Catholic Bishops Oppose Compromise on Birth-Control

[California Girl]

Plain and simple, it goes against the first amendment.

So all of you who don't seem to give a flying fuck about this one, should just shut up about all the BS you've been peddling about the Patriot Act and the TSA and God knows what else.

It's BS and it's no good for you.............

Yes I have already fired off letters to my congressman, both Senators, and the White House.......

Please point out where in the first amendment it says that religious owned businesses can ignore the law?

It doesn't. It merely says that Congress can't prevent you from practicing your religion and it can't establish a state religion.

Nothing in this mandate keeps Catholics from believing the silly things they believe.

And when the Church starts expelling members for practicing birth control, then I'll take them seriously on this issue.

Again....

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Note that last part..... 'free exercise thereof. Congress does not have the right to define what 'free exercise thereof' means. They have no authority do define that. The 'free exercise thereof' includes a religion's right to run charities, schools, hospitals - because they are part of our religion.

You might be too stupid to understand it.... but others are not.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Refuse compromise. Isn't that the name of the game in today's world?

This just goes to show that it was never about first amendment rights or expecting the church to do something it was morally opposed to. This is about the church trying to force it's ideology on people, whether the people want it or not.

No asshole it is not. Try getting your head out of Obamas ass and thinking with it for a change. There is no compromise, Insurance companies are not going to pay for this free of charge. Doctors are not going to work for free. The church will end up paying for it one way or another. And that makes it wrong.

Guy, one more time. The insurance companies have no problem with this. They realize family planning is cheaper than birth. Even most companies don't have a problem with this, they know that a pregnant employee is going to cost them gobs of money in overtime, sick leave, lowered productivity. (That is, unless you are like the assholes I used to work for, who fired employees when they got pregnant.)

Obama gave the men in dresses an out. But the insurance companies won't back them and their own congregations won't really back them. The only Catholics who would get upset about this are the ones who already hate Obama.

If you're going to address what I said, address it, Joe. Don't go changing the fucking subject. The costs will be passed back to the churches in the form of higher premiums no matter what, that's their business model, and that's why the insurance companies don't have any objections. They KNOW it's not going to cost THEM a dime!

 

[JoeB131]

Plain and simple, it goes against the first amendment.

So all of you who don't seem to give a flying fuck about this one, should just shut up about all the BS you've been peddling about the Patriot Act and the TSA and God knows what else.

It's BS and it's no good for you.............

Yes I have already fired off letters to my congressman, both Senators, and the White House.......

Please point out where in the first amendment it says that religious owned businesses can ignore the law?

It doesn't. It merely says that Congress can't prevent you from practicing your religion and it can't establish a state religion.

Nothing in this mandate keeps Catholics from believing the silly things they believe.

And when the Church starts expelling members for practicing birth control, then I'll take them seriously on this issue.

Are you certain you are American?

yup. I am. Now are you going to keep avoiding the point, Sarge?

How does this rule interfer in the free practice of religion in any way?

It doesn't. It's a law that governs business contracts. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[finebead]

Let me know when you have a poll that asks the right question and get's that response. If you can't even ask the right question, why should anyone consider the results as valid?

The majority of Catholics do not want its Church forced to go against its doctrine.

This is a First Amendment issue.

You have not stated your problem with the question. What's the problem? You have not posted any counter-example poll.

You say "The majority of Catholics do not want its Church forced to go against its doctrine.", but clearly this is FALSE.

The vast majority of sexually active catholic women USE BIRTH CONTROL, its 98% that do at some point in their life! How can the majority of catholics not want the church to be forced to go against their doctrine, when 98% of them go against the doctrine themselves?

A national survey found that 98 percent of sexually active Catholic women use birth control at some point in their lives. Moreover, a survey by the Public Religion Research Institute reported that even among Catholics, 52 percent back the Obama policy: they believe that religiously affiliated universities and hospitals should be obliged to include birth control coverage in insurance plans.

So, does America’s national health policy really need to make a far-reaching exception for Catholic institutions when a majority of Catholics oppose that exception?

