Archbishop: Obama Needs To Stop 'Intruding Into Internal Life Of Church'

[_Abyssinia]

Pro-Life Congressman Has the Backbone to Stand Up to Abortion

lifenews.com/2012/02/14/pro-life-congressman-has-the-backbone-to-stand-up-to-abortion/

 

[_Abyssinia]

Wedneday: Join pro-life webcast re: Obama contraceptive mandate

Priests for Life and the National Right to Life Committee are cosponsoring a webcast tomorrow evening to update pro-lifers on where things stand with the Obamacare contraception mandate and what we can each do about it.

Date: Wednesday, February 15
Time: 9-10p EST
Sign up [here](http://www.priestsforlife.org/webcast/).

On the call will be:

Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life
Congressman Chris Smith, Co-Chair of the U.S. House Pro-life Caucus
Doug Johnson, Federal Legislative Director for National Right to Life
David N. O’Steen, Ph.D., Executive Director of National Right to Life
Charles S. LiMandri, attorney filing the federal lawsuit on behalf of PFL

Sign up now. President Obama is trying to portray this issue as over, thanks to his “accommodation.” He couldn’t be more wrong.

jillstanek.com/2012/02/wedneday-join-pro-life-webcast-re-obama-contraceptive-mandate/

 

[_Abyssinia]

BREAKING: Reid will allow vote on Blunt amendment to stop Obama’s mandate

The Hill indicates Reid said Tuesday that he will allow a vote on the Blunt amendment. Meanwhile, the usual pro-abortion leaders int he Senate — Patty Murrary and Barbara Boxer — say they will aggressively oppose the amendment.

lifenews.com/2012/02/14/senate-may-vote-on-amendment-to-stop-obamas-abortion-mandate/

Please contact your senator as soon as possible. Facebook link and tweet link. Tell your family and friends to contact their senator.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Cardinal-elect Dolon spoke about chastity and marriage in mass a few weeks ago, that made international news apparently, as if it is out of the ordinary for a Bishop (or Priest) to speak about that in Church. It probably is, but it should not be.

Bravo! Hopefully others will follow his example.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I think the bishops are doing everything they can right now. I think if we want to get the word out more, then we have to do some of the work. I know that’s why I’m in CAF and I’m on twitter and several other places, and that’s why I’m talking to all the Catholics I know about this. It’s important. I’ve also written to my representatives in Congress and signed several petitions.

Regardless of whether or not they are, you are absolutely right that we, the laity, need to do more, much more.

But this all brings me back to my original question: who is thinking this through on a strategic level and helping to coordinate Catholic efforts? Is that something we should expect from the cardinals or should that be a lay function that coordinates with the bishops?

 

[iloveangels]

Regardless of whether or not they are, you are absolutely right that we, the laity, need to do more, much more.

But this all brings me back to my original question: who is thinking this through on a strategic level and helping to coordinate Catholic efforts? Is that something we should expect from the cardinals or should that be a lay function that coordinates with the bishops?

We do need a lay function, yes. We can’t count on the cardinals and bishops to do everything for us. There are only 300 of them and part of the responsibility is ours.

In addition to an organized lay function, Catholics need to talk to their relatives and friends and make sure that EVERYONE knows what’s going on, and what the bishops are saying and what is at stake. No one should be surprised if this thing goes into effect and all these Catholic institutions suddenly have to pay these huge fines.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

We do need a lay function, yes. We can’t count on the cardinals and bishops to do everything for us. There are only 300 of them and part of the responsibility is ours.

In addition to an organized lay function, Catholics need to talk to their relatives and friends and make sure that EVERYONE knows what’s going on, and what the bishops are saying and what is at stake. No one should be surprised if this thing goes into effect and all these Catholic institutions suddenly have to pay these huge fines.

I know there are many pro-life and Catholic organizations putting out statements and I’m sure some of them are thinking this through, but is there one that would stand above the others and take a leadership role? Maybe the Catholic League or something like that?

 

[LisaA]

If you want a great analysis of how our culture has promoted this anti-life culture and the state’s rise to power over our lives take a look at this essay:

courageouspriest.com/father-richard-perozich-identity-theft-soul-life-lock

I find Courageous Priest has very thoughtful editorials and they do not back down or waffle on the teachings of the Church. I hope we see more of this type of speaking in our homilies. It’s time to stand up not stand down

Lisa

 

[PTL]

I know there are many pro-life and Catholic organizations putting out statements and I’m sure some of them are thinking this through, but is there one that would stand above the others and take a leadership role? Maybe the Catholic League or something like that?

