Bishops rip HHS mandate That Forces Coverage of Birth Control, Abortion Drugs

[Rence]

Does anyone really believe the motivation of the Catholic bishops and institutions is “control the actions of others”? Their motivation is to control their own actions alone, and Obama is the one trying to “control the actions” of churches. And just how does one think Catholic directors of institutions “would concentrate on being living examples of Catholics” if they countenance paying for abortion and “controlling the actions of the others” who do not want to subsidize it in paying their premiums? What kind of “living example” is that?

First of all, they’re already paying for it. It’s already being paid for in premiums, deductables, copays and provider discounts. Second of all, if the Catholic employers are providing a government mandated benefit, then they are simply complying with a government mandate. That doesn’t mean they endorse it, that means they have no choice in the matter due to government mandate. They can continue to be a living example by teaching the rules of the Church regarding ABCs and educating people about NFP.

 

[Rence]

But one does have to pay for others who do in higher premiums or fines. Believe me,
every “mandate” in health care insurance has a price tag.

Yes it does, and it does so across the board. It’s already being paid for. So “paying for it” is a nonissue. You’re paying for it anyway and already.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

It’s already being paid for in the form of premiums, copays, deductibles and provider discounts. So these same folks who say they don’t wanna pay for it, are already doing so. So that can’t be the bone of contention. The bone of contention is that they don’t want it available to their employees because they don’t approve of their employee’s choice to take advantage of those benefits.

By this twisted logic it would be perfectly reasonable for a Catholic Hospital to be required to hire hit men to murder and the burden would be on the person offered this to say “no”.

However, the law rightfully recognizes that someone who hires a hit man is legally (and morally) culpable as the murderer himself.

Now here we are talking about, among other things, abortion, and I recognize that not everyone regards abortion as murder.

But Catholics do.

 

[Rence]

**Nimzovik Responds: **

Soooooo… by your logic of " If one doesn’t want to use them, one doesn’t have to use them." I guess it is **fair **that Catholics should be able to say “If one doesn’t want to PROVIDE them, one doesn’t have to PROVIDE them.” Them being of course abortion services as dictated - yes dictated is the operative word here…by our Gov’t. Eh wot?

By logic, if the regulation sticks and offering the benefits becomes a requirment, all employers across the board, except those who meet the criteria for religious examption, will have to comply.

 

[Rence]

Nimzovik Responds

Bingo! It is called “FREEDOM OF RELIGION”. This is the **right ***that is being trampled upon. *

I don’t feel anyone’s rights are being trampled on. People have the freedom to choose not to use the added benefits.

 

[JimG]

I must respectfully disagree with this. It is common practice for bureaucracy to add details as they implement legislation. Anyone who supported Obamcare because it didn’t explicitly require Catholics to fund abortion simply did not think ahead. Congress gave HHS the power to decide what health care policies must include. Catholic Kathleen Sebelius was certainly operating within the letter of the law in this decision.

Catholic Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi famously said, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.”

Now we are finding out.

Of course. My point is that this mandated coverage was not within the legislation itself. Congress gave HHS the power to decide what health care policies must include. That power is given within the framework of the law.

I worked for a federal agency myself. We changed regulations about once a year, sometimes with (name removed by moderator)ut from people in the industry, sometimes without. The way it worked was:

1. Decide what you want to do.
2. Publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register, and give a public comment period.
3. Read the public comments, and give a reason for disregarding the ones you don’t like.
4. Publish a final rule to do what you wanted to do in the first place.

 

[manualman]

It’s already being paid for in the form of premiums, copays, deductibles and provider discounts. So these same folks who say they don’t wanna pay for it, are already doing so. So that can’t be the bone of contention. The bone of contention is that they don’t want it available to their employees because they don’t approve of their employee’s choice to take advantage of those benefits.

Assertion not in evidence. Most diocesan plans that cover all teachers, social workers and admin staff are written up in self-insured policies that do NOT cover morally repugnant ‘services’. The actuarial tables account for this. The diocese generally then reinsurse for bad years in which expenses exceed its annual premium pool.

There is no way to support your assertion given this general model of insurance at the diocesan level. Money today is NOT being taken from employees and used for abortion pills, sterilization or the pill. In an average year, the money going out to providers comes ONLY from the premium pool, regardless of which big name health plan has its name on the card. If employees want bad stuff, they need to procure it on their own. So how right now is the Church “already” paying for this?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I don’t feel anyone’s rights are being trampled on. People have the freedom to choose not to use the added benefits.

People have the freedom to disobey the law, too.

 

[JimG]

I don’t feel anyone’s rights are being trampled on. People have the freedom to choose not to use the added benefits.

But Catholic institutions do not have the freedom to NOT violate its conscience. Catholic institutions must either reject their Catholicism or cease to exist.

 

[jwinch2]

The fact is that our Bishops have spoken plainly and stated that it IS a violation of our rights of religious practice and freedom. Or, don’t we listen to the successors of the Apostles anymore on matters of faith and morals?

 

[Rence]

By this twisted logic it would be perfectly reasonable for a Catholic Hospital to be required to hire hit men to murder and the burden would be on the person offered this to say “no”.

Catholic hospitals don’t hire hit men, and even if they did, it’s illegal. So I don’t see the comparision between the two issues. Sorry.

Now here we are talking about, among other things, abortion, and I recognize that not everyone regards abortion as murder.

But Catholics do.

Not everyone employed and serviced by this mandate are Catholic. And this isn’t about abortion. This is about a healthcare benefits package that includes ABCs.

 

[jwinch2]

This is about a healthcare benefits package that includes ABCs.

Which, according to the definitions in place by the Obama administration, includes abortive inducing drugs such as the morning after pill.

