Catholic Church Waging War on Women and Gays

Oct 30, 2007 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Fables of the reconstruction

“Pharmacists must seek to raise people's awareness so that all human beings are protected from conception to natural death, and so that medicines truly play a therapeutic role”

Pope Benedict XVI said Monday that pharmacists have a right to use conscientious objection to avoid dispensing emergency contraception or euthanasia drugs - and told them they should also inform patients of the ... via Fables of the reconstruction

Comments
206,921 - 206,940 of 219,864 Comments Last updated Tuesday

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241607
Nov 16, 2012
 
And today the Christian and Muslim leaders of the cults are ONLY intent on the religious "conversion" of each other.

And to make matters even more ridicuous ... the Christians slander each other as offenders of god's will, while in Muslim countries, the Muslims slander each other as offenders of Allah's will.

And they call the ridiculous nonsense they promote as truth ... LOVE!!!

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241608
Nov 16, 2012
 
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "for medical malpractice" is giving you so much trouble, Moron?
You adore your special little phrases Bitner, but within the phrases is YOUR malpractise concerning DISHONESTY.

You are one of the most deceptive people I have ever encountered.

You can phrase it any way you desire ... but you believe the physicians intentionally caused her death ... which (if that were true) would be murder in the first degree!!!

“Post at your own risk”

Since: Sep 09

Whining is unbecoming

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241609
Nov 16, 2012
 
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
You adore your special little phrases Bitner, but within the phrases is YOUR malpractise concerning DISHONESTY.
You are one of the most deceptive people I have ever encountered.
You can phrase it any way you desire ... but you believe the physicians intentionally caused her death ... which (if that were true) would be murder in the first degree!!!
June, many malpractice suits do not involve premeditation.
I haven't read all of the current batch of posts, but I don't think Sis used the word "intentional".

Did you read the article in its entirety?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241610
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
You adore your special little phrases Bitner, but within the phrases is YOUR malpractise concerning DISHONESTY.
You are one of the most deceptive people I have ever encountered.
You can phrase it any way you desire ... but you believe the physicians intentionally caused her death ... which (if that were true) would be murder in the first degree!!!
No, that is not my position. The dishonesty is all yours.

My position is that they allowed her to die by deliberately NOT doing everything medically in their power to save her. That is not "murder", nor did I ever imply that it is. It is medical malpractice, and it is not my "special phrase". It's a legal and medical phrase, but I can see that it's yet ANOTHER phrase YOU are too stupid to use properly, or even understand.

You're a fricken moron.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241611
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
No, that is not my position. The dishonesty is all yours.
My position is that they allowed her to die by deliberately NOT doing everything medically in their power to save her. That is not "murder", nor did I ever imply that it is. It is medical malpractice, and it is not my "special phrase". It's a legal and medical phrase, but I can see that it's yet ANOTHER phrase YOU are too stupid to use properly, or even understand.
You're a fricken moron.
I disagree.

Your attitude toward the physicians indicated that they chose to let the woman die, when they knew they could have saved her ... which would be murder ... no matter how you now try to pretty up your harsh judgment concerning the physicians.

I believe their intent was to save the woman.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241612
Nov 16, 2012
 
Junket wrote:
<quoted text>
June, many malpractice suits do not involve premeditation.
I understand that. I am referring ONLY to Bitner's attitude toward the INTENT of the physicians.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241613
Nov 16, 2012
 
Malpractice most certainly does not indicate intentional harm.

Bitner's attitude toward the idea that the physicians intended to harm the woman by depriving her of necessary care, is an attitude that irritates the bejeepers out of me!

Such an attitude could cause harm to the physicians that I believe did their best within very trying circumstances.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241614
Nov 16, 2012
 
When in NEED to prove religious "truths" ... always fall back on the words written by others.

If the gullible believers can be persuaded that the words of ancient peoples contain absolute truth ... YOU, as a leader of a religious cult will have it made.

Again and again, history proves it is so.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>

From the book,“A History of Christianity”… volume 2 Clyde L. Manschreck, Editor, comes the following………

In addition to the need for a canon and a creed, the early church also felt the need for the authority of authentic leadership. With so many voices being raised, some of them claiming direct and superior revelation, it was only natural to turn to the apostles for a way out of the confusion.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241615
Nov 16, 2012
 
June VanDerMark wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree.
Your attitude toward the physicians indicated that they chose to let the woman die, when they knew they could have saved her ... which would be murder ... no matter how you now try to pretty up your harsh judgment concerning the physicians.
I believe their intent was to save the woman.
You are wrong. It would not be murder at all, but medical malpractice. Just because YOU are too stupid to understand that, doesn't change the facts.

