Leominster parishioners say birth control mandate an attack on religious freedom

Mar 24, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Sentinel & Enterprise

More than 25 protesters and their children stood outside St. Anna Church on Lancaster Street Friday voicing their ire over the Obama administration's decision mandating religious institutions provide contraceptives and other services that are objectionable to their faith.

Comments
21 - 39 of 39 Comments Last updated Aug 19, 2012
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Just Facts

Southborough, MA

#21 Mar 28, 2012
ward 5 wrote:
the new law bould require catholic hospital to provide birth control as part of their perscription program for their employee, you do not have to buy them, these same hospitals recieve money from the goverment to run their hospitals, these hospital hire people of all beliefs, and more than half of all catholic use birth control
Your English is pretty sad...you really should take an English class or two. Preventing births isn't health care it is population control. Provide the proof that these hospitals recieve government funding to run their hospitals. It doesn't matter what belief system you have when you hire into a company and they cannot discriminate against you because of your beliefs. It also doesn't matter if a Catholic person chooses to violate a rule within their faith...that is their choice.

Our Constitution specifically states that government needs to stay out of religion and not impose itself on any religion, which is what this government is trying to do...it cannot be allowed.
Just Facts

Southborough, MA

#22 Mar 28, 2012
BTW...if you don't believe what the Catholic Church believes, then don't go to work in a Catholic Institution...pretty simple.
Calm

Leominster, MA

#23 Mar 28, 2012
I noticed no one bothered to mention that birth control isn't just used to prevent pregnancy. It is also used for effective treatment of hormone disorders and uterine tumors.
Agree

Leominster, MA

#24 Mar 28, 2012
Good point calm. That's why it should be up to a doctor to prescribe them for you not a priest or a nun.
By your logic

Fitchburg, MA

#25 Mar 28, 2012
Just keep saying the same stupid things, no matter what is said that shows the error in your thinking. Someday you repeating it will make it true!

You know who I'm talking to.

No amount of truth will ever convince you that you're wrong.

Hammerhead comes to mind.
Agree

Leominster, MA

#26 Mar 28, 2012
Unless it says 'Father O'Malley MD' On the door of the church they shouldn't be providing any sort of medicine except for the sriritual kind.
Agree

Leominster, MA

#27 Mar 28, 2012
What's the matter PRO churches are now hospitals supporters? Did I stump you? The last I knew priests can't write prescriptions and doctors can't give out sacraments.

“sexual bliss”

Since: Aug 12

Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong

#28 Aug 11, 2012
Really wrote:
<quoted text>
And you have missed the point of the whole discussion. As an employer, the Church is not exempt from providing contraception as any other form of medical care in the plans they offer. This not about the government covering contraception. As a husband, you should know the cost of family planning does not equal the cost, nor the convenience of buying tampons. It requires a doctor. Married couples should not be forced to use condoms because one of them works for the Catholic Church.
CONTRACEPTIVES: Let me get this straight! The Obama govt has ordered all employers (or only churches?) to provide birth control for the workers. Staff of one church protest this, thinking govt agents will force them to use condoms. As if the Catholic staff could not simply drop their latex allocation into the trash.. this is beginning to soundlike a Woody Allen movie...
Join Free

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#29 Aug 11, 2012
This is not just a Catholic issue. This is an assault on religious freedom, period. To even consider a waiver in order to get around the issue of conscience is to say that we are willing to compromise our liberty in a discrete and piecemeal fashion. What's next? A waiver on gun ownership only for those who have been members of the police or the military? Once we allow this insidious practice of waivers on basic rights, we have given up our liberties to the whim of the State. This is a fight against tyranny, make no mistake about it.
yeah

Oxford, MA

#30 Aug 11, 2012
Really wrote:
They object to laws that force their churches AS EMPLOYERS to provide contraception care coverage to their employees. Too bad they can't see the advantages in reduced maternity leave costs, absences due to child-related illnesses, day-care conflicts, snow days, etc. Assisted population control is a win-win, with the exception of dwindling diocese or parish constituents.
I think they are more concerned about being forced to pay for abortions.
yeah