 

[estesbob]

For some Christians maybe because Christ said in Matt 25 to care for the ill (NAB, GNT). He didn’t say to assure care is only in reach for some specified lower percentage of the population. And if care is to be provided, someone has to pay for it. A woman who can’t afford care on her own, might want it to protect her health and save her life.

And he didn’t say we can fulfill our obligation to care for the poor by voting for someone who promises to take money from somebody else and do it for us

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Of course. My point is that this mandated coverage was not within the legislation itself. Congress gave HHS the power to decide what health care policies must include. That power is given within the framework of the law.

Of course, this is all hindsight. But the real question to ask is: who expected this outcome? Was this a bolt out of the blue or a natural progression along a well worn path? Were Catholics who supported Obamacare betrayed or were they willfully ignorant of the obvious.

Going forward, you are not going to get anywhere by arguing that HHS has exceed its authority under Obamacare. The only chance along those lines is to argue that Congress exceeded its authority under the US Constitution, which fight has finally reached the Supreme Court. One would hope that the USCCB might join with the states fighting this evil monstrosity.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Catholic hospitals don’t hire hit men, and even if they did, it’s illegal. So I don’t see the comparision between the two issues. Sorry.

This is an analogy designed to help you understand the moral culpability of one who pays for an evil act.

Not everyone employed and serviced by this mandate are Catholic. And this isn’t about abortion. This is about a healthcare benefits package that includes ABCs.

This became about abortion when the HHS included that, among other things, in the package of required health care benefits.

 

[JimG]

Catholic hospitals don’t hire hit men, and even if they did, it’s illegal. So I don’t see the comparision between the two issues. Sorry.

Not everyone employed and serviced by this mandate are Catholic. And this isn’t about abortion. This is about a healthcare benefits package that includes ABCs.

It’s about providing for artificial birth control, sterilization, and drugs which induce chemical abortion. For Catholic institutions, it’s like saying, “okay, so you don’t agree with providing hit men to your employees. They don’t have to use the hit men, but you have to pay for them if they want them.”

 

[Ridgerunner]

It’s already being paid for in the form of premiums, copays, deductibles and provider discounts. So these same folks who say they don’t wanna pay for it, are already doing so. So that can’t be the bone of contention. The bone of contention is that they don’t want it available to their employees because they don’t approve of their employee’s choice to take advantage of those benefits.

Not so. I buy health insurance for my employees. If I add some benefit, I have to pay for it. If I delete a benefit, my premium goes down. At one time in my life, I negotiated provider agreements for an insurer. Take this off, it costs less. Add this on, it costs more. You’re directly paying for that benefit. That’s the way it works.

The “bone of contention” is not to prevent their employees from having abortions. They can do that regardless, and no Catholic institution thinks they can prevent that. The “bone of contention” is forcing Catholic institutions to be complicit in providing the means to do it. It’s his Act of Supremacy.

I will agree that Obama is making all of us pay for abortion. That was his intention all along and his bogus “executive order” was simply designed to fool people. I guess it actually did fool some for awhile.

So, you asked, in another post, what is anyone prepared to do about it? Well, protest might result in a temporary modification of the order. But the man can’t be trusted to respect religion or conscience, as we have all learned, and so the only recourse we have against his disrespect for religion and his further imposition of his Culture of Death is to support his opponent this year, with everything we have in us.

And while we’re at it, we should also support the opponents of all of his party’s candidates. That party will never learn until it starts massively losing election after election. It will never change its way if it does not. I am a former Democrat officeholder, and I know.

So, I only have one vote, and I am not George Soros who can hand a candidate a billion dollars. But I do have some funds. And I have a conscience too, and know someday I will face, not King Henry VIII or King Obama I, but the King of Kings. He will judge me for ever evil act I committed, and there have been plenty of them. But the one thing He will not accuse me of is supporting those who promote the killing of innocent children.

 

[Rence]

Assertion not in evidence. Most diocesan plans that cover all teachers, social workers and admin staff are written up in self-insured policies that do NOT cover morally repugnant ‘services’. The actuarial tables account for this. The diocese generally then reinsurse for bad years in which expenses exceed its annual premium pool.

There is no way to support your assertion given this general model of insurance at the diocesan level. Money today is NOT being taken from employees and used for abortion pills, sterilization or the pill. In an average year, the money going out to providers comes ONLY from the premium pool, regardless of which big name health plan has its name on the card. If employees want bad stuff, they need to procure it on their own. So how right now is the Church “already” paying for this?

All premiums, deductibles, copays and provider discounts are meant to make up for the losses from benefits being claimed and used by members as a whole, and they are distributed among all payors and providers. When I was pricing plans for our office, all of the reps told me that these costs were determined by region and made up for what others didn’t pay. This was four different insurance companies.

 

[Rence]

Not so. I buy health insurance for my employees. If I add some benefit, I have to pay for it. If I delete a benefit, my premium goes down. At one time in my life, I negotiated provider agreements for an insurer. Take this off, it costs less. Add this on, it costs more. You’re directly paying for that benefit. That’s the way it works.

With optional benefits, I may agree with you. But these are benefits that will be made across the board. As such, the cost will be distributed among all, regardless of who uses them or not.

 

[Ridgerunner]

All premiums, deductibles, copays and provider discounts are meant to make up for the losses from benefits being claimed and used by members as a whole, and they are distributed among all payors and providers. When I was pricing plans for our office, all of the reps told me that these costs were determined by region and made up for what others didn’t pay. This was four different insurance companies.

As one who used to negotiate provider contracts for insurers and employers, I can assure you that’s not how it works. It’s not all bundled together by “region”. An insurer and even an insured employer pays for what he gets and gets what he pays for, if he knows what he’s doing. I think those insurance reps sold you a bill of goods, brother.