I wondered what other religiously affiliated organizations do in this situation. Christian Science traditionally opposed medical care. Does The Christian Science Monitor deny health insurance to employees?

“We offer a standard health insurance package,” John Yemma, the editor, told me.

That makes sense. After all, do we really want to make accommodations across the range of faith? What if organizations affiliated with Jehovah’s Witnesses insisted on health insurance that did not cover blood transfusions? What if ultraconservative Muslim or Jewish organizations objected to health care except at sex-segregated clinics?

The basic principle of American life is that we try to respect religious beliefs, and accommodate them where we can. But we ban polygamy, for example, even for the pious. Your freedom to believe does not always give you a freedom to act.

In this case, we should make a good-faith effort to avoid offending Catholic bishops who passionately oppose birth control. I’m glad that Obama sought a compromise. But let’s remember that there are also other interests at stake. If we have to choose between bishops’ sensibilities and women’s health, our national priority must be the female half of our population.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/opinion/sunday/kristof-beyond-pelvic-politics.html

I've stated it all over the fucking board. If you can't keep up, that's not my problem.

The fact remains, while a majority of people support access to birth control (and I am one of them)... the polls - at least those who actually ask the right question.... show that support goes to the Church.

The right question is not about birth control. It is whether people support the government forcing a religion to 'compromise' its doctrine. The Catholic Church is against birth control - no matter how many Catholics personally choose to use it - it is against Church Doctrine.... and the vast majority support the Church over the Government.

But.... more importantly than any 'poll', is the First Amendment - polls are irrelevant. The First Amendment provides freedom of religion... and the 'free exercise thereof'... Catholic charities, schools, hospitals, etc... they are the 'free exercise thereof' of our religion.

Get over it. Every single individual in the country could support Obama.... doesn't matter... this is a nation founded on the Constitution... not opinion polls.

You ask the wrong question, and the poll asks specifically the right question, do you support the Obama administration requiring religious affiliated institutions to cover birth control, the answer is 58% of catholics say YES.

They do not view it as telling the church what to do in church matters, the catholic church employees do not have to be offered birth control. There is the religious freedom. And most catholics recognize that when the church operates OUTSIDE the activities of the church, it should be governed by secular laws of the secular space. That's what people think.

 

[JoeB131]

Guy, one more time. The insurance companies have no problem with this. They realize family planning is cheaper than birth. Even most companies don't have a problem with this, they know that a pregnant employee is going to cost them gobs of money in overtime, sick leave, lowered productivity. (That is, unless you are like the assholes I used to work for, who fired employees when they got pregnant.)

Obama gave the men in dresses an out. But the insurance companies won't back them and their own congregations won't really back them. The only Catholics who would get upset about this are the ones who already hate Obama.

If you're going to address what I said, address it, Joe. Don't go changing the fucking subject. The costs will be passed back to the churches in the form of higher premiums no matter what, that's their business model, and that's why the insurance companies don't have any objections. They KNOW it's not going to cost THEM a dime!

1) I wasn't responding to you, I was responding to Ollie.

2) Birth Control is Revenue Neutral. They know it's not going to cost them a dime because paying for 50 birth control prescriptions is less than paying for one pregnancy. That's why they have no objections.

3) The Church's objections here are NOT financial. They are not pleading poverty here. Their objection is not 'We can't afford it", it's "We don't want to pay for it because our bizarre intreperation of the Bible says that birth control is wrong, even though 75% of our congregants disagree with our position and we are already complying in 28 states that already require it.."

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Anyone who believes in a god cannot accuse others of a lack of critical thought.

Anybody who makes statements like that does not know what critical thought is.

 

[California Girl]

You have not stated your problem with the question. What's the problem? You have not posted any counter-example poll.

You say "The majority of Catholics do not want its Church forced to go against its doctrine.", but clearly this is FALSE.

The vast majority of sexually active catholic women USE BIRTH CONTROL, its 98% that do at some point in their life! How can the majority of catholics not want the church to be forced to go against their doctrine, when 98% of them go against the doctrine themselves?


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/opinion/sunday/kristof-beyond-pelvic-politics.html

I've stated it all over the fucking board. If you can't keep up, that's not my problem.