I receive multiple grassroots emails daily and I actually emailed all of them asking if they would form an organization uniting all faith groups (Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, etc) together and fight for religious freedom. None of them write me back except one, saying they are working on their focused issues and would not specifically fight just for one issue.

I think as an individual, at least we can do our best to influence people we run into contact daily. That may be not big enough, but it is a start. We have to start somewhere. And, please sign every accountable petitions and contact the Congress and Senate.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I receive multiple grassroots emails daily and I actually emailed all of them asking if they would form an organization uniting all faith groups (Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, etc) together and fight for religious freedom. None of them write me back except one, saying they are working on their focused issues and would not specifically fight just for one issue.

I think as an individual, at least we can do our best to influence people we run into contact daily. That may be not big enough, but it is a start. We have to start somewhere. And, please sign every accountable petitions and contact the Congress and Senate.

That’s my impression as well, and maybe that’s for the best, I don’t know.

But when I step back and watch this with an objective eye, I see a well oiled war machine on the Obama side and a ragtag assembly on the Catholic side. Yeah, we are outraged, but can we coordinate a coherent strategy or will Obama be able to pick his battles and fine tune his attacks to pick off enough support to get his way?

 

[northernstar]

Yes, but it’s really not about demographics. It’s about religious freedom.

We have the right to believe as we do about homosexuality and a whole host of issues, in addition to the birth control and abortion issues. The federal government may not tell us what to believe and we do not have to bow down to them like they were a god. We have a religion and we have the constitutional right to practice it in freedom.

So why not just practice what you preach. I mean nothing rude, just don’t buy birth control so what if is a part of the benefits package. There are other things in it you could use on the sly, massage therapy, for a non-existant ailment. This just a choice a woman and her husband make. It prevent throw away, abused children, that no one seems to care for after they pass the cute toddler age.

It is simply there for the non- Catholics so why destroy a plan that has thousands of other good benefits for the weaker members of society.

That is what I do not get…

 

[iloveangels]

So why not just practice what you preach. I mean nothing rude, just don’t buy birth control so what if is a part of the benefits package. There are other things in it you could use on the sly, massage therapy, for a non-existant ailment. This just a choice a woman and her husband make. It prevent throw away, abused children, that no one seems to care for after they pass the cute toddler age.

It is simply there for the non- Catholics so why destroy a plan that has thousands of other good benefits for the weaker members of society.

That is what I do not get…

Here is the issue:

The Church has taught for centuries now that participating in procuring an abortion is a mortal sin. In fact you get automatically excommunicated for it. IT doesn’t matter what role you play, you can’t participate in an abortion in any way whatsoever, not even to just pay for it and that’s all.

Therefore, it’s a problem to ask the Church to contract with insurance companies to offer these services to their employees. It puts the church in an impossible situation. It has to say, “Don’t use abortion” and at the same time “Here’s your abortion coverage, offered to you by Us.”

Do you see the problem now???

But it gets worse. Suppose that the Church drops insurance for the employee to avoid paying for abortion. Then the employee is free to go straight to the government and buy the insurance for themselves. They have a right to do that. In that case, the Church would get FINED for not offering abortion coverage. And I believe the employee would be fined too, on top of everything else.

Now do you see the problem?

BTW, this is Obamacare we’re talking about. You can’t choose not to take abortion coverage in Obamacare. You can’t choose not to pay for it. It’s REQUIRED. Even if you’re a MAN. (Why men have to covered for abortion, I have no clue because I wasn’t aware they get pregnant, but there you are.)

 

[LisaA]

So why not just practice what you preach. I mean nothing rude, just don’t buy birth control so what if is a part of the benefits package. There are other things in it you could use on the sly, massage therapy, for a non-existant ailment. This just a choice a woman and her husband make. It prevent throw away, abused children, that no one seems to care for after they pass the cute toddler age.

It is simply there for the non- Catholics so why destroy a plan that has thousands of other good benefits for the weaker members of society.

That is what I do not get…

I’m trying very hard not to believe that your entire post is tongue in cheek and you don’t really believe such things. Let’s see you suggest defrauding an insurance company and claim that ending a pregnancy is merely a choice rather than a murder and that people toss out their children after they pass the cute toddler stage. Is this what you truly believe?

ILoveAngels has done a great job in explaining why this mandate is in direct violation of the Church’s teaching, not to mention violating the right of conscious of many who are not in the Church, not to mention that the mandate is a direct violation of the Constitution.

But beyond that your argument is really nonsensical. The argument you use has been used to justify evil for centuries: I don’t choose to own slaves but they really do a lot of good for others so I won’t stand in the way of this violation of human rights. I mean there is some good that comes of this mandate so no matter that we blow off the Constitution, force Catholics to participate in a grave sin, and if implemented may very well destroy many Catholic organizations that ALSO do a lot of good.

