This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Dolan: White House is “strangling” Catholic church

Dolan: White House is “strangling” Catholic church - Comments

Elisabeth Cornwell's Avatar Comment 1 by Elisabeth Cornwell

So are US taxpayers now expected to subsidize the Church suing the government in addition to subsidizing the protection of pedophiles and the oppression of women? Oh Joy!

Tue, 22 May 2012 22:38:24 UTC | #942979

chawinwords's Avatar Comment 2 by chawinwords

I caught Dolan's repetitive use of the word "strangling" in reference to the poor, poor, persecuted church. But, I was thinking of just how far the church will go to "strangle" a woman's human dignity. If history tells us anything, the number would be in the tens of centuries. Then too, Elisabeth Cornwell makes a good point as to how far the church will go to strangle the human dignity of innocent little children by Catholic priests, etc., and the church its self!

Tue, 22 May 2012 22:49:49 UTC | #942981

rod-the-farmer's Avatar Comment 3 by rod-the-farmer

Now let's all think for a minute what they might be strangling the church with. Dare we hope the entrails of the last priest ?

Tue, 22 May 2012 22:49:57 UTC | #942982

Roaddogg's Avatar Comment 4 by Roaddogg

and the religious persecution narrative begins...

Tue, 22 May 2012 22:57:07 UTC | #942986

Zeuglodon's Avatar Comment 5 by Zeuglodon

Georgetown should amend its ways or stop calling itself a Catholic or Jesuit institution, Blatty said."

So it stops calling itself a Catholic or Jesuit institution. How's that?

Tue, 22 May 2012 23:06:08 UTC | #942989

Border Collie's Avatar Comment 6 by Border Collie

Dang it, Rod, you beat me to it.

Oh, well. Oh, my. Boo hoo. A strangled church. Maybe to make amends he'll also make NASA an "outreach to Catholics" department for their contributions to science, just like for the Muslims. I mean, damn, if it wasn't for Catholics and Muslims, WHATEVER would science do?

BTW, nice outfit, Cardinal Don. Fabulous, just fabulous.

Sorry, I started not to, but I just have to say this ... How many little boys have strangled on the penises of priests? OK, now, hate me. Delete the comment. Scold me. Whatever.

Tue, 22 May 2012 23:06:28 UTC | #942990

Quine's Avatar Comment 7 by Quine

If the Courts don't draw a line as to bound the Establishment Clause, any group of folks can get together and start a church that has doctrine exempting them, and any businesses that they own, from the laws all the rest of us must follow. The Obama administration has extended an exemption to the RCC so that they do not have to provide this coverage for any of their direct church employees, and has given them the opportunity to avoid paying for this part of the coverage of employees at their schools and hospitals. Yes, some will have to switch from self insuring to buying insurance if they want to take advantage of that accommodation, but it is still there for them.

(Watch for the Church of Scientology to start selling ministerships on the web that let you be exempt from the entire health insurance mandate.)

People ask what is wrong with religion? Well, for one thing (of many), it always goes wrong when it expects to be granted a status that is above (or exempt from) the laws that protect our citizens. I urge all in the USA to stand up to these enemies of reproductive rights and health care, who come forth falsely cloaked in the vestments of religious freedom.

Tue, 22 May 2012 23:17:31 UTC | #942993

Anonymous's Avatar Comment 8 by Anonymous

Comment Removed by Moderator

Tue, 22 May 2012 23:43:42 UTC | #943001

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 9 by mordacious1

Comment 8 by IDLERACER

There are many normal men that don't have that desire.

Tue, 22 May 2012 23:49:14 UTC | #943002

Zeuglodon's Avatar Comment 10 by Zeuglodon

Comment 7 by Quine

If the Courts don't draw a line as to bound the Establishment Clause, any group of folks can get together and start a church that has doctrine exempting them, and any businesses that they own, from the laws all the rest of us must follow.

Institutionalized religious exceptionalism in Law seems to me to be one of the biggest obstacles to reducing its impact on society. If it was cut down to a private hobby and denied special legal privilege, then the people who insist on defending religion would have a great case.

People ask what is wrong with religion? Well, for one thing (of many), it always goes wrong when it expects to be granted a status that is above (or exempt from) the laws that protect our citizens.

With the more pressing point being that their justifications for this are intellectually inadequate. It is telling quacks they don't need to be subjected to medical trials simply because they're "alternative" medicine.