Oxford, MA

#31 Aug 11, 2012
The Insider wrote:
<quoted text>
Trust me they are not celebate. There was a baby cemetary located behind the South Street School where the nun's newborns were buried for many years in order to keep the birth secret.
Are you serious? Are you saying they killed the babies at birth? Why wouldn't they just surrender them adoption at birth?
trippy

New York, NY

#32 Aug 12, 2012
Agree wrote:
Unless it says 'Father O'Malley MD' On the door of the church they shouldn't be providing any sort of medicine except for the sriritual kind.
like

“sexual bliss”

Since: Aug 12

Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong

#33 Aug 13, 2012
Thanks for all the comments, some confusing. Does it mean the govt. is ordering employers to privide contraception for employees? Sounds good, for those who might not bother to buy condoms, etc. And for those who must not use contraception --is anyone forcing them to use condoms,etc? Please clarify.

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#34 Aug 14, 2012
Stamos wrote:
This is not just a Catholic issue. This is an assault on religious freedom, period. To even consider a waiver in order to get around the issue of conscience is to say that we are willing to compromise our liberty in a discrete and piecemeal fashion. What's next? A waiver on gun ownership only for those who have been members of the police or the military? Once we allow this insidious practice of waivers on basic rights, we have given up our liberties to the whim of the State. This is a fight against tyranny, make no mistake about it.
Birth control OK, gun control OK, I'm all for both. Stop being a drama queen with all this talk of "tyranny", it's the US slowly getting into the 21st century. When are we going to have an openly gay disabled President I ask? It's about time.
Devils Advocate

Rockville, MD

#35 Aug 14, 2012
The Woffer wrote:
<quoted text>
Birth control OK, gun control OK, I'm all for both. Stop being a drama queen with all this talk of "tyranny", it's the US slowly getting into the 21st century. When are we going to have an openly gay disabled President I ask? It's about time.
I thought Barney Frank retired!?!?!
Simplicity

Leominster, MA

#36 Aug 14, 2012
I believe that a baby in the woom should have the same rights as everyone else. Just like I believe if you make a choice to be punctured in the head and have your body suucked into a vacuum cleaner that's your right. These babys have no say and it's wrong.

Since: Aug 12

Location hidden

#37 Aug 14, 2012
Devils Advocate wrote:
<quoted text>
I thought Barney Frank retired!?!?!
He's not black. We want a black gay disabled President. Oh, and a Democrat.

“sexual bliss”

Since: Aug 12

Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong

#38 Aug 19, 2012
The Woffer wrote:
<quoted text>
He's not black. We want a black gay disabled President. Oh, and a Democrat.
Ooops, you missed one category: Female...

“sexual bliss”

Since: Aug 12

Tsuen Wan, Hong Kong

#39 Aug 19, 2012
Simplicity wrote:
I believe that a baby in the woom should have the same rights as everyone else. Just like I believe if you make a choice to be punctured in the head and have your body suucked into a vacuum cleaner that's your right. These babys have no say and it's wrong.
I personally agree with Simplicity.The unborn child in the womb deserves to live. Note, if a man rapes a woman, and she is pregnant, the bad guy gets 2 years in jail (if there is a vacant cell) BUT the innocent baby is sentenced to death! Is it fair?-- Roger G. Boschman

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Fitchburg Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Debate: Ferguson - Fitchburg, MA 8 hr Jtn 42
Has Jtn ruined Topix? 14 hr Tammy from Miami 1
Numbers of homeless increase in region 18 hr But 6
Thief grabs cash box at Leominster farm stand 21 hr Tim 4
Man charged with assaulting ex-girlfriend - Sen... (Sep '09) Fri Karen 67
McKay hosting family barbecue Thu Karen 2
Fitchburg Market Basket workers elated to be back Aug 28 Karen 1
•••

Fitchburg News Video

•••
•••

Fitchburg Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Fitchburg People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Fitchburg News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Fitchburg
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••