If the HHS mandate on contraception isn't overturned, what will the Catholic church do?

[joclucsylv]

Gus Lloyd of the Catholic Channel played a homily from a priest this morning. It was a powerful homily and I don’t know who the priest was as I tuned in late.

The priest was saying that if the conscience bill isn’t passed, the Catholic church will be forced to shut down hospitals which help the poor. The government will then take over these hospitals and that means we are even closer to socialized medicine which is EXACTLY what the government wants.

I am not familiar with Catholic hospitals. Do they treat the poor for free if they don’t have medicaid or other insurance?

 

[garn9173]

I believe the Bishops and the Church in general has politicized this issue as much as the politicians have. When the president showed willingness to accept that all religious-based organizations (anyone with a tax exemption for this purpose) may opt out of this mandate, all of a sudden the Bishops and the Church broadened this issue and suggested it should apply to ALL employers, insurance plans, etc.

I have three problems with the Bishops movement into the political arena –

1. This is a public relations campaign put in place to try and persuade the millions of Catholics to change their acceptance of birth control. Since I do not know a single Catholic (and nearly all my friends and colleages are Catholic) who can say they do not now or never have used artificial contraception, then I think this is going to be a miserable failure for the Bishops. Worst case scenario, there will be more non-practicing Catholics and/or an exodus from an already struggling faith community.
2. This is one more way for Church leadership to assault personal freedoms of Americans by expecting government to impose what the Bishops can’t and haven’t been able to accomplish – even with their own flock.
3. After thousands of years of being second class citizens, women’s futures are at risk because a group of males who have never had a child, never been forced into a second class status and never suffered the health issues females deal with every day, want to deny us the right to follow our own conscious. If Jesus allows us to choose, then why do the Bishops not follow his lead?

You can attack me if you wish here – sadly the most conservative among Catholics think it is their jobs to judge the rest of us and to tell us how to think and what to do as if we do not have the ability to discern this for ourselves. I love my faith. I believe in all things that I know are fundamental truths of the Church. However, nowhere does the Bible say we can’t use artificial forms of birth control. So many of the controversial stands by the Church have changed many times over the Church’s history – one should understand why some of us are confused about knowing when something is truth and when it is fallable. I do believe that the Pope has the authority and infallability on issues of faith. I just don’t believe whether or not a person uses contraceptives is a matter of faith.

These are painful times in our beloved Church. So much division and so much politicizing of our faith. I am very sad about it all.

Pregnancy isn’t a disease. Don’t want to be pregnant? Don’t have sex, what a concept.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Since I do not know a single Catholic (and nearly all my friends and colleages are Catholic) who can say they do not now or never have used artificial contraception,

Really?

 

[manualman]

Pamm, I don’t want to attack you or question your personal honor.

But are you aware that a Walgreens or CVS pharmacy is on every 3rd corner of metro America? Have you ever been to a gas station that DIDN’T sell condoms? A box of condoms is, what $5? You really think your rights are threatened because we aren’t willing to pay for your $600 a year pill prescription?

I’m wondering if you have been madly misinformed here. Nobody is stopping you from doing what you want. We just don’t want to pay for it. Buy it yourself, problem solved.

 

[TMC]

The HHS mandate is not getting overturned and in response the Church will do nothing. The mandate is clearly not unconstitutional, so the courts will not be intervening. The House tried and failed to pass legislation to overturn it, so it is here to stay.

As to what the Church will do, I see no reason to think the Church will do anything. As much as the bishops grumble about the “accomodation,” the fact is that the Church itself was always exempted from the mandate, and the accomodation means that no Catholic institution is paying for health insurance that includes contraception. That is a better situation than many Catholic instutions already have, as many have already been required to provide contraception coverage by state laws. The Church is not going to close its hospitals or its universities (which are the two kinds of instutions actually affected by the rule), it will come to terms with the accomodation, maybe after “negotiating” same face-saving tweak to the language of the final rule.

