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

[Teresara]

I think that you are missing a big point. The Federal money is accepted for the good of the people (e.g. medicare and medicaid). Not all medical institutions are willing to accept medicare and medicaid because of the major inconvenience and possible loss of revenues. This is a situation where distribution of federal money is really for the convenience of the distributor and not of the recipient. The federal system would have major problems if the poor and the elderly would miss access the Catholic medical institutions because the government is not paying medicare or medicaid anymore.
The other point that you are missing is that the government is making a mandate independently of federal funding.
Finally the government accepts our funding (e.g. taxes) with strings attached, it is called the constitution.

Could you explain the underlined more for me? The last line opens a different can of worms that has grey areas of interpretation when it comes to God and the Constitution. Long debated before me and will be after me. So hopefully I can gather some info without confusing the issue too much.

 

[Tbrightson]

This argument is bogus for another reason.

The catholic insitutions are not receiving freebies. It is getting paid for services rendered by Medicare/Medicaid, usually at a loss.

If the Govt wants to use that argument, then the Hosptials should stop taking medicare/medicaid patients…

To say they should follow govt dictat for providing services to the govt is no different then the govt telling the coffee shop what brand of coffee they must buy and serve to everyone else simply because the govt bought some coffee to go for a meeting they had.

 

[Teresara]

I’m sorry, but this whole “He who pays the piper calls the tune” argument is not convincing to me.

First, the HHS mandate has nothing whatsoever to do with allocation of federal funds. The mandate applies to everyone regardless of whether they are tax exempt (or not) or whether they receive federal funds (or not). My Catholic friend with his own business who pays taxes and receives not a dime from the government is still forced under this mandate to violate his conscience and offer these “benefits” to his employees while he pays the bill.

So anyone who is building their argument upon the premise that the Church “deserves” this because She receives federal and/or state monies is just tossing out a red herring. The Church could forsake tax exempt status and refuse all outside funds and it wouldn’t change a thing about this mandate.

All this aside, I strongly object to the notion that the Church does not have a right to the funds it receives. Tax money is not the property of the secular government to do with as they see fit. Tax money is our money. The government gives out grants to organizations who are meeting public needs in a financially responsible way. They do not have the right to take over that organization and dictate its policies simply because they give them such a grant.

Catholic institutions save the government money because they typically operate much more efficiently (imagine that!). I’ve heard the story that, back in the day, a certain archbishop was fighting with the state regarding funds and so, to make his point, he cancelled 1st grade in all of the diocesan Catholic schools for one year (thereby forcing the State to pay for their education). The State quickly learned that it was far cheaper for them to give money to the Catholic school system than to educate all those kids themselves.

Goodness, point taken on the last paragraph – and I’m learning from the previous ones, however – there is no dumb question, deep breath, you seem to be educated on this – the highlighted part above – is that referring to offering Medical insurance? period? Like Social Security was?

I attended 9 years of Catholic School – my parents had to pay for all of it.

 

[pnewton]

BEWARE OF COMPROMISE!! (Somewhat devoted) Catholics who voted for Obama are in bed with a python. He’ll give the “compromise” to get re-elected & may even offer an “apology”.

I would have no problem with a compromise that actually addressed the problem with this mandate. For example, the religious exemption to covering these costs could be extended to those organizations that believe them to be sinful. Then, a separate rider could be granted for those women who want them, paid out of the pockets of these women. That way, the money would be coming only from the individual and the Church would not have to be involved, yet those women who desired these services would still be covered.

 

[healonzo]

Health insurance plans for Catholic institutions cover this; so this is a moot point.

 

[Teresara]

I think there are two separate issues. Yes, when the government ‘gives’ funds you have to follow their rules and should as that is part of gratitude when receiving a gift. In the case of the mandated insurance the government is not giving anyone anything. It is mandating that employers provide health insurance to their employees with specified benefits. There is no obligation out of gratitude to follow the law. So the relevant issues are whether the requirements of the law are justified or the law violates some fundamental freedom.

I agree with your statement about influence only in so far as promoting the powerful modern nation state, as has been done, and its many mandates necessarily means you are going to be subject to its powers yourself. If you accept that the government has a right to all wealth and to distribute it according to its prerogatives then you will be under its influence.

Okay - Thank you! Mandated insurance is what some are up in arms about – that I understand.

 

[Joe_5859]

Thank you all for replying – honestly this was not to argue – I really was wondering if I was missing some thing. Your thoughts have given me much to research on my own and I appreciate it.

No red herring – just an honest question – I haven’t posted on these boards much and this is a helluva place to put myself out there – but as I was frothing at the mouth saying the govt can’t do this on Sunday, and then after doing some preliminary research I just felt as soon as found out govt funds are used it ended the debate in my mind. But the news is so heavily in favor or against and this issue of funding wasn’t even brought up I knew I was missing something so I had to ask – so thank you for answering. Now I have better questions to research answers on. Much food for thought.

