The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
PDF versionHHS move amounts to 'to hell with you,' bishop says as protests mount
Jan. 27, 2012
Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius stands next to President Barack Obama in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington in 2011. (CNS photo/Reuters)
WASHINGTON -- A week after the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services told individuals and institutions who oppose contraception "to hell with you," as one bishop put it, members of the U.S. Catholic hierarchy were mobilizing their followers to fight.
Bishops across the country -- including Archbishop Wilton D. Gregory of Atlanta, Archbishop Gregory M. Aymond of New Orleans and Bishop Robert N. Lynch of St. Petersburg, Fla. -- were preparing letters to be read at all Masses during the Jan. 28-29 weekend.
But one of the most strongly worded reactions to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius' Jan. 20 announcement that religious organizations could delay but not opt out of a requirement that all health plans cover contraception and sterilization at no cost came from Bishop David A. Zubik of Pittsburgh, in a column titled "To hell with you."
Sebelius and the Obama administration "have said 'To hell with you' to the Catholic faithful of the United States," Zubik wrote. "To hell with your religious beliefs. To hell with your religious liberty. To hell with your freedom of conscience. We'll give you a year, they are saying, and then you have to knuckle under."
He called on Catholics in the Pittsburgh Diocese to "do all possible to rescind" the contraceptive mandate by writing to President Barack Obama, Sebelius and their members of Congress about this "unprecedented federal interference in the right of Catholics to serve their community without violating their fundamental moral beliefs."
Bishop Daniel R. Jenky of Peoria, Ill., enlisted the aid of St. Michael the Archangel in fighting "this unprecedented governmental assault upon the moral convictions of our faith."
In a Jan. 24 letter to Peoria Catholics, he directed that the prayer of St. Michael be recited "for the freedom of the Catholic Church in America" during Sunday Masses at every parish, school, hospital, Newman center and religious house in the diocese.
The prayer reads in part: "Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil" and "cast into hell Satan and all the evil spirits, who roam throughout the world seeking the ruin of souls."
"I am honestly horrified that the nation I have always loved has come to this hateful and radical step in religious intolerance," Jenky said in the letter.
"While it is primarily the laity who should take the leading role in political and legal action, as your bishop it is my clear responsibility to summon our local church into spiritual and temporal combat in defense of Catholic Christianity," he added. "I strongly urge you not to be intimidated by extremist politicians or the malice of the cultural secularists arrayed against us."
NCR: February 17-March 1, 2012
Subscribe to NCR to get all the news and special features that aren't always available online. In this issue:
- Conscience Roundup
Hear what theologians, commentators, and our editors have to say about the contraception mandate
- Special Section: Religious Life
Work of missioners, past and future; African meetings; and more
- Tribute to a Peacemaker
New York's Pax Christi fetes Daniel Berrigan
"We cannot -- we will not -- comply with this unjust law," declared Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted of Phoenix in a Jan. 25 letter.
"Our parents and grandparents did not come to these shores to help build America's cities and towns, its infrastructure and institutions, its enterprise and culture, only to have their posterity stripped of their God-given rights," Bishop Olmsted said. "In generations past, the church has always been able to count on the faithful to stand up and protect her sacred rights and duties. I hope and trust she can count on this generation of Catholics to do the same."
The Catholic bishops of Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas, said in a joint statement that they "cannot stand by silently" in light of what they called "an unprecedented and untenable abrogation of religious freedom in the United States."
"This is part of a pattern in the United States that has degenerated from the recognition of religion as good and salutary in our society to religion being subjected to punitive discrimination," said the statement signed by Bishops Kevin J. Farrell of Dallas and Kevin W. Vann of Fort Worth and Dallas Auxiliary Bishops J. Douglas Deshotel and Mark J. Seitz.
They urged the nearly 2 million Catholics in North Texas, along with "other people of good will," to join them "by speaking out for the protection of conscience rights and religious liberty that are essential to the common good of our nation and in keeping with the basic human rights enshrined in our American way of life."
Archbishop Allen H. Vigneron of Detroit, in a Jan. 21 statement, called on lawmakers in Washington to "step up, step in, and protect the rights of their fellow citizens from a government mandate that is truly unconscionable."
"This fight against the federal government's overreaching exercise of its power is everybody's fight," he added.
