Senate Dems stop "conscience exemption"

  • Thread starter Thread starter garn9173
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ishii said:
And neither will the federal govt. - which is not capable of taking care of the sick. It is a folly to trust the federal govt. to do anything efficiently and effectively. Perhaps you could point out where I’m wrong on this. In other words, this side of paradise, the poor will always be with us - and there is not one federal govt. program which will “cure” poverty. There are, however, lots of federal govt. programs which will create more poverty. Anyone who has an open mind and a knowlege of history can see that. Of course some let their partisan, liberal, rigid ideology prevent them from seeing the truth.

Ishii
Click to expand...
Private charity, faith based groups, and government can together play a role. Or Medicare seems to be a pretty popular government program for taking care of the sick. So a Medicare for all program from birth to death works for me too. With single payer we wouldn’t even be having this employer based healthcare discussion. Of course I admit I don’t place taxes and government costs and efficiency higher on my list of priorities or even on an equal plane with, as I do on the moral value of the sick being adequately cared for.
 
greenwoj said:
It’s not charity when the federal government forces you, under penalty of law, to forfeit your property to another individual. Charity is an act of the free will.
Click to expand...
Like I’ve said, private charity hasn’t been working out all that well for all those without affordable, adequate and proper healthcare. Someone going to an ER after they’ve become sicker than might have been necessary constitutes neither adequate or proper care to me.
 
CMatt25 said:
I’m not one of them but from what I gather some people do seem to think going to a hospital ER constitutes adequate care. 🤷
Click to expand...
I believe those people go to ER because they have no insurance and the ER staff MUST treat them by law.

Jim
 
ishii said:
And neither will the federal govt. - which is not capable of taking care of the sick. It is a folly to trust the federal govt. to do anything efficiently and effectively. Perhaps you could point out where I’m wrong on this. In other words, this side of paradise, the poor will always be with us - and there is not one federal govt. program which will “cure” poverty. There are, however, lots of federal govt. programs which will create more poverty. Anyone who has an open mind and a knowlege of history can see that. Of course some let their partisan, liberal, rigid ideology prevent them from seeing the truth.

Ishii
Click to expand...
Well, my parents were cared for by the Veterans admimistration, social security, medicare and medicaid.

All did a pretty good job, considering my father became ill at 43 years of age and could not work. He died at 87.

So, by my experience, these government programs worked well. Heck of a lot better than if they had nothing.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Well, my parents were cared for by the Veterans admimistration, social security, medicare and medicaid.

All did a pretty good job, considering my father became ill at 43 years of age and could not work. He died at 87.

So, by my experience, these government programs worked well. Heck of a lot better than if they had nothing.

Jim
Click to expand...
What do you mean by nothing? If no government support would your family just have cast him aside?

Remember the Catholic principle of subsidiarity?
 
buffalo said:
What do you mean by nothing? If no government support would your family just have cast him aside?

Remember the Catholic principle of subsidiarity?
Click to expand...
We were only kids. Without government support, we would’ve lost our home, and who knows what because at that time, welfare wasn’t around.

The Church brought communion to my father, and that’s were it ended, other than advise to my mother to offer our suffering up and to trust in God.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
I believe those people go to ER because they have no insurance and the ER staff MUST treat them by law.

Jim
Click to expand...
Exactly. They are MANDATED to treat them by law, regardless of their ability to pay. And the punishment is severe if they don’t.

But someone has to absorb the costs. The question is who, and can we do it without another mandate.
 
ProVobis said:
Exactly. They are MANDATED to treat them by law, regardless of their ability to pay. And the punishment is severe if they don’t.

But someone has to absorb the costs. The question is who, and can we do it without another mandate.
Click to expand...
Well, before Romney care, it was those who had health insurance who paid, along with the state. The state placed a surcharge on insurance companies to pay for uninsured. That cost was passed onto members in their premiums.

Same happens with car insurance. We have to pay for coverage in case we’re hit by an uninsured driver.

