|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Yeah sorry if it came off wrong. I wasn't talking about every Protestant in the US, but I'd certainly say someone who makes the literal interpretation of the bible the foundation of his belief system,(as the hobby lobby guy does) qualifies him as a Christian fundamentalist.
|
On July 02 2014 03:01 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2014 02:38 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 02:13 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:48 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 01:29 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:25 ampson wrote:On July 01 2014 23:54 Nyxisto wrote:On July 01 2014 16:56 BillGates wrote:
Anyone else familiar with the Alex Jones radio show? Just found out that show few weeks ago and that guy is so well researched and knowledgeable, one of the rare Americans that actually knows which planet he is on.
I agree with 90% of his deep analysis and information, I think some of the details may be different and stuff, but the overall geo-strategy analysis is spot on.
"Jones has been the center of many controversies, including his controversial statements about gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. He has accused the U.S. government of being involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, the September 11 attacks, the filming of fake Moon landings to hide NASA's secret technology and the killing of "thousands of astronauts". He believes that government and big business have colluded to create a New World Order through "manufactured economic crises, sophisticated surveillance tech and—above all—inside-job terror attacks that fuel exploitable hysteria". Jones describes himself as a libertarian and a paleoconservative"
If Wikipedia didn't make all of this up that guy is probably the most ridiculous person in the United States.(along with the Republican lady two posts above) edit: Also, Hobby Lobby still covers Vasectomies and Viagra While I agree Alex Jones is a nut, what does hobby lobby covering Vasecomies/Viagra have to do with anything? The Hobby Lobby owners clearly believe that life begins at conception, so they fought to be able to not pay for contraceptives that destroy a fertilized egg or prevent it from attaching to a uterus. Neither Viagra nor vasectomies prevents a fertilized egg for coming to term. I'll agree on Viagra, but I don't see how male sterilization is something a religious person would approve of if you don't hold different standards for men and women. Taking away your ability to reproduce but still having sex doesn't really sound like something the good old bible would approve of. Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. I can clearly see what the majority of American Christians think, my point is that they're being hypocritical. If you interpret the bible the way these guys do drawing the line beyond vasectomy is ridiculous. It's a little coincidental that all these evangelical interpretations and positions always seem to profit Caucasian male heterosexual Christians while everyone else is going to get screwed. You are making no sense at all. You can make the argument that their perspective is wrong, unscientific, whatever. But it's not hypocritical. The bible belt leads the statistics in divorces, murders, teen pregnancy and std infection rates. Christian evangelicals in the US are the incarnation of hypocrisy.
Those statistics are correct. However have absolutely nothing to do with what I'm talking about. My only point is that it is not hypocritical that many Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies as they would something like birth control pills.
Keep in mind that "American Protestants" includes denominations like Lutheranism and Episcopalianism, both of which take very different stances on matters such as abortion and contraception. Better to go a bit further and line up Hobby Lobby's interests with Evangelical threads of Protestantism.
Yeah I would definitely agree with that.
Yeah sorry if it came off wrong. I wasn't talking about every Protestant in the US, but I'd certainly say someone who makes the literal interpretation of the bible the foundation of his belief system,(as the hobby lobby guy does) qualifies him as a Christian fundamentalist.
Hobby Lobby's views on contraception appear to be more on the "liberal" end of pro life evengelical Christian spectrum. This is probably why prolife groups supported them in their legal challenge over other groups. It certainly more acceptable to the public than those prohibiting all forms of contraception. Those guys do exist.
|
Hobby Lobby has always paid, and still continues to pay for 16 of the 20 types of contraception.
1.Male condoms
2.Female condoms
3.Diaphragms with spermicide
4.Sponges with spermicide
5.Cervical caps with spermicide
6.Spermicide alone
7.Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)
8.Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)
9.Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
10.Contraceptive patches
11.Contraceptive rings
12.Progestin injections
13.Implantable rods
14.Vasectomies
15.Female sterilization surgeries
16.Female sterilization implants
They didn't want to pay for 2 types of morning after pills... and 2 types of IUD's. (due to the implantation = abortion belief)
|
On July 02 2014 03:12 MstrJinbo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2014 03:01 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 02:38 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 02:13 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:48 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 01:29 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:25 ampson wrote:On July 01 2014 23:54 Nyxisto wrote:On July 01 2014 16:56 BillGates wrote:
Anyone else familiar with the Alex Jones radio show? Just found out that show few weeks ago and that guy is so well researched and knowledgeable, one of the rare Americans that actually knows which planet he is on.