The fact remains, while a majority of people support access to birth control (and I am one of them)... the polls - at least those who actually ask the right question.... show that support goes to the Church.

The right question is not about birth control. It is whether people support the government forcing a religion to 'compromise' its doctrine. The Catholic Church is against birth control - no matter how many Catholics personally choose to use it - it is against Church Doctrine.... and the vast majority support the Church over the Government.

But.... more importantly than any 'poll', is the First Amendment - polls are irrelevant. The First Amendment provides freedom of religion... and the 'free exercise thereof'... Catholic charities, schools, hospitals, etc... they are the 'free exercise thereof' of our religion.

Get over it. Every single individual in the country could support Obama.... doesn't matter... this is a nation founded on the Constitution... not opinion polls.

You ask the wrong question, and the poll asks specifically the right question, do you support the Obama administration requiring religious affiliated institutions to cover birth control, the answer is 58% of catholics say YES.

They do not view it as telling the church what to do in church matters, the catholic church employees do not have to be offered birth control. There is the religious freedom. And most catholics recognize that when the church operates OUTSIDE the activities of the church, it should be governed by secular laws of the secular space. That's what people think.

We are not a nation governed by 'polls', we are a nation of laws.

The government does not have the right to define what is or is not the 'free exercise thereof' of the First Amendment. Polls are irrelevant.... and for every poll you can provide, there are others that show the opposite. It's often the problem with 'polls', it depends who you ask and how you frame the question.

Such is life.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Plain and simple, it goes against the first amendment.

So all of you who don't seem to give a flying fuck about this one, should just shut up about all the BS you've been peddling about the Patriot Act and the TSA and God knows what else.

It's BS and it's no good for you.............

Yes I have already fired off letters to my congressman, both Senators, and the White House.......

Please point out where in the first amendment it says that religious owned businesses can ignore the law?

It doesn't. It merely says that Congress can't prevent you from practicing your religion and it can't establish a state religion.

Nothing in this mandate keeps Catholics from believing the silly things they believe.

And when the Church starts expelling members for practicing birth control, then I'll take them seriously on this issue.

Again....

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Note that last part..... 'free exercise thereof. Congress does not have the right to define what 'free exercise thereof' means. They have no authority do define that. The 'free exercise thereof' includes a religion's right to run charities, schools, hospitals - because they are part of our religion.

You might be too stupid to understand it.... but others are not.

That's the most ignorant thing I've seen in this whole debate.

The Catholic church gets to claim that Notre Dame football games are 'religion' and therefore the lady hired to work a concession stand can be denied birth control in her health plan,

contrary to US law.

lolol

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Refuse compromise. Isn't that the name of the game in today's world?

This just goes to show that it was never about first amendment rights or expecting the church to do something it was morally opposed to. This is about the church trying to force it's ideology on people, whether the people want it or not.

Because we all know Obama would never take the position that he gets to make the rules cause he won.

Tell me something, if you objected to the government forcing you to pay for kids to go to church, and they decided that instead of you paying for it you would instead have to pay someone else who then pays for that, would you think that was a compromise, or would you think they were trying to insult your intelligence?

 

[washamericom]

is this government mandate so women can have recreational sex (sex for fun) ??

No, it so they can have a life other than being an obligatory baby machine.

i'd like to have a life and not be an obligatory baby making machine.

should the muslims or jews have to pay for my rubbers ? how about circumcision?, will that be mandatory too under obamacare ?

 

[GuyPinestra]

Guy, one more time. The insurance companies have no problem with this. They realize family planning is cheaper than birth. Even most companies don't have a problem with this, they know that a pregnant employee is going to cost them gobs of money in overtime, sick leave, lowered productivity. (That is, unless you are like the assholes I used to work for, who fired employees when they got pregnant.)

Obama gave the men in dresses an out. But the insurance companies won't back them and their own congregations won't really back them. The only Catholics who would get upset about this are the ones who already hate Obama.

If you're going to address what I said, address it, Joe. Don't go changing the fucking subject. The costs will be passed back to the churches in the form of higher premiums no matter what, that's their business model, and that's why the insurance companies don't have any objections. They KNOW it's not going to cost THEM a dime!