I'm not trying to "pretty up" anything, you lying piece of shit.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241616
Nov 16, 2012
 
Without Gerald Gardner and his cohorts preaching and writing words about ancient witches, etc., modern Paganism would not exist.

The modern Pagans mentally ingested SOME of those words in a very serious manner in deed ... but they threw away Gerald's words that the "goddess curses homosexuals."

It was and is to the advantage of the modern Pagans to distance themselves from that specific "nasty" teaching of Gerald, as other religions already taught such nonsense.

You will see the deceptions of the modern Pagans ... only if you choose to see!

They no-doubt value their ritual silliness as did and do all people of religion ... but the silliness of ALL religion stems ONLY from fantasy ... PERIOD ... and Gerald Gardner's fantasies and written words are from my perspective of no more value than were the words of the hairy ape-like, ignorant ancient peoples.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241617
Nov 16, 2012
 
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>
You are wrong. It would not be murder at all.
Of course it wouldn't! But if you had your way ... it WOULD!

My guess is, you would have no mercy on those physicians ... NONE!!!

"How DARE they," is your attitude!

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241618
Nov 16, 2012
 
My guess is, if one such as Bitner went into law, she would be a prosecutor, NOT a defense lawyer.

Everyone would be guilty until proven by further testimony of countless witnesses as innocent ... unless they were Wiccan.

Bitner would let other prosecutors take those cases, as she wouldn't want to appear to favor her own religion.{{{snicker}}}

Atheists do not favor those in any religion, so a lawyer who is Atheist, whether a prosecutor, or a defense lawyer would be best to keep quiet about his/her Atheism.

Very quiet indeed.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241619
Nov 16, 2012
 
Observe the hard features of the prosecutor Nancy Grace, and through his religion, the prosecuting pope (concerning who will burn in hell)... and you will see that harsh judgment takes its toll on the facial features of those who KNOW such certain answers!

But sometimes there IS a backlash.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>

Nancy Grace will likely get sued for her unprofessional crusade to deny Casey Anthony a fair trial, put her to death, and gin up public hatred against her

The prosecution’s case fell apart by overcharging Casey Anthony and trying to put her to death.

Had they charged her with manslaughter or some lesser murder charge, they might well have gotten a conviction. The prosecution made a strong circumstantial case that Casey Anthony had something to do with the death of her daughter.

http://www.escapetyranny.com/2011/07/05/nancy...

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241620
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Nancy Grace's fiance of many years past was "murdered."

My guess is, Nancy had her "reasons" for becoming a prosecutor!

Note her mention of how "god" ultimately gave her "something good."

Whether her aggression to make her fiance's death meaningful is "good" ... is a matter of opinion.

I believe she "could be" dangerous to those that she believes gets in "her" way of settling an over-due debt to HER.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241621
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

The Catholic "church" has been sued many times for the cover-up of the pope in the sex-abuse scandal.

But the pope has not been sued!

Religion often protects criminals that otherwise would have to answer to an earthly judge.

Whether real justice will ensue is any body's guess, but if there is simply more of the same after death ... the pope will be sitting on a throne, still claiming he IS in deed preaching "truth."

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241622
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

What NEXT???
>>>>>>> >>>>>>

Top court hears botched home circumcision case Friday

OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada will hear on Friday the dramatic case of a B.C. father who, for religious reasons, tried to circumcise his four-year-old son on his kitchen floor with a carpet blade and a blood coagulant meant for horses.

Counsel for D.J.W. will argue that the man’s actions were performed with “reasonable care” and without intent to harm his son.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/court+hears+bo...

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241623
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

It is NEVER the children that choose to have their genitals mutilated.

It is the sickness of adults suffering from religious indoctrination that keep on inflicting the needless suffering.

And they carry on the rituals because they don't question that the rituals were created by ancient human mental-malpractice.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241624
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

The idea that a god would create a foreskin only to have men cut off the foreskin because the god finds it "necessary," is beyond ludicrous.

Yet the rabbis and the mullahs continue to preach their supposed truths.

And the followers continue to follow.

Since: Sep 09

Vanderhoof, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241625
Nov 16, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Chris Hitchens and the "knowing> rabbi!

http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Joyce

Orangeville, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#241626
Nov 16, 2012
 
tman wrote:
<quoted text>
I know. We both have diagreements and we both believe we are the ones who are right. However, I believe that my views on abortion are more progressive than yours because new medical science and technology favor the pro-life movement.
No matter what you say the bottom line is you believe the unborn always comes first than the pregnant female. That's the way the Roman Catholic Church sees it and always did.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••