C
canadianguy1143
Guest
You do consider taking artificial birth control to be a sin?
Wisconsin Diocese offers birth control insurance, but warns employees not to use it
- Status
C
Corki
Guest
That’s the way I see it happening too. Also, if a manager or HR person were to counsel an employee to use the ABC benefit, that person would be subject to termination.
R
Rence
Guest
It’s not my intent to make it sound innocent at all.
You’re right, they created the environment and made it impossible for him to farm his land. That’s horrible. I don’t know what to say in reponse to that. Is he still fighting them?
They are making contraceptives available to all subscribers. They’re not forcing people to take them. When one uses another entity to provide services, they really can’t complain about those services. The insurance companies are there to service all people, not certain sub populations. They can’t say, “contraception is covered – unless you’re Catholic”. Why? Because 90% of Catholics are on birth control despite what the Church teaches.
R
Rence
Guest
That’s what I suggested as an option a while up this thread. They may be able to just opt out of the prescription coverage. The subscribers can add any prescription benefit out of their own pockets if they want prescription coverage. And that’s a good compromise because medications are expensive and many families need them. In this way, the diocese won’t have to indirectly pay for contraceptives and families can get the prescription coverage they need. It won’t have anything to do with the diocese.
M
manualman
Guest
You’re changing the topic. Nobody here is saying that the Church should be allowed to force insurance companies to comply with catholic teaching. What we are saying is that the STATE must cease forbidding insurance companies from offering policies that comply with catholic moral teaching. They absolutely are attempting to make the catholic church pay for contraception.
S
sharmin
Guest
Yes, but I also consider smoking to be a sin, lying to be a sin, and premarital sex to be a sin. There are obviously different degrees of sin.
R
Rence
Guest
I’m sorry, I don’t mean to change the topic. I apologize if you feel that is what I am trying to do. Let me restate it: The State mandated that all insurance companies in the state cover contraception in their prescription benefit. If the diocese subscibes to the commercial carriers, which are mandated by the State, then they have to subscribe to the policy as the State mandated it. They do have some options:
- they can appeal to the State to make an exception for Catholic institutions
- they can choose not to include prescription benefits or appeal to not include it
- they can self-insure their employees
- they can warn their employees that they will not be in line with the teachings of the Church if they use contraceptives.
I hope that brings my posts back on topic.
H
Hypatia
Guest
The law does not establish a religion, so they are free and clear there. Nor does it keep the Catholics from practicing theirs. So, again, the state seems pretty free and clear. The diocese has options if it doesn’t want to offer birth control to its employees. Nor is the state requiring the employees to receive or use birth control. You would be hard pressed to find a First Amendment case here.
Just quickly scanning through the various news reports on the issue, there is already one diocese in Wisconsin and a couple hospitals that are self-insured, so it is not as if this is impossible, if the diocese were genuinely concerned about the issue.
I still don’t understand how, if this is such a big issue, the Catholic Church could justify paying all the money to businesses, namely the insurance companies, which support birth control and abortion. That seems a far bigger problem. You know the insurance companies, which the diocese has patronized well before this law, spend money on those things. Your employees on the other hand have signed statements saying they will not avail themselves of something contrary to Church teaching. Yet the diocese is trying to prevent its own employees, who have promised not use birth control to start with, from having access to birth control, while sending money to the company which, they know, pays for birth control and abortions.
They have always used insurance companies, knowing those companies provide services contrary to Catholic teaching. They are not required to either use the companies or to provide birth control for their employees. The diocese is doing all these things because it is convenient and cheaper…reasons it probably condemns when it talks about birth control and people who do not want the inconvenience or expense of (more) children.
M
manualman
Guest
You should do more homework before casting such aspersions. What you describe is called “remote material cooperation with evil.” And it is NOT classified as sinful by the Church, either for herself or for the faithful. It is considered heroic virtue (i.e. above and beyond the call) to refrain from this behavior, but it not morally necessary when the consequences of doing so are negative. This is why I as a catholic can still buy my groceries at the local supermarket/pharmacy even though they sell contraceptives, and even RU-486. Same situation. Where else am I going to buy food?
