“This contraception fight in particular was illuminating. It was like being in a time machine,” Obama told the crowd, many of whom had purchased tickets that cost $1,000 to attend. “Republicans in Congress were going so far as to say an employer should be able to have a say in the health care decisions of its female employees. You know, for a party that prides itself on being rabidly anti-regulations of almost any kind, for folks who claim to believe in freedom from government interference and meddling, it doesn’t seem to bother them when it comes to a woman’s health.” [Via Gateway Pundit]
Well let’s get into a time machine Mr. President.
First off we could rock it old school.
Or go all flux capacitor at 88 mph.
Now we can travel back to the founding of our country. A country largely founded to escape religious persecution. The colonists didn’t get it all down as far as religious rights were concerned, but by the founding of this country the understanding of right to freedom of worship had coalesced. It is no coincidence that the first right enumerated was “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”. This means that even if you disagree or think outdated somebodies belief, Congress still can not prohibit the free exercise of religion. It doesn’t matter if you think opposition to contraception, sterilization, and abortion quaint. An actual human right such as free exercise of religion predates any government and does not change just because Tuesday has lapsed unto Wednesday to paraphrase Chesterton.
Mocking Catholics for their opposition to contraception, sterilization, and abortion as if they were some throwback to some phony idea of medieval times is rather a low thing to do. The violation of human rights is now a talking point on the campaign trail. Something to be bragged about in front of picked friendly groups. “I’m responsibly for killing Osama bin Laden and I am laying some kick-ass on Catholic to boot!” Funny though how careful the administration was with religious sensitivity in burying Osama while going on to have no sensitivity at all to the concerns of faithful Catholics.
Getting back into our time machine of choice we will find that in the history of Christendom that opposition to contraception was universal. Even the Protestant reformers described it in terms of mutual-masturbation and virtual sodomy. It was the Anglican Lambeth conference in 1930 that first opened up the “morality” of contraception in regard to married couples. Soon pretty much most of Christendom had fallen to this novelty and either the Catholic Church is the most pigheaded of all institutions ever, or she truly is being guided by the Holy Spirit.
Now as we use our time machine to survey the founding of this country I don’t think we have to worry too much about time paradoxes and repercussions of affecting time. After all what might be the worst that could happen – 60 million unborn children killed, assisted suicide, and the other emanations of the Culture of Death? Instead of the killing your grandfather paradox we have the kill your own children paradox which is quite a paradoxical thing for a parent to do. Though by redefining the vocabulary you don’t get rid of the paradox, you just make it easier to swallow.
“Republicans in Congress were going so far as to say an employer should be able to have a say in the health care decisions of its female employees.”
No, they were saying employers should have a choice in what kind of health care plan they provide based on their right to freedom of religion. No employer should be forced to abide by somebodies else’s conscience, they should be able to abide by their own. Employees can buy for themselves any kind of health care coverage they want that is not provided. Sure everybody always wants somebody else to pay for something, but that is a preference not a right. An employer not providing healthcare benefits does not prevent the employee doing so. Sure there are costs involved – but really if you need birth control pills you can buy them at target for $9 a month unless you have the shopping sense of Sandra Fluke. There is just no right to employer subsidized healthcare insurance. Employer subsidized healthcare was originally a perk to attract people – unfortunately it attracted the government.
But I guess listening to the President is illuminating and like being in a time machine harkening back to every government that curtailed religious freedom for their own reasons.
65 comments
salvage,
If you think that fornication is spiritually healthy you are wrong. You’ve been sucked into carnality, but then again if you atheistically believe that man is just a body without any soul/spirit or connection with a higher power that is not surprise.
>Speaking dismissively about a time period as if that alone says everything, since nothing that came out of it could possibly be good, is intellectually lazy.
…
Not really sure what you’re on about here, where did I do this?
>A shortcut that spares you the effort of having to work out what actually is allegedly wrong with the thing in question
Yeah, can you get specific here?
>As for contraception, it either is prohibitively expensive or laughably inexpensive — you don’t get to have it both ways.
It’s not expensive to an insurance company it can be to a working woman.
>One of the gauges of freedom is the extent to which we exercise autonomy in decisions over the fruits of our own labor, i.e. money. That does not make us cheap or greedy.
Okay, but we are talking about insurance company money.
>Fornication as litmus test for deciding whether a person has a “healthy” attitude about sex — as defined by you?
You define sex differently from me? Neat! What’s yours?
> I find myself having difficulty distinguishing whether you are begging the question or using circular reasoning, but if it is not a little of both then it is certainly one or the other.
Really? I thought it was obvious that I was begging the question; I think theists like Catholics have such a bizarre attitude towards sex. Like how it’s bad unless you have magic words said before.
>So is arsenic. I wouldn’t recommend it for purposes other than that for which it is indicated, especially not internal consumption.
