Comments on: Another Catholic priest indicated in pedophilia cover up. http://www.skeptimusprime.net/2012/03/05/another-catholic-priest-indicated-in-pedophilia-cover-up/ One atheist's thoughts on politics, religion, and philsophy Sat, 28 Mar 2015 21:28:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.2 By: Dylan Walker http://www.skeptimusprime.net/2012/03/05/another-catholic-priest-indicated-in-pedophilia-cover-up/#comment-61 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 23:47:34 +0000 http://www.skeptimusprime.net/2012/03/05/another-catholic-priest-indicated-in-pedophilia-cover-up/#comment-61 First, I recommend you read the post I made about the birth control issue back in February as I went into this in more detail, as to the freedom of choice issue, I think this is nonsense, the government tells companies what is fair compensation all the time, Minimum Wage, the fact that companies of a significant size are required to offer health coverage to their full time employees, 40 hour work weeks, vacation time, sick days….these are there because of government regulations.

The government does this all the time, and just a look at the working conditions that most people throughout history have lived under until the 19th century when governments started enacting these rules is justification enough for these rules in my opinion. Sure it may be possible to go to far, but I hardly think asking to have contraception covered, is to far, since providing it actually SAVES insurance companies money on average.

1., I don’t think Stalin and Mao are comparable because many of the people in the catholic church who are complaining about the contraception issue aren’t’ just in the same group…they are the same PEOPLE. I don’t hold all Catholics responsible for the cover up, but it stands to reason that a lot of the people complaining about this were in on it.

2. I suggest you read up on Reynolds V. United States, a case in 1878 which ruled on the issue of polygamy, and I quote “to permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.”

By the logic employed here you would also have to argue that Jehovah’s witnesses could refuse to cover blood transfusions to their employees, Scientologists could refuse to cover psychological treatments, Christian Scientists could refuse to offer ANY coverage.

Even if this was a religious freedom issue, and I don’t think for a moment it is, you would simply be arguing that the religious freedom of the catholic owners of their secular hospitals and schools trump the religious freedom of the people they employ. I will never support any religions “freedom” that entails a religious person limiting someone Else’s privileges because their religion demands it, if Catholics don’t like birth control they don’t have to take it. Of course they do take, at a rate of about 98%, in the U.S. which just shows how irrelevant the Catholic church is in this country.

Lastly, this is also a health issue, Many women are prescribed forms of birth control for reasons other than preventing pregnancy, they idea that these women, if they can’t afford to pay for it, will have to go to their boss and essentially beg for a special exemption is absurd.

]]>
By: thesnarkwhohuntsback http://www.skeptimusprime.net/2012/03/05/another-catholic-priest-indicated-in-pedophilia-cover-up/#comment-60 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 22:12:11 +0000 http://www.skeptimusprime.net/2012/03/05/another-catholic-priest-indicated-in-pedophilia-cover-up/#comment-60 The issue with contraception is far larger than just the Catholic church, it’s more about freedom of choice and about the government being able to tell companies and churches what they HAVE to pay for.

However, in the interest of discussing this as a freedom of religion issue.

Saying that all the actions of the church must be judged by a group of pedophiles and those that covered up there actions, is like saying that all Atheists must be judged on Stalin or Mao’s actions, because they were Atheists too. I know that you would disagree with that.

My point being that, yes this cover up and the reason for it was despicable, but stomping all over the 1st amendment isn’t acceptable because of it.

]]>