100% of Catholic Bishops Oppose Obama’s Contraceptive Mandate

Well now it looks like all 181 American Catholic Bishops have united with an opposition to the ObamaCare mandate to force insurance companies to offer contraceptives, including those that induce abortion, free of charge.

That's "free of charge" After the companies include those expenses in the premium rates to everybody of course. So, maybe it really isn't "free". Not to mention the religious controversies that may in fact be unconstitutional.

The Obama administration has already granted waivers and exemptions to certain religious groups, but not all, and possibly not equally.

Other religious leaders and some colleges have also expressed their oppositions.


February 17, 2012 -- CNSnews.com

(CNSNews.com) -- All 181 Catholic Bishops in the United States oppose and have publicly denounced a regulation issued by the Obama administration that would require every health insurer to offer contraceptives, including those that induce abortion, free of charge.

The bishops oppose the mandate because, they argue, it is a violation of religious liberty under the First Amendment – in this case, the federal government forcing individual Catholics to subsidize products and services that are contrary to their religious beliefs.

“Our Catholic hospitals, schools, and charities are under attack by a federal government which refuses to recognize their First Amendment right to religious freedom,” said Brian Burch, president of CatholicVote.org, which compiled the data and confirmed the position of the bishops. “These organizations are pillars in our communities, built over the centuries with love by generations of Catholics.”

181 Bishops say NO !!

1) What if the Supreme Court says ObamaCare is unconstitutional ?

2) What happens if the Court says "It Stands" !!

The conservative movement is gaining momentum.


Obama has a campaign problem I think

Originally posted by xuenchen
That's "free of charge" After the companies include those expenses in the premium rates to everybody of course. So, maybe it really isn't "free".

Just a point on this. I thought the same thing too, at first, but it turns out that giving out free contraceptives is actually going to save the insurance companies money because the cost of caring for a pregnant woman and the birth of a child far outweighs the cost of free contraceptives.

I'm actually grateful for this story because it has brought to light the fact that women are going to be getting free birth control and they are thrilled about that. More women support ObamaCare than ever. So, 181 guys in pointy hats and dresses may have their panties in a bunch over this, but the women of the country, Catholic and otherwise, are thrilled about it.

I don't think Obama has a campaign problem, I think the GOP has handed him the presidency on a silver platter with this issue.

So do we in this modern age really take the opinion of people who believe and take their opinion from a fictional book seriously?
This is a medical and workers rights issue, which religion should not be allowed to manipulate in the name of fairy tales.
Since when did religion give you the right to disadvantage your workers?
Freedom to religion should not mean freedom to treat your workers like crap.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

but it turns out that giving out free contraceptives is actually going to save the insurance companies money because the cost of caring for a pregnant woman and the birth of a child far outweighs the cost of free contraceptives.

Explains it all doesnt it.
Church = business

reply to post by TheCommentator


Doesn't freedom of religion mean the power to decide what medical care your employees receive?

I can't BELIEVE we're using contraceptives as a political issue in 2012! I thought we got beyond this 40 years ago!

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by TheCommentator

 

Doesn't freedom of religion mean the power to decide what medical care your employees receive?

I can't BELIEVE we're using contraceptives as a political issue in 2012! I thought we got beyond this 40 years ago!

Well I don’t know what it’s like in America but I didn’t think any employer could disadvantage his workers.
Exactly, this is why religion is bad because it puts society in a circle of hate and confusion that gets us absolutely no where.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Doesn't freedom of religion mean the power to decide what medical care your employees receive?

no

freedom , [ not just of religion ] grants you the pwer to decide what medical care YOU recieve - it does not confer the right to dictate to others

reply to post by xuenchen


wow - just wow all catholic bishops support catholic dogma ? i am asstounded

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Doesn't freedom of religion mean the power to decide what medical care your employees receive?

Right. I pointed this out in another thread. The argument that the GOP is making is that the employer's religious beliefs and moral values trump the employee's religious beliefs and moral values.