Aymond, who was in Rome for his "ad limina" visit to Pope Benedict XVI, said Jan. 26 that he had already sent a letter to members of Congress protesting the HHS decision and now expected the Catholic faithful to take action.
"This is a critical time and one that will call for us to engage in public dialogue," he said. "We cannot stand by and allow this to move forward without speaking out."
Aymond said Catholics "must be able to live the message of Christ in the U.S. and follow our conscience."
"We are not demanding that others live our Christian values, but we should have the right to do so," he added.
Although both Gregory and Lynch had announced they would write letters to be read at weekend Masses, the texts of those letters had not been made public as of the afternoon of Jan. 26.
Writing in The Wall Street Journal Jan. 25, Cardinal-designate Timothy M. Dolan of New York, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said the HHS decision rejected the "loud and strong appeals" by "hundreds of religious institutions and hundreds of thousands of individual citizens" since the comment period began last August.
He said it is naive to think that contraception and sterilization will be "free" under the HHS mandate.
"There is no free lunch, and you can be sure there's no free abortion, sterilization or contraception," he wrote. "There will be a source of funding: you."
Speaking that evening at Fordham University in New York, the archbishop told reporters that Obama had called him the morning of Jan. 20 "to tell me the somber news" before the HHS decision was announced publicly.
He said he felt "terribly let down, disappointed and disturbed" and found it difficult to reconcile the decision with what the president had told him during a meeting in November -- "that he considered the protection of conscience sacred, that he didn't want anything his administration would do to impede the work of the church that he claimed he held in high regard, particularly in the area of health care, education, works of charity and justice."
It's sad that Bishop Zubik
It's sad that Bishop Zubik and a few other prelates have responded to the HHS ruling with such strident and polemical language. A way may be found to resolve this impasse between church and state, but only if each side is willing to assume the good will of the other.
The USCCB can take legal
The USCCB can take legal action and perhaps they should. It could go all the way to the Supreme Court.
The HHS action shows you how weak, stupid, and unimaginative are our bishops. The hierarchy burned their bridges with the Obama administration long ago by jumping in bed with the neo con Catholics and their ilk in the Tea Party movement. So, it's payback time, big time. Just more proof the Catholic Church is now dismissed as little more than fascist cranks out of touch with their own membership.
While we're on the subject of the "unconscionable", the cardinal-designate archbishop of New York should include as another example of it, the supreme tax dodge the Church in this country, and other churches, continue to enjoy. Just one massive tax subsidy to a venal and corrupt institution very much in need of structural reform from the head on down.
What a joke... so the
What a joke... so the Church's tax exemption is "dodge" and a "subsidy"? The Catholic Church feeds more people, clothes more people, educates more people, gives medical care to more people, visits more prisoners. etc. than any other institution in the history of the world.
I almost hope this comes to a stand-off and the Catholic Church closes all of her schools and hospitals for one week. You think the state could pick up the slack? I'd like to see it try!!
Read "Nonfeasance" and
Read "Nonfeasance" and "Render Unto Rome" plus read online how Archbishop Viganò was kicked out of the Vatican to stop his efforts to stop the corruption. All Catholics should ask their bishops this, "How much cash are you going to drop into the basket at the ad limina visit. There is grounds to question the church tax status.
And why exactly would the
And why exactly would the hierarchy of the Church in the U.S. want to do a thing like that? Do you not see that that would only create more dissension and make the Church look even worse than it does now? Strong arm techniques like this only make for more warfare, not less
What a joke... so the
What a joke... so the Church's tax exemption is "dodge" and a "subsidy"? The Catholic Church feeds more people, clothes more people, educates more people, gives medical care to more people, visits more prisoners. etc. than any other institution in the history of the world.
I almost hope this comes to a stand-off and the Catholic Church closes all of her schools and hospitals for one week. You think the state could pick up the slack? I'd like to see it try!!
-----------------------------------------------
Check out the history of the Church. For 2000 years all that you say the Church did and does was often carried out while being taxed by the king or emperor. The Church didn't need a tax right-off then, nor does it need one now, to do what Holy Scripture command it and all churches should be doing.
Instead , they continue using TAX FREE Church funds to silence the victims of priestly sexual abuse and the bishops use TAX FREE funds to frustrate legislative efforts to extend the statute of limitations, or use the TAX FREE money provided by folks in the pews for lavish living for themselves and the clergy. The Church should be turning each and every parish in this country into an outreach to the poor, the sick, and the dying. Rather than bishops preening themselves with TAX FREE funds in their cappa magnas, silken dresses, and jeweled pointey hats amidst the golden candlesticks they've also purchased with TAX FREE revenue.
