Boston1

ZASHAGALKA, Thank you for the explanation! The depot thing makes sense.

Thank you for the detailed explanation that makes a lot of sense.

the posts, but it's degenerated into name calling and emotional pitying - and that wasn't my intention in engaging in the discussion. I thought "tolerant" people accepted differing views. I thought that was the general mantra of the movement. Clearly, the tone of this thread has become clouded with "intolerance". I hoped to be a part of interesting debate. Guess not, no biggie. It was interesting hearing some of the differing thoughts. Relativism can be such an exasperating and spiraling perspective. Thanks, again. Do Good.

but they were blocked by those who claim to care for individual rights, weren't they?

in the VA system...tell me if you feel the same. :)

Hi Talaxandra, I simply don't have the time to write a thesis here on Planned Parenthood and their agenda that is well documented dating back to the 1930's. Planned Parenthood is without question the number 1 provider of condoms in North America. They also provide, according to Consumer Reports, the "least reliable" condoms on the market to their clients. Additionally, they are the number 1 provider of abortions in North America - think there's any link between providing ineffective condoms and abortions? As to the connection between Planned Parenthood and the UN and efforts to control world population - extremely well documented. I have no doubt you know how to do an internet search. As to the willingness of Pro-Aborts in thier zeal to deny care, put people out of work, and close down Christian charity centers, I'd suggest you investigate the case against Catholic Charities USA in California. Regarding rape - should the innocent baby be killed? We are way off the topic of the original post - but really maybe not so much. Planned Parenthood asserts their "right" to protect rapists if it means garnering an abortion $ for their office, you don't agree with that protection do you? Let's not paint the supporters of this legislation unfairly unless we're willing to shine a BRIGHT light on its opposition. I think that's fair, don't you? Have a great one :)

I apparently have managed to move the question of the original post ... Quickly, one of the HUGE organizations that wishes to impose it's will on a world is PLANNED PARENTHOOD. Are you unaware of Planned Parenthood's influence on the United Nations and their (UN) wish to overtly impose population control (that means getting into your bedroom) on your household? Honestly, this is straying far from the percieved original intent of this writer and the post generating this discussion. If you hate Christians, God love you...you're free to do that. America allows you to do that - in very concerted and organized ways. Shouldn't Christians, know matter how much they are hated or their beliefs are hated, be allowed to congregate and legislate? Isn't that the thrust of the original post? Which brings me back to the thought that the "tolerant" seem most offended by, without explaining why, my expression and question - WHY IS IT WRONG TO DISAGREE WITH YOU? Christians accept they are going to be persecuted. Many have died for that belief (some who disagree with me would say 'not enough' ) Seriously, why do you believe anyone should be morally forced to defend (which is what this law hopes to avert) a position they morally disagree with...opposers of this measure have hoped to couch this in terms of the good Samaritan parable - opposers have tried to couch this in terms of what's right and what's wrong...but I thought - in terms of moral relativism there is no right and no wrong - so how from what I can tell (from what's been posted) if the law is about MORAL freedom - can anyone supporting it, really be in the wrong? Who opposes moral freedom?

GOD LOVES the SINNER but HATES the SIN.

I work overnight, and I've got to get to bed - but I assume everyone likes something of an immediate response to their post - my immediate response? You're kidding! You wrote - "The terms 'pro-abortion' and 'pro-homosexual' make it sound as though there's a group of people trying to make people have abortions or change their sexual orientation, in this case 'Catholics and other Christians'. Are you not aware of the individuals that call themselves Catholics and Christians and the HUGE MARKET for materials that are designed to draw individuals to "abortions" and an "appreciation" for "alternative sexual orientation" - all for profit? Are you not aware of whose driving those markets? Seriously, my question addresses only your knowledge of whether or not there is a HUGE movement by a small movement to "convert" "Christians" to their "non-Christian" beliefs? It's a 'yes' or 'no'. Do Good. Boston1 :)

because someone else is asserting thier rights? Let's take a breath and thank goodness for anonymous forums and the outlet they provide. I'm a new nurse, I love nursing...but man am I frustrated by the things nurses do to each other :) Thanks for writing.

I speak very respectfully and sincerely to you. I applaud that you respect the right of anyone to refuse the right to care to another. Isn't that at the very base of the "pro-choice" movement? I know several people (mostly men) that believe themselves to be homosexual. None of them call themselves "gay", because none of them call themselves "happy". There is a movement, and to be honest with you you'd be naive to believe otherwise, within the "gay" and radical "membership" of homosexuals that savor nothing more, on a daily basis, than a confrontation with Christians. Why? You know why...honest homosexuals and honest Christians know why. There is an interesting caveat to your post to which I'll add emphasis for reasons which will become obvious "...I do think that the religious groups should be able to refuse care to anyone other than VIOLENT PEOPLE..." I wonder how many homosexuals that suffer silently (as I believe you wish to present yourself - I may be wrong - and as EVERY homosexual I've met does) - really recognize the Christian persecution by RADICAL homosexuals as a similar battle they face? A VIOLENT onslaught by VIOLENT PEOPLE. I wonder how many RADICAL homosexuals recognize that wish to bash Christians wish to do so with the same hatred they perceive Christians wish bash them. Let's be honest, Chad, if you think the life of homosexuality is a pleasing way of life - that's your choice, but at the same dance if you ask me to waltz with you, aren't I allowed to say "no".? Many RADICAL homosexuals, and I don't believe you're one (I think you just want to live your life - and hope everyday, if there's an afterlife, you do alright in the end) think it's offensive for anyone to say "I don't want to dance with you". Sometimes in life, people keep walking, no matter how much you're hurting. It always feels wrong when you're the one that's hurting. Does that always mean it always is wrong? Chad, you've said you've "never tried to force my sexual orientation on anyone". I'm being honest with you - most homosexuals (I'm assuming that's where you're at - for reasonable conjecture) I've met don't care that anyone knows ... however, there is a RADICAL movement of homosexuals that wants to impose their beliefs on everyone, would you agree? It is to those that want to condemn this kind of legislation that I addressed my post. God bless, do Good. :) I have never tried to force my sexual orientation on anyone. I live my life everyday and I do think that the religeous groups should be able to refuse care to anyone other than violent people. Chad

respect, you've not discredited my post. In fact, you've supported it! The tact of the most intolerant is to pretend the "fallacy" of those that disagree with them is self-evident. Yet, they reject self-evidence (i.e. that which appears "normal") as proof of the weakness of their own tenets. If you want to discredit my comments, take a real a shot. God bless you and always do Good. Boston1

Every VA hospital takes tax money from taxpayers but refuses treatment to most taxpayers.

Proabortion and prohomosexual groups are incessantly trying to force their beliefs on Catholics and other Christians. Why do they and they're apologists consider it wrong for others to stand up for their own rights of a free conscience? It seems to me the most intolerant groups are the ones that preach the "tolerance virtue" the loudest. I'd like to read more about the legislation and the thoughts of those who favor it. The thoughts of those who oppose it will be well covered in the mainstream media.