Catholic Bishops Oppose Compromise on Birth-Control

[GuyPinestra]

I guess I'm damned to Hell because I was circumcised as an infant.

I guess it's a good thing I'm not a Catholic, huh?

Just guessing here... LOL!

 

[Inthemiddle]

It may be a new law now... so i would think the question is, is it constitutional in regards to religious institutions.

I see nothing unconstitutional about it in regards to religious organizations. The first amendment is not absolute. Polygamy laws have been upheld as constitutional despite some religions preaching polygamy as a spiritual duty. If a church were to say that it's against their doctrines to pay overtime, would that be sufficient to exempt a church from paying overtime to is employees? If a church said it was against its doctrine to submit to search warrants, would that create an exception that prevented the police from executing an otherwise valid search warrant?

The first amendment protects the church from government interference in what it may teach regarding spiritual matters. But religious freedom does not create an exemption from laws enacted by the legislature that are not religious by nature. The heath care law is a law that deals with accessibility to affordable health care, in accordance with Congress' power to regulate interstate commerce. That is the issue the law is designed to address. The birth control issue is merely a provision of that law, and as such does not constitutes nothing more than Congress' lawful power under the commerce clause. Birth control is a common and basic form of preventative treatment, which aids people in their own family planning, as well as having additional applications that could lead a doctor to prescribe medical reasons other than pregnancy prevention. The church's first amendment rights are not violated by being required, because the church is not being required by the government to teach anything regarding birth control. The church still remains free to teach its position on birth control, and the church's followers remain free to either use or not use birth control based on their personal decisions and the advice of their physicians.

Not offering birth control is sub par health care?

Yes, I would say so, as the issue applies here. It's medicine based on someone else's ideology, instead of it being based on the needs of the patient. Birth control treatments are an ordinary part of modern day medicine. People choose to use or not use such treatments based on their personal family planning desires and the advice of their doctors for their overall health. There are applications for some birth control options that are completely unrelated to pregnancy, or that make one or the other birth control method more desirable. It's not much different, in essence, then the parents of sick children who refuse medical treatment in favor of trying to pray for God to cure their children.

If so .. i do hope they quit their jobs and find others that provide what they want.

Well, that's a lovely thought. But it really misses the point. The health care law covers all employers. The church should not be an exception. Like I said, someone has to do it. If employer health insurance packages are going to be part of the system that we're using to make affordable health care accessible to all Americans, then saying that someone should just quit their job and (hope and pray that they can) find a new one is antithetical to that. It's like telling someone, "Well, sucks if your husband beats you, just leave him and find a new one, no need to have the government involved by making it a crime and prosecuting him and going through all the hassle of a trial."

 

[Inthemiddle]

I guess I'm damned to Hell because I was circumcised as an infant.

I guess it's a good thing I'm not a Catholic, huh?

Just guessing here... LOL!

Actually, I would say that it's good for you that Catholicism is false. But that's another thread I suppose.

 

[Luissa]

I think this is interesting...

About 58% of American Catholics "believe that employers should be required to provide their employees with health care plans that cover contraception," the survey showed. That was higher than the percentage of white mainline Protestants (50%) and white evangelicals (38%) who believe that. The Catholic Church officially forbids contraception use, but 98% of Catholic women who have been sexually active have used birth control. The survey comes as Catholic bishops and their supporters are protesting a decision last month by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Survey: Majority of Catholics support including birth control in health care plans | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

But a majority of Catholics, 52%, "say that religiously affiliated colleges and hospitals should have to provide coverage that includes contraception," said the Institute's survey. That was greater than the percentages of white mainline Protestants (45%) and white evangelicals (31%) who feel the same.

 

[Luissa]

Listening to the bishops squeal, you'd also never know that, long before the Obama administration acted, 28 states -- including Mitt Romney's home state of Massachusetts and Newt Gingrich's home state of Georgia -- had already adopted regulations requiring contraception coverage without co-pay. Eight of those states, by the way, don't even provide an opt-out provision for churches.

Catholic bishops cry wolf on contraception - chicagotribune.com

 

[Luissa]

But women's health. Guttmacher found that 58 percent of women who use birth control do so, not just to prevent pregnancy, but for other important health reasons, like reducing the risk of ovarian cancer or treating uterine fibroid tumors and anemia.Catholic bishops cry wolf on contraception - chicagotribune.com


I bolded this for The T and other idiots.

 

[Luissa]

So yes, the Catholic Bishops are very wrong on this issue... but hey good job on agreeing with them while the majority of catholics in this country don't.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Does anyone know that the Church bowed out of mandatory circumcision mid last century?

Somewhere around the 1500's I think it was.

Mid last century would be 1950... right?

