76? Some seventy-year olds are in better shape than some of the twenty-year olds I see.
I am not sure what you think this article proves. It does not demonstrate that the members of the religious communities are not active in the hospitals that they founded. What point were you trying to make with that article?
This is America - you know, the land of the free. Why would a Catholic hospital have to pay a fine in the first place? That is cruel and unusual.
Did you even read the articles or do you persist in believing that the sisters you remember as a child have not aged? The AVERAGE age is 76. More than 90% of these religious not only don’t work there any more, they never set foot in these institutions. They can’t. This is a thing of the past that you remember.
Did you even read either of them, which are quite explicit on what is really going on? I mean, I can quote them to you, but my having to do so would just be more evidence that you’re not reading them.
You’re writing what you want to say, which is fine. But that doesn’t make it conform to the actual facts of the situation. It doesn’t.
Oh, homosexual “marriage”.
Well, now that you’ve uttered the requisite 50-mile-high invective about that, look at the details. I don’t want to discuss them here because it would be off-topic in this thread, and I try to stay out of this one because it gripes me to see the Church have this problem. We are so over-leveraged on this, we’re going to get trounced. But you watch exactly what happens next–sometime in the next 5 years or so. It’s going to be uuuuugly.
No, I can assure, I have seen it with my own eyes! Yes, it is true! I have seen the Sisters of Charity, less than one day ago, engaged in the day to day operation of a Catholic Hospital.
Off the topic? Yet you were the one who brought it up in the first place. LOL!
Yes, forcing Catholics into these dilemmas is very ugly.
Exactly what percentage of women religious are “Sisters of Charity?” Do you think all the women religious in the US are “Sisters of Charity?”
We are pontificating to people who work for us on their morals while behaving exactly the same way they do. This has consequences.
We stepped into these dilemmas of our own free will, or rather, I should say the decision makers in the Church in the US did. The sound you hear is the other shoe dropping.
Now I am even more confused.
Wow. So, how is the Catholic Church in the U.S. responsible for the HHS mandate?
Whoaaaa! Hold, on there!
Yup. I know what invective is. And I’m very familiar with it in the Catholic context. It’s a very common feature of Catholic existence.
Oh, do I need to make a list of the “Catholics” in this administration who brought us the HHS mandate? Do I need to tell you the whole story of how contraception became as Catholic as holy cards in this country? And nothing was done. Nothing.
Kathleen Sibelius = Catholic Church? Nope, not seeing it.
So, where is this “invective” that you assert is present in my post. I can’t find it. Perhaps you could direct me to a word or phrase that you think is invective?
Look it up, she’s Catholic. This is just the tip of the iceberg though.
Kathleen Sibelius (Catholic) = Catholic Church? Still not seeing it.
What should have been done?
You just want to argue, and I’m past it. Watch and see what happens and doesn’t happen during the next year. My predictions: