-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Say goodbye to Catholic Hospitals...
- Thread starter WestminsterMan
- Start date
BTW, this wouldn’t be happening if we hadn’t handed over healthcare to the government in the first place. When are people going to learn? Healthcare needs to be between an individual, his or her doctor, and -if an individual chooses to be insured- whatever insurance company that individual chooses.
Been wondering about that myself. We need to support the Catholics in this fight. We are well on our way to becoming a socialist police state.
There are more than a few out there that believe for the sake of advancement of socialism some babies have to die. The important thing is that we get on with redistributing the wealth, right?
Obamacare—because no child should be born just because her mother couldn’t afford an abortion!
Last edited by a moderator:
freeatlast
New Member
I fail to understand why anyone is surprised. This is just another event in the stripping away the rights and freedoms of the people by the liberals. You can blame this on every person who is willing to give any freedom or right up for any reason such as the TSA searching people without cause. Any person who agrees with what the TSA does with the claim to keep us safe holds guilt for this action also.
glfredrick
New Member
Over 90% of all the hospitals in America have Christian roots. So do the universities.
Now, we are handing over, wholesale, the entire lot to a secular atheistic state. Sad day when Christ's people loose their "saltiness."
Now, we are handing over, wholesale, the entire lot to a secular atheistic state. Sad day when Christ's people loose their "saltiness."
Letter to all congregations in the Diocese of Trenton: WE WILL NOT COMPLY!!
http://stdavidtheking.com/images\features\bishopletter012012.pdf
I could not be more pleased to see that the RC’s are finally beginning to understand that this Administration will NOT accommodate religious convictions in pursuit of their agenda. It is not too late, I hope and pray, for others to join with the RC’s principled stand.
http://stdavidtheking.com/images\features\bishopletter012012.pdf
I could not be more pleased to see that the RC’s are finally beginning to understand that this Administration will NOT accommodate religious convictions in pursuit of their agenda. It is not too late, I hope and pray, for others to join with the RC’s principled stand.
Last edited by a moderator:
It is a shame (sin?) that so many Christians are on the sidelines or are missing in action on this crucial principle. It is evidenced by so few responses on this thread. Sad!! As Mont974x4 said, 'Will you stand up before there is an overt takeover of our pulpits as well?'
A friend of mine sent me the following email: '.. in New York City, Mayor Koch tried something like this on the Catholic Church there. Cardinal O’Connor '...opposed Mayor Ed Koch’s executive order requiring all social service agencies, including those run by the Church, to provide equal services to homosexuals.' The cardinal refused on the grounds that it would make the Church appear to be sanctioning homosexual practices and lifestyle.” The Cardinal threatened to shut down Catholic hospitals in the city if the Mayor forced the issue. 'Early on in the AIDS epidemic, Cardinal O’Connor approved the opening of a specialized AIDS unit in St. Clare’s Hospital in Manhattan, the first of its kind in the state. He often nurtured and ministered to dying AIDS patients, many of whom were homosexual. Even though he refused to condone the actions of homosexuals (many of whom had invaded his St. Patrick’s Cathedral to angrily interrupt services), he would not allow his moral differences to interfere with ministering to them. As USA Today reported, he ‘washed the hair and emptied bedpans of dying AIDS patients, some too sick to know who he was.’ Former New York Governor Mario Cuomo once said of the archdiocese, ‘No place in the country are they working more aggressively to help AIDS patients than in the archdiocese.’” Yet O’Connor threatened to shut down these programs if Koch forced his hand. Koch backed down. . . . . .'
...
Consider Catholicism’s highest-ranking elected official, Vice President Biden. Biden had encouraged engagement with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on conscience rights. Now he will be remembered as the Catholic cover for the violation of Catholic conscience. Betrayal is always an inside job.
Consider Catholicism’s most prominent clerical leader, Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, head of the Conference of Catholic Bishops. Dolan had pursued a policy of engagement with the administration. In November, he met face to face with Obama, who was earnestly reassuring on conscience protections. On Jan. 20, during a less-cordial phone conversation, Obama informed Dolan that no substantial concession had been made. How can Dolan make the argument for engagement now?
The implications of Obama’s power grab go further than contraception and will provoke opposition beyond Catholicism. Christian colleges and universities of various denominations will resist providing insurance coverage for abortifacients. And the astounding ambition of this federal precedent will soon be apparent to every religious institution. Obama is claiming the executive authority to determine which missions of believers are religious and which are not — and then to aggressively regulate institutions the government declares to be secular. It is a view of religious liberty so narrow and privatized that it barely covers the space between a believer’s ears.
Obama’s decision also reflects a certain view of liberalism. Classical liberalism was concerned with the freedom to hold and practice beliefs at odds with a public consensus. Modern liberalism uses the power of the state to impose liberal values on institutions it regards as backward. It is the difference between pluralism and anti-­clericalism.'''
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...1/30/gIQANB7XdQ_story.html?wprss=rss_opinions
Consider Catholicism’s highest-ranking elected official, Vice President Biden. Biden had encouraged engagement with the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on conscience rights. Now he will be remembered as the Catholic cover for the violation of Catholic conscience. Betrayal is always an inside job.
Consider Catholicism’s most prominent clerical leader, Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, head of the Conference of Catholic Bishops. Dolan had pursued a policy of engagement with the administration. In November, he met face to face with Obama, who was earnestly reassuring on conscience protections. On Jan. 20, during a less-cordial phone conversation, Obama informed Dolan that no substantial concession had been made. How can Dolan make the argument for engagement now?
The implications of Obama’s power grab go further than contraception and will provoke opposition beyond Catholicism. Christian colleges and universities of various denominations will resist providing insurance coverage for abortifacients. And the astounding ambition of this federal precedent will soon be apparent to every religious institution. Obama is claiming the executive authority to determine which missions of believers are religious and which are not — and then to aggressively regulate institutions the government declares to be secular. It is a view of religious liberty so narrow and privatized that it barely covers the space between a believer’s ears.
Obama’s decision also reflects a certain view of liberalism. Classical liberalism was concerned with the freedom to hold and practice beliefs at odds with a public consensus. Modern liberalism uses the power of the state to impose liberal values on institutions it regards as backward. It is the difference between pluralism and anti-­clericalism.'''
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...1/30/gIQANB7XdQ_story.html?wprss=rss_opinions
seekingthetruth
New Member
seekingthetruth
New Member
I just saw a catholic bishop on the news that said that even if Cathoilic health providers are granted an exception clause for religious reasons, that it would only protect Catholic patients. So, if a non-Catholic patient demanded an abortion or birth control, or the day after pill, the Catholic health provider would be forced by law to provide it.
He said that Catholic health providers and Cathoilic charities have never asked if the person in need was Catholic or not, but that now they would be forced to, because the care they would be forced to provide by law would change by the beliefs of the client.
Makes no sense to me.
John
He said that Catholic health providers and Cathoilic charities have never asked if the person in need was Catholic or not, but that now they would be forced to, because the care they would be forced to provide by law would change by the beliefs of the client.
Makes no sense to me.
John
Though Michelle Malkin's article from today correct, and good reading.
"First, they came for the Catholics"
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/01/31/first-they-came-for-the-catholics/
"First, they came for the Catholics"
http://michellemalkin.com/2012/01/31/first-they-came-for-the-catholics/
This is a direct attack, by the state, on religious liberty.