Paul Johns, put all the works
Paul Johns, put all the works in the past tense. All the work you list to the degree you claim, was in pioneer time, and has now shrank considerably the past decades. And now the Catholic church takes government money to do the charity work under the faith based initiative, remember.
You see there are not anymore hordes of nuns doing it for free, while living in abject poverty. Young women will not tolerate the injustice, inequality and abuse at the hands of the clergy, in the church. Until this changes, our young women will not join religious orders in the numbers they used to, when the parents simply mandated them to become religious.
I so agree with your views.
I so agree with your views. But of course I can see why, your a Benedictine. An Order established centuries before the Church corruption, an Order in touch with the thinking people of the Church. The bishops need to stop and ask the question, "What would Jesus do?"
No, Fr. Dunstan, the HHS
No, Fr. Dunstan, the HHS action shows you how weak, stupid, and unimaginative is the HHS, and by extension many members of the administration including the President. I still can barely believe they could be so dense as to commit such a glaring violation of the First Amendment which could cost Obama his reelection. Public opinion is turning steadily against abortion. So in their desperate attempt to mainstream this abominable practice they come up with a tactic about as brilliant as building the Berlin wall. When did the hierarchy burn their bridges with the Democrats? Never. They played a major role in electing Obama. They have supported all his policies except those that force Catholics to violate their consciences. They practically canonized Ted Kennedy, and allowing the conferral of an honorary degree on Obama at Notre Dame - against their very own directive - while he wiped the floor with them. I could go on.
Please don't forget it was the Democrats who deserted the Pro Life movement and the Catholic Church when that party's leaders who were virtually all pro life switched en masse and became pro aborts, leaving the pro lifers with nowhere to go except the Republican party, which has served them fairly well since. And there is nothing unconscionable about granting tax exempt status to non-profit religious organizations. Our government and the American people consider it wise and fair. If you are a Roman Catholic priest you ought to know that.
Fr. Dunstan's comments remind
Fr. Dunstan's comments remind me of Homer Simpson's advice to his son Bart: "Remember, any time the going gets tough, It's time to quit!".
It is incredibly joyful that
It is incredibly joyful that Bishop Zubik and several other prelates have responded to the HHS ruling with strong and prophetic language. A way must be found to resolve this opression by the the state of the Church, but this is only possible when the state recongnizes it has no power to order to tell the Church to do something immoral.
So I guess that is why
So I guess that is why nothing is done about the Pedophile priests and that includes the Bishops. They pick and choose who they will come down on.
Illogical and off topic. If
Illogical and off topic. If you know about "pedophile priests" about whom "nothing is being done" then you should call the police immediately.
I know of *NO* such priests.
Mormon sects in this country
Mormon sects in this country that believe in polygamy as a matter of faith are forbidden by our laws to practice that faith. While I think that is an injustice that should be addressed, it does go to show that, yes, societies do make laws that limit how free a faith is to practice its faith.
There is a balance that a government must reach in working with a Church to ensure its freedom. There is also a balance a Church must reach with a government. Because that balance is the respect for those who do not agree with a Church teaching.
As a Catholic and a citizen, I can only write my political representatives to let them know that I treasure both being Catholic and being a citizen of a democracy. I support the ruling by HHS - it protects the Church in teaching its message, and it protects a core group of those who teach the faith and may be presumed to hold to all the teachings of that faith. But, it recognizes the right of others to live by the choices we make, each according to our individual conscience. And this is something the Church has forgotten. And, especially, it does not allow a religious affiliated organization to coerce citizens to live by a religious belief they do not hold.
No one is forced to go to a
No one is forced to go to a religious institution and seek their services. However, a religious institution, under the law, has every right to live out their conscience.
Let me say it differently. If I go to Walmart, I can not force them to be like Macys. We have no right to tell any religious group what they should or should not be. No ONE is forcing anyone to live by any religious tenet. Quite the contrary. Every one has the option to go elsewhere and get those services that they need.
The separation of church and state works both ways.
I cloud not have said it
I cloud not have said it better myself. Thank you for such an eloquent and on point response from a fellow Catholic that agrees!