See? Perfect example, you compare sex to a poison!
>So is fire, but I would recommend keeping it in your fireplace and not setting a blaze in the middle of your living room floor.
Yet having sex in the middle of your living room can be great… well depending on the quality of your carpet.
>Seems being the key word…but only to the uninformed.
Once again, sex is bad before marriage good after right? That is your religion’s position? Why?
>Why do you keep pressing these not-particularly-relevant questions?
You don’t get the connection between sex and contraception?
>And insisting you are some sort of champion of logic in spite of some very obvious fallacies? That’s what is bizarre.
So point these fallacies out already!
>What the market can afford! That’s rich!
Uh… no, capitalism… you don’t understand that as well?
>If it was so affordable then why the desperate need for reform?
I’m pretty sure the health care reform is more than contraception.
Wow, are you sure you are smart as you think you are? You don’t’ seem to understand much of what you’re talking about.
>There is absolutely nothing natural about having sex and expecting not to conceive.
Really? Every time people have sex there is pregnancy? I can tell you from grateful experience that simply isn’t true.
And so people who don’t want to have children / already have enough they should then just stop having sex?
>That’s kinda what it is designed to do.
“Designed” Really? Who designed it?
>No actually, it’s quite a beautiful and awesome thing in its proper context,
And that context is what and what does it do to make a difference?
>and some of us hate to see it misused — like a Stradivarius being used for a tennis racket.
And that’s your business because why? Unless you own the violin you have no say on what its used for… or am I wrong about that as well?
>That’s all I have to say, for the benefit of any lurkers who may be watching.
Aw, look at you Brave Sir Robin running away!
>Somebody else can indulge your ridiculous arguments,
Like how sex is poison?
>not to mention your condescension and grossly unjustified superiority complex.
If only I were as clever as you thinking that every time people have sex it must be for procreation because only YOU know what people should do then I my condensation would be correct and my superiority completely justified!
>Good sir, I’m starting to believe you’re missing the point. There are long, long stretches of the Catechism that do not talk about sin.
I don’t care what Catechism say, I am interested in what you think.
>I’d be interested to see where “pray the gay away” is written anywhere in the Catechism.
So prayer doesn’t work?
>If you think that fornication is spiritually healthy you are wrong.
I’m not sure what “spiritually” anything is. What I do know is that sex is physically and mentally healthy and there is much medical evidence to back that up.
>You’ve been sucked into carnality,
That sounds totally hot!
>but then again if you atheistically believe that man is just a body without any soul/spirit or connection with a higher power that is not surprise.
Well yeah, there are no such things as gods and there is nothing supernatural about human beings certainly not in regards to sex.
Implying that The Catholic position is insensitive to women’s health care is the tail chasing the dog when millions of babies are killed yearly through legalized abortion supported and defended by liberal democrats…and the majority of those babies are black and poor…!!!
[…] not change just because Tuesday has lapsed unto Wednesday to paraphrase Chesterton. Continued- http://www.splendoroftruth.com/curtjester/2012/04/it-was-like-being-in-a-time-machine-obamas-mocking… __________________ Your socks stink. To view links or images in signatures your post count […]
Implying that The Catholic position is insensitive to women’s health
Oh not just women’s healthy, pretty much anything to do with women. What I love about Catholicism is the way the Bishops all live in giant houses, wear very nice cloths, eat well and generally live like the CEOs they are whereas the nuns… well don’t. Tell me how high can a woman rise in the Vatican hierarchy? And why are they so limited?
>care is the tail chasing the dog when millions of babies are killed yearly through legalized abortion
No, babies aren’t killed, a fetus is not a baby.
>supported and defended by liberal democrats…and the majority of those babies are black and poor…!!!
Ha! Ha! Because if there is one thing liberal democrats hate it’s the Blacks and the poor! Yes, abortion is racial genocide!
Rich White people get abortions too. Poor people get abortions sometimes because they simply cannot afford to have children.
Of course if they were on birth control it wouldn’t happen as often.
What’s worse taking a pill that prevents the egg from being in position to be fertilized or abortion?
I am interested in what you think.
Do you think a single other person in this thread came to that conclusion? No person here has any reason to take you seriously. At least, no reason you’ve provided.
>Do you think a single other person in this thread came to that conclusion?
I have no idea.
>No person here has any reason to take you seriously. At least, no reason you’ve provided.
Gosh, did they all email you and tell you that? Are you the Curt Jester’s commentators spokesperson?
Actually, Salvage, if you really look back at ancient history, you’ll notice how women led their households to the new movement termed ‘the Way.’ You might wonder why? There were some very powerful women within the Church throughout history. Just because the Church doesn’t demand women to be men in order to have dignity, doesn’t mean we aren’t equal; in fact, a true feminist will certainly appreciate the difference in the attitude of the Church, vs the attitude of the American workplace.