1) I wasn't responding to you, I was responding to Ollie.

2) Birth Control is Revenue Neutral. They know it's not going to cost them a dime because paying for 50 birth control prescriptions is less than paying for one pregnancy. That's why they have no objections.

3) The Church's objections here are NOT financial. They are not pleading poverty here. Their objection is not 'We can't afford it", it's "We don't want to pay for it because our bizarre intreperation of the Bible says that birth control is wrong, even though 75% of our congregants disagree with our position and we are already complying in 28 states that already require it.."

Next time please use his name instead of mine, and there won't be a similar misunderstanding...

And if you think the insurance companies aren't going to pass on the increased costs I've got some beachfront land in Arizona for sale... CHEAP!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Only on the left do two wrongs equal a right... two wrongs destroy a right though... the right endowed by our creator.

Some of these idiots don't even understand that they are actually supporting a lot of things they have serious problems with when they argue the way they do. Didn't the government once pass a law saying it was legal to lock up people because they were Japanese? Does that mean they can pass one locking up people because they are gay?

The internment of Japanese-Americans was done by executive order, not by legislation, so it wasn't a "Law". It does demonstrate that "rights" are largely an illusion, though.

Now, if someone was forcing Catholics to take birth control in a Eugenics program to rid the world of stupid people, yeah, you might have a point about this being a violation of the law or rights.

But saying a business has to meet certain minimum standards. Sorry, not a violation of rights at all.

Guess what, genius, the policy I am objecting to is not a law either, and rights are only an illusion to idiots, intelligent people understand that governments exist only to the extent they infringe on rights. Government is a necessity because there are people who cannot live without one, but that does not mean that intelligent people have to accept increasing its infringement on their rights just because the idiots are going to die.

For the record, this is not saying a business has to meet minimum standards, which is, in itself, ridiculous, It is saying that religious institutions have to provide services that infringe on their free exercise of religion. It is more like forcing a vegetarian restaurant run by devout Hindus to serve meat than it is about meeting minimum standards, but I do appreciate your efforts to twist this into something that makes sense to your small brain, every time you do you do more to prove that Obama is wrong than anything I can say does.

 

[The T]

I've stated it all over the fucking board. If you can't keep up, that's not my problem.

The fact remains, while a majority of people support access to birth control (and I am one of them)... the polls - at least those who actually ask the right question.... show that support goes to the Church.

The right question is not about birth control. It is whether people support the government forcing a religion to 'compromise' its doctrine. The Catholic Church is against birth control - no matter how many Catholics personally choose to use it - it is against Church Doctrine.... and the vast majority support the Church over the Government.

But.... more importantly than any 'poll', is the First Amendment - polls are irrelevant. The First Amendment provides freedom of religion... and the 'free exercise thereof'... Catholic charities, schools, hospitals, etc... they are the 'free exercise thereof' of our religion.

Get over it. Every single individual in the country could support Obama.... doesn't matter... this is a nation founded on the Constitution... not opinion polls.

You ask the wrong question, and the poll asks specifically the right question, do you support the Obama administration requiring religious affiliated institutions to cover birth control, the answer is 58% of catholics say YES.

They do not view it as telling the church what to do in church matters, the catholic church employees do not have to be offered birth control. There is the religious freedom. And most catholics recognize that when the church operates OUTSIDE the activities of the church, it should be governed by secular laws of the secular space. That's what people think.

We are not a nation governed by 'polls', we are a nation of laws.

The government does not have the right to define what is or is not the 'free exercise thereof' of the First Amendment. Polls are irrelevant.... and for every poll you can provide, there are others that show the opposite. It's often the problem with 'polls', it depends who you ask and how you frame the question.

Such is life.

Indeed. Polls are instruments that can inform or be used for nefarious purposes of herding those that wish not to think for themselves...

 

[ABikerSailor]

Do Catholics have a problem with insurance paying for drugs to treat male erectile dysfunction - like Viagra?

Probably not, because without an erection, you can't get a woman pregnant, and if you don't get the woman pregnant, you can't raise good little dogma drones, because to be effective, they have to be taught from birth so that THEY can raise good little dogma drones.