Well, except the choice of
Well, except the choice of the provider to offer said service. You have fallen for the cult of unbridled consumer choice. In each transaction there must be a willing buyer and willing seller. The buyer can not force the seller to sell.
"...opression by the state of
"...opression by the state of the Church,..." Oh, give me a break! This is nothing compared to the opression of women by the Church for centuries. The Bishops should stop whining.
So, you're not against
So, you're not against oppression...just against oppression you don't like.
Actually the Catholic Church
Actually the Catholic Church has been the greatest defender of women's rights for 2000 years!!! How are women fairing in the Muslim religion?? In the Middle Eastern culture??
Dear Fr. John - I really
Dear Fr. John - I really don't think the state is trying to tell the Church that it must do something so immoral as to use or even promote the use of contraceptives. The government mandate is directed to INSURANCE COMPANIES, not the Church. If the church does not want to supply health insurance to its personnel, it really doesn't have to do so, does it?
Actually, J.H. the Catholic
Actually, J.H. the Catholic Church *is* mandated by federal law to provide health insurance for all employees, whether they are Catholic or not. Now the Church also has to pay for things that are clearly against Catholic teaching. And please note that Christian Scientists organizations are not required to provide free medical services that they disagree with. Jehovah's Witnesses are not required to provide free blood transfusions that they disagree with. It's simply an attack on Catholic teaching.
the difficulties over health
the difficulties over health care are not new and the issues have been explored in public dialogue and private discussion .
there is every reason to believe that the president knew exactly what he was doing .
he has said something tantamount to the hell with you .
the response of catholics will be strong and resistance sustained.
cultural catholics will yield and harry the bishops . church going catholics will split on the issue .
enough will stand with the bishops to seriously endanger obama's reelection
This issue needs to get all
This issue needs to get all the airtime and publicity possible because it will insure Obama's re-election as well it should!!!!
This will be Obama's
This will be Obama's Waterloo... hide and watch!!
Let us spray!! With Obama,
Let us spray!! With Obama, the only honest man (by comparison to Newt or Santorum) out there, no need to hide.
That's why I'll be watching with a great deal of pleasure. As regressive humanoids on the birth-control issue take the bait and come crawling out of the woodwork, contemporary women will be ready to greet them with stockpiles of bug spray. So PST PST PJ!!!
The cultural catholics as you
The cultural catholics as you call them will yield and harry the bishops, and have been harrying faithful bishops for a long time. Harrying the bishops seems to be an obsession with them. It is noteworthy, and very sadly so, that in this case they are prepared to allow the First Amendment to be trodden on rather than rather than pass up another chance to harry the bishops. I believe that will not be forgotten for a long time.
I doubt it. The Catholic
I doubt it. The Catholic church rallies around the Republican parties anti-abortion campaign while turning a blind eye to all of the other atrocities they sanction and promote worldwide.
The Catholic Healthcare
The Catholic Healthcare system for the first time in the history of this country is in real political and legal jeopardy. This is not some joke in an election year but a legislative reality. Some Bishops are for the first time seeing the writing on the wall and speaking up. Unfortunately it is to little to late for the Catholic Healthcare system which , in order to survive in a government controlled healthcare system, will be forced to either comply or face fines and government sanctions. Moreover, in addition to dismantling Catholic healthcare institutions think of the message this sends to young students contemplating a profession in Medicine, no Catholic values tolerated or wanted. If you want road map of what lies ahead for Catholic Healthcare look at the diminished role of Catholic agencies in adoption services as one example.
And while you're at it, look
And while you're at it, look at the reason for the situation of the Catholic adoption agencies; blantant discrimination against gay and lesbian prospective adoptive parents who could give loving homes to needy children.
Indeed, of those Catholic
Indeed, of those Catholic healthcare organizations not being declared "non Catholic" by bishops, other large health systems like Catholic Healthcare West just formed a new "non-Catholic" holding company. This is the future of Catholic healthcare.
If Catholic hospitals providing OB services are ordered by bishops to let pregnant women die along with their dying fetuses, then maybe they SHOULD go out of business.
Recent statistics show that 1 out of 5 American women have been raped...those are just the reported rapes. If my daughter, mother or sister were ever raped, I would not wanted them to be taken to a Catholic hospital, where they are given "ovulation tests" and treated as little incubation factories for the monster rapists' sperm. What an incredible invasion of privacy...for someone to check to see if you are fertile after a violent attack, so you can be sent home to incubate the semen of a violator (albeit with a $2,000 ED bill to your insurance company.)