I agree with 90% of his deep analysis and information, I think some of the details may be different and stuff, but the overall geo-strategy analysis is spot on.
"Jones has been the center of many controversies, including his controversial statements about gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. He has accused the U.S. government of being involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, the September 11 attacks, the filming of fake Moon landings to hide NASA's secret technology and the killing of "thousands of astronauts". He believes that government and big business have colluded to create a New World Order through "manufactured economic crises, sophisticated surveillance tech and—above all—inside-job terror attacks that fuel exploitable hysteria". Jones describes himself as a libertarian and a paleoconservative"
If Wikipedia didn't make all of this up that guy is probably the most ridiculous person in the United States.(along with the Republican lady two posts above) edit: Also, Hobby Lobby still covers Vasectomies and Viagra While I agree Alex Jones is a nut, what does hobby lobby covering Vasecomies/Viagra have to do with anything? The Hobby Lobby owners clearly believe that life begins at conception, so they fought to be able to not pay for contraceptives that destroy a fertilized egg or prevent it from attaching to a uterus. Neither Viagra nor vasectomies prevents a fertilized egg for coming to term. I'll agree on Viagra, but I don't see how male sterilization is something a religious person would approve of if you don't hold different standards for men and women. Taking away your ability to reproduce but still having sex doesn't really sound like something the good old bible would approve of. Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. I can clearly see what the majority of American Christians think, my point is that they're being hypocritical. If you interpret the bible the way these guys do drawing the line beyond vasectomy is ridiculous. It's a little coincidental that all these evangelical interpretations and positions always seem to profit Caucasian male heterosexual Christians while everyone else is going to get screwed. You are making no sense at all. You can make the argument that their perspective is wrong, unscientific, whatever. But it's not hypocritical. The bible belt leads the statistics in divorces, murders, teen pregnancy and std infection rates. Christian evangelicals in the US are the incarnation of hypocrisy. Those statistics are correct. However have absolutely nothing to do with what I'm talking about. My only point is that it is not hypocritical that many Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies as they would something like birth control pills. Show nested quote +Keep in mind that "American Protestants" includes denominations like Lutheranism and Episcopalianism, both of which take very different stances on matters such as abortion and contraception. Better to go a bit further and line up Hobby Lobby's interests with Evangelical threads of Protestantism. Yeah I would definitely agree with that. Show nested quote +Yeah sorry if it came off wrong. I wasn't talking about every Protestant in the US, but I'd certainly say someone who makes the literal interpretation of the bible the foundation of his belief system,(as the hobby lobby guy does) qualifies him as a Christian fundamentalist. Hobby Lobby's views on contraception appear to be more on the "liberal" end of pro life evengelical Christian spectrum. This is probably why prolife groups supported them in their legal challenge over other groups. It certainly more acceptable to the public than those pro biting all forms of contraception. Those guys do exist.
Ugh... who would of thought that millions of people would read this
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.
And pull from it that they should start hundreds of new strains of a new religion called Christianity. Then tell all of the Jewish people who are reading the book the Christian religion uses that they got it all wrong. Let alone write-off all the Law's they no longer like (most of the old testament, except when they are hating gays, or subjugating women).
"We know you are God's chosen people, we know you walked through deserts, parted the Red Sea, built the Arc (I guess not all Christians believe this to be literally true?), etc.. But after Jesus the Jewish people got it all wrong about their God"
It feels like a movie or something... How do we even allow this non-sense to pervade so intensely. I don't have a problem with people believing totally nonsensical things, it's when they try to change the law based on fairy tales and non-fact based beliefs. A person who says that the Arc was a literal story, the earth is ~9,000 years old, that evolution is a 'lie straight from the pits of hell', or even believes in 'Hell' (Hell is a christian creation that post dates Jesus), should be laughed out of public life just as we would someone talking about how aliens abducted their dog and it's now a 'pod dog'. Unless despite believing aliens abducted his dog to replace it with a pod spy you think the guy might have some good ideas?
Besides just being grossly ignorant, it's actually dangerous not to put people like that in their place. This is evidenced by the statistics Nyx posted about the 'Bible belt', when combined with the pictures I posted earlier. Unplanned children are growing up either not taught about sex or lied to, not taught about contraception (because it makes them sluts) and instead only taught about abstinence (works about 5% of the time give or take a bit [cant really know for sure {looked it up and 5% is being generous}]), then they are getting pregnant as teens or contracting STI's some of them that will last the rest of their lives and potentially lead to deadly problems like Cancer or HIV. then their little unplanned pregnancy grows up in the same system and starts the cycle over again.