 

[Luissa]

It’s against federal law for employers to

exclude contraceptives from their health insurance plans when they

cover other preventive treatments, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said Wednesday.

The commission also found that excluding contraceptives also amounts to sex discrimination because these prescriptions are available only for women.

In the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, Congress specified that cost is not a defense, Vargyas said. She added that studies have found the cost is actually minimal. “You can buy years and years of contraceptives for the cost of one unintended pregnancy.”

The health plan and employers involved in these cases — who were not identified — also argued that their plans only covered “abnormal conditions” and that it was not sex discrimination. The commission rejected both of those arguments.

But most health plans cover similar services, and the decision announced Wednesday could be used by other women who seek coverage from their employers. It could also provide ammunition in a lawsuit.

EEOC: Preventive Insurance Includes Contraceptives - ABC News

 

[California Girl]

Wow.

As I said the last time you said that, the EEOC can say all sorts of things, and get overturned in court. The EEOC ruled a few years ago that churches couldn't fire people without government approval, that went all the way to the Supreme Court, and was unanimously struck down this year. The case you think is so wonderful hasn't even got past one judge, never mind the Supreme Court. In fact, EEOC is supposed to issue a revised ruling this month, my guess is they will simply argue that their ruling is not moot because the HHS rule takes precedence.

Guy, the Courts have been ruling for a woman's right to birth control since 1965.

The Church is not going to win this one. Sorry.

I guess you dont get the bit about .... the church is not denying them birth control... they are just not covering it in health care THEY offer. The chruch is not saying that they cannot have, procure it on their own, or use it.

Classic twist and spin coming from the left.... they can't deal with the facts so they lie, bullshit and spin. SOP. I doubt even they believe the shit their throwing out.

 

[Luissa]

Guy, the Courts have been ruling for a woman's right to birth control since 1965.

The Church is not going to win this one. Sorry.

I guess you dont get the bit about .... the church is not denying them birth control... they are just not covering it in health care THEY offer. The chruch is not saying that they cannot have, procure it on their own, or use it.

Classic twist and spin coming from the left.... they can't deal with the facts so they lie, bullshit and spin. SOP. I doubt even they believe the shit their throwing out.

Did someone say the church is saying their employees cannot take it?

And we all know Catholic women do not listen to them, so I am trying to figure out where we said they told them not to take it?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Bullshit argument Wry. First off, Obama would never even have won Election without Catholic Support in the first place. Second, you are not defending status quo, the Church is, as a matter of Conscience. This issue was not debated before being signed into law, so there really is no consent of the Governed. It was shoved down our throats. Why do you not anticipate consequence? Why should the Church be alright with funding Abortions, something it is Adamantly against in Principle? In matters of Conscience, who get's the last word in a Free Society? In any Society? What is corruption of Principle? Who loses in the end?

I'm so glad you shared a reasoned and unemotional tirade with me. Thank you.

As for your opinion that this is a matter of conscience, I have some doubts. I suspect the Catholic Church and other competing religious orders need numbers, abortion and birth control would restrict the number of new followers. Telling someone of faith that they will go to hell for using contraception seems to me little different than the exercise of power and control of an abuser.

That is likely far fetched to you and probably to most of the Bishops. However, for anyone to suggest that the history of the Catholic Church as a political institution is absurd hasn't an inkling of history.

nice strawman. barley?

The fallacy is Straw Man, del, and defined thusly:

Straw man

Definition: One way of making our own arguments stronger is to anticipate and respond in advance to the arguments that an opponent might make. In the straw man fallacy, the arguer sets up a weak version of the opponent's position and tries to score points by knocking it down. But just as being able to knock down a straw man (like a scarecrow) isn't very impressive, defeating a watered-down version of your opponent's argument isn't very impressive either.

Stirke two!

 

[Jroc]

Of course i am.

because circumcision and birth control are equivalent issues in catholic dogma.

idiot

Both are condemned by the church. So why aren't you being consistent? That's not my fault, it's yours. Don't blame me for your lack of intelligence.

Look idiot... the Federal government has no power to tell a private business or organizations what they have to sell. People like you sit here and defend tyrannical all power government, this is what you get. Open your friken eyes man

the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics outlawed the practice of Judaism (and persecuted all religious/ethnic beliefs). Jewish males from the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics were denied circumcision due to the long-standing socialist prohibition of Jewish religious practice.

HOLOCAUST MUSEUMS HOME PAGE ENCYCLOPEDIA EDUCATION CENTER - EXPOSE NAZISM, FASCISM, SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, GENOCIDE swastika http://rexcurry.net/swastik3clear.jpg Swastika Jewish Hebrew Ha-Shoah, socialist Holocaust, Wholecaust, Wholecost, Francis Bel

 

[Luissa]

I should add most insurance companies don't cover circumcision anymore, including state funded health care. My son was getting state paid health care through Group Health when he was born and they would not pay for it.
I am not sure what people are arguing on that, but most people have to pay out of pocket theses days.

 

[Jroc]

I should add most insurance companies don't cover circumcision anymore, including state funded health care. My son was getting state paid health care through Group Health when he was born and they would not pay for it.I am not sure what people are arguing on that, but most people have to pay out of pocket theses days.

So pay for it, so what? Insurance doesn't cover the fee for the Mohel at a Jewish Bris either.

Mohel: Who Is A Qualified Mohel?

A mohel is an expert in the surgical aspects of circumcision as well as knowledgeable in the laws and customs pertaining to a traditional circumcision and ceremony. A mohel is a person who is certified to be capable and knowledgeable in both the surgical aspects of performing circumcision as well as the traditional aspects of performing a kosher circumcision and the traditional ceremony

 

[syrenn]

I should add most insurance companies don't cover circumcision anymore, including state funded health care. My son was getting state paid health care through Group Health when he was born and they would not pay for it.
I am not sure what people are arguing on that, but most people have to pay out of pocket theses days.

Exactly, so why force the church to pay for something that they do not offer? If the women want birth control... pay for it out of pocket like the rest of us.

 

[SFC Ollie]

all i have to do is look down to know you have no fucking clue what you're talking about, googleboi



keep swinging

See you in Hell, then. Because you've lost eternal salvation. That's the position of the church. It's just frequently overlooked.

Um, no that is not the position of the church from all the reading I've been doing.

For all the old rules and declarations you want to quote the modern catholic church takes no stance on circumcision that is not done as a religious ceremony...

In other words, they could care less as long as it is not done for religious reasons...

one of several similar statements I ran across, I'm not going back and looking for all of them....
Can Catholics circumcise their sons? - Catholic Answers Forums

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Way to avoid the question.

It's not a valid question Ravi. We are not dealing with what ifs, we are dealing with the actual fact that the first amendment may be under attack.

Now I am not a very religious person, and I am not a catholic, but I'll be damned if i will allow the constitution to be broken. And this may be doing it.

The point is that if you allow a business a religious exemption for one religious belief you certainly can't deny them one for another. I doubt Catholics are going to suddenly embrace pedophilia but what if some organization like NAMBLA becomes a religion?

Anyway, here's a good link on the ins and outs of the issue.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/feb/10/health-care-law-catholics-birth-control/

You really do not understand the issues, do you? The government is trying to impose on the Catholic church by forcing it to do something it disagrees with, not by trying to prevent it from torturing people they think are witches. The first is wrong because the government is imposing its beliefs on a group that disagrees with it, when it has already exempted another religion from the law completely, even if they run a business that actually deals with the public. The latter is the Catholics trying to impose their beliefs on others.

Anytime anyone tries to impose their beliefs on someone else I will raise an objection.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Wow.

As I said the last time you said that, the EEOC can say all sorts of things, and get overturned in court. The EEOC ruled a few years ago that churches couldn't fire people without government approval, that went all the way to the Supreme Court, and was unanimously struck down this year. The case you think is so wonderful hasn't even got past one judge, never mind the Supreme Court. In fact, EEOC is supposed to issue a revised ruling this month, my guess is they will simply argue that their ruling is not moot because the HHS rule takes precedence.

Guy, the Courts have been ruling for a woman's right to birth control since 1965.

The Church is not going to win this one. Sorry.

My name is not Guy.

The courts have ruled that religious employers who provide certain services have to apply them equally. This allows the church to not actually provide the service, or allows them to set up a copay where the employee can pay for the service themselves. States also have much broader definitions of religious institutions that are exempted from the laws. Obama, in his infinite wisdom, decided to require all employees to provide contraception, period, and narrowed the religious exemption to the point that the only places that qualified were churches, and a strong argument could be made that if a non Catholic wen to a Catholic church and asked for help to get to the nearest gas station no one would be able to answer the question legally without making the church exempt.

Please, keep proving you don't know anything, I enjoy the feeling I get when I mock you.

 

[Luissa]

I should add most insurance companies don't cover circumcision anymore, including state funded health care. My son was getting state paid health care through Group Health when he was born and they would not pay for it.
I am not sure what people are arguing on that, but most people have to pay out of pocket theses days.

Exactly, so why force the church to pay for something that they do not offer? If the women want birth control... pay for it out of pocket like the rest of us.

I pay a premium, and so my companies health care plan covers it.

My biggest problem with this is, these Bishops are playing politics. A majority of Catholics are for them covering birth control, and many Catholic Hospitals and Charities already cover birth control. Look up how many Catholic Women actually take birth control.
You say you don't want big government running you life, but you have no problem with male Arch Bishops running yours?