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

[irishpatrick]

I am not a lawyer, but I have read somewhere if Catholic organizations do not provide the immoral health care, they pay $2000 fine for each employee. I don’t know how long that $2000 covers, each month? each year? If someone has the knowledge, please help us understand.

I am not clear on all this. I have read/heard that the Church is being held to the mandate because it accepts Federal money, so if they rejected the money, could they do as they please?

 

[irishpatrick]

More importantly, this fine is, for all purposes, an imposed insurance coverage for the very “health” services that the bishops are complaining about. In other words, you can buy insurance or you can pay the fine but either way you will be funding ABC now that it has been declared a health care right.

How? If they have to pay 2k, how is that funding of ABC?

 

[PTL]

You are right. Paying the high amount of fine is funding ABC anyway. So the only choice will be not buy insurance, not pay fine, but go to jail.

 

[irishpatrick]

You are right. Paying the high amount of fine is funding ABC anyway. So the only choice will be not buy insurance, not pay fine, but go to jail.

How does paying the fine equate to paying for ABC?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

How? If they have to pay 2k, how is that funding of ABC?

One might quibble about buying insurance vs. paying a fine but the way this is structured, the employees will be provided ABC either by the employer through forced purchase of insurance plans or by fines levied on those who don’t buy insurance.

The later was primarily designed to cover those employers who would otherwise not provide insurance, such as for minimum wage employees. The idea was to make every employer provide health insurance one way or another. But obviously this will also cover contentious objectors nicely as well. (Ah, the irony!)

You are right. Paying the high amount of fine is funding ABC anyway. So the only choice will be not buy insurance, not pay fine, but go to jail.

If Catholic hospitals (for example) refuse to purchase the insurance and if they refuse to pay the fine then they might go to jail but another possibility is that the hospital will be taken over by the government as a forfeiture. I’m guessing that long before that would occur, the hospital will shut down or sell to a non-Catholic entity or some such. Obviously that’s not an option available for a diocese office.

This is a pickle!

 

[Incomplete]

I am not clear on all this. I have read/heard that the Church is being held to the mandate because it accepts Federal money, so if they rejected the money, could they do as they please?

People are quick to say this, but I haven’t seen any proof of it. My understanding is that every employer will have to offer this, and we know that small employers don’t except Federal funds.

As far as accepting Federal money, how could they stop? For example, Catholic hospitals can’t just turn down people funded by Medicare or Medicaid.

 

[irishpatrick]

One might quibble about buying insurance vs. paying a fine but the way this is structured, the employees will be provided ABC either by the employer through forced purchase of insurance plans or by fines levied on those who don’t buy insurance.

The later was primarily designed to cover those employers who would otherwise not provide insurance, such as for minimum wage employees. The idea was to make every employer provide health insurance one way or another. But obviously this will also cover contentious objectors nicely as well. (Ah, the irony!)

If Catholic hospitals (for example) refuse to purchase the insurance and if they refuse to pay the fine then they might go to jail but another possibility is that the hospital will be taken over by the government as a forfeiture. I’m guessing that long before that would occur, the hospital will shut down or sell to a non-Catholic entity or some such. Obviously that’s not an option available for a diocese office.

This is a pickle!

I am still not clear. What part of this mandate says that there will be a 2k fine, and then where does it state that the fine will be used for health insurance?

 

[ajaxbogs]

Sen Rubio is introducing a bill to counter this attack on Catholicism. The bill is the Religious Freedoms Act (which should be guaranteed by the Constitution). Please let your senators and representatives know you want them to support this bill.

Hey you Catholics who always vote Democrat. Why does it always seem its Republicans who get the ball rolling on Pro-Life & freedom of religion legislation?

Not holding my breath for an answer…

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I am still not clear. What part of this mandate says that there will be a 2k fine, and then where does it state that the fine will be used for health insurance?

You don’t want to read the law directly unless you are a masochistic lawyer. Far better to look to analyses such as this one:

heritage.org/research/projects/the-case-against-obamacare

A better source would be a legal firm advice to a client on the law, I’m sure there are some out there, but I’m not sure where you can find such online.

 

[PTL]

Hey you Catholics who always vote Democrat. Why does it always seem its Republicans who get the ball rolling on Pro-Life & freedom of religion legislation?

Not holding my breath for an answer…

I am a Catholic and I did not vote for Obama.