I urge all in the USA to stand up to these enemies of reproductive rights and health care, who come forth falsely cloaked in the vestments of religious freedom.

We in the UK aren't exactly home and dry on this front, with the added irony that most of the population, religious included, doesn't even want the religious influence on politics.

Wed, 23 May 2012 00:01:08 UTC | #943007

Sample's Avatar Comment 11 by Sample

Here is the filed complaint : pdf

I've been following this "Holy War" on a couple of Catholic sites. Yes, one site called it an actual Holy War. Forgive me for pointing this out, but I checked my calendar and it does indeed say 2012, not 1012. What a childish and disgraceful choice of words regarding a disagreement when there is a secular, non-violent legal method for redress!

The second sentence of the complaint outlines exactly what the complaint isn't about: contraception! I don't think the legal system will take kindly for wasting time by reading what this complaint isn't about! What a weak opening! Anyway, there are plenty of tidbits to chew on. One of my favorites:

“We don’t serve people because they’re Catholic, we serve them because we are, and it’s a moral imperative for us to do so.” (from the Complaint)

I think a statement like this may do the Plaintiff more harm than good. Which makes me wonder something. If the Catholic organizations lose this case, what exactly do they lose? Many a Catholic leader has stated they would seriously consider dropping all benefits if their doctrines are compromised. Wouldn't that save them an awful lot of money? So, they end up getting a windfall in savings while at the same time can cry for the next 1,000 years that they are the persecuted Church Militant. This complaint looks choreographed to do just that, imo.

Mike

Wed, 23 May 2012 00:02:29 UTC | #943008

lewis.breland's Avatar Comment 12 by lewis.breland

Let me get this straight. Allowing Catholic women access to birth control by law is a usurpation of the First Amendment? Get fucking real.

Wed, 23 May 2012 00:06:18 UTC | #943010

Anonymous's Avatar Comment 13 by Anonymous

Comment Removed by Moderator

Wed, 23 May 2012 00:09:46 UTC | #943011

Net's Avatar Comment 14 by Net

strangling the catholic church? well, finally. it's really the only humane thing to do to put it, and all of us, out of our misery.

Wed, 23 May 2012 01:11:54 UTC | #943021

zengardener's Avatar Comment 15 by zengardener

I am my own church of me and I demand an exemption from everything.

If the government doesn't comply, they are walking all over my first amendment rights.

Wed, 23 May 2012 01:41:01 UTC | #943028

All About Meme's Avatar Comment 16 by All About Meme

It is not about whether people have access to certain services; it is about whether the government may force religious institutions and individuals to facilitate and fund services which violate their religious beliefs.

For those of you who didn't grow up in religious families, I'm fixin' to tell y'all (please excuse the Texas twang, but I'm living in Austin now) how my (wonderful, beloved, old-school, non-college-educated, terminally Catholic) father might view this matter.

Dad's Axiom #1:

If a young man knocks-up a young woman, he should marry her. It's "the right thing to do". (Period.)

There. That was easy enough.

Now, I know y'all are the inquisitive types, so you might at this point be tempted to ask the obvious question: Why is marrying the girl the right thing to do? Dad?

Dad's Axiom #2:

Marriage and kids tends to straighten-out wayward young men. It makes them into better people. (Like Dad, for instance.)

Why does marriage and kids make a young man into a better person?

Dad's Axiom #3:

It makes him more responsible. A man needs to grow up, find a woman, and settle down.

(Don’t ask him to define “responsible”, because Dad hates semantics and will just end up completing the Catholic circle of reason at some point. Republican talking points will also emerge, i.e. family values, etc.)

I firmly believe billions of fathers, whether they're Catholic, Baptist, agnostic, or even atheist, would answer these questions in a similar way. Yes, the results are in: apparently a loose, single, heterosexual man is bound for trouble in this life. (Why this same marriage medicine isn't resoundingly prescribed by Catholic fathers for loose, single, gay men, is another hypocrisy entirely).

To summarize, if contraception and abortion were de rigueur, this planet would be crawling with irresponsible single people. And then where would we be.

So pair up and mate, everybody. (Except you homos, of course.)