(also I don’t’ understand “mandates” – sigh – ) Great opportunity to learn.

I know you were not trying to argue and I am sorry if my post came off as though it was directed specifically to you. The tone of your OP was such that I figured you were just asking an honest question.

I’ve just seen the argument in many different places and was venting because it bothers me. Sorry about that. Usually I’m more reserved.

 

[Cristiano]

Could you explain the underlined more for me? The last line opens a different can of worms that has grey areas of interpretation when it comes to God and the Constitution. Long debated before me and will be after me. So hopefully I can gather some info without confusing the issue too much.

What I am saying is that medicare and medicaid are a bureaucratic pain in the neck, it takes a long time to receive payment, and the payment is not determined by the cost of providing a service to the elderly or the poor but it is simply defined by how much the government is willing to pay. Because of that a lot of medical organizations choose not to accept patients covered by medicare or medicaid. When I say that this case of distribution of federal money is convenient for the distributor (government) and not for the recipient (medical institution) I mean that in a lot of cases this is the only way for the government to ensure that elderly and poor citizens get medical treatment.

 

[Teresara]

The constitution does not directly address the matter of government funding/control of private institutions, but it does address something similar and if I may make a comparison to another right we enjoy in the U.S. it might help to shed some light.

In the U.S. We have the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. The reason for that right is expressed in the preceding phrase, “A well regulated militia being necessary…”.
These two things work in balance. Yes the government has the right to “regulate” but under no circumstances can they remove the right to keep and bear arms.

Likewise, if the government sees that it is to it’s advantage to partner (financially) with a private, faith based organization in some matter that is fine. However, that such partnership MUST keep in mind the freedom and religious rights of the private faith based organization that it chooses to partner with.
In other words, it is not the religious institution that must bend to the government’s will, rather the government is the one that must bend in such cases, or it must choose to cut it’s partnership with the faith based group and assume the full responsibility (and costs) for whatever services the group previously supplied.

The thing to remember though is that in the case of Obama Care, it doesn’t matter if government money is involved or not…Even if the Church told the Government to keep their money, the problem would not go away.
So arguments that attempt to tie government funding to this type of government regulation simply do not hit the mark.

Peace
James

I understand what you are saying. Makes sense.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Just to clarify the USCCB did oppose anything in Obamacare that was related to abortion but they supported the bill for the most part. Here are a couple of links:

catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?ID=527
catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=612
catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?ID=525

Well, they did oppose anything in obacare that was related to abortion, and they didn’t.They depended on the Stupak Amendment, which would not have prevented this particular outcome anyway. Had the Stupak Amendment passed, the result would have been no different.

So, one could say the USCCB, either out of ignorance, intent or blind trust in Obama’s good intentions, supported this outcome all the way through the process.

 

[Teresara]

I know you were not trying to argue and I am sorry if my post came off as though it was directed specifically to you. The tone of your OP was such that I figured you were just asking an honest question.

I’ve just seen the argument in many different places and was venting because it bothers me. Sorry about that. Usually I’m more reserved.

I understand – and I haven’t read enough here or elsewhere. One last reply: I want to give you all something to think about. Not get mad at me - well that’s your prerogative – We had our own construction business for 25 years. i chose not to get insurance – in 18 years of raising kids, emergency rooms, and two operations we still paid less in those years to fund our medical bills than we would have had we bought insurance, and we didn’t have to deal with the insurance companies --yes we were young and thought omnipotent. I was then diagnosed with bipolar. No problem paying the bills. However, when I did decide to look into medical insurance at age 48 no one would insure me. Not One company.

Fast forward two years. I’m diagnosed with breast cancer. Luckily small, I have to have a lumpectomy. It would cost 50,000. in the US – it cost 3500. in Mexico. I researched Medical Tourism, found reputable doctor and hospital - and had to leave the great US of A – also did not have the recommended radiation because we can’t afford it. Now there are would’ve, could’ve, should’ve’s – but barring that – who is going to insure a woman with a history of breast cancer? What options do I have if it comes back? And after the recent downturn of the economy I am SOL – I need some sort of Universal Healthcare – and I realize this means we will have to pay extra for our employees.

 

[Joe_5859]

Goodness, point taken on the last paragraph – and I’m learning from the previous ones, however – there is no dumb question, deep breath, you seem to be educated on this – the highlighted part above – is that referring to offering Medical insurance? period? Like Social Security was?

I attended 9 years of Catholic School – my parents had to pay for all of it.