How many of you decent men out here want to see the Church force women to have a violent rapist's offspring? Your wife, your 11 year old daughter, your sister?
"the Catholic Healthcare
"the Catholic Healthcare system which , in order to survive in a government controlled healthcare system, will be forced to either comply or face fines and government sanctions."
Actually, HHS directives leave one other alternative. These institutions, along with Catholic colleges, schools, and charities, can in fact lay off all non-Catholic employees; accept only catholics as consumers, patients, or aid recipients; and make sure they provide instruction in the faith to those they do provide the service to. They will then qualify under the conscience exemption detailed by the HHS directive.
For those who can no longer be accepted by these institutions, they could be given a card with HHS' phone number.
Yes, Rev. Isaac, a way HAS
Yes, Rev. Isaac, a way HAS been found to resolve the impasse. A suit has been filed by Christendom college utilizing the same legal team that won the 9-0 rejection by the Supreme Court of the administration's ham-fisted attempt to dictate to religious organizations who their leaders should be. I disagree with you about assuming good will. Cardinal designate Dolan assumed the good will of the administration. He now admits he got taken.
The more accurate statement
The more accurate statement from the Catholic bishops should have been, "Thank you, Secretary Sebelius, for preserving the separation of church and state!" What the bishops don't seem to understand is that NO religious entity is entitled to set government policy. This is NOT the Vatican; this is the United States! People here have freedom to choose. All people here have that freedom; freedom CANNOT be denied to individuals to choose just because the Vatican doesn't approve of the possible choice. If you do not want to take advantage of the merits of a contraceptive, don't use it. But you cannot take that right away from others just because it violates your religious dogma. In this country, no religion can be made state policy.
You once more miss what the
You once more miss what the law actually says. It isnt making contraception or abortion legal-it isnt a question of the "right to choose" as you call it. Its forcing religious organizations to SUBSIDIZE these servcies against their beliefs.
The government isn't
The government isn't subsidizing anything, Gerard, but providing a service to ALL citizens who choose to take advantage of that service. A corporation or institution CANNOT pick and choose which laws it wants to follow and for which citizens it will provide the benefit of the law. That is pure discrimination. That would work at the Vatican, but not in the United States.
My nation protects my right
My nation protects my right to conscientiously oppose war and does not make me perform military service. Why does my nation strip other people of their right to conscientiously object to perform certain health care services?
The Church cannot be made to
The Church cannot be made to buy Playboy for anyone no matter what the "law" states... An immoral law is no law at all!! And the Church will NEVER pay for abortifacients!!
Of course the government
Of course the government isn't subsidizing anything--and he did not say it was. He said the government is forcing the Catholic institutions to subsidize these services they teach as immoral. Very different than what your statement "the government is....providing a service to ALL citizens..." Not quite.
Well, in a way it is the
Well, in a way it is the "right to choose." It is the individual's right to choose that is lost by one person saying to another "my conscience trumps yours; because I don't like something you don't even get a choice about it."
We all live under governments at various levels. My city has a water system and rules about joining it; I pay for the water and sewer connection that I am required to use. My county has schools and libraries I must support with my taxes whether I use them or not. My state taxes me to pay for universities that I don't use. I pay taxes to fight wars that were never justified. I also pay taxes that provides health care for people - something I believe in very much. It is quite a mixed bag but I am a member of these local, state and national communities and, overall, we do pretty well as communities.
Before we had the Affordable Care Act most states set minimum coverage standards for insurance sold in those states and 26/28 of those states required coverage of birth control. Some of those states did not have exemptions for religious organizations and there are some Catholic organizations out there now that do provide it because the state required it.
Now that health care is becoming a public good of the national government it makes sense for their to be some minimum coverage requirements and some standardization - that actually protects the public. It also makes sense for those standards to be based on medically recognized, legal, and socially accepted medical practices. Given that about 90% to 98% of women of this country make use of forms of birth control or seek sterilization, it would not really make sense to ignore them. That would be like ignoring childrens phylicals and immunizations in health care coverage or mens' annual prostate exams. Overall, though, I think that assuring good health care is available for its citizens is a function of government.