Also on religious freedom, people who think this country was established to promote religious freedom didn't bother to read past the white-washed version of history.
|
On July 02 2014 03:39 RCMDVA wrote:Hobby Lobby has always paid, and still continues to pay for 16 of the 20 types of contraception. Show nested quote +1.Male condoms
2.Female condoms
3.Diaphragms with spermicide
4.Sponges with spermicide
5.Cervical caps with spermicide
6.Spermicide alone
7.Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)
8.Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)
9.Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
10.Contraceptive patches
11.Contraceptive rings
12.Progestin injections
13.Implantable rods
14.Vasectomies
15.Female sterilization surgeries
16.Female sterilization implants They didn't want to pay for 2 types of morning after pills... and 2 types of IUD's. (due to the implantation = abortion belief)
I think what grinds peoples gears is not so much the fact that they won't pay for these2 specific things, it's that the employer has a say at all in what healthcare they pay for. It's a little bit like having your landlord decide what TV channels you're allowed to watch because after all you're living under their roof.
Employers shouldn't have a say about how employees use their provided healthcare. We're not living in feudal times were landowners decide how the majority of population has to live their lives because they are the ones owning the land. The Hobby Lobby people have even publicly stated that they see it as their mission to "convert" their employees. I think even Danglars suggested before to keep the employer out of this kind of decision-making.
Just let the employer pay a certain amount of their employees healthcare or get rid of employer subsidized healthcare completely and move towards a public system.
|
United States43590 Posts
On July 02 2014 02:38 MstrJinbo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2014 02:13 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:48 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 01:29 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:25 ampson wrote:On July 01 2014 23:54 Nyxisto wrote:On July 01 2014 16:56 BillGates wrote:
Anyone else familiar with the Alex Jones radio show? Just found out that show few weeks ago and that guy is so well researched and knowledgeable, one of the rare Americans that actually knows which planet he is on.
I agree with 90% of his deep analysis and information, I think some of the details may be different and stuff, but the overall geo-strategy analysis is spot on.
"Jones has been the center of many controversies, including his controversial statements about gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. He has accused the U.S. government of being involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, the September 11 attacks, the filming of fake Moon landings to hide NASA's secret technology and the killing of "thousands of astronauts". He believes that government and big business have colluded to create a New World Order through "manufactured economic crises, sophisticated surveillance tech and—above all—inside-job terror attacks that fuel exploitable hysteria". Jones describes himself as a libertarian and a paleoconservative"
If Wikipedia didn't make all of this up that guy is probably the most ridiculous person in the United States.(along with the Republican lady two posts above) edit: Also, Hobby Lobby still covers Vasectomies and Viagra While I agree Alex Jones is a nut, what does hobby lobby covering Vasecomies/Viagra have to do with anything? The Hobby Lobby owners clearly believe that life begins at conception, so they fought to be able to not pay for contraceptives that destroy a fertilized egg or prevent it from attaching to a uterus. Neither Viagra nor vasectomies prevents a fertilized egg for coming to term. I'll agree on Viagra, but I don't see how male sterilization is something a religious person would approve of if you don't hold different standards for men and women. Taking away your ability to reproduce but still having sex doesn't really sound like something the good old bible would approve of. Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. I can clearly see what the majority of American Christians think, my point is that they're being hypocritical. If you interpret the bible the way these guys do drawing the line beyond vasectomy is ridiculous. It's a little coincidental that all these evangelical interpretations and positions always seem to profit Caucasian male heterosexual Christians while everyone else is going to get screwed. You are making no sense at all. You can make the argument that their perspective is wrong, unscientific, whatever. But it's not hypocritical.
A vasectomy is almost certainly in breach of "spilling your seed upon the earth" (Genesis 38 ) in which sex without the chance of procreation is condemned whereas nowhere in the Bible is the issue of when ensoulment explained. So yes, there is absolutely hypocrisy in deciding that female birth control are against Christian beliefs without any biblical sources while giving the all clear to male birth control that is specifically condemned.
Anyone who fails to see that traditional Christianity favours white heterosexual men is being purposefully blind to be honest.
|
It's a little bit like having your landlord deciding what TV channels you're allowed to watch because after all you're living under their roof.