If you’re looking for more info on the whole thing, this article does a pretty good job of summarizing things

Basically, all the hullabaloo is over the interpretation of a phrase in Obama’s landmark healthcare bill that passed a couple years ago. The phrase was that all insurers would be required to provide “preventive health services”. That seems inocuous enough. But when it came time for the HHS (Health & Human Services) to define what that meant , they defined it to include contraception, abortifacients (AKA the “morning after pill”) and sterilization (because pregnancy is a “disease” by their definitions). And all this is to be provided to everyone at no cost: no copay, no deductible.

Anyone who employs anyone is subject to these rules: big businesses, small businesses, non-profits, etc., etc. The only exemption to this mandate is for religious organizations. But they defined “religious organization” so narrowly as to exclude many, many places. The only groups that qualify are those that (1) employ mostly those of that religion; (2) serve mostly those of that religions; and (3) have as their primary purpose the inculcation of that religion. This definition excludes Catholic hospitals, Catholic schools, Catholic Universities, and many other Catholic social service agencies.

I certainly empathize with your personal situation. Indeed, it is stories like yours that so vividly illustrate the need for health care reform. But this is not the way to go about it.

 

[LisaA]

. No problem paying the bills. However, when I did decide to look into medical insurance at age 48 no one would insure me. Not One company.

Fast forward two years. I’m diagnosed with breast cancer. Luckily small, I have to have a lumpectomy. It would cost 50,000. in the US – it cost 3500. in Mexico. I researched Medical Tourism, found reputable doctor and hospital - and had to leave the great US of A – also did not have the recommended radiation because we can’t afford it. Now there are would’ve, could’ve, should’ve’s – but barring that – who is going to insure a woman with a history of breast cancer? What options do I have if it comes back? And after the recent downturn of the economy I am SOL – I need some sort of Universal Healthcare – and I realize this means we will have to pay extra for our employees.

You know this illustrates the overall problem with Obamacare. Yes there were some failings in our medical payment system such as your situation or for those who have pre-existing conditions. However instead of addressing the PROBLEMS, Obamacare was simply a power grab on the part of Democrats who had the opportunity to take over a huge segment of our economy. The 2700 page bill included a number of time bombs such as coverage of “preventative care” but in addition had HUGE opportunities for unelected beauocrats such as Sebelius to make up the law as she wanted it implemented. There was absolutely no compelling reason for Obamacare to be enacted in the format that emerged from various backroom deals, paybacks and carve outs. But the Democrats used people like you as the poster children to promote their powergrab. Who doesn’t sympathize with someone diagnosed with a potentially life threatening disease who feels their options are limited due to no health insurance? But you see how the few such situations allowed the Democrats to shove through this nightmare of a bill.

Now we see yet another unintended consequence. A completely natural state such as pregnancy is now deemed a disease on par with cancer or atherosclerosis…to be prevented at all costs and if not prevented to be terminated quickly! It would take a committed Leftist to justify these totally unnecessary procedures with the same breath as for mammograms or PSA tests.

Even sadder is that Catholics elected this man and Catholic bishops believed his line of baloney about wanting healthcare for all…they are now reaping what they sowed in 2008 and 2009. God help us. But one silver lining is that FINALLY I think the Bishops are realizing that Obama IS exactly what he told us he was, a committed statist, Leftists, elitist who cares nothing about deeply held beliefs regarding life issues. I hope it is not too late.

Lisa

 

[Teelynn]

And just because I’m really fired up about this…

I am quite tired of the sentiment that the government is somehow doing the Church a favor by “allowing” them to perform all these social services. The Church is out there, in the trenches, serving the poorest of the poor and helping those in need and now the Church gets punished simply because the government has graciously bestowed public funds to help the Church do just that and we refuse to violate our conscience?

I’m normally a pretty mellow guy, but this really gets me going.

Some people fail to see what the Church actually does for the poorest of the poor, and how they do not profit financially. Catholic Charities in my area (Illinois) is constantly having fund raisers just to keep their heads above water, and now they have been kicked in the teeth by Gov. Quinn (a “Catholic”) and the boys (and girls) that have violated our first right, here in Illinois. You talk about fired up!!! I have had it up to my eyeballs with these attacks on our faith in this country, while in the mean time, we are in the trenches with the poor and marginalized, feeding them, giving them medical care and taking it on the chin for them. But the agenda of this administration is NOT to help the poor. It is a false claim that the Democratic Party is all in for the poor. Since when with Democrats at the helm have the poor been substantially helped? I have not seen it. A few years back I listened to a Pastor from a Church in the south that commented on this very issue, he said: “I have been voting Democrat for almost 40 years, and I and my flock are just as poor now as we ever were”. Nope, it’s NOT the Democrats who help them, and not the Republicans either…it has always been the Catholic Church who have been there for them through thick and thin.

And now, they’re stabbing us in the back. Well, I can tell you, that’s not going to help the poor either!

