The Catholic Church's War on Healthcare

spidergoat

spidergoat

pubic diorama
Valued Senior Member
So apparently there are provisions in the new health care bill that would force employers like Catholic hospitals to provide birth control and the morning after pill to their employees as part of providing health insurance. The right wing crazies are going apeshit about this, saying that this proves Obama wants to attack religion, specifically the Catholic church. What do you think? Should all employers have to provide health care, no matter what that specifically entails? Or should an employer, due to religious belief, be able to withhold certain kinds of medical services their employees? What if the employee supports the institution but happens to use contraception, like 98% of Catholics in the US do? What if you are an employee and are not Catholic? Is this an attack on religious freedom?
 
spidergoat said:
So apparently there are provisions in the new health care bill that would force employers like Catholic hospitals to provide birth control and the morning after pill to their employees as part of providing health insurance. The right wing crazies are going apeshit about this, saying that this proves Obama wants to attack religion, specifically the Catholic church. What do you think? Should all employers have to provide health care, no matter what that specifically entails? Or should an employer, due to religious belief, be able to withhold certain kinds of medical services their employees? What if the employee supports the institution but happens to use contraception, like 98% of Catholics in the US do? What if you are an employee and are not Catholic? Is this an attack on religious freedom?
Click to expand...


No organization should be allowed to withhold services based on religious beliefs. If an organization doesn't want to provide those benefits, then don't hire employees.

What would these organizations say if one of their flock were denied services based on their faith? If that isn't okay, why is it okay for an organization to deny services based on their own faith?
 
They say it's because they are forced to pay for the morning after pill, which they believe is the same as abortion. They claim it's an attack on religious liberty.
 
The issue is hardly a war on health care, it's simply the Church not wanting to fund something it believes is a sin.

So while health care is important, we also believe in the Separation of Church and State.

But here the State is telling the Catholic Church (as an employer) that it must ignore it's own teachings and pay for something the Church claims is a sin.

I would think that if this issue is that important to you, then you don't have to work for the Catholic Church, but by the same token the Church should be allowed to practice what it preaches.

More to the point I think legislation that was a tad more flexible could avoid this issue.
 
adoucette said:
The issue is hardly a war on health care, it's simply the Church not wanting to fund something it believes is a sin.

So while health care is important, we also believe in the Separation of Church and State.

But here the State is telling the Catholic Church (as an employer) that it must ignore it's own teachings and pay for something the Church claims is a sin.

I would think that if this issue is that important to you, then you don't have to work for the Catholic Church, but by the same token the Church should be allowed to practice what it preaches.

More to the point I think legislation that was a tad more flexible could avoid this issue.
Click to expand...

As an employer, they are beyond their borders as a church. Nobody is telling the church as a place of worship that they have to endorse abortions or cover contraceptives, but as an employer they absolutely do.
 
But they aren't actually sinning. As employers, they should provide health care, the specifics of which are between the employee and their doctor.
 
spidergoat said:
But they aren't actually sinning. As employers, they should provide health care, the specifics of which are between the employee and their doctor.
Click to expand...

I don't think this particular avenue of the discussion needs to be explored. Even if it were implicitly a sin, they should still be required to provide that kind of healthcare coverage to their employees. If they don't want to participate, then don't hire employees.
 
I love how they don't object at all to taxes that lead to bombings that kill children (however justified the cause), but when you want to kill two cells in your womb (or prevent them from ever meeting), they freak out like religious freedom is dead in America.
 
spidergoat said:
I love how they don't object at all to taxes that lead to bombings that kill children (however justified the cause), but when you want to kill two cells in your womb (or prevent them from ever meeting), they freak out like religious freedom is dead in America.
Click to expand...

They also love the death penalty, which makes their stance as "Pro-lifers" seem almost a joke.
 
It's unfortunate that the Republicans have decided to frame this as an attack on religion. I understand that the culture in Washington is to get your side a win no matter what, but nobody in that town is stupid enough to think Obama's actually trying to mess with Catholics. There is potential here to have an important (and long overdue) discussion, portraying it this way only muddies the issue.
 
Don't you see, this justifies all their worst fears. That Obama isn't who he appears to be, that he's a raving lunatic radical liberal.
 
You know if you had Universal health care provided by the state out of taxes then this wouldn't matter
 
I'll approach this from a Catholic point of view:

Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.

Birth control for employees comes under the heading of "Caesar". So Jesus already solved this problem. :D

The Obama admin softened its tone on this today indicating that they are willing to explore options.
 
Ivan Seeking said:
I'll approach this from a Catholic point of view:

Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.

Birth control for employees comes under the heading of "Caesar". So Jesus already solved this problem. :D

The Obama admin softened its tone on this today indicating that they are willing to explore options.
Click to expand...

Nicely done.

As for Obama backing off, I was sort of already operating under the assumption that there was no way this thing would actually happen.
 
spidergoat said:
But the same people would receive the same drugs and contraception, so what's the difference?
Click to expand...

The problem isn't people receiving the benefits, it's the Catholic organizations giving it. If Healthcare is provided by the government, then it's not something an employer has to deal with.
 
spidergoat said:
But the same people would receive the same drugs and contraception, so what's the difference?
Click to expand...

What you chose to access isnt the issue, its the employer deciding what you should and shouldn't access. Actually I find it facinating that those who were saying that if obama care got through there would be "Death pannels" and that "beurocrats rather than yourself and your doctor would be deciding what health care you could recive" aren't up in arms about this. Insted of the goverment deciding what your alowed to recive its your employer. So theoretically if we take this to the logical conclusion even though its illegal to discriminate based on pregancy, an employer could just say they aren't providing any obstetric services and keep women who want kids out of a company that way in spite of the laws forbiding it. Also the church doesnt just employ priests and adminstrative services, how many hospitals are paid for by the catholic church in the US because the goverment isn't providing health care? School teachers etc.
 
Asguard said:
What you chose to access isnt the issue, its the employer deciding what you should and shouldn't access. Actually I find it facinating that those who were saying that if obama care got through there would be "Death pannels" and that "beurocrats rather than yourself and your doctor would be deciding what health care you could recive" aren't up in arms about this. Insted of the goverment deciding what your alowed to recive its your employer. So theoretically if we take this to the logical conclusion even though its illegal to discriminate based on pregancy, an employer could just say they aren't providing any obstetric services and keep women who want kids out of a company that way in spite of the laws forbiding it. Also the church doesnt just employ priests and adminstrative services, how many hospitals are paid for by the catholic church in the US because the goverment isn't providing health care? School teachers etc.
Click to expand...

Insurance companies already have death panels. The belief that they don't is the biggest fallacy of all. Additionally, Obamacare removes caps where the insurance company's auth-death-panel clause kicks in- "Your policy has been exhausted. Thank you for your business".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top