 

[achmafooma]

The HHS mandate is not getting overturned and in response the Church will do nothing. The mandate is clearly not unconstitutional, so the courts will not be intervening. The House tried and failed to pass legislation to overturn it, so it is here to stay. …]

Meaning no disrespect, but it clearly is unconstitutional.

The contraceptive mandate goes fully against the free exercise clause of the 1st Amendment, and will almost certainly not stand. I would refer you to the the Supreme Court’s recent unanimous ruling that the free exercise clause upholds a broad religious liberty that extends to affiliated organizations like schools and hospitals, and to their relationships with their employees: ‘Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC.’ This precedent (and many before it) make it almost certain that this particular regulation will not stand.

The overall mandate that all citizens buy health insurance is less cut-and-dried, but still stands a good chance of being overturned. The government’s argument is that it is covered by the interstate commerce clause (since otherwise it would be prohibited under the 10th Amendment restrictions on federal authority). The interstate commerce clause has never been used to mandate that all citizens participate in a commercial activity; it has been used to restrict activity, or to require purchases in particular cases, but never anything this broad or expansive.

The current court tends to take a position that narrowly errs on the side of not broadening federal authorities in new ways. The fact that the federal government has never before asserted an authority to mandate that all individuals make a type of commercial purchase will serve to seriously undermine the government’s case with 4 or 5 of the justices.

If I were a betting man, I would expect it to come down like this:

The contraceptive mandate goes down in flames (unanimous ruling) and the government has to allow a broad religious exemption, which would extend to Catholic hospitals and charities and make this a non-issue for the Church.

The overall health care mandate is either upheld or overturned by a narrow 5-4 decision. I think 5-4 to overturn is very slightly more likely, but I wouldn’t bet on anything other than it being a 5-4 decision one way or the other.

God bless.

 

[fix]

1. Worst case scenario, there will be more non-practicing Catholics and/or an exodus from an already struggling faith community.

Refusing to accept the authority of the Church already imperils their souls.

This is one more way for Church leadership to assault personal freedoms of Americans by expecting government to impose what the Bishops can’t and haven’t been able to accomplish – even with their own flock.

This is not accurate.

After thousands of years of being second class citizens, women’s futures are at risk because a group of males who have never had a child, never been forced into a second class status and never suffered the health issues females deal with every day, want to deny us the right to follow our own conscious. If Jesus allows us to choose, then why do the Bishops not follow his lead?

They are free to sin. No one is stopping them. The Bishops just do not want to participate in their sin.

You can attack me if you wish here – sadly the most conservative among Catholics think it is their jobs to judge the rest of us and to tell us how to think and what to do as if we do not have the ability to discern this for ourselves.

Ironic.

I love my faith. I believe in all things that I know are fundamental truths of the Church. However, nowhere does the Bible say we can’t use artificial forms of birth control. So many of the controversial stands by the Church have changed many times over the Church’s history – one should understand why some of us are confused about knowing when something is truth and when it is fallable. I do believe that the Pope has the authority and infallability on issues of faith. I just don’t believe whether or not a person uses contraceptives is a matter of faith.

Who is the authority in these matters?

 

[Birdpreacher]

Keep on telling CAtholics to follow its teaching. While the mandate is intrusive on how Catholics run businesses that effect the public (hospitals/schools) There is nothing in the law that says a Catholic must use Birth Control

 

[Rence]

I believe the Bishops and the Church in general has politicized this issue as much as the politicians have. When the president showed willingness to accept that all religious-based organizations (anyone with a tax exemption for this purpose) may opt out of this mandate, all of a sudden the Bishops and the Church broadened this issue and suggested it should apply to ALL employers, insurance plans, etc.