Just because something is medically recognized, legal, and socially accepted does not mean the government mandates a person has to use it. (The exception is some local and state requirements on certain children's immunizations.) The government creates the opportunity. It really is up to the individual - THE INDIVIDUAL - to choose what health care they will use.
The government should not empower a religious group to require or coerce people to live by a faith tenet. And they certainly should not allow tax dollars from people of all faiths to be used to fund that requirement or coercion. The government should leave faiths alone to teach, preach, exhort. But they should not legislate their ability to enforce a faith tenet.
It is about time the RCC
It is about time the RCC subsidize birth control and even sterilization to decrease the number of abortions overall. Good birth control and sexual education /family planning will bring about a big reduction in abortions. The bishops are going to have to admit to themselves a reality: people they don't want to have sex (including Catholics they insure) are going to have sex against their counsel and advice and they'll have to fund birth control for employees. They have painted themselves into this corner and now they're going to lose face on this. it is their own problem. RCC women and men aren't going to back down on this, nor should we.
If it was true that birth
If it was true that birth control brings about "a big reduction in abortions" as you claim, then why is "failed birth control" the number one reason women seek abortions? This is a fact published by the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute and by other pro-choice organizations. http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/facts/women_who.html#1
Ordering Churches and their
Ordering Churches and their members to violate their most fundamental teachings and beliefs is preserving the separation of Church and State? Wow! Trying to dictate to religious organizations who their leaders should be is preserving the separation of
Church and State? Double wow!!
What religious entity is setting or trying to set government policy? None. Some religious entities are seeking a legitimate exemption from a government policy or dictate that is of dubious constitutionality to begin with. That is well within their rights, or to quote your words 'all people here have that freedom' too.
"...freedom CANNOT be denied to individuals to choose just because the Vatican doesn't approve of the possible choice." Quite true, but 1) freedom is not being denied. People who find contraception morally acceptable can have it but the Church or others who consider it a grave social evil (on a par with slavery) should not have to provide it or pay for it. And 2) it is not the Vatican's disapproval that counts here. It is the disapproval of and consciences of millions of American citizens, who consider contraception and abortion grave evils in which they cannot in good conscience participate even in remote ways. The First Amendment is there for such people. It has been seriously violated here, as I'm sure the Supreme Court will agree.
It's not what the bishops
It's not what the bishops want, but want their employees want. Many don't really see them as teachers. Most of child-bearing age are following their own lights. A good number are not even catholic. Freedom of conscience for who? The bishops or their employees? With the biggest issues the world has ever faced - catastrophic climate destruction, globalization, greed in society, growing poverty and income and inequality... the bishops are excited about their prerogative to deny others the right to make their own decisions under some form of comprehensive insurance. Really? This is so laughable. And most people are laughing at them. No wonder they're becoming irrelevant.
Nobody is denying anybody's
Nobody is denying anybody's right to make a personal decision. This mandate forces the Catholic Church to PAY for the contraception, etc. used by non-Catholics or by Catholics who are violating the Church's teaching. The Church has never told non-Catholic employees that they can't use birth control. Any employee of a Catholic school or hospital or shelter or whatever can cash their paycheck and go down to a pharmacy and buy whatever contraception they want, and the Church has never tried to stop them. Why is the government now forcing the Church to pay for something that is opposed to Catholic teaching? And why do you think that's an okay thing to do?
"We are not demanding that
"We are not demanding that others live our Christian values, but we should have the right to do so," he added.
Excuse me but to me it looks as if he is doing just that: trying to demand that woman live by his values.
I attend mass regularly, always have, but I have never ever heard a priest preach against birth control. If the bishops really want their Christian values to be adhered to, they need to convince by education, not legislate and forbid. If Catholic women were convinced that using the pill is wrong then having it covered by health insurance wouldn’t be an issue. Need I mention that all surveys show an extremely high percentage of Catholics disagree with the bishops on this issue? Continuing in this vane just further erodes their moral authority.
Begin to gather the
Begin to gather the witch-hunters, the exorcists, the inquisitors... Start, right now, to lighten a good fire in front of the White House... The populace would love it: once, together with hangings, was the most popular show on earth. In real and royal (by divine mandate) Catholic countries, the people aplauded and brought the children to scream in delight. Almost as good as Disneyland! P.S. To understand better, please read the solution than Jonathan Swift found to get rid of the poor. It can inspire the Holly Crusaders.
