Yes with a caveat.....if it is something we believe in. Again, just fight for what you believe in and don't hide under a broader umbrella that you're not always going to hide under if it doesn't impact you.

 

Well the "if it is something we believe in" is a caveat that the Catholic people as a whole need to look into on their own. The Church also preaches to keep holy the day of the Sabbath and not to take the Lord's name in vain. How many times do people skip church on Sundays...or even go to church period? How often do people take the Lord's name in vein?

 

Should the Church stop fighting for their teachings - or even teaching them - when their "faithful" don't like to practice them?

Well the "if it is something we believe in" is a caveat that the Catholic people as a whole need to look into on their own. The Church also preaches to keep holy the day of the Sabbath and not to take the Lord's name in vain. How many times do people skip church on Sundays...or even go to church period? How often do people take the Lord's name in vein?

 

Should the Church stop fighting for their teachings - or even teaching them - when their "faithful" don't like to practice them?

 

Again, nothing to do with my argument. You'll get no argument out of me for the above.

Gotcha. Would Catholic schools riding public school buses count? That happens today.

Just happen to read some articles in the Boone County recorder that this is under debate right now and being questioned by public officials. So yes it happens TODAY. But they legally do not have to, and as budgets are scrutinized it could end.

Just happen to read some articles in the Boone County recorder that this is under debate right now and being questioned by public officials. So yes it happens TODAY. But they legally do not have to, and as budgets are scrutinized it could end.

 

That debate hsa been going on for over 10 years re: busses.

 

I see your logic but I think it's , as you say, a stretch.

Again, nothing to do with my argument. You'll get no argument out of me for the above.

 

Well, I would say the Catholic Church is fighting for its religious freedom (regarding not being forced to provide birth control, which it views as sinful). It may be a political move to call their fight a "religious freedom" fight, but seeing as this is dealing with politics - BIG time politics, for that matter - I don't see your gripe about "calling it what it is".

It's all about context. When the Church argues "Religious Freedom" I see Clyde's point that it should encompass everything in it's dealings with its faithful. I, also, understand where Colonels and BirdsFan are coming from in that this issue falls under "Religious Freedom" so that it is fair game to use the term.

 

I think that we can all agree that the Government is treading into very, very volatile waters. The very first time that an organization gets fined for this, the case will go through the court system like a virus.

I get what he's saying. I'm not sure if it's that big of a deal though.

I get what he's saying. I'm not sure if it's that big of a deal though.

 

When you talk precedent, it is a huge deal.

I was talking to someone else about this today and this seemed to crystallize my point.

 

It's like Freedom of Speech. You're either for it completely or you're not. You can't be for part of it but not the other just because it's deemed offensive to you.

 

IMO the Church is the latter. They're only in it for what they believe .

I was talking to someone else about this today and this seemed to crystallize my point.

 

It's like Freedom of Speech. You're either for it completely or you're not. You can't be for part of it but not the other just because it's deemed offensive to you.

 

IMO the Church is the latter. They're only in it for what they believe.

 

So if the Catholic Church is truly for freedom of religion, they need not try to argue that they shouldn't be forced to provide birth control :confused:

So if the Catholic Church is truly for freedom of religion, they need not try to argue that they shouldn't be forced to provide birth control :confused:

 

Uh, no.

Uh, no.

 

Well your logic in your previous post completely lost me...honestly.

Well your logic in your previous post completely lost me...honestly.

 

I can't make it any clearer.

 

 

 

I am arguing that the Church is being disingenuous when we have prayers and signs that argue about Religious Liberty when in fact it's about a specific Catholic issue - birth control. Had the issue been reversed - ie no health plan can provide coverage for birth control - we would NOT be having prayers and signs about "religious liberty."

 

I'm all for the Church fighting for what they believe in. Just be honest about it.

 

Mex, you're not following or you're being obstinate. I AGREE they have the right to fight THIS issue. That's not the point.

 

Did you go to mass today? If so, what prayer did you recite at the end? We recited one about religious liberty. You're either for it ENTIRELY or you're not. IMO the Church is NOT. They pick and choose.

 

You prove my point. If you're for "religious freedom" you're for ALL religious freedom even if goes against what you believe.

 

Just say what you're really for and all is cool. People can then decide whether they support your issue or not.

 

Asinine analogy.

 

I gave a specific example earlier that no one has responded to.

 

If the govt said that the new law forbids ANY and ALL healthcare plans from covering birth control the Catholic church would not do a thing to protest religious freedom even though there are some religions that do not forbid said birth control.

 

You agree or disagree?

 

I didn't say anything about contraceptives being illegal or legal.

 

My hypothetical AGAIN said that the law said a plan could NOT provide coverage for contraceptives. That doesn't mean they would be illegal. They just couldn't be covered. Not all religions view contraceptives like the Catholic church does so those that do not would INDEED have their religious rights impacted by the govt.

 

So, AGAIN, would the Church rally the troops?

 

I was talking to someone else about this today and this seemed to crystallize my point.

 

It's like Freedom of Speech. You're either for it completely or you're not. You can't be for part of it but not the other just because it's deemed offensive to you.

 

IMO the Church is the latter. They're only in it for what they believe .

I can't make it any clearer.

 

Well they are praying for a type of religious freedom, aren't they? They are praying for the religious freedom to not be forced into sin (via laws requiring them to distribute birth control).

 

Were The Church urging prayer in favor of a law that banned employers from providing birth control, do you think they would call it "praying for religious freedom"? I don't see how they could call it anything like that. The Church might urge Catholics to pray in favor of it, yes, but I don't see them calling it the same thing. That's where I lose your logic...

Well they are praying for a type of religious freedom, aren't they? They are praying for the religious freedom to not be forced into sin (via laws requiring them to distribute birth control).

 

Were The Church urging prayer in favor of a law that banned employers from providing birth control, do you think they would call it "praying for religious freedom"? I don't see how they could call it anything like that. The Church might urge Catholics to pray in favor of it, yes, but I don't see them calling it the same thing. That's where I lose your logic...

 

They are indeed pray for a TYPE of religious freedom and I support their right to do so.

 

Despite reading it numerous times I'm not completely following your 2nd paragraph.

 

 

 

No, there wouldn't even be a prayer for the ban because they agree. You can't say you're for freedom only if it's in line with the Church.

 

You can't say you're for Freedom of Speech unless it has offensive words. You're either for it completely or against it completely. There is no middle ground.