Don't know what the situation is like in Germany, but in the US it is often the case that your landlord dictates what cable package (if any) they will provide. Want HBO? Pay for it yourself.
|
On July 02 2014 04:04 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2014 02:38 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 02:13 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:48 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 01:29 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:25 ampson wrote:On July 01 2014 23:54 Nyxisto wrote:On July 01 2014 16:56 BillGates wrote:
Anyone else familiar with the Alex Jones radio show? Just found out that show few weeks ago and that guy is so well researched and knowledgeable, one of the rare Americans that actually knows which planet he is on.
I agree with 90% of his deep analysis and information, I think some of the details may be different and stuff, but the overall geo-strategy analysis is spot on.
"Jones has been the center of many controversies, including his controversial statements about gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. He has accused the U.S. government of being involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, the September 11 attacks, the filming of fake Moon landings to hide NASA's secret technology and the killing of "thousands of astronauts". He believes that government and big business have colluded to create a New World Order through "manufactured economic crises, sophisticated surveillance tech and—above all—inside-job terror attacks that fuel exploitable hysteria". Jones describes himself as a libertarian and a paleoconservative"
If Wikipedia didn't make all of this up that guy is probably the most ridiculous person in the United States.(along with the Republican lady two posts above) edit: Also, Hobby Lobby still covers Vasectomies and Viagra While I agree Alex Jones is a nut, what does hobby lobby covering Vasecomies/Viagra have to do with anything? The Hobby Lobby owners clearly believe that life begins at conception, so they fought to be able to not pay for contraceptives that destroy a fertilized egg or prevent it from attaching to a uterus. Neither Viagra nor vasectomies prevents a fertilized egg for coming to term. I'll agree on Viagra, but I don't see how male sterilization is something a religious person would approve of if you don't hold different standards for men and women. Taking away your ability to reproduce but still having sex doesn't really sound like something the good old bible would approve of. Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. I can clearly see what the majority of American Christians think, my point is that they're being hypocritical. If you interpret the bible the way these guys do drawing the line beyond vasectomy is ridiculous. It's a little coincidental that all these evangelical interpretations and positions always seem to profit Caucasian male heterosexual Christians while everyone else is going to get screwed. You are making no sense at all. You can make the argument that their perspective is wrong, unscientific, whatever. But it's not hypocritical. A vasectomy is almost certainly in breach of "spilling your seed upon the earth" (Genesis 38 ) in which sex without the chance of procreation is condemned whereas nowhere in the Bible is the issue of when ensoulment explained. So yes, there is absolutely hypocrisy in deciding that female birth control are against Christian beliefs without any biblical sources while giving the all clear to male birth control that is specifically condemned.
you guys are talking about different things.
he started this converstaion with:
Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo.
the dont condem femal kind of birth control because it's says in the bible that sex without chance of procreation is bad, but because they think that killing an human embryo is forbidden.
|
United States43590 Posts
On July 02 2014 04:12 Paljas wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2014 04:04 KwarK wrote:On July 02 2014 02:38 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 02:13 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:48 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 01:29 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:25 ampson wrote:On July 01 2014 23:54 Nyxisto wrote:On July 01 2014 16:56 BillGates wrote:
Anyone else familiar with the Alex Jones radio show? Just found out that show few weeks ago and that guy is so well researched and knowledgeable, one of the rare Americans that actually knows which planet he is on.
I agree with 90% of his deep analysis and information, I think some of the details may be different and stuff, but the overall geo-strategy analysis is spot on.