The comments above are
The comments above are idiotic at best!! Are these people clueless? The bishops are not denying contraceptives to anyone, they are saying that they will NOT be forced to buy them for people!! If you don't see this as "religious freedom", you are seriously out to lunch. The Supreme Court will kill this 9-0 just as they did the right to choose ministers for a church.
The issue at hand is not
The issue at hand is not whether or not the Catholic Church or any religion has the ability to set policy for the United States. The issue is that if abortion and contraception are to be considered a choice (a concept that over 40 years has become entrenched in the minds of many Americans) than it is just that- a choice and not an inherent right. There are other ways to ensure accessibility to contraception rather than mandating employers provide it. To use a slightly absurd analogy to highlight the situation: this is similar to mandating PETA to fund steak dinners for its workers.
Catholics already pay for
Catholics already pay for abortion now in innumerable ways from public revenues derived from their taxes. The bishops are themselves out to lunch. They should have seen this tactic by Obama and the HHS coming a long time ago. Again, they've been caught napping.
Most Catholics in the US will support the HHS decision, as they should. Catholics have their own moral choice, just don't have an abortion.
I agree that most of the
I agree that most of the bishops were caught napping... but not the Holy Spirit... Who seems to have awoken some of them!!
Yeah the Holy Spirit is awake
Yeah the Holy Spirit is awake and the bishop's better run and hide because SHE doesn't like their attitude towards women at all!!!!
After 2000 straight years,
After 2000 straight years, you would think the Holy Spirit would have His act together - that is because HE DOES!! But not according to some of His advisors on this sight... ALERT - The Catholic Church was here before you (and the USA) and She will be here long after all of you are gone...
Yeah and SHE (THE CHURCH)
Yeah and SHE (THE CHURCH) will be here standing liberated on her own 2 feet in a pin-striped suit and brief case telling the Bishops in front of The Judge to straighten up or else long after you and your laughable (He He He) ideology for the TRINITY, finds itself draining down your manhole-idol of patriarchal contrivance!
Sorry, Fr. Dunstan, but they
Sorry, Fr. Dunstan, but they should not support this ruling. Saying that they should completely misses the point. The bishops should not be forced to pay and thus provide something they believe to be a morally intrinsic evil. This violates their moral conscience. Regardless of whether or not you agree with the ban on birth control and sterilization, put that in a little box and lock it away. That's not what this is about. It's about people telling these men that they cannot act on their conscience.
And hey, you're right: Catholics are free to choose whatever. The Church doesn't deny you that. It simply says some things are virtuous, and some are not. Some will lead you to Heaven, and some will not.
For commenters here in general: Please excuse the bishops for unanimously supporting that which is good and right and true according to the Catholic faith, and go back to reminding them of their failures.
The point of the legislation
The point of the legislation is to have reproductive health services available to all women. As so many have said: if you don't want to use birth control, then don't. Nobody is making you do so. Have a baby every year if you want to, and the rest of us will pay for it.
But let's look at this issue from another point of view. Some orthodox Catholics don't want to pay for somebody else's birth control costs and think they should be able to opt out of that.
That logic applied, what about people who don't believe in the prolongation of the end of life at all costs? Should I protest or call it an impingement on my freedom because some person from the religious right wants to keep a person technically alive on a respirator for years on end, at tremendous cost to families, insurance companies and healthcare facilities? I pay for that cost in my insurance premiums too, though I choose not to use it. I consider such artificial prolongation of life and suffering as immoral as some fundamentalists consider birth control. Am I then a victim of discrimination? I think not.
Susan Lersch
susan.lersch@yahoo.com
Telling people to pay up with
Telling people to pay up with "If you don't want to use birth control, then don't"... is like saying, "If you don't believe in slavery, don't own one!"
I don't believe that slavery nor birth control is right and I don't want to pay for someone to participate in either of them!!
Comparing slavery to birth
Comparing slavery to birth control is an analogy that displays cognitive dissonance.
How is birth control like slavery? Support your analogy with facts.
To begin with, most forms of
To begin with, most forms of chemical contraceptives act as abortifacients. They destroy a human life that has come into existence. That is a violation of an individual's right to life. Slavery was a violation of an individual's right to freedom. In addition the practice of contraception (even forms of contraception that do not work by aborting) actually promote abortion by making it more socially acceptable. Advocates of liberal abortion always demand that it be available as a back up for failed contraception. That's why so many faithful Catholics and other Christians cannot participate even remotely in facilitating contraceptive use or abortion.