No one is telling any religious organization to teach differently or to change their values, people are simply asking that they honor the same beliefs of those they employ and not infringe on their beliefs by forcing theirs on them.

Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by xuenchen

 

wow - just wow all catholic bishops support catholic dogma ? i am asstounded

I was equally shocked.

What if we will see a worldwide support movement starting up !!

Wheeeew.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Just a point on this. I thought the same thing too, at first, but it turns out that giving out free contraceptives is actually going to save the insurance companies money because the cost of caring for a pregnant woman and the birth of a child far outweighs the cost of free contraceptives.

That makes some sense, but which studies have been cited or are they "assuming".

In the meantime, the rates go up anyway I think.

Insurance companies always look at profit first.

I wonder how many prevented pregnancies vs. the total cost of the medications (including the abortion pills and/or procedures) would be necessary to see the break even point on rates State by State.

It may not even be possible to assemble data on if's and maybe's.

reply to post by xuenchen


Really now?
Poll: Catholics support new contraception policy

According to the poll, 57 percent of Catholic voters — and 59 percent of Catholic women — support the mandate Obama outlined Friday.

Seems what the heads of church want and what the churchmembers themselves want aren't quite the same.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

reply to post by DontTreadOnMe

Nor force a citizen to pay taxes for something they disagree with morally.

No one wants to pay tax

A mandate? Like we live in some 3rd world country ruled by a strong amn out of isues.

Dem war room needs some real generals.....this looks like the 3rd grade military school at work. This is so very stupid. These clowns are running the country?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Dear Benevolent Heretic,

You know that I admire you even though we diverge a bit on some issues. But I must be misunderstanding you, because I'm ending up very far away from you here.

Just a point on this. I thought the same thing too, at first, but it turns out that giving out free contraceptives is actually going to save the insurance companies money because the cost of caring for a pregnant woman and the birth of a child far outweighs the cost of free contraceptives.

If that was true, then the insurance companies would be doing it now, they wouldn't be waiting for a government order to make them save money.

Doesn't freedom of religion mean the power to decide what medical care your employees receive?

Do you think this is about church institutions telling their employees what care they can recieve? Isn't it telling the employees what care the institution will pay for? I don't see the problem with that, all companies tell empoyees what benefits they will recieve and which ones they won't.

Please straighten me out where I have gone wrong.

With respect,
charles1952

Originally posted by TheCommentator
This is a medical and workers rights issue, which religion should not be allowed to manipulate in the name of fairy tales.

That's ridiculous. This isn't a workers rights issue or even a religious issue, this is an economics issue and forcing people to supply things to other people against their will is called extortion, which is a brand of violence.

So, if people want to use violence to force a group of people to supply a product to another group of people in the absence of a proper demand, it's only right to expect violence right back i.e. self-defense.

I really do hope some prominent economists start voicing their opinions against this nonsense.

reply to post by xuenchen

Well now it looks like all 181 American Catholic Bishops have united with an opposition to the ObamaCare mandate to force insurance companies to offer contraceptives, including those that induce abortion, free of charge.

On the other hand, of the Catholics that matter on this issue, the women, 98% of (sexually active women between the ages of 15-44) have used contraception methods not sanctioned by the Church.

For the sake of intellectual honesty: the 98% figure is misleading; a better number would be 68%. Still dramatic, and still of more significance than 100% of (supposedly) celibate men.

reply to post by TheCommentator

Explains it all doesnt it. Church = business

Well not quite accurate. Some Churches run businesses. Those businesses are not religious organizations, they are businesses. Business should pay taxes and be subject to business rules and laws no matter who their owners are.

This is of course not the way the 'real' world works.

The argument that HHS mandate is wrong because it violates our conscience or some right is defending a Conservative position with Liberal language. Stop it – now. This is suggesting that religion is purely a private matter whereas Catholicism has been, and will hopefully continue to be, a force for arguing against privatizing religion. Ceding that religious beliefs of right and wrong are simply dependent upon those subscribers to Catholicism is not what the Church should accept as a valid argument; what is wrong in Catholic social teachings is wrong, regardless of your faith or lack thereof.

