Posted on 02/15/2012 6:49:17 PM PST by Brian Kopp DPM
“A bit off topic, but as a nurse in training, we are not being educated to “screen” patients for owning firearms and keeping them in the home — the idea being to “prevent’ you from harming yourself, if you become depressed.
I say — if they ask you in a physical history exam if you own a gun ...don’t even say yes. It’s personal info they have no right to know. Screw ‘em.”
A bit confused on your reply, are they training you ask about firearms in the home?
My company is moving to a health plan that has a mandatory wellness program, where they draw your blood do a physical and history. I’m a bit concerned how this information is gong to be used and by whom.
But I believe that according to the Bible that marital love is meant to be pleasurable. The greatest pleasure not the pleasure of oneself, but rather the pleasure of giving pleasure to the one loved.
I think that in marriage the sexual act is meant to bind two who are married in a way that nothing else can and is meant to be an expression of love between two people, not just a mechanical act with the purpose of procreation. Without the expression of love then it is merely a function rather than an act of love. Abiding love between married people is enhanced and strengthened through the marital bed.
Marital sex must be an act of love, pleasure and with the purpose of procreation all at the same time, one not canceling the other out, but rather enhancing each other as an act that truly does glorify God.
We need to stay far, far away from the religious arguments, and stay with the unConstitutionality of the the whole thing.
Quite a few protestant FReepers are rubbing their hands in glee over the Catholic issue of contraception. They fail to recognize the magnitude of the Religious freedom aspect. To paraphrase several comments I have received; You reap what you sow. I keep reiterating that if the Catholic Church loses on this then their respective churches will fall even faster.
Many things which the Bible terms sinful are (or have been) against the law, punishable by fines or imprisonment.
Many other things which the Bible terms sinful are not.
Into which category do you believe contraception should fall??
"I keep reiterating that if the Catholic Church loses on this then their respective churches will fall even faster. "For well over half of those non-Catholics who call themselves Christian, "Fall from what?". While there are vocal Fundamentalists here on FR and while Southern Baptists can almost all be relied on to be trying to follow Christ, what of the majority?
If this isn't successfully framed as a moral issue it isn't going to do any better campaigns to guarantee real freedom of speech on college campuses does. Fundamentalists by and large don't think they even need a church or any sort of fellowship. The larger denominations mostly already ordain queers, marry queers one to another, don't have a problem with contraception or abortion, and are in no way averse to the basic premise that contraception should be a part of insurance policies. Some portion of them may not like the idea of the government mandating this or that aspect of health-care and may realize that this is really a battle over the First Amendment, but they can hardly "fall" to something they embrace.
But still, while possibly concerned with the Constitution they're not at all concerned about Christianity being stomped on because in what they claim is Christianity everything is permissible. They really believe that if it feels good do it because if it feels good God intended it for our enjoyment. Etc, and so on, mitigated only by what's not popular at the moment rather than by moral teaching from the Bible. For example, rather than say anything at all about theology, several people reacted to my becoming Catholic with, "how can you join a Church that is against contraception".
So, fall from what? Obama wants to establish a State religion and he won't have any shortage of support from Catholics in name only and those who say they are Christian but who remain within the mainstream denominations that constitute the majority of non-Catholic Christians.
About 1/3 of Catholics plus 2/3 of non-Catholic Christians are quite happy with Barry dictating morality to the Catholic Church and anyone else who doesn't subscribe to the "progressive" Christianity of most churches. What does 1/3 of Catholics plus 2/3 of non-Catholics amount to as a percentage of the population? That combined group is already a party to something other than Christianity no matter what they prefer to call themselves and would be more than happy to see a State religion established the same way it was established in England, France, and so on, throughout history. In addition, there are plenty of Fundies and CINOs who are always happy to see anyone attack the Catholic Church and while they may see this as a violation of the First Amendment, a good many of them won't speak up. Overall, I doubt 51% of the population see this as a First Amendment issue worth stepping up and speaking up over.
