XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.politics.liberalism, soc.culture.usa   
   XPost: alt.atheism   
   From: danielsan1977@gmail.com   
      
   On 3/3/2012 9:42 PM, Dånk 42Ø wrote:   
   > On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 18:24:39 -0800, DanielSan wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 3/3/2012 5:24 PM, Don Kresch wrote:   
   >>> On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 16:10:28 -0700, Vurgil   scrawled in   
   >>> blood:   
   >>>   
   >>>> In article<3b55l7tf5nkdn5nbub66321u7klsb9cjr0@4ax.com>,   
   >>>> Steve   wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 18:31:47 +0000 (UTC), 2907 Dead   
   >>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 12:30:05 -0600, Dånk 42Ø wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> I support the right to birth control and abortion, but I wonder   
   >>>>>>> whether the government should be paying for it or forcing others to   
   >>>>>>> pay for it.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> In other words you don't support the right.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> It can't be a right if it infringes someone else's rights, you   
   >>>>> pathetic loon.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Then religious hospitals have no *right* to impose their religious   
   >>>> beliefs on their medical practices, as that infringes on the rights of   
   >>>> the patients.   
   >>>   
   >>> 	It's a business like any other. A jewish deli doesn't serve   
   >>> pork--is that an infringement of the rights of the eaters?   
   >>   
   >> No, because pork-eaters can go to another deli.  Are you seriously   
   >> suggesting that eating of a certain type of food is the same as medical   
   >> operations?!   
   >   
   > When did birth control pills become a "medical operation?"   
      
   What if medical operations were against someone's religion?  Should they   
   be "forced to pay" for someone's operation?  Christian Scientists, for   
   example.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)