But the argument is far deeper than just contraception. It is about the fundamental control over society, a century’s long struggle between Catholicism and Liberalism. Whereas Liberals proclaim humans are naturally free and autonomous, bound only by laws which regulate physical behavior which results in physical harm. Thus Liberals assert that people should not be limited in their natural rights except where it can cause harm to another; otherwise the state should be neutral. So Liberalism asserts Rights as superior to any notion of “good” and the state should aim for fairness in protecting and expanding the sphere of individual liberty while balancing claims to potential harms.

This is where the conflict since the Enlightenment between Liberalism and Catholicism arises. In Catholic teachings there is a specific “good” which must be understood and enforced, which has been the cause for Catholics to erect many institutions under their authority to live out their conception of the “good”. In this regard Catholics cannot hold their religion as private but instead as the fundamental understanding of the world, thus clashing with Liberalism. Through this conception of the “good” Catholics cannot simply allow the state to proscribe what is good or not, because there is a higher authority than the state to which we answer.

We Catholics view human nature as entirely different as Liberals. Man is not inherently free and independent; we are members of the Body of Christ. Naturally we are social and political animals; requiring law, culture, and religion for proper order. Law is not meant simply to prevent harm but is derived from, and meant to advance, the “good”. This means that the law must be derived from Divine law, restricting human behavior so as to prevent sin and self-destruction; so virtue is necessary both within a legal context and a personal context. Merely protecting the “right”, as the Liberal state does, is not what society is meant to do; it must protect the “good”. However this does not mean the Church and State must be one; rather the State must ground its legal vision within Church doctrine.

The Church’s law in regards to contraception is being treated as though so long as the doctrine is not enforced outside of the Church, it should be ignored and not intruded upon by the state. That is the argument we hear, even from Catholics, instead of the argument that the Church doctrine is inherently right and good. Strictures pertaining to birth control are not taught as merely faith-based laws applicable only to Catholics; it is right, regardless of religious beliefs.

Now, very few will remember but Pope Paul VI in his encyclical “Humanae Vitae” warned about four important consequences stemming from the widespread use of contraceptives and birth control:

• General lowering of moral standards
• A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy
• The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men.
• Government coercion in reproductive matters.

How else are we doing since this great sexual revolution? Kim Kardashian's marriage lasted 72 days. Illegitimacy: way up. In 1960, 5.3% of all births in America were to unmarried women. By 2010, it was 40.8% [PDF]. In 1960 married families made up almost three-quarters of all households; but by the census of 2010 they accounted for just 48 percent of them. Cohabitation has increased tenfold since 1960.

And if you don't think women are being reduced to objects to satisfy men, welcome to the internet, how long have you been here? Government coercion: just look to China (or America, where a government rule on contraception coverage is the reason why we're talking about this right now).

Business Insider

Of course not all of the problems can be tied back to birth control alone, but you are kidding yourself to deny that the Pope was not prophetic. The problem is one that the Church recognizes. Just because you do not physically harm someone does not mean harm has not been done to society. Liberalism asserts that individual autonomy is most important and that any social ills caused should be corrected by the state if necessary, and if it does not infringe upon individual rights. Catholicism asserts that society is itself autonomous and any actions within it which are aimed at individual satisfaction will be destructive. The Church holds this view for everything from sex and gambling to economics and trade. Liberalism says the state should be indifferent to individual desires while Catholicism teaches that some desires are inherently wrong and destructive for the social fabric of a community.

However as the fourth point in the Pope’s prophetic summation points out, the state will turn its back on belief in autonomy. They would remove the veil of indifference and begin to attack institutions holding onto an opposing world view. So the state would force Liberalism and freedom on people holding onto self-limiting views with the barrel of a gun if need be. To those who cannot yet see it, this is more than a debate over contraception; it is a debate over world views which are still feuding. Now that one has the clear upper hand it is seeking to enforce its vision on the other, even if it means violating some of its own assertions about “rights” to do so.

Front Porch Republic – Religious Liberty