XPost: alt.society.liberalism, alt.politics.liberalism, soc.culture.usa
XPost: alt.atheism
From: markp@NOSPAMmail.com
On 3/3/2012 9:54 PM, China Blue Sea wrote:
> In article,
> Dånk 42Ø wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 10:37:23 -0800, China Blue Sea wrote:
>>
>>> In article,
>>> Dånk 42Ø wrote:
>>>
>>>> The government is attempting to force religious institutions to include
>>>> birth control services in their health insurance plans, even if birth
>>>> control violates their religious teachings. The issue is bigger than
>>>
>>> I would think forcing the Catholic church to hire Hindus would be a
>>> bigger issue, but it is already tried and true law that if that church
>>> cannot discriminate based on religion for most kinds of jobs.
>>
>> True, but the issue isn't religious discrimination, it's whether a
>> religious organization should be forced to violate its principles.
>
> Hint: Hinduism is pretty much contrary to every principle of Catholicism.
>
>> If Christian organizations are not free to discriminate when hiring
>> employees, then Jewish and Muslim organizations may not discriminate,
>> either. (Of course, nobody would dare tell a Muslim organization it must
>> hire Jews.) Now suppose that I, a Satanist, am hired by a Jewish
>> hospital. My contract says that since I am on call, the hospital
>> cafeteria must provide me with free meals. I have a constitutional right
>> to eat pork, so now I demand that the cafeteria provide me with free pork
>> chops and bacon cheeseburgers. Naturally, Jews would object, arguing
>> that my right to eat pork does not require them to provide it.
>
You do not have a constitutional right to eat pork.
>
> Provide evidence any of your conclusions could actually occur.
>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
