Obama Health Care Bill would force Catholic Institutions to Violate their Beliefs

[T-Dub]

[quote name='CincyInDC' timestamp='1332861963' post='1112525']
I'm starting to think that rounding up large numbers of Americans and sterilizing them would be the best solution for all parties involved.
[/quote]


I'm for it, but can we start taxing the churches too?

[Ron~Popeil]

[quote name='The PatternMaster' timestamp='1332862019' post='1112526']

So why does the Pope, the leader of the Catholic church, favor the use of birth control? It seems like the American Catholic church is behaving like a spoiled child who doesn't like being told what to do, but wants to enjoy the benefits of being a tax exempt. Common sense will tell you that providing birth control will help the stop of unwanted pregancies and the spread of STD's...what's wrong with that?
[/quote]

Personally I have no issue with birth control. I do have an issue when the federal government orders a religious organization to violate their beliefs. Your attempt to twist the Pope's stance on birth control is irrelevant to the topic, this issue is about federal power and the establishment clause.

[Ron~Popeil]

[quote name='The PatternMaster' timestamp='1332872502' post='1112612']


Didn't the Catholic church used to torture and kill scientist because they were practicing "witchcraft"? It amazes me how people can eschew common sense when religion comes into play.
[/quote]

Yes they did. They also burned people alive, invaded the middle east, and a whole host of other horrific acts. What does this have to do with the modern church? Should we condemn Italians because of what the Romans did?

[CincyInDC]

We should condemn Italians because they are smelly and generally disruptive.

Exactly which Catholics are being forced to use BC?

[Ron~Popeil]

[quote name='CincyInDC' timestamp='1333049985' post='1113622']
We should condemn Italians because they are smelly and generally disruptive.

Exactly which Catholics are being forced to use BC?
[/quote]

Church institutions are going to be forced to provide birth control. This violates the beliefs of the church and is religious tyranny by the federal government. We should always be suspicious of federal power and the fact that so many people that espouse freedom are speaking out in favor of violating the freedom of any religion is alarming. Whether you share those beliefs or not it should frighten everyone. You can't pick and choose your battles based on whether or not you like the particular group being targeted. If this kind of thing is allowed to happen to anyone it will eventually happen to everyone.

As to your first point I actually think the french are a bit more smelly but not quite as disruptive.

[T-Dub]

[quote name='Ron~Popeil' timestamp='1333086104' post='1113769']
Church institutions are going to be forced to provide birth control.
[/quote]

No, church institutions are going to be "forced" to provide the same standard of health insurance for their employees as any other employer. If those employees have some moral problem with birth control they can choose not to use it. It's not like they're going to make nuns go door to door handing out condoms FFS.

[CincyInDC]

I'm imagining the church secretary with a wicker basket on her desk, and instead of candy in it she'll have condoms. But that's now how it will be.

What about those religious nutters who don't believe in medicine? They'll have to provide insurance for their employees, too. I say don't discriminate. Medical care and birth control for anyone and everyone!

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1333088038' post='1113771']

No, church institutions are going to be "forced" to provide the same standard of health insurance for their employees as any other employer. If those employees have some moral problem with birth control they can choose not to use it. It's not like they're going to make nuns go door to door handing out condoms FFS.
[/quote]


Right but the Church is not like any other employer. Other employers dont have religious stances on things, they simply exist to provide employment. Ron in this case is right were talking about a violation of the separation clause. Its not a matter of the individual who may not be of the Church, it's a matter of the institution being forced to violate their religious stance.

[CincyInDC]

I think the Church [i]is[/i] like any other employer in the country. If Church doctorine stated that children should work 60 hours per week, what then? Grant an exception allowing child labor in churches?

I look at it like this: "We're the government and we don't give a shit about your religious beliefs; to us you are an employer, and you will abide by the laws we have set down regarding employment. You will receive no special treatment."

[Jamie_B]

But they do receive special treatment in tax exempt status so that argument doesnt work, also I dont think there is any religious footing to stand on to make children work 60 hours a week.

[CincyInDC]

All non-profit organizations have tax-exempt status. Nothing special there.

They do receive other special treatment, and it needs to stop. Namely the non-prosecution of pedo-priests.

[T-Dub]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1333109138' post='1113787']


Right but the Church is not like any other employer. Other employers dont have religious stances on things, they simply exist to provide employment. Ron in this case is right were talking about a violation of the separation clause. Its not a matter of the individual who may not be of the Church, it's a matter of the institution being forced to violate their religious stance.
[/quote]

I don't see how the institution is violating a religious stance when an employee uses their health insurance on birth control pills.

[Ron~Popeil]

[quote name='CincyInDC' timestamp='1333109759' post='1113790']
I think the Church [i]is[/i] like any other employer in the country. If Church doctorine stated that children should work 60 hours per week, what then? Grant an exception allowing child labor in churches?