Wed, 23 May 2012 02:10:00 UTC | #943030

PBrain's Avatar Comment 17 by PBrain

tideless wisdom...of course they know best . gotta love it ,ha. ok,i hate it, more coffee incoming

Wed, 23 May 2012 02:56:50 UTC | #943038

xmaseveeve's Avatar Comment 18 by xmaseveeve

If you scroll down on one of the original links, you get an official declaration as to the purpose of the lawsuit to preserve religious freedom. There is a lot of completely irrelevant argument about which institutions which should be classified as religious. They state;

By including an exemption at all, the government apparently agrees that, in keeping with decades of practice and precedent, religious institutions should not be compelled to purchase drugs or procedures that violate deeply held religious or moral beliefs.

But President Obama has already said that they don't have to pay for the contraception services, so they are lying. How does allowing women access to contraception violate anyone's religious freedom? How?

Why should church organisations have any exemptions from the law? And see the photo above? See the Catholic jazz hands coming up? Brady does that too. They think they can push you back by the power of the holy spirit. They are, however, not Canute. Some of them look as if they're about to break into a chorus of 'Thriller'. 'And I can thrill you more than any ghost can' - oh no, the'd get struck by lightning for that. Could do a moonwalk though. Someone should cut a video together. A row of popes, cardinals and bishops, all doing the Catholic jazz hands. Which song would accompany it?

You don't get emerald rings like that in a Christmas cracker. It's worthy of Elvis - goes with the holy medalions, I suppose. I wonder how many have kissed that ring? Freedom to deny medical health services for women? Will Eve's punishment never end? It probably wasn't even a Granny Smith apple.

Wed, 23 May 2012 03:04:12 UTC | #943039

Quine's Avatar Comment 19 by Quine

To summarize, if contraception and abortion were de rigueur, this planet would be crawling with irresponsible single people. And then where would we be.

Well,,,, Obviously, at the parties.

Wed, 23 May 2012 03:17:04 UTC | #943040

xmaseveeve's Avatar Comment 20 by xmaseveeve

Unbelievable. 12 lawsuits against Obama, and I suppose the taxpayer foots the bill for fighting them? What a waste of money. That's where accommodationism gets you. Instead of trying to abolish religious exemptions from the law, we should introduce freedom from religion legislation, and any existing privilege will remain as long as it does not violate freedom from religion.

Anyway, how can the right to medical care possibly be trumped by the right to deny it?

I see that they are still lying by stating that they won't 'fund or facilitate' women's health services, knowing that they explicitly do not have to fund it. The level of 'facilitation' is so minimal that no court would recognise it. What if a woman needs a sterilisation for medical reasons? Say another pregnancy would kill her? I suppose she must 'abstain' for life, and if she doesn't, it's God's will if she dies. Bullshit!

At least the comments from Catholics on the linked forum seemed against these silly old fools. And baaaatty Blatty. That old grinning fool in the red dress just looks like a bad Madonna fan. 'Vogue! Yeah! Let your body move...' I reckon they're all secret break-dancers. No one can be that uptight. I bet they lip-synch to Michael Jackson's 'Bad'.

Wed, 23 May 2012 03:32:10 UTC | #943042

Quine's Avatar Comment 21 by Quine

... we should introduce freedom from religion legislation ...

Good luck, we have only one open non-believer in Congress (there are four open gays). We are hanging on by the tips of our nails to what Jefferson and Madison bequeathed to us, while David Barton is trying to pry our fingers off that tiny ledge.

Wed, 23 May 2012 03:49:20 UTC | #943043

susanlatimer's Avatar Comment 22 by susanlatimer

Comment 10 by Zeuglodon

Institutionalized religious exceptionalism in Law seems to me to be one of the biggest obstacles to reducing its impact on society. If it was cut down to a private hobby and denied special legal privilege, then the people who insist on defending religion would have a great case.

I wish it were that simple. Nothing makes better sense. Go ahead and practise your hobby as long as you practise it within the law. Or is that too simplistic?

With the more pressing point being that their justifications for this are intellectually inadequate.

Intellectually insulting is more like it. It doesn't take a great deal of intelligence to determine that they are just making stuff up.

And yet Dolan has "just a phone call away" status with the President of the United States.

Comment 18 by xmaseveeve

How does allowing women access to contraception violate anyone's religious freedom? How?

Violating the freedom of women makes up a huge part of the grand tradition that is the catholic church.

They don't care about religious freedom. They certainly didn't come up with the idea. They do and always have cared about political power.