>Actually, Salvage, if you really look back at ancient history, you’ll >notice how women led their households to the new movement termed ‘the Way.’
Sure early Christianity was popular in ancient Rome among women, slaves and the other lower orders. It appealed to anyone under oppression because it promised a better life in the next one. The Roman pagan afterlife was more of a continuation of the current one / a dreary place depending on you god.
So no I don’t wonder why, I’m a total Rome nerd.
>There were some very powerful women within the Church throughout history.
Really? And they were who?
>Just because the Church doesn’t demand women to be men in order to have dignity, doesn’t mean we aren’t equal;
Ha! Ha! A place for everything and everything in its place! I wonder if you see how deeply condescending that statement is? Oh ladies, no, no don’t worry your pretty little heads about the difficult things, that’s why God made men!
So what do you say to the women who are demanding equality within the church hierarchy? The ones who would like a taste of the wealth and power enjoyed by the men?
>a true feminist will certainly appreciate the difference in the attitude of the Church, vs the attitude of the American workplace.
I’m sorry I don’t understand what you mean here. Are you saying that a feminist would approve of a “glass ceiling” in the church?
Or answer me this, why can’t a woman be a priest, cardinal or pope?
Ummm… they could be cardinals – but that’s another story. Men can’t bear children, or nurse them. So? Should you stomp your feet and say it isn’t fair? We are different, which is a great thing – I think you agree with me on this point 😉 We have different gifts which compliment one another.
The role of priest to Church, like the role of Christ to His Bride, mirrors the marital relationship. If you want, you could read ToB – I’m afraid I’m not eloquent enough to really explain in the manner it deserves.
As for the workplace (sorry, I was heading out the door and didn’t word that well enough) why must women put in the hours that men put in at the expense of their children in order to go through that glass ceiling? Why should we have to continually prove ourselves to attain respect? Our worth is inherent – it is in our being, not in our doing.
Strong powerful women in the Church – St. Catherine of Sienna and St. Teresa of Avila right off the top of my head; Hildegard of Bingen, Julian of Norwich, Queen Mathilda…. there are others, but my mind is blurry from lack of sleep – sorry.
>Ummm… they could be cardinals – but that’s another story.
What? That’s news to me, please tell me that story!
>Men can’t bear children, or nurse them. So?
So that is because there are physical limitations, I am unaware of the need for reproducing organs in the Catholic church’s leadership’s duties.
In fact isn’t that sort of thing frowned upon?
>Should you stomp your feet and say it isn’t fair?
Me? Oh heck no, I think this whole thing a goofy waste of time and money. The Catholic church can be as misogynistic in its human resources policies as they like as long as they’re not getting any public money. I’m just wondering why or how it’s justified in your mind.
>We are different, which is a great thing – I think you agree with me on this point We have different gifts which compliment one another.
Yes, again in the arena of sex and reproduction but that’s not what we are talking about. In terms of leadership and ability what is it about a woman that makes it impossible for her to have such a position in the church.
In my life I’ve had several woman bosses and they seemed to be as competent / incompetent as their male counterparts.
>The role of priest to Church, like the role of Christ to His Bride, mirrors the marital relationship.
…
So if there was a female Pope it would be like gay marriage?
Your god only listens to mortals with penises?
>As for the workplace (sorry, I was heading out the door and didn’t word that well enough) why must women put in the hours that men put in at the expense of their children in order to go through that glass ceiling?
Must? Well the only must is that they must be given equal access and pay, everything else is choice.
And sometimes it is “must” because the family can’t survive on one income. Back in the day unions and regulation assured a family enough financial stability but we’re no longer in that world.
> Why should we have to continually prove ourselves to attain respect?
You don’t. If you want to be a stay at home mom, great, if you want to be working, great, my opinion is complete indifference. I’m talking about opportunity to do as you please, choice.
Do you think women having equal choice in careers a bad thing?
>Our worth is inherent – it is in our being, not in our doing.
Well your worth as a human being certainly is, nothing to do with your genitals, that’s immaterial in regards to worth.
>Strong powerful women in the Church
Saints and queens? Really? Well queens get their position from birth and the wealth that it brings so not exactly what I’m talking about and saints? So women attain position in the Vatican after they die? That’s what a woman has to do to rise in your esteem?
Any women that worked their way up like the Popes do? Any women that set policy? Influence direction? Bring about a significant change?
[…] “It’s Like Being in a Time Machine…” President Mocks Catholics (Curt Jester) […]
[…] Obama is an enemy of the Church. Given his tyrannical HHS mandate, which seems to be specifically targeted at Catholics [1], there does appear some truth to the statement. His administration has a history […]