Tell me your post was all in jest please
Lisa

 

[_Abyssinia]

Birth-Control Mandate: Unconstitutional and Illegal
It violates the First Amendment and the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The birth-control coverage mandate violates the First Amendment’s bar against the “free exercise” of religion. But it also violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. That statute, passed unanimously by the House of Representatives and by a 97-3 vote in the Senate, was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. It was enacted in response to a 1990 Supreme Court opinion, Employment Division v. Smith.

online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204795304577223003824714664.html?mod=rss_opinion_main

This is a very good article, it goes into the technicalities of the unconstitutionality of the birth-control mandate.

 

[Tigg]

If you want a great analysis of how our culture has promoted this anti-life culture and the state’s rise to power over our lives take a look at this essay:

courageouspriest.com/father-richard-perozich-identity-theft-soul-life-lock

I find Courageous Priest has very thoughtful editorials and they do not back down or waffle on the teachings of the Church. I hope we see more of this type of speaking in our homilies. It’s time to stand up not stand down

Lisa

I forgot all about this web site which I used to visit occassionally. Many thanks…I’ve now subscribed. I doubt we’ll hear this type of message much in our area - we are so lax in so many ways, altho we’ve taken steps to educate the adults; still it seems they can’t even get their kids to Mass.

 

[Tigg]

I receive multiple grassroots emails daily and I actually emailed all of them asking if they would form an organization uniting all faith groups (Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, etc) together and fight for religious freedom. None of them write me back except one, saying they are working on their focused issues and would not specifically fight just for one issue.

I think as an individual, at least we can do our best to influence people we run into contact daily. That may be not big enough, but it is a start. We have to start somewhere. And, please sign every accountable petitions and contact the Congress and Senate.

The K of C is helping and the Supreme Knight e-mailed each Grand Knight of the individual councils to reach everyone in their membership. Their web page now says “Take action for religious freedom” and I believe nationwide it is a fraternity with well over a million in membership. A sample letter is being drafted from at least one council here (there may be more) and each knight will be personally encouraged to contact his elected official. Now in our heavily populated area of Dems, no one can be certain if indeed they will do it. Altho they say they are pro-life, some seem to have a conflict with faith over politics.

 

[Incomplete]

I’ve been reading the mandate so far at this site: ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2012-03547_PI.pdf

A chilling line it it (or at least, chilling to me):

Individuals are more likely to use preventive services if they do not have to satisfy cost sharing requirements (such as a copayment, coinsurance, or a deductible).

They are talking about preventative care in general, but adding contraception/sterilization/abortion means that they are referring to those things as well. It sounds like they are saying, in other words, that through this act the government is actively promoting contraception and the rest. It is good for the government to mandate this because then women are more likely to contracept/sterilize/abort.

It’s not that I didn’t know that, I just didn’t expect to see it in writing in their words.

…recognized that women have unique health care needs and burdens. Such needs include contraceptive services.

Contraception is a need? I guess that would also include sterilization and abortion as a need.

Research also shows that cost sharing can be a significant barrier to effective contraception.

Which is probably why Obama said that 99% of women use birth control. Cost is such a barrier, otherwise it would be 100%, and the government has a compelling interest to ensure it’s 100%, right?

There is a bit in there as well about how use of contraception is an issue tied into workplace equality.

I still struggle with how this has become an issue. With Obamacare, are there are still co-pays for medication in general? My mother-in-law, for example, takes meds for her kidneys and her heart, medication that helps to keep her alive. She will still pay a co-pay…but we have to provide contraception for “free” if I understand this correctly.

 

[Tigg]

I’ve been reading the mandate so far at this site: ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2012-03547_PI.pdf

A chilling line it it (or at least, chilling to me):

They are talking about preventative care in general, but adding contraception/sterilization/abortion means that they are referring to those things as well. It sounds like they are saying, in other words, that through this act the government is actively promoting contraception and the rest. **It is good for the government to mandate this because then women are more likely to contracept/sterilize/abort. **

It’s not that I didn’t know that, I just didn’t expect to see it in writing in their words.

I’ve said it before, they are advancing another agenda in addition to ripping the Bill of Rights apart. I think it’s all about population control (google the UNFPA, or population fund.) Their solution (sustainability) to reducing poverty is simply death. It’s everywhere and I think another reason why same sex marriage is being legislated.

 

[JimG]

“Individuals are more likely to use preventive services if they do not have to satisfy cost sharing requirements (such as a copayment, coinsurance, or a deductible).”

No doubt the same rationale will be used when abortion coverage without co-pay is mandated.

 

[pismopal]

Are people voting for big government and then complaining when they get one?