I have three problems with the Bishops movement into the political arena –

1. This is a public relations campaign put in place to try and persuade the millions of Catholics to change their acceptance of birth control. Since I do not know a single Catholic (and nearly all my friends and colleages are Catholic) who can say they do not now or never have used artificial contraception, then I think this is going to be a miserable failure for the Bishops. Worst case scenario, there will be more non-practicing Catholics and/or an exodus from an already struggling faith community.
2. This is one more way for Church leadership to assault personal freedoms of Americans by expecting government to impose what the Bishops can’t and haven’t been able to accomplish – even with their own flock.
3. After thousands of years of being second class citizens, women’s futures are at risk because a group of males who have never had a child, never been forced into a second class status and never suffered the health issues females deal with every day, want to deny us the right to follow our own conscious. If Jesus allows us to choose, then why do the Bishops not follow his lead?

You can attack me if you wish here – sadly the most conservative among Catholics think it is their jobs to judge the rest of us and to tell us how to think and what to do as if we do not have the ability to discern this for ourselves. I love my faith. I believe in all things that I know are fundamental truths of the Church. However, nowhere does the Bible say we can’t use artificial forms of birth control. So many of the controversial stands by the Church have changed many times over the Church’s history – one should understand why some of us are confused about knowing when something is truth and when it is fallable. I do believe that the Pope has the authority and infallability on issues of faith. I just don’t believe whether or not a person uses contraceptives is a matter of faith.

These are painful times in our beloved Church. So much division and so much politicizing of our faith. I am very sad about it all.

I will pray for you too, that people will stop attacking you, by calling your names and condemning you for your views, and making you feel like an outsider – because we all know that attacking people for their views and harassing them does nothing to change their mind in the first place :hug1:

 

[Rence]

If the HHS mandate on the Catholic church isn’t overturned, will the church shut down their Catholic hospitals and Universities?? Do you think they will end up by covering contraception for employees??

I suspect that they will continue to fight for the mandate to be tabled, which is what they should do. But if the mandate goes into effect, I think they will follow the law, just like any other law. This is no different than any other law. But again, they will, and should, fight it until they can’t anymore.

 

[TMC]

Meaning no disrespect, but it clearly is unconstitutional.

The contraceptive mandate goes fully against the free exercise clause of the 1st Amendment, and will almost certainly not stand. I would refer you to the the Supreme Court’s recent unanimous ruling that the free exercise clause upholds a broad religious liberty that extends to affiliated organizations like schools and hospitals, and to their relationships with their employees: ‘Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC.’ This precedent (and many before it) make it almost certain that this particular regulation will not stand.

The overall mandate that all citizens buy health insurance is less cut-and-dried, but still stands a good chance of being overturned. The government’s argument is that it is covered by the interstate commerce clause (since otherwise it would be prohibited under the 10th Amendment restrictions on federal authority). The interstate commerce clause has never been used to mandate that all citizens participate in a commercial activity; it has been used to restrict activity, or to require purchases in particular cases, but never anything this broad or expansive.

The current court tends to take a position that narrowly errs on the side of not broadening federal authorities in new ways. The fact that the federal government has never before asserted an authority to mandate that all individuals make a type of commercial purchase will serve to seriously undermine the government’s case with 4 or 5 of the justices.

If I were a betting man, I would expect it to come down like this:

The contraceptive mandate goes down in flames (unanimous ruling) and the government has to allow a broad religious exemption, which would extend to Catholic hospitals and charities and make this a non-issue for the Church.

The overall health care mandate is either upheld or overturned by a narrow 5-4 decision. I think 5-4 to overturn is very slightly more likely, but I wouldn’t bet on anything other than it being a 5-4 decision one way or the other.

God bless.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that facially neutral laws of general application are constitutional, even if they create some burden on religious practice. It is sometimes call the Smith Principle which is a reference to the SC case Employment Division v Smith. That is why Rastafarians aren’t allowed to smoke marijuana, Sikh fireman have to wear fire helmets, Muslim women have to allow their faces to be shown in ID pictures, etc, etc. The Hosana Tabernacle case did not deal with this issue at all, it dealt with a completely different issue - the ministerial exception, which has nothing to do with the mandate at all. The Smith decision was written by Scalia, and conservatives on the Court have generally been on that side of this issue - they tend to find that citizens are required to follow laws of general application despite any religious objections. I would expect that a large majority of the court would uphold the mandate, especially given that it does not apply to Churches at all, and that Church-affiliated institutions are not actually required to pay for contraception coverage.