So which diocese in WI is self-insured? Milwaukee, I bet. Economics 101 suggests that only the largest of pools could possible make self insurance work.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
A key question here would be whether one is required to be a practicing Catholic to be an employee of the Wisconsin Diocese. In a diocese near me, you don’t have to be, and not every employee is Catholic. That could be why the Diocese “has” to offer contraception coverage.
C
CathFaith1
Guest
A Democratic-controlled legislature.
Sadly, by today’s standards, I’m not sure anything else needs to be said.
S
sharmin
Guest
Remember that there are women out there who go on the pill who aren’t even sexually active. I was one of them. Even married women whose doctors prescribe the pill aren’t necessary having sex while on it. One friend of mine, Catholic, abstained while on the pill. The pill in and of itself isn’t against Church teaching…only if you are using it for birth control. Pretty hard for the diocese to enforce that.
R
Rence
Guest
Another thing they can do is get the other dioceses (sp?) together and self-insure. That might help it work for them. The more members, the more discount, the more affordable.
D
Dale_M
Guest
You may be right, but it would be good to know why no religious exemption was provided. Such knowledge could be important in devising strategy to amend the law.
Catholics represent about 30% of the population in Wisconsin. That’s an impressive bloc of voters, if mobilized on an issue (or at least the if prospect of such a mobilization is credible.)
C
CathFaith1
Guest
I suppose if one could find arguments from bills such as SB 155 it could help?
(From 2005)
Republicans in the Wisconsin Legislature have proposed a measure (SB 155) that would allow pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions, including contraceptives, for moral or religious reasons. In response,
Democratic lawmakers last week introduced legislation that would require pharmacists to fill all valid prescriptions for contraceptives, regardless of their moral or religious objections. Doyle is expected to veto SB 155 if it reaches his desk, and the Democrats’ bill likely will face strong opposition in the Republican-controlled Legislature (Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report, 6/9).
medicalnewstoday.com/articles/26408.php
C
Corki
Guest
I am old enough to remember a time when birth control wasn’t covered under most mainstream health insurance. Even then, a woman with a medical need for the drugs in birth control pills could get them, covered by insurance. It isn’t the drug that is covered or not covered. It’s the classification of contraception that’s covered or not covered.
C
Corki
Guest
Why would that matter? The Church doesn’t teach that it is immoral for Catholics to use contraception. The Church teaches that contraception is a grave evil. The Church should not be forced to provide something she believes to be intrinsically wrong to anyone - Catholic or not.
That line of thinking is like saying Catholic hospitals should provide sterilizations (or abortions) to patients just as long as the patients aren’t Catholic.
H
Hypatia
Guest
I am going to assume the Jesuits came up with that distinction.
I am comfortable making distinctions about degrees of culpability, but to say you have NO culpability when you are sending large sums of money to a company you know facilitates activities you think are immoral – indeed, you consider quite a few of those activities to be murder – seems like the worst kind of rationalization. On the face of it, it would seem to me that you have much more to worry about there, than you do from your employees who have signed contracts saying (in effect) they will not use birth control.
To answer your question, it was the diocese of Green Bay that was self-insured (heroically virtuous?).
H
Hypatia
Guest
I am not sure Democrat or Republican has much to do with it.
It was a Republican controlled legislature that, in 2008, overwhelmingly required Wisconsin hospitals to inform women, who had been sexually assaulted, of the availability of emergency birth control and to provide it if requested. No religious exemption was provided.
H
Hypatia
Guest
Cases on birth control and insurance companies have gone through the court systems in several states. The courts have consistently ruled that insurers must treat birth control in the same manner they do all other prescription medications, and that the failure to do so constitutes gender discrimination since it forces women to pay higher health costs in order to receive what is standard health care.
The New York “Supeme Court”, for instance, said that when religious organizations employed or provided services to people that did not hold the same religious beliefs, they were subject to public regulations.
The Supreme Court has refused to hear any appeals of these cases, letting the state court rulings stand.
- Status