"Jones has been the center of many controversies, including his controversial statements about gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. He has accused the U.S. government of being involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, the September 11 attacks, the filming of fake Moon landings to hide NASA's secret technology and the killing of "thousands of astronauts". He believes that government and big business have colluded to create a New World Order through "manufactured economic crises, sophisticated surveillance tech and—above all—inside-job terror attacks that fuel exploitable hysteria". Jones describes himself as a libertarian and a paleoconservative"
If Wikipedia didn't make all of this up that guy is probably the most ridiculous person in the United States.(along with the Republican lady two posts above) edit: Also, Hobby Lobby still covers Vasectomies and Viagra While I agree Alex Jones is a nut, what does hobby lobby covering Vasecomies/Viagra have to do with anything? The Hobby Lobby owners clearly believe that life begins at conception, so they fought to be able to not pay for contraceptives that destroy a fertilized egg or prevent it from attaching to a uterus. Neither Viagra nor vasectomies prevents a fertilized egg for coming to term. I'll agree on Viagra, but I don't see how male sterilization is something a religious person would approve of if you don't hold different standards for men and women. Taking away your ability to reproduce but still having sex doesn't really sound like something the good old bible would approve of. Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. I can clearly see what the majority of American Christians think, my point is that they're being hypocritical. If you interpret the bible the way these guys do drawing the line beyond vasectomy is ridiculous. It's a little coincidental that all these evangelical interpretations and positions always seem to profit Caucasian male heterosexual Christians while everyone else is going to get screwed. You are making no sense at all. You can make the argument that their perspective is wrong, unscientific, whatever. But it's not hypocritical. A vasectomy is almost certainly in breach of "spilling your seed upon the earth" (Genesis 38 ) in which sex without the chance of procreation is condemned whereas nowhere in the Bible is the issue of when ensoulment explained. So yes, there is absolutely hypocrisy in deciding that female birth control are against Christian beliefs without any biblical sources while giving the all clear to male birth control that is specifically condemned. you guys are talking about different things. he started this converstaion with: Show nested quote +Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. the dont condem femal kind of birth control because it's says in the bible that sex without chance of procreation is bad, but because they think that killing an human embryo is forbidden.
Because they believe that an embryo has a human soul without any biblical justification whereas they do not believe that sex without procreation is sinful, despite the bible literally saying "Onan had sex without any chance of procreation so God killed him".
That's the hypocrisy, that they've just added and removed bits from the bible to suit their own needs. The bits that condemn male birth control are ignored whereas new bits which condemn female birth control are added.
|
On July 02 2014 04:17 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2014 04:12 Paljas wrote:On July 02 2014 04:04 KwarK wrote:On July 02 2014 02:38 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 02:13 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:48 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 01:29 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:25 ampson wrote:On July 01 2014 23:54 Nyxisto wrote:On July 01 2014 16:56 BillGates wrote:
Anyone else familiar with the Alex Jones radio show? Just found out that show few weeks ago and that guy is so well researched and knowledgeable, one of the rare Americans that actually knows which planet he is on.
I agree with 90% of his deep analysis and information, I think some of the details may be different and stuff, but the overall geo-strategy analysis is spot on.
"Jones has been the center of many controversies, including his controversial statements about gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. He has accused the U.S. government of being involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, the September 11 attacks, the filming of fake Moon landings to hide NASA's secret technology and the killing of "thousands of astronauts". He believes that government and big business have colluded to create a New World Order through "manufactured economic crises, sophisticated surveillance tech and—above all—inside-job terror attacks that fuel exploitable hysteria". Jones describes himself as a libertarian and a paleoconservative"
If Wikipedia didn't make all of this up that guy is probably the most ridiculous person in the United States.(along with the Republican lady two posts above) edit: Also, Hobby Lobby still covers Vasectomies and Viagra While I agree Alex Jones is a nut, what does hobby lobby covering Vasecomies/Viagra have to do with anything? The Hobby Lobby owners clearly believe that life begins at conception, so they fought to be able to not pay for contraceptives that destroy a fertilized egg or prevent it from attaching to a uterus. Neither Viagra nor vasectomies prevents a fertilized egg for coming to term. I'll agree on Viagra, but I don't see how male sterilization is something a religious person would approve of if you don't hold different standards for men and women. Taking away your ability to reproduce but still having sex doesn't really sound like something the good old bible would approve of. Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. I can clearly see what the majority of American Christians think, my point is that they're being hypocritical. If you interpret the bible the way these guys do drawing the line beyond vasectomy is ridiculous. It's a little coincidental that all these evangelical interpretations and positions always seem to profit Caucasian male heterosexual Christians while everyone else is going to get screwed. You are making no sense at all. You can make the argument that their perspective is wrong, unscientific, whatever. But it's not hypocritical. A vasectomy is almost certainly in breach of "spilling your seed upon the earth" (Genesis 38 ) in which sex without the chance of procreation is condemned whereas nowhere in the Bible is the issue of when ensoulment explained. So yes, there is absolutely hypocrisy in deciding that female birth control are against Christian beliefs without any biblical sources while giving the all clear to male birth control that is specifically condemned. you guys are talking about different things. he started this converstaion with: Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. the dont condem femal kind of birth control because it's says in the bible that sex without chance of procreation is bad, but because they think that killing an human embryo is forbidden. Because they believe that an embryo has a human soul without any biblical justification whereas they do not believe that sex without procreation is sinful, despite the bible literally saying "Onan had sex without any chance of procreation so God killed him". That's the hypocrisy, that they've just added and removed bits from the bible to suit their own needs. The bits that condemn male birth control are ignored whereas new bits which condemn female birth control are added.