 

[manualman]

I suspect that they will continue to fight for the mandate to be tabled, which is what they should do. But if the mandate goes into effect, I think they will follow the law, just like any other law. This is no different than any other law. But again, they will, and should, fight it until they can’t anymore.

Is that the advice you’d have given Rosa Parks in 1968? Just wondering.

 

[BellsMom]

The priest was saying that if the conscience bill isn’t passed, the Catholic church will be forced to shut down hospitals which help the poor. The government will then take over these hospitals and that means we are even closer to socialized medicine which is EXACTLY what the government wants.

This makes sense to me. I also think that as companies begin dropping their insurance in droves opting to just pay the penalty, the government will move in to insure those workers. Soon there will be a giant single payer system with optional add-on coverage through private insurers.

Didn’t a hospital chain out west just recently drop it’s catholic status due to a conflict with church teaching ? I don’t think there will be a mass closing of hospitals because of this.

 

[royal_archer]

I believe the Bishops and the Church in general has politicized this issue as much as the politicians have. When the president showed willingness to accept that all religious-based organizations (anyone with a tax exemption for this purpose) may opt out of this mandate, all of a sudden the Bishops and the Church broadened this issue and suggested it should apply to ALL employers, insurance plans, etc.

The president took the first step of denying first ammendment rights to all employer, insurance plans, etc. just because Obama backed off a slight bit does not make the church the aggressor here.

I have three problems with the Bishops movement into the political arena –

The Bishops are not moving into the political arena, Obama dragged politics into a moral arena.

1. This is a public relations campaign put in place to try and persuade the millions of Catholics to change their acceptance of birth control. Since I do not know a single Catholic (and nearly all my friends and colleages are Catholic) who can say they do not now or never have used artificial contraception, then I think this is going to be a miserable failure for the Bishops. Worst case scenario, there will be more non-practicing Catholics and/or an exodus from an already struggling faith community.

That public relations campaign has been in place since the book of Genesis was written. So if a millions of Catholics all of a sudden supported slavery would that make slavery right? Also, this is not a case of the church deciding against contraception, God has made that decision and we have no right to go against that decision regardless of how many Catholics want the decision changed.

1. This is one more way for Church leadership to assault personal freedoms of Americans by expecting government to impose what the Bishops can’t and haven’t been able to accomplish – even with their own flock.

The personal freedom to decide what legal chemicals would be purchased by an employer for its employees was always a personal freedom enjoyed by the employer prior to this Obama mandate. The Church is not asking the government to impose anything. They are doing the oposite by asking to government to stop making impositions into private matters.

1. After thousands of years of being second class citizens, women’s futures are at risk because a group of males who have never had a child,

I am a father with two children. Most of the men I know also have children.

never been forced into a second class status and never suffered the health issues females deal with every day,

This ruling applies equally to men and women. there are surgical, chemical and physical forms of birth control for men also and they are addressed equally.

want to deny us the right to follow our own conscious. If Jesus allows us to choose, then why do the Bishops not follow his lead?

God gives everyone the right to choose life or Hell. If you wish to make the lesser of those choices, no one is inhibiting your free will to make that choice. The rest of us want to be able to make the better choice with out some athiestic politician telling us we have to partake in sinful activity.

You can attack me if you wish here – sadly the most conservative among Catholics think it is their jobs to judge the rest of us and to tell us how to think and what to do as if we do not have the ability to discern this for ourselves. I love my faith.

I condem anyone who would attack you for your opinions stated here, however we have the obligation to “attack” innaccuracies in statements posted here. I, like many, am taking issue with your assertions, not you. I firmly hope that our difference of opinions is primarily due to the lack of knowledge on at least one of our parts. I suspect others will correct me when I post something that is innaccurate or incomplete.

