Appeals Court Denies Notre Dame’s Challenge to Health Law’s Contraception Mandate

[zz912]

Jesus did say something didn’t he about rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s? We all often have to pay for things demanded by our government that we don’t want to pay for.

Christians cannot participate in this evil. Paying taxes is not evil, even if the tax money is used for evil. Paying for insurance, when that insurance will provide evil, IS participating in evil. Christians can’t do it.

 

[zz912]

Nevertheless, it is why (the major issue of religious freedom aside) if ND must ultimately provide health care coverage for contraception, the fault is not ND’s.

It doesn’t matter if the govt says you must commit evil. Christians may not do so.

 

[Thorolfr]

Christians cannot participate in this evil. Paying taxes is not evil, even if the tax money is used for evil. Paying for insurance, when that insurance will provide evil, IS participating in evil. Christians can’t do it.

The Supreme Court declared the money collected for Obamacare to be a tax.

 

[Thomas_White]

Christians cannot participate in this evil. Paying taxes is not evil, even if the tax money is used for evil. Paying for insurance, when that insurance will provide evil, IS participating in evil. Christians can’t do it.

What is the difference? Evil is evil. What are Catholic institutions to do if federal law requires it?

 

[zz912]

What is the difference? Evil is evil. What are Catholic institutions to do if federal law requires it?

Refuse to comply.

Federal law doesn’t trump God’s law.

And while evil is evil, there is the matter of remote versus material cooperation in evil. Paying taxes is remote. Paying directly for evil is material.

 

[Kenny_Kamel]

My belief is such that since I understand contraceptives are sometimes prescribed for health reasons…

While this belief has been made common it is in error. Contraceptives serve no medical necessity, at best they can only function in treating symptoms. The issues they are prescribed to address can be mitigated, if not eliminated, by multiple other means which in no way contradict religious beliefs.

This has nothing to do with contraception, it is about the state imposing its will.

 

[Thomas_White]

While this belief has been made common it is in error. Contraceptives serve no medical necessity, at best they can only function in treating symptoms. The issues they are prescribed to address can be mitigated, if not eliminated, by multiple other means which in no way contradict religious beliefs.

This has nothing to do with contraception, it is about the state imposing its will.

I agree this is about the state imposing its will, but a contraceptive pill is chemicals. If these chemicals are not used for contraception and solely to treat a medical condition, there is no harm.

These chemicals are not intrinsically evil, and that they might be is actually heresy. This concerns the nature of God’s Creation.

 

[Kenny_Kamel]

I agree this is about the state imposing its will, but a contraceptive pill is chemicals. If these chemicals are not used for contraception and solely to treat a medical condition, there is no harm.

These chemicals are not intrinsically evil, and that they might be is actually heresy. This concerns the nature of God’s Creation.

Actually there is a harm, carcinogenic contraception such as the birth control pill has been classified as a Class 1 carcinogen by the World Health Organization. It is no less harmful than asbestos. It is a primary contributor to multiple forms of cancer - breast, cervical, ovarian, etc. In fact the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute lists this contraception as increasing the probability of breast cancer higher than anything other than abortion.

 

[Thomas_White]

Actually there is a harm, carcinogenic contraception such as the birth control pill has been classified as a Class 1 carcinogen by the World Health Organization. It is no less harmful than asbestos. It is a primary contributor to multiple forms of cancer - breast, cervical, ovarian, etc. In fact the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute lists this contraception as increasing the probability of breast cancer higher than anything other than abortion.

That’s not remotely accurate. If it were, there is no way physicians would continue to prescribe oral contraceptives. And the FDA wouldn’t allow it anyway.

But beyond that, I think you miss the larger point. Many things are harmful if they are misused, and if it were the case that oral contraceptives were harmful, it would not mean those chemicals were inherently evil but only that they should not be used for that purpose. This is true of pretty much everything that exists as well as of the circumstances in which one might or might not act.

Can’t you see the basic question: did God created evil? Or does evil arise with mankind’s misuse of God’s Creation?

 

[Kenny_Kamel]

That’s not remotely accurate. If it were, there is no way physicians would continue to prescribe oral contraceptives. And the FDA wouldn’t allow it anyway.

But beyond that, I think you miss the larger point. Many things are harmful if they are misused, and if it were the case that oral contraceptives were harmful, it would not mean those chemicals were inherently evil but only that they should not be used for that purpose. This is true of pretty much everything that exists as well as of the circumstances in which one might or might not act.

