• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The party of 'freedom' just voted against a bill to protect access to contraceptives

Truth in love

Well-Known Member
"Free exercise" does have recognized limits...even by many
of the faithful, eg, genital mutilation of girls, honor killings.
Being forced to provide differs from being forced to perform.
Does the latter happen?

Preventing me from harming you is a standard limit. The Provide/Perform line is not functional.
 

Truth in love

Well-Known Member
Show me evidence that a doctor must perform and abortion even against his will?


From the article cited in the OP

"The bill would create a federal right for people to access contraceptives and for doctors and pharmacists to provide them."
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
From the article cited in the OP

"The bill would create a federal right for people to access contraceptives and for doctors and pharmacists to provide them."
There should be a federal right to personal choice, and eliminate all nanny state mandates that affect personal choice. Not just abortions.
 

Truth in love

Well-Known Member
There should be a federal right to personal choice, and eliminate all nanny state mandates that affect personal choice. Not just abortions.

So can we end all laws on who can have sex with who? Does this include children?
Can we end laws on what kind of weapons I get to have?
Can we end laws on what I can do on my property?
End vaccine mandates, airport searches, anti discrimination laws, special tax previsions etc?
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
And once again you put narrative over fact.
"Right" does not mean "compulsory". Just because I have the right of protest does not mean that I have compulsory to protest. Capice?

And I asked you to provide evidence that a doctor must perform an abortion even against his/her will, and yet again you cannot do it. I'm not the problem here, so let me recommend that you get over your own ego and try to deal with the facts.

To put it bluntly, you simply do not care what the "Truth" is if it conflicts with your own predetermined beliefs as we've seen on so many of your posts, thus having an intelligent discussion with you is darn near impossible.
 
Last edited:

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
So can we end all laws on who can have sex with who? Does this include children?
Can we end laws on what kind of weapons I get to have?
Can we end laws on what I can do on my property?
End vaccine mandates, airport searches, anti discrimination laws, special tax previsions etc?

Why would you include children with that? Thats just plain weird.
 

Truth in love

Well-Known Member
"Right" does not mean "compulsory". Just because I have the right of protest does not mean that I have compulsory to protest. Capice?

And I asked you to provide evidence that a doctor must perform an abortion even against his/her will, and yet again you cannot do it. I'm not the problem here, so let me recommend that you get over your own ego and try to deal with the facts.

To put it bluntly, you simply do not care what the "Truth" is if it conflicts with your own predetermined beliefs as we've seen on so many of your posts, thus having an intelligent discussion with you is darn near impossible.

The "right to" bare arms does not force me to be armed. But if have a "right" for you to sell me a gun. You are forced.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
The "right to" bare arms does not force me to be armed. But if have a "right" for you to sell me a gun. You are forced.
That latter sentence doesn't make any sense whatsoever, including in the context under discussion, so I'm clearly just wasting my time with this.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
From the article cited in the OP

"The bill would create a federal right for people to access contraceptives and for doctors and pharmacists to provide them."
Can you provide text in the bill that would require
that a doctor who doesn't do abortions would be
forced to do them?
As for pharmacists, they're only providing the drug.
The customer would perform the abortion by taking it.
 

Truth in love

Well-Known Member
Can you provide text in the bill that would require
that a doctor who doesn't do abortions would be
forced to do them?
As for pharmacists, they're only providing the drug.
The customer would perform the abortion by taking it.

I don't have the text of the bill I was going off of the OP resource.

So to put on their shoes for a moment. I'm not required to pull the trigger, just supply you with ammo for you school shooting so I can sleep well at night???
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I don't have the text of the bill I was going off of the OP resource.

So to put on their shoes for a moment. I'm not required to pull the trigger, just supply you with ammo for you school shooting so I can sleep well at night???
More easily.
We all pay taxes for things we oppose.
That's less onerous than having to
perform things we oppose.
 
Top