I believe in all things that I know are fundamental truths of the Church. However, nowhere does the Bible say we can’t use artificial forms of birth control.

yes it does, indirectly:usccb.org/bible/genesis/38
Also, where in the Bible does it say all moral teaching is in the Bible? Christ did not give us a Bible, he gave us the Church, from which came the New Testament.

So many of the controversial stands by the Church have changed many times over the Church’s history – one should understand why some of us are confused about knowing when something is truth and when it is fallable. I do believe that the Pope has the authority and infallability on issues of faith. I just don’t believe whether or not a person uses contraceptives is a matter of faith.

Accepting what the Church teaches is a matter of faith. Also, no one is requiring you to believe. But there are others who do believe. Those who do believe have the right to practice their religion with out the government dictating that they sin.

These are painful times in our beloved Church. So much division and so much politicizing of our faith. I am very sad about it all.

This is also an opportunity to increase the visibility of the Church and to educate people on how these teachings were handed down from God to the Church to carry out.

 

[royal_archer]

One has to wonder if closing of CC hospitals and schools isn’t the ulterior motive of the Obama administration. Perhaps they want less presence of the Church in the US.

!!

I suspect the same thing!

 

[royal_archer]

.

Probably not the most charitable way of responding here.

 

[royal_archer]

That statement is truly blasphemous. You presume upon God’s mercy.

tecnically not.

Christ does allow us to choose. it is free will. the prior poster just made no mention of the penalties or rewards associated with those choices.

 

[scipio337]

…
2) This is one more way for Church leadership to assault personal freedoms of Americans by expecting government to impose what the Bishops can’t and haven’t been able to accomplish – even with their own flock.

1. After thousands of years of being second class citizens, women’s futures are at risk because a group of males who have never had a child, never been forced into a second class status and never suffered the health issues females deal with every day, want to deny us the right to follow our own conscious…

Yes, the bishops want to hurtle America back to January, 2012, when conscience still counted, and employers were free to cover what they wanted.

I will pray for the pain you must feel to make you bash the bishops and praise this monstrosity.

 

[ACCT]

Have you read the Declaration of Independence? It is not just a historical document. It is an unchanging document that holds the key to our freedom. We have lost sight of this document and have put our freedom into the precarious hands of the so-called “majority.”

I compare the Declaration of Independence to the articles of incorporation of a company, and the Constitution to the by-laws of a company. The moral laws of right and wrong are contained in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

The source of the “rule of law” goes back to Divine Law. The Declaration of Independence uses the words, the “equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.” What do these words really mean?

The ideas of the source of legitimate law were being formulated by the Catholic Church before the Magna Carta. Truth always goes back to the source of truth, which is public revelation, commonly known as the Holy Scriptures.

ANY CIVIL LAW IN TRANSGRESSION OF DIVINE LAW IS INVALID! An unjust law is no law at all! Such laws are to be defied because they do not exist. There is no basis for them. A recent example is Spain’s “laws” on marriages and adoptions. Pope Benedict has ordered citizens of Spain who work in adoption agencies to defy Spain’s new laws of illicit marriages and adoptions. Workers in adoption agencies are to refuse to fill out any paperwork or grant adoption of children to illicit and unnatural marriage unions. Spain’s new law disobeys natural law. NO HUMAN LAW AGAINST NATURAL LAW IS VALID!

There is Divine Law, Natural Law and Civil Law, in that order. Man only has control over civil law. Each type of law is separate and you cannot substitute one type of law for another type of law.

 

[Tigg]

1. Worst case scenario, there will be more non-practicing Catholics and/or an exodus from an already struggling faith community.

Of all the error you posted regarding the bishops and Church teaching, (clearly you do not know the Catholic faith which you claim to embrace) I actually agree with this sentence. I, and many others, believe there will be a full blown schism over this, and finally we will see nothing but the Faithful Remnant, a smaller and purified number of true Catholics continuing to believe and defend the teachings of the past 2,000 years.