Some issues

Ok I want to discuss some issues that have either been slightly brushed aside or MAJORLY brushed aside.  I'll put up two.

1. The catholic Church giving out contraceptives.

2.  What happened with the embassitor in Bengazi.



Please discuss, and don't give somebody negative karma for what they believe in!

I haven't heard about either of these issues would someone please enlighten me.

I haven't heard about either of these issues would someone please enlighten me.

Exactly.  Overlooked.

Anyway, #1 is the problem that the government forced the catholic church to give out free contraceptives.  Contraceptives are against its religion.

#2 The attack on Bengazi was when the ambassador was attacked by a mob of people, in a base in Bengazi set up by America.  During this attack a base practically 1 mile away was called for back-up while they watched this whole ordeal take place.  They asked the president for clearance and he said no.  Please remember that he was watching the whole thing to.  Countless times back-up is called but denied.  A group of 3-5 troopers were fed up and went to help the ambassitor.  They all died.  Obama told America that he said he would find the people who were responsible.  Claiming he had no idea this happened.  FOX NEWS did a report on this attack, and uncovered the coverup.  Obama said he would face trial soon after the election.  Which was in December.

How did the government force the Catholic Church to give out free contraception

Quote from: MrsNosihctuh on May 11, 2013, 11:43:24 PM

I haven't heard about either of these issues would someone please enlighten me.

Exactly.  Overlooked.

Anyway, #1 is the problem that the government forced the catholic church to give out free contraceptives.  Contraceptives are against its religion.

#2 The attack on Bengazi was when the ambassador was attacked by a mob of people, in a base in Bengazi set up by America.  During this attack a base practically 1 mile away was called for back-up while they watched this whole ordeal take place.  They asked the president for clearance and he said no.  Please remember that he was watching the whole thing to.  Countless times back-up is called but denied.  A group of 3-5 troopers were fed up and went to help the ambassitor.  They all died.  Obama told America that he said he would find the people who were responsible.  Claiming he had no idea this happened.  FOX NEWS did a report on this attack, and uncovered the coverup.  Obama said he would face trial soon after the election.  Which was in December.

Now that I have been enlightened, I researched what I could find on the subjects.
1) According to what I found, the government did NOT force the Catholic Church to give out contraceptives, but it did require foundations supported by the Catholic Church such as hospitals and schools to offer contraceptives as an option for unwanted pregnancy thanks to a cleverly written exception.
2) Now with Benghazi, I had heard about it. It just slipped my mind. That does seem to me to be a cover-up. While several of the explanations given for why back-up could not come are believable, the several rejected inquiries about extra security prior to the attacks do concern me.

1) According to what I found, the government did NOT force the Catholic Church to give out contraceptives, but it did require foundations supported by the Catholic Church such as hospitals and schools to offer contraceptives as an option for unwanted pregnancy thanks to a cleverly written exception.

That is about the same as forcing CC out of charity business, isn't it?

The fact that governemn forces any private organization to follow GOVERNMENTS poliies reeks of an infringement on democracy. If someone was going to a catholic-supporting/supported hospital, they shouldnt WANT contraceptives. They should go to an abortion clinic or some other such facility and leave catholic facilities well alone with their religious views and practices.

Now from what I have learned as a Christian is that not everyone that goes to a Christian facility (whether it be private school, church or a hospital) is a Christian. Some of the doctors and nurses at a hospital might not have the same opinion on abortion as the rest of the leadership there. I hate the idea of this.

The fact that governemn forces any private organization to follow GOVERNMENTS poliies reeks of an infringement on democracy. If someone was going to a catholic-supporting/supported hospital, they shouldnt WANT contraceptives. They should go to an abortion clinic or some other such facility and leave catholic facilities well alone with their religious views and practices.

Yes but some of these "private organizations" have no problem accepting government benefits.

That is also wrong, although it originates with government(as they should not hand out these benefits to begin with. Its a power grab) but ends with the organizations accepting the $$. Noones right in this debate :/

I am utterly confused here. Topic 1, the Christian church is giving out contraception? That's a good thing isn't it? How does this usurp democracy? You "voted" for these people. And conversely you didn't vote for anyone in the Christian church. I am missing the point, is government coercing these institutions into doing something that no reasonable person could say is bad, but then the opposite is fine? Christians/Catholic/Any church is allowed to coerce their members with the fear of divine judgement from the creator of the universe, based on absolutely no proof or democratic process?

Honest question, am I misreading this situation?

Edit: I love how people who are republicans love Jesus so much, and they hate when the government gets involved in the Church. But when they bail out corporations (referred to as Job Creators), enforce immigration (referred to as illegals) and want a gigantic military (referred to as freedom fighters) it's all good then. Did the government get involved when catholic priests were raping children? Did a single member of the clergy get charged with obstruction of justice? If self-deception were an Olympic sport, this is how our most gifted athletes would appear when they were in peak condition.

I am utterly confused here. Topic 1, the Christian church is giving out contraception? That's a good thing isn't it?

No DC, it would be like me forcing you to publicly sign iMtG Law, while I'm fully aware of the fact that you are an anarchist. It's not a good thing at all.

I mean, they are forcing Church to give out contraception against their very beliefs.

The fact that governemn forces any private organization to follow GOVERNMENTS poliies reeks of an infringement on democracy.

I will just point out a simple technicality: democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner. Another words, democracy is tyranny of majority over minority.

It infringes on decency, not democracy

How is that good? Its against their religious morals. And no need to be so stereotypical of republicans man. Im republican, dislike our enormous military, hate bailouts, support the choice for abortion(although i think it is wrong, i believe people have the right to be wrong-same arguments for legalizing drugs, which i support) etc etc. i try to be as logical about everything as possible, avoiding consulting what im told i SHOULD believe until ive made a decision for myself. I dont disagree with contraception. I disagree with forcing hose who disagree with contraception to suppor it. Separation of church and state was originally central to the US was it not?

Quote from: Dudecore on May 12, 2013, 10:18:57 AM

I am utterly confused here. Topic 1, the Christian church is giving out contraception? That's a good thing isn't it?

No DC, it would be like me forcing you to publicly sign iMtG Law, while I'm fully aware of the fact that you are an anarchist. It's not a good thing at all.

Perhaps. But if you stand by the reasons for requiring someone to do so, then it should be consistent. If I do or do not accept falls upon me wanting to get into a social contract. The answer is "no", but that is neither here nor there.

The larger point I was making is the inconsistency in logic. It seems dishonest not to mention that being anti-contraception is strictly a religious agenda. You're allowed to have your beliefs, I personally wish they were more informed, but nonetheless are very much influenced by desires to see those things instituted. I think an actual moral Christian would infact be outraged by the existence of government at all - not the things they do specifically to certain "sacred" institutions.

Edit: this is the metaphorical "you" and not anyone in particular.