I look at it like this: "We're the government and we don't give a shit about your religious beliefs; to us you are an employer, and you will abide by the laws we have set down regarding employment. You will receive no special treatment."
[/quote]


It goes to the nature of the organization. A religious institution is just that, religious. "Congress shall make no laws regarding the establishment of religion [b]or prohibiting the free exercise thereof[/b]." The bold part is the crux of this issue. Free exercise of religion means having the freedom to follow your religious beliefs. Being forced to violate those beliefs is infringing on that right. If they were trying to force something on Muslims, Buddhists or any other religious group I would be here arguing the same thing. You may not like the church, a lot of people don't but that is immaterial. Part of the reason this grand experiment has lasted as long as it has is because we are free people with inalienable rights. If we allow one group to be trampled on it can and will happen to others.

[Ron~Popeil]

[quote name='CincyInDC' timestamp='1333111577' post='1113796']
All non-profit organizations have tax-exempt status. Nothing special there.

They do receive other special treatment, and it needs to stop. Namely the non-prosecution of pedo-priests.
[/quote]

We agree on the pedo priests thing. Anyone proven to have done this should be hammered by the criminal justice system even more so than other pedophiles because they use a position of trust and authority to find their victims.

[T-Dub]

I think an equally valid question would be why my employer has any business knowing how I use my health insurance

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1333165041' post='1114059']

I don't see how the institution is violating a religious stance when an employee uses their health insurance on birth control pills.
[/quote]

When they are being told to provide it.

[T-Dub]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1333199237' post='1114107']

When they are being told to provide it.
[/quote]

They provide the health insurance. How I use it is none of their business. It's the equivalent of Jewish Hospital telling their employees they can't bring ham sandwiches for lunch..

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1333317574' post='1114510']

They provide the health insurance. How I use it is none of their business. It's the equivalent of Jewish Hospital telling their employees they can't bring ham sandwiches for lunch..
[/quote]


No it would be if the Jewish hospital was the ones paying for the meat. They arent.

[T-Dub]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1333321752' post='1114516']


No it would be if the Jewish hospital was the ones paying for the meat. They arent.
[/quote]

Right! Just like Catholic institutions aren't paying for the BC. They are paying for the insurance.

[|Elflocko|]

Part of me says that if you work for a Catholic institution and expect them to pay for birth control you have a loose grip on reality.

On the other hand, if you're a Catholic organization and accept Federal funds, you need to shut the hell up and do as they say considering that's part of the deal.

The evil part of me wants to tell the Catholic and other religious organizations "Fine, we won't require you to offer this particular portion of standard medical insurance coverage if you stop trying to influence elections and sticking your nose in where it doesn't belong".

Makes me wish I had the power, influence and money to throw a proverbial badger into the chicken coop...

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='T-Dub' timestamp='1333328668' post='1114525']

Right! Just like Catholic institutions aren't paying for the BC. They are paying for the insurance.
[/quote]


Insurance which provides BC which goes against what the Church stands for.

I'm not catholic so I dont care about the BC issue, but I do care when government violate the separation clause and starts telling churches what they can and cant do that may go against their beliefs.

I'm sorry but you have no ground to stand on here, this is a clear violation of that separation.

[CincyInDC]

What if a Catholic employee of the church is a member of condoms4life.org and wants BC? I don't believe the church ever gets to [i]make[/i] an individual's day to day decisions. What it comes down to is how the individual exercises his or her right to worship, and not how the church wants you to. Religion has always been ala carte anyway (e.g., I'll follow this rule today but this other rule is inconvenient, so I can break it).

Papist rules are silly anyway.

[|kennethmw|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1333332122' post='1114533']


Insurance which provides BC which goes against what the Church stands for.

I'm not catholic so I dont care about the BC issue, but I do care when government violate the separation clause and starts telling churches what they can and cant do that may go against their beliefs.

I'm sorry but you have no ground to stand on here, this is a clear violation of that separation.[/quote]

It most definitely isn't a clear violation. There are obviously two views, both of which have been outlined. You have an OPIONION, not a truth.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='kennethmw' timestamp='1333366891' post='1114562']
It most definitely isn't a clear violation. There are obviously two views, both of which have been outlined. You have an OPIONION, not a truth.
[/quote]


actually what i have is the fact that the exception for this has been written, so yeah...

[|kennethmw|]

[quote name='Jamie_B' timestamp='1333369352' post='1114572']


actually what i have is the fact that the exception for this has been written, so yeah...
[/quote]

Actually, they provided an exception to mollify the conservative block of the Catholic Church that doesn't in any way, shape or form change the delivery of services, it just takes the moves the payment source.