. There's no reason to get upset just because you're called out on your bullshit.

If a woman never fornicates, she doesn't get pregnant. That isn't BS, that's a scientific fact. Rape is a separate issue. Sorry if logic and reason confuse you.

If a woman abstains (chooses to not participate in sexual activity) she can still become pregnant through rape. It's quite simple. To say otherwise is ignorance at best, intentional bullshit at worst. Let's not forget things like artificial insemination that can lead to pregnancy in a woman regardless of whether or not she chooses to abstain.

Again, you're spewing bullshit. Just admit it. Anyone with the ability to logically examine the issue, and who has a basic understanding of biology, would disagree with you.

#28 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (7740 posts) -

Well I hope the SC rules against the likes of Hobby Lobby and a bunch of these other 'religious' for profit companies. Fuck 'em, they're for profit. If they're going to be for profit they have to play by the rules like anyone else.

This is ignoring the fact that the morning after pill is NOTHING like an abortion. Its astounding that these morons can't even bother doing a quick google search to examine the mechanism of the pill.

I'm glad the religious affiliation in this country continue to shrink year after year.

#29 Posted by whipassmt (13987 posts) -

You know...the Catholics don't want to provide birth control in their health-care plans. It's going to the Supreme Court and people around here are launching lawsuits.

I was just thinking...if the Catholics get a pass on birth control, do Jehovas Witnesses get a pass on covering blood transfusions? What if your employer is one of those against childhood vaccinations? Where does it end?

Actually in the cases that the Supreme Court agreed to hear the companies are not Catholic. The owners of Hobby Lobby are Protestant (I think Evangelical) and the owners of the Conestoga Wood Specialties are Mennonites. Also the Hobby Lobby owners are not opposed to all forms of birth control, the reason they are suing is because the mandate would require them to cover some abortion-inducing drugs, not because of contraceptives per se.

On an aside, if a person needs a blood transfusion and their insurance doesn't cover that (which is probably quite a rare situation), or if they don't have insurance (maybe they lost it due to Obamacare), obviously the hospital would still do the transfusion.

#31 Edited by DarkGamer007 (6024 posts) -

The problem with the religious exclusion, is that it only cares for the leaders of certain companies and NOT the employees. Is a CEO of a company saying that birth control is immoral, and not providing it to his employees a breach of his employee's religious freedom because they may be against it? They are only required to cover birth control, but they are not forced to use it, nor are their employees.