 

[irishpatrick]

People are quick to say this, but I haven’t seen any proof of it. My understanding is that every employer will have to offer this, and we know that small employers don’t except Federal funds.

As far as accepting Federal money, how could they stop? For example, Catholic hospitals can’t just turn down people funded by Medicare or Medicaid.

Why can’t a private organization turn down whomever they please?

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

People are quick to say this, but I haven’t seen any proof of it. My understanding is that every employer will have to offer this, and we know that small employers don’t except Federal funds.

Correct. While that has been a problem in the past with other government overreaches, Obmacare is not limited in scope to organizations that accept funding from the government. By design, it is a mandate that you incur by being born. And that is largely the basis of the constitutional challenge. Never has the federal government claimed the authority to require citizens to purchase a product or service.

 

[Incomplete]

Why can’t a private organization turn down whomever they please?

There are laws about emergency care. Other than that, I don’t know if they legally can turn down these people or not. But how could a Catholic organization turn them down without violating their conscience?

That, and as Bubba confirmed, it wouldn’t make a difference regarding this mandate. It’s not about public funds. All employers, whether or not they accept federal funds, will be forced to provide this coverage. For example, the small print shop a friend used to work for, he didn’t, of course, accept federal funding. But as an employer, even if he was Catholic, he would be forced to offer this.

 

[irishpatrick]

There are laws about emergency care. Other than that, I don’t know if they legally can turn down these people or not. But how could a Catholic organization turn them down without violating their conscience?

That, and as Bubba confirmed, it wouldn’t make a difference regarding this mandate. It’s not about public funds. All employers, whether or not they accept federal funds, will be forced to provide this coverage. For example, the small print shop a friend used to work for, he didn’t, of course, accept federal funding. But as an employer, even if he was Catholic, he would be forced to offer this.

Scary stuff. This issue along should cause all Christians to vote for anyone other than Obama.

 

[Joe_5859]

This raises an interesting question: why is it so difficult to get the word out? Wouldn’t it be great if the bishops could directly email parishioners and direct them to appropriate online resources where they could learn more? (Like Catholic.com?) And how about Facebook? When everyone’s grandmother is online, it seems like there is still an over reliance on parish sermons.

In order to do this, a bishop would first need a mass email list. In order to get this mass email list, every parish would have to collect the email address of every parishioner. And, of course, they would need permission to do so. Not everyone has email. And of those that do, some won’t give it out to anyone just on general principle so as not to receive junk email. And of those who give it out, many might have their junk mail filters set in such a way that the mail goes straight to the trash. And many still might not check their email that frequently. And then there will be the people who change their email address everytime they turn around (but forget to tell half the people they’ve given their email address to).

New media ways of connecting work great for younger crowds. I think we’re still a ways away from it being the best way to contact everyone.

There are some neat new enterprises like flockNote, which would make communication super easy. But that is if you get everyone on board to communicate this way. In an ideal world, the bishop could send a email/text/voicemail message to his whole diocese with just a click. Perhaps some day…

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

In order to do this, a bishop would first need a mass email list. In order to get this mass email list, every parish would have to collect the email address of every parishioner. And, of course, they would need permission to do so. Not everyone has email. And of those that do, some won’t give it out to anyone just on general principle so as not to receive junk email. And of those who give it out, many might have their junk mail filters set in such a way that the mail goes straight to the trash. And many still might not check their email that frequently. And then there will be the people who change their email address everytime they turn around (but forget to tell half the people they’ve given their email address to).

New media ways of connecting work great for younger crowds. I think we’re still a ways away from it being the best way to contact everyone.

There are some neat new enterprises like flockNote, which would make communication super easy. But that is if you get everyone on board to communicate this way. In an ideal world, the bishop could send a email/text/voicemail message to his whole diocese with just a click. Perhaps some day…

It would be a lot of work, I agree, but I think it would be worth it in the long run.

I don’t think you need to get everyone online, just a critical mass. If you are online and informed then you can tell your grandmother.

The Catholic Church is a huge institution with a billion followers. But it relies on archaic methods of communicating.

While internal divisions are part of the problem, and not an insignificant one, the issue of communication is also a major issue.