umm, do we really still attack christians for not believing all the nonsense in the bible?
they dont have to add anything to the bible to condemn femal birth control, they just need to assume that an embryo is a full-fledged human from a moral standpoint (like it says in the bible).
using a less insane interpretation of the bible so that you dont condem condoms isnt hypocritical, its just not as dumb.
using an interpretation of the bible so that you dont condem female birth control would be better yes, but favorism towards males isnt hypocritical either, despite how bad it is.
|
umm, do we really still attack christians for not believing all the nonsense in the bible?
Yes, because that's the part where the hypocrisy comes into play. If you only respect the part of the bible that do not affect your own life I'd say that's a pretty lame interpretation of the book.
|
On July 02 2014 04:30 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +umm, do we really still attack christians for not believing all the nonsense in the bible? Yes, because that's the part where the hypocrisy comes into play. If you only respect the part of the bible that do not affect your own life I'd say that's a pretty lame interpretation of the book.
but they surley respect many parts which affect their own life. id bet that they go to church every sunday at that they celebrate christmas and stuff. a lame interpretation isnt hypocritical either, just lame
|
In this case I'd say that even using an interpretation of the bible where spilling seed is sin, it is still relatively minor when compared to murder (which they believe abortion is). Remember the whole premise is that everybody sins and that Christ can forgive, but murder is straight-up breaking a commandment and is considered by many to be the ultimate crime. You can't assign the same weight.
|
On July 02 2014 04:17 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2014 04:12 Paljas wrote:On July 02 2014 04:04 KwarK wrote:On July 02 2014 02:38 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 02:13 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:48 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 01:29 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:25 ampson wrote:On July 01 2014 23:54 Nyxisto wrote:On July 01 2014 16:56 BillGates wrote:
Anyone else familiar with the Alex Jones radio show? Just found out that show few weeks ago and that guy is so well researched and knowledgeable, one of the rare Americans that actually knows which planet he is on.
I agree with 90% of his deep analysis and information, I think some of the details may be different and stuff, but the overall geo-strategy analysis is spot on.
"Jones has been the center of many controversies, including his controversial statements about gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. He has accused the U.S. government of being involved in the Oklahoma City bombing, the September 11 attacks, the filming of fake Moon landings to hide NASA's secret technology and the killing of "thousands of astronauts". He believes that government and big business have colluded to create a New World Order through "manufactured economic crises, sophisticated surveillance tech and—above all—inside-job terror attacks that fuel exploitable hysteria". Jones describes himself as a libertarian and a paleoconservative"
If Wikipedia didn't make all of this up that guy is probably the most ridiculous person in the United States.(along with the Republican lady two posts above) edit: Also, Hobby Lobby still covers Vasectomies and Viagra While I agree Alex Jones is a nut, what does hobby lobby covering Vasecomies/Viagra have to do with anything? The Hobby Lobby owners clearly believe that life begins at conception, so they fought to be able to not pay for contraceptives that destroy a fertilized egg or prevent it from attaching to a uterus. Neither Viagra nor vasectomies prevents a fertilized egg for coming to term. I'll agree on Viagra, but I don't see how male sterilization is something a religious person would approve of if you don't hold different standards for men and women. Taking away your ability to reproduce but still having sex doesn't really sound like something the good old bible would approve of. Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. I can clearly see what the majority of American Christians think, my point is that they're being hypocritical. If you interpret the bible the way these guys do drawing the line beyond vasectomy is ridiculous. It's a little coincidental that all these evangelical interpretations and positions always seem to profit Caucasian male heterosexual Christians while everyone else is going to get screwed. You are making no sense at all. You can make the argument that their perspective is wrong, unscientific, whatever. But it's not hypocritical. A vasectomy is almost certainly in breach of "spilling your seed upon the earth" (Genesis 38 ) in which sex without the chance of procreation is condemned whereas nowhere in the Bible is the issue of when ensoulment explained. So yes, there is absolutely hypocrisy in deciding that female birth control are against Christian beliefs without any biblical sources while giving the all clear to male birth control that is specifically condemned. you guys are talking about different things. he started this converstaion with: Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. the dont condem femal kind of birth control because it's says in the bible that sex without chance of procreation is bad, but because they think that killing an human embryo is forbidden. Because they believe that an embryo has a human soul without any biblical justification whereas they do not believe that sex without procreation is sinful, despite the bible literally saying "Onan had sex without any chance of procreation so God killed him". That's the hypocrisy, that they've just added and removed bits from the bible to suit their own needs. The bits that condemn male birth control are ignored whereas new bits which condemn female birth control are added.