JMHO
Compare
VeneficialVen`e*fi"cial\, Veneficious \Ven`e*fi"cious\, a. Acting by poison; used in poisoning or in sorcery. [Obs.] "An old veneficious practice." --Sir T. Browne. -- Ven`e*fi"cious*ly, adv. [Obs.]
That translator error in a single word has lead both the Orthodox and Protestants to doctrinal error. The Orthodox, with their practice to consult the holy fathers, are without excuse on this.
All of that may well be true, but, again, what does it have to do with the constitutionality of funding or banning contraceptives? Why is this issue being inserted into this argument? Why are you buying it?
Sex is more than a procreative activity. It can be a uniting force that supports a life long union. Sex, in and of itself, is neither good nor bad. Being pleasurable, it can be used and abused, but like say, fire, water, gravity, etc. it can both nurture, and harm. It is the intent that shifts it into the good or bad side.
The church has set up its own argument which is completely unassailable if one accepts the underlying assertions. The church assumes that anything other than a utilitarian motivation for sex is driven by urges to power and dominance - because that weakens the power and dominance of the church. The standard view of reproduction up until the mid 1800's was that the man generated life, and the woman's function was only to be a fertile vessel. Whether it is explicitly stated or not, the abhorrence of contraception comes from the assumption that it universally destroys life. When in fact true contraception prevents life from starting, in fact really no differently than celibacy prevents life from starting.
The second underlying, unspoken purpose for a ban on contraception was that up until recently, it was just plain dangerous and unhealthy. The prohibition is there to improve the health of the population. Lastly - natural family planning - It's nothing more than bad contraception, blessed by the pope. If contraception subverts the will of God, then purposefully abstaining from sex in order to prevent conception does the exact same thing. The only thing that justifies it is the extra biblical word of the head of the church. Which reminds us of all the other unbiblical characteristics of the leadership I raised in the first paragraph. Thanks but no thanks.
By the way, my long winded screed aside, the President is dead wrong to think he has the power to for the Catholic Church to pay for contraception and abortion. I fully support the church’s position. It’s not a matter of specifics, it’s a matter of religious and personal rights.
bingo!
Obama is counting on combining birth control and abortion into one issue.
We are no going to have religious kooks and opportunists jump up for their 15 minutes of personal glory.
they don’t care if obama wins, just as long as THEY have the chance to stand in front of the temple and look cool.
Yes, they are. It’s part of the normal health history. We are to ask — do you own a gun? Do you keep firearms in the home?
The idea is to prevent suicide, I suppose. However, people have owned guns forever ...what is the big deal?
However, if your a liberal gungrabber government, and your’e also mandating a healthcare system, with an electronic data base, then the information is right there as to who has guns in the home. Could be very useful.
Creepy, if you ask me.
Great. Some people think that God thinks that contraception is wrong. That’s fine as long as they don’t try to impose their belief on others via the law.
The issue is not contraception, it is religious Freedom. I am being asked to pay for and support what I consider immoral practices. Why do my insurance premiums have to pay for someone else contraception or abortion?
Why should hospitals with religious affiliation be forced to do procedures that they consider immoral?
The government is mandating that we violate what we consider Gods laws in favor of man's law.
Good luck.
You obviously know nothing of the Church's teachings on this subject. You entire post is nonsense.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
You should read it to disabuse yourself of these silly notions regarding the continual, universal teachings of Christianity (Protestant, Orthodox, and Catholic) regarding birth control (which have only been changed by some sects of Christianity, primarily Protestant, in the past 80 years.)
Then your right, its probably best to keep your mouth shut. Especially if the information is not relevant to what you are seeing the Dr. for.
As I tell my kids. “Be careful of what you say, you can never unsay something...”
It is very creepy all the information they are attempting to gather about people. (Government and Corporations).
Best to have a very small footprint.
When a poster posts demonstrably false information about the Church’s teachings on contraception, they are either completely ignorant, or willfully lying. I thought it less “making it personal” to assert the former than the latter, but I’ll try harder in the future not to display such contempt for willful ignorance, as you request.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.