The Catholics need the believers. And.........I've also started to see commercials for the Catholic church encouraging members who left to "come back home".

 

[California Girl]

Please point out where in the first amendment it says that religious owned businesses can ignore the law?

It doesn't. It merely says that Congress can't prevent you from practicing your religion and it can't establish a state religion.

Nothing in this mandate keeps Catholics from believing the silly things they believe.

And when the Church starts expelling members for practicing birth control, then I'll take them seriously on this issue.

Again....

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

Note that last part..... 'free exercise thereof. Congress does not have the right to define what 'free exercise thereof' means. They have no authority do define that. The 'free exercise thereof' includes a religion's right to run charities, schools, hospitals - because they are part of our religion.

You might be too stupid to understand it.... but others are not.

That's the most ignorant thing I've seen in this whole debate.

The Catholic church gets to claim that Notre Dame football games are 'religion' and therefore the lady hired to work a concession stand can be denied birth control in her health plan,

contrary to US law.

lolol

If football was directly shown to be a biblical - hence Christian - tenant, then yes. But it is not.... but Charity is. So is learning. And healing. These are all core to our religion - and not just ours.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Please point out where in the first amendment it says that religious owned businesses can ignore the law?

It doesn't. It merely says that Congress can't prevent you from practicing your religion and it can't establish a state religion.

Nothing in this mandate keeps Catholics from believing the silly things they believe.

And when the Church starts expelling members for practicing birth control, then I'll take them seriously on this issue.

Are you certain you are American?

yup. I am. Now are you going to keep avoiding the point, Sarge?

How does this rule interfer in the free practice of religion in any way?

It doesn't. It's a law that governs business contracts. Nothing more, nothing less.

I try so hard to be patient and understanding..................

It forces the church to provide a service that is against its teachings.

Is that easy enough to understand? It is so simple that I would bet I could get kids in HS to understand it..... Now please bend over grab hold of your ears and give a hard sudden pull. The popping sound you hear will be your head coming out of your ass.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Refuse compromise. Isn't that the name of the game in today's world?

This just goes to show that it was never about first amendment rights or expecting the church to do something it was morally opposed to. This is about the church trying to force it's ideology on people, whether the people want it or not.

No asshole it is not. Try getting your head out of Obamas ass and thinking with it for a change. There is no compromise, Insurance companies are not going to pay for this free of charge. Doctors are not going to work for free. The church will end up paying for it one way or another. And that makes it wrong.

Guy, one more time. The insurance companies have no problem with this. They realize family planning is cheaper than birth. Even most companies don't have a problem with this, they know that a pregnant employee is going to cost them gobs of money in overtime, sick leave, lowered productivity. (That is, unless you are like the assholes I used to work for, who fired employees when they got pregnant.)

Obama gave the men in dresses an out. But the insurance companies won't back them and their own congregations won't really back them. The only Catholics who would get upset about this are the ones who already hate Obama.

Again, the insurance companies have no problem with the mandate because they are not going to pay for it. Why is that simple fact so hard for you to grasp? Are you actually dumber than I think you are?

 

[HUGGY]

Do Catholics have a problem with insurance paying for drugs to treat male erectile dysfunction - like Viagra?

Probably not, because without an erection, you can't get a woman pregnant, and if you don't get the woman pregnant, you can't raise good little dogma drones, because to be effective, they have to be taught from birth so that THEY can raise good little dogma drones.

The Catholics need the believers. And.........I've also started to see commercials for the Catholic church encouraging members who left to "come back home".

Can't be..CG says the Catholics wouldn't stoop to tv advertising..you hafta be LYING!!!!!