An alternative interpretation is that Judah instructed His son Onan to have sex with his brothers widow so that she can have a child. Onan disobeyed and had sex with no chance of conception. That disobedience displeased God who killed Onan. So lesson of the story, if your Father instructs you to impregnate your brothers widow, don't be like Onan, make it count 
As a side note, let's try to stop all this debate about religious doctrine. It's going to go nowhere.
|
On July 02 2014 04:58 MstrJinbo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2014 04:17 KwarK wrote:On July 02 2014 04:12 Paljas wrote:On July 02 2014 04:04 KwarK wrote:On July 02 2014 02:38 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 02:13 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:48 MstrJinbo wrote:On July 02 2014 01:29 Nyxisto wrote:On July 02 2014 01:25 ampson wrote:On July 01 2014 23:54 Nyxisto wrote:[quote] [quote] If Wikipedia didn't make all of this up that guy is probably the most ridiculous person in the United States.(along with the Republican lady two posts above) edit: Also, Hobby Lobby still covers Vasectomies and Viagra While I agree Alex Jones is a nut, what does hobby lobby covering Vasecomies/Viagra have to do with anything? The Hobby Lobby owners clearly believe that life begins at conception, so they fought to be able to not pay for contraceptives that destroy a fertilized egg or prevent it from attaching to a uterus. Neither Viagra nor vasectomies prevents a fertilized egg for coming to term. I'll agree on Viagra, but I don't see how male sterilization is something a religious person would approve of if you don't hold different standards for men and women. Taking away your ability to reproduce but still having sex doesn't really sound like something the good old bible would approve of. Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. I can clearly see what the majority of American Christians think, my point is that they're being hypocritical. If you interpret the bible the way these guys do drawing the line beyond vasectomy is ridiculous. It's a little coincidental that all these evangelical interpretations and positions always seem to profit Caucasian male heterosexual Christians while everyone else is going to get screwed. You are making no sense at all. You can make the argument that their perspective is wrong, unscientific, whatever. But it's not hypocritical. A vasectomy is almost certainly in breach of "spilling your seed upon the earth" (Genesis 38 ) in which sex without the chance of procreation is condemned whereas nowhere in the Bible is the issue of when ensoulment explained. So yes, there is absolutely hypocrisy in deciding that female birth control are against Christian beliefs without any biblical sources while giving the all clear to male birth control that is specifically condemned. you guys are talking about different things. he started this converstaion with: Majority of American Christians don't have the same moral objections to vasectomies that they would to oral contraceptives. This is because a vasectomy prevents fertilization instead of harming a fertilized embryo. the dont condem femal kind of birth control because it's says in the bible that sex without chance of procreation is bad, but because they think that killing an human embryo is forbidden. Because they believe that an embryo has a human soul without any biblical justification whereas they do not believe that sex without procreation is sinful, despite the bible literally saying "Onan had sex without any chance of procreation so God killed him". That's the hypocrisy, that they've just added and removed bits from the bible to suit their own needs. The bits that condemn male birth control are ignored whereas new bits which condemn female birth control are added. An alternative interpretation is that Judah instructed His son Onan to have sex with his brothers widow so that she can have a child. Onan disobeyed and had sex with no chance of conception. That disobedience displeased God who killed Onan. So lesson of the story, if your Father instructs you to impregnate your brothers widow, don't be like Onan, make it count As a side note, let's try to stop all this debate about religious doctrine. It's going to go nowhere.
Agreed! Get religious beliefs out of the political and legal sphere. If only someone had told Hobby Lobby that first, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Again it's hard to believe them anyway, when they have no problem paying for the pills to get made, just a problem with paying for their employees to have access to the drugs they paid to create...