Can’t you see the basic question: did God created evil? Or does evil arise with mankind’s misuse of God’s Creation?

Allow me to clarify that statement a bit:

According to the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, among that which increases the probability of the development of breast cancer, contraception ranks second behind abortion. Consider the dramatic increase in incidence of breast cancer in recent years. The long-term usage plan of contraception averages 30 years per person and the usage of contraception became widespread 30-40 years ago. Those women who began using it in the 1960’s, 1970’s, and 1980’s are now part of the demographic developing breast cancer after prolonged contraception use. This is not necessarily considering abortion as part of the equation but suffice it to say that both contraception and abortion are primary drivers behind the rapidly increasing epidemic of female reproductive organ cancers.

I worked for a government healthcare agency and much of what I did was in research and regulation. The FDA is a rubber stamp agency that sells its stamp, something being FDA approved means nothing to me. As far as physicians go, obtaining a prescribing authority is among the most lucrative ventures any physician or nurse practitioner can engage in nowadays (see marijuana for example). Med schools are teaching providers how to prescribe often instead of providing actual medical service. It is quicker, easier, and the volume due to this is lucrative. Pharmaceutical companies have salesmen who go out offering huge profit sharing incentives to any physician or hospital, etc that will sign on to prescribe what they’re selling.

The healthcare field is getting ugly and I decided to get out to pursue a more ethical and moral line of work. Evils such as abortion and contraception are as commonplace as aspirin to many medical providers. Insofar as contraception in concerned I would recommend doing some research on the health effects one can expect, short-term and long-term because they can be devastating no matter what the doctor may tell you (or may refrain from telling you).

Research Link: www.contraceptiveconundrum.com

 

[Thorolfr]

Allow me to clarify that statement a bit:

According to the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute, among that which increases the probability of the development of breast cancer, contraception ranks second behind abortion.

Abortion might be immoral, but the claim that this increases the risk of breast cancer is contrary to mainstream scientific opinion:

The abortion–breast cancer hypothesis posits that having an induced abortion can increase the risk of getting breast cancer. This hypothesis is at odds with mainstream scientific opinion and is contradicted by major medical professional organizations. In early pregnancy, hormone levels increase, leading to breast growth. The hypothesis proposes that if this process is interrupted by an abortion then more immature cells could be left behind, resulting in a greater potential risk of breast cancer over time.[1]

The abortion–breast cancer hypothesis has been the subject of extensive scientific inquiry, and the scientific community has concluded that abortion does not cause breast cancer.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion%E2%80%93breast_cancer_hypothesis

 

[Kenny_Kamel]

Abortion might be immoral, but the claim that this increases the risk of breast cancer is contrary to mainstream scientific opinion:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion%E2%80%93breast_cancer_hypothesis

Wow… Wikipedia! The mainstream medical community also hands out birth control pills like Tic Tacs. They have a vested interest in the promotion of abortion and contraception because big money interests like the pharmaceutical companies and wealthy depopulation types (ie Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, etc) push for it. They suppress the truth while entities doing intensive, long term research (ie Breast Cancer Prevention Institute) are substantiating the empirical evidence.

We can all go round and round about this, I can post all the data and someone can accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist but as we’ve seen recently with PP when an interest of the power brokers gets challenged those in power will circle the wagons and go out of their way to protect said interest. Perhaps instead of considering the truth you may should think on you own suspicion and doubt as to whether you don’t believe what I have said simply because you don’t want want to believe it.

 

[zz912]

Originally Posted by Kenny Kamel View Post
Actually there is a harm, carcinogenic contraception such as the birth control pill has been classified as a Class 1 carcinogen by the World Health Organization. It is no less harmful than asbestos. It is a primary contributor to multiple forms of cancer - breast, cervical, ovarian, etc. In fact the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute lists this contraception as increasing the probability of breast cancer higher than anything other than abortion.

That’s not remotely accurate. If it were, there is no way physicians would continue to prescribe oral contraceptives. And the FDA wouldn’t allow it anyway.

It’s completely true.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IARC_Group_1_carcinogens

cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/generalinformationaboutcarcinogens/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens

*Known human carcinogens

International Agency for Research on Cancer
Group 1: Carcinogenic to humans*

…
Estrogen-progestogen oral contraceptives (combined) (Note: There is also convincing evidence in humans that these agents confer a protective effect against cancer in the endometrium and ovary)