And in addition to that contraception diminishes respect for all human life. The reason is that it is a rejection of the gift of life which is offered by the creator. Rejecting a gift obviously shows little respect for it. It's not a long step from there to destroying the gift of life after it begins. And from that point respect declines for all human life. This may seem far-fetched but if you look at the history of liberalized abortion it is borne out by the empirical evidence.
Your comparison of birth
Your comparison of birth control and slavery is sheerly mind-boggling. Let's just let it stand on its own merits, if any.
Now:
Would you be kind enough to address my other point? What about people who don't share the fundamentalist point of view regarding end-of-life care? Should they be forced to pay for insurance that covers prolongation of suffering because there are people who believe that as long as there's a heartbeat (even if that heartbeat has to be shocked into action), a respirator should be continued on a stroked-out patient for months and years? I find that sort of "medical care" obscene. Yet you'd probably like me to pay for it in my insurance premium.
Explain how that's different, please.
Susan Lersch
susan.lersch@yahoo.com
That is NOT the Catholic
That is NOT the Catholic position... and NO, I don't want you to pay for any of my medical benefits - I do that myself when I buy my policy. I pay for what I want and I get it. If you want birth control pay for it!!
Then there is the whole issue
Then there is the whole issue of Catholic Hospitals participating in government funding of all sorts while denying patients medical care that is routine in non Catholic hospitals. I have a real problem with my tax money being funneled to a hospital system which denies basic reproductive services for women, puts the right to life of a non viable fetus above that of it's mother, and has an end of life protocol which can bankrupt a lot of families and force insurance premiums ever higher. And what makes all this even more egregious is the fact in many locations the Catholic hospital is the only alternative.
If Catholic hospitals feel conscience bound to force Catholic moral teaching on their patients, then Catholic hospitals should stop taking government funds. But.....they will more than likely just drop Catholic from their name and become spiritual rather than religious. :)
If you are implying that the
If you are implying that the Catholic Church believes we should prolong the end of life at all costs that is not correct. The Church has a pretty well developed teaching on the end of life issues. Basically she believes that ordinary methods of preserving life should be used. Extraordinary and excessively costly methods should not. Indeed in some circumstances it would be immoral to use such methods. The basic point is that caregivers, medical personnel and others involved should to nothing to hasten death or deliberately bring about death, the underlying concern always being respect for God, the author of human life. The same is true regarding contraception and abortion.
The government has merely
The government has merely implemented the recommendations that the Vatican II committee on birth control recommended, how ironic. How surprising that it takes the government to move the church to the place of the Holy Spirit and the people. You can not legislate morality and if we (the people, the church) could, our bishop leaders would look a whole lot different. We, the people of God, have made our decision on birth control as is evidenced by the statistics on usage of birth control. The bishops are fighting a battle with no soldiers!
The bishops are fighting a
The bishops are fighting a battle with no soldiers!
-------------------------------------------
Will, you're oh so right. The bishops are eager and ambitious careerists. Anxious to look good in Rome whenever the opportunity arises to please the Pontifex Maximus.
They'll fall on their swords because they have no army behind them. What army they had once has gone out the door. Just the prattling pious knee-jerk Catholics who will always bow and scrape to them and pull out their wallet to support what they believe to be a case of "father or the bishop knows best".
This is the Catholic archbishop Dolan and the bishop of Pittsburgh have come to rely upon.
Even seen the crowd at World
Even seen the crowd at World Youth Day - young, vibrant and faithful. Even seen the crowd at a Call To Action conference - gray, sad, dissenting and passing. In 20 years, the age of dissent will be only a bad memory!!
Tip of the biretta to you,
Tip of the biretta to you, Paul!
Wishful thinking, padre, to
Wishful thinking, padre, to you.
OR, values and beliefs that
OR, values and beliefs that are unquestioned in the naïveté and inexperience of youth, are more rigorously examined and questioned with the wisdom of age.
Think of it as a youthful passion for the pop music of Beyonce becoming, in later years, the appreciation for the rich texture of the musicianship of Nina Simone.
If you have the same values and beliefs at 60 that you had at 20, that would seem to demonstrate that you exercised little discernment in your chronological maturation.
OR... maybe you discovered
OR... maybe you discovered the Truth at an early age?!?
Post new comment