Cuz she's little miss can't be wrong and you don't have a twat so you couldn't be even if you wanted to be.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGXdQ298jbc]Little Miss Can't Be Wrong Spin Doctors Lyrics - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Poll: Defying Bishops, Catholics Support Obama Birth Control Rules | AlterNet

I agree with the Obama admin, as do the majority of catholics in the country. I don't see any move against religious freedom. The patrons or parishioners of the catholic church voluntarily attend services on Sunday, and they are all (with a very few exceptions) members of the faith. The catholic church does not have to provide birth control coverage to its "church workers", such as employees of the archdiocese offices (there are many lay employees there), nor in the local church parishes (and there are paid lay employees there). These are, as far as I am aware, always catholics who believe and support the faith, performing job that directly support the doctrine of the church. So, when the church is clearly acting as the church, they ARE FREE to not provide birth control coverage on their insurance.

The catholic church also operates hospitals and universities. This is a very different situation. Neither a hospital nor a university is a church. They routinely accept people at their hospital or school who are NOT catholic. They employ workers who are NOT catholic. The primary mission of the hospital and school is NOT the transmission of church dogma. The mission of the hospital is to heal the sick and the mission of the school is to educate people (not about church dogma either).

In these cases, hospitals and schools, the church manages the affairs of the institution, but the INSTITUTION IS NOT A CHURCH. Now, the church is an employer just like everyone else.

It is not correct for the church to accept non-catholic employees to perform a job that has nothing to do with the transmission of church dogma, and to force its religious beliefs down that employees throat.

The church is free to follow its dogma and specify policies to its members working inside the church, but when it leaves its role behind and enters secular endeavors, it needs to be governed by secular rules.

At a catholic university, if you are a catholic woman, you are offered free birth control by your insurance plan, there is no rule that you must use it. Nobody is saying you have to violate church policy. Just say no, and all is ok between you and the church. I see no violation of religious freedom here at all.

Let me know when you have a poll that asks the right question and get's that response. If you can't even ask the right question, why should anyone consider the results as valid?

The majority of Catholics do not want its Church forced to go against its doctrine.

This is a First Amendment issue.

You have not stated your problem with the question. What's the problem? You have not posted any counter-example poll.

You say "The majority of Catholics do not want its Church forced to go against its doctrine.", but clearly this is FALSE.

The vast majority of sexually active catholic women USE BIRTH CONTROL, its 98% that do at some point in their life! How can the majority of catholics not want the church to be forced to go against their doctrine, when 98% of them go against the doctrine themselves?

A national survey found that 98 percent of sexually active Catholic women use birth control at some point in their lives. Moreover, a survey by the Public Religion Research Institute reported that even among Catholics, 52 percent back the Obama policy: they believe that religiously affiliated universities and hospitals should be obliged to include birth control coverage in insurance plans.

So, does America’s national health policy really need to make a far-reaching exception for Catholic institutions when a majority of Catholics oppose that exception?

I wondered what other religiously affiliated organizations do in this situation. Christian Science traditionally opposed medical care. Does The Christian Science Monitor deny health insurance to employees?

“We offer a standard health insurance package,” John Yemma, the editor, told me.

That makes sense. After all, do we really want to make accommodations across the range of faith? What if organizations affiliated with Jehovah’s Witnesses insisted on health insurance that did not cover blood transfusions? What if ultraconservative Muslim or Jewish organizations objected to health care except at sex-segregated clinics?

The basic principle of American life is that we try to respect religious beliefs, and accommodate them where we can. But we ban polygamy, for example, even for the pious. Your freedom to believe does not always give you a freedom to act.

In this case, we should make a good-faith effort to avoid offending Catholic bishops who passionately oppose birth control. I’m glad that Obama sought a compromise. But let’s remember that there are also other interests at stake. If we have to choose between bishops’ sensibilities and women’s health, our national priority must be the female half of our population.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/12/opinion/sunday/kristof-beyond-pelvic-politics.html

I have, go back and look.

 

[JoeB131]

Next time please use his name instead of mine, and there won't be a similar misunderstanding...

And if you think the insurance companies aren't going to pass on the increased costs I've got some beachfront land in Arizona for sale... CHEAP!!

Oh, I see. I refer to everyone as "Guy". Unless I know it's a chick. Sorry for the confusion.

I'm saying the insurance companies aren't going to pass along the costs because 1) there won't be any for the reasons stated and 2) They know damned well their competitors will be happy to jump in and undercut them.

Raising your customer's costs is always the LAST resort in business.