|
|
|
On July 01 2014 13:46 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2014 10:43 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 01 2014 10:40 IgnE wrote:
Aspirin is used chronically for reducing heart attack risk. Is it labeled for that use? I'm glad you brought up it's labeling, it serves as a reminder of how completely bullshit our marketing/labeling laws are, how people are tricked into believing that something they purchase will benefit them without being explicitly told so, and how millions of people regularly don't act in their 'rational self-interest' and why models that make that assumption are fundamentally flawed. It doesn't lack that label from a lack of effort...? Show nested quote +On Friday, the FDA denied a request from Bayer, based in Leverkusen, Germany, to change the labeling on its packaging to market the product for heart-attack prevention for patients with no history of cardiovascular disease. Aspirin generated $1.27 billion in sales for Bayer last year. SourceAlthough they couldn't get approval for that lie they were able to come up with these creative law avoidance techniques. Exhibit A: Note how it says " Regimen" implying it's a lifestyle/ongoing. + Show Spoiler +Exhibit B: It's got "Heart advantage" it's what hearts crave! + Show Spoiler +This, like pretty much all drug related issues, has little to nothing to do with science, safety, or legitimate concerns (although the opposition tends to pretend it does). But also, like most drug related issues, is heavily influenced by religious people who are totally oblivious to the reality of the situation.
Thanks for demonstrating that the FDA is much more sensitive to chronic drug use than acute use. We done here?
|
On July 02 2014 05:34 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2014 13:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 01 2014 10:43 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 01 2014 10:40 IgnE wrote:
Aspirin is used chronically for reducing heart attack risk. Is it labeled for that use? I'm glad you brought up it's labeling, it serves as a reminder of how completely bullshit our marketing/labeling laws are, how people are tricked into believing that something they purchase will benefit them without being explicitly told so, and how millions of people regularly don't act in their 'rational self-interest' and why models that make that assumption are fundamentally flawed. It doesn't lack that label from a lack of effort...? On Friday, the FDA denied a request from Bayer, based in Leverkusen, Germany, to change the labeling on its packaging to market the product for heart-attack prevention for patients with no history of cardiovascular disease. Aspirin generated $1.27 billion in sales for Bayer last year. SourceAlthough they couldn't get approval for that lie they were able to come up with these creative law avoidance techniques. Exhibit A: Note how it says " Regimen" implying it's a lifestyle/ongoing. + Show Spoiler +Exhibit B: It's got "Heart advantage" it's what hearts crave! + Show Spoiler +This, like pretty much all drug related issues, has little to nothing to do with science, safety, or legitimate concerns (although the opposition tends to pretend it does). But also, like most drug related issues, is heavily influenced by religious people who are totally oblivious to the reality of the situation. Thanks for demonstrating that the FDA is much more sensitive to chronic drug use than acute use. We done here?
If that's all you got from that, then yes, we are very done. It seems your point has taken a thorough enough pounding for me.
|
It's a 401k plan. Following the paper trail on where the money ends up is a fun exercise for reporters but not something most people think about. It's probably plausible Hobby Lobby just didn't know.
|
On July 02 2014 05:39 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 02 2014 05:34 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 01 2014 13:46 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 01 2014 10:43 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On July 01 2014 10:40 IgnE wrote:
Aspirin is used chronically for reducing heart attack risk. Is it labeled for that use? I'm glad you brought up it's labeling, it serves as a reminder of how completely bullshit our marketing/labeling laws are, how people are tricked into believing that something they purchase will benefit them without being explicitly told so, and how millions of people regularly don't act in their 'rational self-interest' and why models that make that assumption are fundamentally flawed. It doesn't lack that label from a lack of effort...? On Friday, the FDA denied a request from Bayer, based in Leverkusen, Germany, to change the labeling on its packaging to market the product for heart-attack prevention for patients with no history of cardiovascular disease. Aspirin generated $1.27 billion in sales for Bayer last year. SourceAlthough they couldn't get approval for that lie they were able to come up with these creative law avoidance techniques. Exhibit A: Note how it says " Regimen" implying it's a lifestyle/ongoing. + Show Spoiler +Exhibit B: It's got "Heart advantage" it's what hearts crave! + Show Spoiler +This, like pretty much all drug related issues, has little to nothing to do with science, safety, or legitimate concerns (although the opposition tends to pretend it does). But also, like most drug related issues, is heavily influenced by religious people who are totally oblivious to the reality of the situation. Thanks for demonstrating that the FDA is much more sensitive to chronic drug use than acute use. We done here? If that's all you got from that, then yes, we are very done. It seems your point has taken a thorough enough pounding for me.
I don't think it took a pounding at all. There weren't many counter arguments.
Edit: also to correct your previous post, rational behavior in a model is not the same as 'rational self-interest'.
Also, the graphic is a couple years old, but most advanced countries require a Rx for birth control: + Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ivIntRl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ER25SQ8.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/121120084146-birth-control-prescription-requirements-story-top.jpg)