And yes, the Bishops were probably naive. But they were promised repeatedly, over and over, not to worry, it would never come to this…the administration would see to it that they would never be in this position…but they lied, right through their teeth, over and over again. Personally, I think the entire health care bill is unconstitutional, and I hope the SCOTUS rules that way. This administration is not only trampling on the Constitution, they are throwing it out the window, and at the same time stabbing people of faith in the back.

As far as I’m concerned this anger is justifiable!

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

I would not be surprised if a crisis appeared in October which just might cause him to have to declare martial law and “postpone” the elections until it’s over. A crisis like Obama trailing in the polls.

That’s what the left said about George Bush…

 

[Teresara]

But the Democrats used people like you as the poster children to promote their powergrab. Who doesn’t sympathize with someone diagnosed with a potentially life threatening disease who feels their options are limited due to no health insurance? But you see how the few such situations allowed the Democrats to shove through this nightmare of a bill.

Lisa

Wow- I kind of take exception to that: “Poster child?” I don’t’ think I was used – I don’t think people understand the situation is real. I’m not asking for your sympathy. Just thoughtfullness. My situation is real. There is more than “a few” of us. Do you want to pay for my 6 month Ultra-sound this month? or for the next three years of doing it? or take the fear of how to pay? or what will I do if it does come back? Will the Catholic Church insure me?
I pray and have faith in God. I can’t afford the rhetoric or ill will .

 

[PTL]

I have had it up to my eyeballs with these attacks on our faith in this country …As far as I’m concerned this anger is justifiable!

I totally agree. My sincere suggestion is to do all you can to wake people up. The least we can do is to tell people what has happened and urge them to take action - sign petition, call Congress, tell other people. It is amazing how many people are clueless. It always upsets me when I mention HHS and their expression goes blank. They know nothing, literally nothing what Obama has done. If we don’t tell, they will never have a clue. If we tell, it may not wake them up, but at least we do what we can. Utilize your righteous anger and make it constructive. Urge others do the same.

 

[1voice]

Anybody with 2 or 3 synapses firing in their brain saw this coming 2 years ago…

If you lie down with dogs …

“We have to pass it … to see whats in it.”
…Nancy Pelosi

Whats in it for Catholics … is a double cross.

He used the fact that most Catholics are liberals to win their vote … and cares little for any of their Catholic values.

There is absolutely no separation of Church and State in Obama. Govt control … trumps everything in his path. Plus nothing.
He says whatever he needs to in order to get what he alone believes in. He used political tricks/ smoke and mirrors… and it worked very well. He easily got his way. He figures that if it goes to the courts … he has a 95% chance of winning.

25% of the Nation’s hospitals are Catholic institutions.

“New rules, introduced under Mr Obama’s overhaul of the US healthcare system, mean that religious charities, universities and other groups must now provide contraception in staff insurance packages.
Failure to do so would result in fines being levied by the federal government that larger Catholic organisations claim would cost them millions of dollars a year.”

telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9064926/Roman-Catholic-leaders-criticise-Barack-Obama-over-healthcare.html

 

[qui_est_ce]

Wow- I kind of take exception to that: “Poster child?” I don’t’ think I was used – I don’t think people understand the situation is real. I’m not asking for your sympathy. Just thoughtfullness. My situation is real. There is more than “a few” of us. Do you want to pay for my 6 month Ultra-sound this month? or for the next three years of doing it? or take the fear of how to pay? or what will I do if it does come back? Will the Catholic Church insure me?
I pray and have faith in God. I can’t afford the rhetoric or ill will .

Read the post again. They didn’t to overhaul the whole healthcare system to treat people like you. Your situation is real, but Obama doesn’t really care about you. He cares about the government being in control because government “cares” about people like you. They don’t.

Obama used examples like you to dupe people into thinking his big government programs are the solution to all ills.

Big government is bureaucracy, corruption, and self-perpetuating.

I will keep you in my prayers.

 

[qui_est_ce]

If you lie down with dogs …

“We have to pass it … to see whats in it.”
…Nancy Pelosi

Whats in it for Catholics … is a double cross.

He used the fact that most Catholics are liberals to win their vote … and cares little for any of their Catholic values.

There is absolutely no separation of Church and State in Obama.
He says whatever he needs to in order to get what he alone believes in. He used** political tricks/ smoke and mirrors.**… and it worked very well. He easily got his way. He figures that if it goes to the courts … he has a 95% chance of winning.

25% of the Nation’s hospitals are Catholic institutions.

“New rules, introduced under Mr Obama’s overhaul of the US healthcare system, mean that religious charities, universities and other groups must now provide contraception in staff insurance packages.
Failure to do so would result in fines being levied by the federal government that larger Catholic organisations claim would cost them millions of dollars a year.”

telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9064926/Roman-Catholic-leaders-criticise-Barack-Obama-over-healthcare.html

So much for transparency.