This is gong to be a long war; people need to start thinking about what needs to be done to win it.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Sharpton: Obama needs to dictate to the Catholic Church to maintain separation of church and state, or something

Someone has a very confused idea about the separation of church and state, and surprisingly, it’s the Reverend in this Morning Joe panel today. Working off of Peggy Noonan’s Wall Street Journal column from Saturday, Al Sharpton argues that Barack Obama had to dictate to the Catholic Church to violate its religious tenets in order to … preserve the separation of church and state?

Rev. Al Sharpton

: No, I think you have to have the reverse argument, and that is if I want to seek employment and have employment in a church but that I disagree with the dogma and theology of the church, do I have the right to be protected by law? And I think that what the Obama administration is saying that you do not have to follow the tenets of a church organization to be an employee of a church.

**Scarborough**: Do you think this is a good decision?

**Sharpton**: If we are going to have a separation of church and state, we’re going to have a separation of church and state. Whether I would personally agree with the decision or not, the question is do I have a right to make that law?

This is an absurd perversion of the concept of separation of church and state. When Thomas Jefferson wrote that (it’s not found in American law), he meant that the church should not dictate to the State on law — and that the state should not dictate to the church on doctrine. Jefferson wanted to avoid establishing a state religion run by Parliament that had the power to manipulate the spiritual for the sake of the secular. That is exactly what Obama proposes to do in this case: dictate to the Catholic Church and its organizations that its doctrine on contraception, abortion, and sterilization are incorrect and force them to fund those practices that violate their most deeply held beliefs on the sanctity of life, all to satisfy Obama’s political needs.

Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski aren’t buying Sharpton’s spin:

Mika Brzezinski

: Obviously they’re getting money from the government. Having said that, the Catholic religion believes certain things; they believe it to be fact. And so you’re asking them not to be Catholic if you impose these regulations on them.

**Scarborough**: You have a lot of Catholics who are pro-choice who were offended by this decision…The very idea that a centralized government, a centralized state can reach out and tell the church…Kathleen Parker put it this way “You have to forfeit your most fundamental beliefs or face prohibitive penalties or close hospitals, schools, charities, etc…” I must say it’s a staggering, staggering decision by HHS…[to Mika] You’re a Catholic. What are your thoughts?

**Brzezinski**: I think it’s wrong; I agree with you. And I think it was an overstep.

The Catholic Church’s hospitals get money from the government, but only for caring for the otherwise indigent. If that’s the basis of the intervention, then Catholic hospitals will likely close their doors. The bishops will not allow for abortions and sterilizations that violate the very mission on which those hospitals are based — the protection and promotion of sacred human life. That will only make matters worse for the poor, and also for the government that would have to fill the very large gap left by the closing of hundreds of hospitals and clinics.

If one disagrees with the Catholic Church’s doctrine on the sanctity of human life, then they don’t need to work for their institutions, as Scarborough says later in the segment. Otherwise, they can buy their own abortions, contraception, and sterilization. Catholics who see these as deep sins should not be forced to underwrite them through their own church (it’s bad enough that we’re doing so through the government), and especially not based on an elitist diktat from a government that is supposed to stay out of church business.

hotair.com/archives/2012/02/06/sharpton-obama-needs-to-dictate-to-the-catholic-church-to-maintain-separation-of-church-and-state-or-something/

 

[Psalm_51]

The authority for the government to do this is rooted in the Obamacare legislation. The Supreme Court will be ruling on the insurance mandate this year before the elections. It they rule against it, which I hope they will, the rest of Obamacare and this particular mandate will collapse. So let’s pray that the Supreme Court will overrule the mandate and this will become moot. Or that Obama will be defeated and Obamacare will be repealed.

Elections matter.

 

[InLight247]

The authority for the government to do this is rooted in the Obamacare legislation. The Supreme Court will be ruling on the insurance mandate this year before the elections. It they rule against it, which I hope they will, the rest of Obamacare and this particular mandate will collapse. So let’s pray that the Supreme Court will overrule the mandate and this will become moot. Or that Obama will be defeated and Obamacare will be repealed.

Elections matter.

Saint Michael the Archangel,
defend us in battle.
Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil.
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray;
and do Thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host -
by the Divine Power of God -
cast into hell, satan and all the evil spirits,
who roam throughout the world seeking the ruin of souls.
Amen.

 

[Joe_5859]

It’s not a question of if this will be reversed but only when and by who.

If Obama wins re-election and Congess isn’t able to overturn it through legislation, this will eventually make it to the Supreme Court and I would be quite surprised if they did not overturn it.