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
We were only kids. Without government support, we would’ve lost our home, and who knows what because at that time, welfare wasn’t around.

The Church brought communion to my father, and that’s were it ended, other than advise to my mother to offer our suffering up and to trust in God.

Jim
Click to expand...
When my dad died at age 43, my family would never have survived without government support either. We also would never have been able to go to Catholic school if our parish didn’t offer subsidized tuition. Some families in our parish were able to not only send several kids (one had six if I recall) to Catholic school for free but also had their uniforms provided as well.

My current parish is no where near as generous with regard to their school. I wonder if that’s just here or is the new norm all over - or even if my home parish was outstanding at the time in being particularly supportive.

Regarding the Blunt amendment - it was written to fail so that the GOP would be able to claim to support conscience rights without having to risk it might actually happen.
 
bellasbane said:
When my dad died at age 43, my family would never have survived without government support either. We also would never have been able to go to Catholic school if our parish didn’t offer subsidized tuition. Some families in our parish were able to not only send several kids (one had six if I recall) to Catholic school for free but also had their uniforms provided as well.

My current parish is no where near as generous with regard to their school. I wonder if that’s just here or is the new norm all over - or even if my home parish was outstanding at the time in being particularly supportive.
Click to expand...
I would submit that in a way the government confiscation of your earned income does affect charitable giving. Many people figure - the government handles it, so I don’t need to. This I believe is bad for society in general and people of faith specifically.
 
buffalo said:
I would submit that in a way the government confiscation of your earned income does affect charitable giving. Many people figure - the government handles it, so I don’t need to. This I believe is bad for society in general and people of faith specifically.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but my parish today does not have a standard second collection every week to support the school - so folks are not being asked to give. I don’t know why.

Plus, I’m pretty sure the tax rate in New York during the seventies was pretty high, but that didn’t seem to inhibit people from supporting the school.
 
bellasbane said:
Perhaps, but my parish today does not have a standard second collection every week to support the school - so folks are not being asked to give. I don’t know why.

Plus, I’m pretty sure the tax rate in New York during the seventies was pretty high.
Click to expand...
Its high now, one of the highest in the country.
 
CMatt25 said:
I prefer as Jesus mandated to see the poor helped and the sick cared for, and in that light what I personally believe, Ishii, is Catholic Charities should comply, avoid any penalty, and do so. But it’s not up to me. Whatever they decide is their choice. It’s up to them.
Click to expand...
So Cmatt, you acknowlege in your post that the penalty for not complying will threaten the ability of catholic charities to effectively help the poor. What do you think of an administration that would force charities into that position? Is such an administration and party worthy of your continued support?

Ishii
 
ishii said:
So Cmatt, you acknowlege in your post that the penalty for not complying will threaten the ability of catholic charities to effectively help the poor. What do you think of an administration that would force charities into that position? Is such an administration and party worthy of your continued support?

Ishii
Click to expand...
Catholic charities are not being forced to comply with the HHS mandate.
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Well, my parents were cared for by the Veterans admimistration, social security, medicare and medicaid.

All did a pretty good job, considering my father became ill at 43 years of age and could not work. He died at 87.

So, by my experience, these government programs worked well. Heck of a lot better than if they had nothing.

Jim
Click to expand...
Did your parents get free contraceptives too?
 
bellasbane said:
Catholic charities are not being forced to comply with the HHS mandate.
Click to expand...
Let me explain my post for you: I said, forced into a choice between paying a penalty for not complying -OR- going against their consciences by complying. Do you think an administration that would force charities *into that position *is worthy of your support? Catholics need to decide which side they are on: are they on the side of the Catholic church or are they on the side of the Obama administration. As I’ve been saying, Obama, it would seem, has done us all a favor in making the choice very clear. Once the choice has been made, it will be very difficult for those who continue to support Obama to come back later and say, " I had no idea he was going to do that." They will have made it clear to everyone that they are Democrat/Obama supporters first, catholic second.

Ishii
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top