I need help gathering a fact

[couponfit]

Did Romney Care, directly or indirectly, result in catholic hospitals and churches paying for abortions and or birth control at the state level?

 

[Leegal]

Did Romney Care, directly or indirectly, result in catholic hospitals and churches paying for abortions and or birth control at the state level?

I could not find anything on abortions, however …

Romney first took a position that religious institutions, Catholic hospitals, would not have to provide the morning after pill for victims of rape. He first vetoed a bill requiring all hospitals to offer rape victims this pill or treatment. The legislature overrode his veto and the law went into effect but Romney was having his administration draft regulations to exempt religious institutions.

Then he reversed himself and required Catholic hospitals to provide the morning after pill treatment for rape victims, if the victim wanted it. The patient could opt out – but the hospital had to make it an option.

thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/30/414222/gingrich-accuses-romney-of-waging-a-war-against-religion/?mobile=nc

 

[Leegal]

Romneycare – really Commonweath Care – provided state tax payer funding for abortions, but I don’t find that Catholic hospitals were required to perform abortions. However, the problem is that a Catholic taxpayer is contributing funds to perform abortions using those state funds.

More here on Romney and the rape victims and the morning after pill. The Church may not be opposed to the morning after pill as it prevents implantation. But an abortificant is prohibited by the Church.

So, the Church would have a problem with dispensing RU486 because RU486 causes a miscarriage and expands the time in which it can be used so that it can cause a miscarriage, unlike the “morning after” pill for a rape victim – which has a small window of time before the fertilized egg travels down the fallopian tube toward implantation.

But Commonweath Care made no distinction between the “morning after” pill and an abortificant. I should add that the morning after pill need not be a pill after all. Rape kits in hospitals may provide the option for an injection to prevent implantation if the victim gets to the hospital soon enough.

ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly-catholic/problem-romneycare

 

[Trishie]

More here on Romney and the rape victims and the morning after pill. The Church may not be opposed to the morning after pill as it prevents implantation.

It prevents implantation of the conceived child and therefore the morning after pill is also an abortificant.

 

[couponfit]

I could not find anything on abortions, however …

Romney first took a position that religious institutions, Catholic hospitals, would not have to provide the morning after pill for victims of rape. He first vetoed a bill requiring all hospitals to offer rape victims this pill or treatment. The legislature overrode his veto and the law went into effect but Romney was having his administration draft regulations to exempt religious institutions.

Then he reversed himself and required Catholic hospitals to provide the morning after pill treatment for rape victims, if the victim wanted it. The patient could opt out – but the hospital had to make it an option.

thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/30/414222/gingrich-accuses-romney-of-waging-a-war-against-religion/?mobile=nc

Thanks. I guess what I"m trying to figure out is if Obama or Romney would both have to “force” catholic hospitals and universities as President to provide healthcare plans with abortions, or if this is really an executive choice? I mean if Romney’s state is already forcing employers in MA to provide healthcare including abortions coverage to employees of catholic hospitals and universities, that would profoundly change my feelings on this matter. I’m seeing this an executive choice but I’m wondering if I’m wrong.

 

[onemangang]

Did Romney Care, directly or indirectly, result in catholic hospitals and churches paying for abortions and or birth control at the state level?

Great question! It would garner more views if it were the title I would think, instead of " I need help gathering a fact"

I’ll try to find out, I’m from Massachusetts originally and my sister is a nurse!

Great topic of discussion

I believe Romney was pro-choice when he ran as Governor of Massachusetts back then, or at least not opposed to it as an option. As a matter of fact, a friend of mines dad, (who is Catholic) worked on his campaign for presidency a few years back and in a meeting the question of abortion came up, Romney was more concerned with upholding the Roe v Wade law than trying to do anything to stop the cycle of violence, so as a “Practicing Catholic,” my friend’s dad stepped down. My friends dad felt that if you’re not against the law ipso facto, you’re for it.

 

[Leegal]

It prevents implantation of the conceived child and therefore the morning after pill is also an abortificant.

Second time this appeared today. The one article said the morning after pill or that injection is not condemned by the Church. I thought it would be condemned.

Then there’s another thread here too that said the morning after pill is not prohibited by the Church. It’s also on rape and incest.

This reply – of course only in the case of rape and incest.

 

[Leegal]

Thanks. I guess what I"m trying to figure out is if Obama or Romney would both have to “force” catholic hospitals and universities as President to provide healthcare plans with abortions, or if this is really an executive choice? I mean if Romney’s state is already forcing employers in MA to provide healthcare including abortions coverage to employees of catholic hospitals and universities, that would profoundly change my feelings on this matter. I’m seeing this an executive choice but I’m wondering if I’m wrong.

It’s an executive or legislative choice at the state level – I mean choice of the legislature to enact the law or governor to sign the law.

One legal problem with Obamacare that is not confronted by the Commonweath Care, is that the federal government has no power over states’ rights on insurance. Obamacare may be Unconstitutional and violate the 10th Amendment. These cases are traveling to the USSC – a challenge as to the Constitutionality of Obamacare.

I’d have to do more checking on whether the issue of insurance forced the Catholic organizations to provide abortion coverage and coverage for contraception.

 

[TraditonRules]

Obama is married to planned parenthood at now wants both control mandated for Catholics,

 

[Leegal]

On preventing implantation, this is the official Church teaching:

On page 21, #36. Since it’s pdf, I cannot quote. But emergency contraception in cases of rape, only to prevent fertilization, is allowed. Once fertilization is confirmed, an abortificant cannot be used. But if she reports the rape and gets to the hospital in a short window of time, that “morning after” treatment will prevent fertilization.

Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Healthcare Services – United States Conference of Bishops

I was surprised to find this out.

 

[Leegal]

On preventing implantation, this is the official Church teaching:

On page 21, #36. Since it’s pdf, I cannot quote. But emergency contraception in cases of rape, only to prevent fertilization, is allowed. Once fertilization is confirmed, an abortificant cannot be used. But if she reports the rape and gets to the hospital in a short window of time, that “morning after” treatment will prevent fertilization.

Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Healthcare Services – United States Conference of Bishops

I was surprised to find this out.

Quoting myself – I used implantation and fertilization interchangeably. My mistake.

Only when it prevents fertilization is it allowed, not implantation.