And once again, this is what this is about.

There. I made it through the post without swearing once. Just barely.

Wed, 23 May 2012 03:54:27 UTC | #943044

All About Meme's Avatar Comment 23 by All About Meme

Comment 19 by Quine

LOL. Dad responds: "Oh, great. So if everybody is partying, who will defend us from the godless Russians?"

A world without religion and marriage is simply beyond the imagination of many people. In their defense, a civilized place like this has never existed historically, and solemnly pointing to the social habits of chimpanzees and cavemen doesn't turn religious frowns upside-down.

Even if religion was eradicated from the planet, I tend to think men and women (and men and men and women and women) would still "pair up" in some fashion. After all, it's only possible for us humans to have sex and intimacy with one other individual at a time. (I know what you're thinking, but it's true in orgies, too.)

To summarize my thesis: one penis, one vagina ===> ergo religion and marriage. (Cough.)

To usher in our new world more swiftly, perhaps New Atheism should be focusing on the exciting new plumbing enhancements genetic research seems to promise, rather than engaging in tiresome philosophical debates.

(Fine. I'll get my coat.)

Wed, 23 May 2012 04:14:20 UTC | #943046

Quine's Avatar Comment 24 by Quine

To usher in our new world more swiftly, perhaps New Atheism should be focusing on the exciting new plumbing enhancements genetic research seems to promise, rather than engaging in tiresome philosophical debates.

(Fine. I'll get my coat.)

Well, yeah, if we could genetically engineer sex far beyond mind blowing sex, then maybe we could supplant all religions. But, that is going to take some time.

Wed, 23 May 2012 04:50:28 UTC | #943048

All About Meme's Avatar Comment 25 by All About Meme

Somebody somewhere has to have photos of Timmy Dolan in the VIP section of a strip club, with one of the (numerous) scantily-clad women wearing that cross around his neck as a waist chain.

Unfortunately, that kind of behavior would probably just land him on the short list at the next papal conclave.

Wed, 23 May 2012 05:08:18 UTC | #943051

mmurray's Avatar Comment 26 by mmurray

Comment 24 by Quine :

To usher in our new world more swiftly, perhaps New Atheism should be focusing on the exciting new plumbing enhancements genetic research seems to promise, rather than engaging in tiresome philosophical debates.

(Fine. I'll get my coat.)

Well, yeah, if we could genetically engineer sex far beyond mind blowing sex, then maybe we could supplant all religions. But, that is going to take some time.

Or we could genetically engineer away gender differences so that sexism would go away and peace would reign on RDnet :-).

Michael

Wed, 23 May 2012 06:50:57 UTC | #943060

Quine's Avatar Comment 27 by Quine

Comment 26 by mmurray:

Or we could genetically engineer away gender differences so that sexism would go away and peace would reign on RDnet :-).

Read The Lathe of Heaven by Le Guin.

Wed, 23 May 2012 06:59:42 UTC | #943061

strangebrew's Avatar Comment 28 by strangebrew

Papal Madonna's, choir boys at your feet Wonder how you manage to make ends meet? Who find the money when you pay the rent? Did you think that money was heaven sent?

Comment 22 by susanlatimer

There. I made it through the post without swearing once. Just barely.

You have far greater patience then I...well most folks here do! I have no such inhibition...Fuck 'em...Fuck 'em al! to hell and beyond. Strangling is the only appropriate medicine...after all they practised it enough when they got all red sweaty and breathless when burning heretics...Sins of their fathers and all that!. It is almost biblical 'them that live by the noose die by the noose'

The whining seems to be reaching crescendo pitch...sure sign they know they are on a hiding to nothing but determined to sow intolerance grief and misery in their wake!

A dying and rotting corpse of a magisterium slowly imploding into its own putrescent black and twisted heart...all that will be left is that sickening stench of righteous bigotry, and that will fade in time and the light of rationalism.

As for Blatty...or is it ...

Karras ?

Wed, 23 May 2012 08:02:50 UTC | #943069

Sample's Avatar Comment 29 by Sample

4:44, the restrictive nature of the exemption... (+Dolan)

There's more of that spin...

Mike

Wed, 23 May 2012 08:48:20 UTC | #943071

Stafford Gordon's Avatar Comment 30 by Stafford Gordon

Freeloading whingers.

Wed, 23 May 2012 12:06:55 UTC | #943090