Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

liberal N proud

(60,334 posts)
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 07:41 AM Feb 2012

A bunch of grumpy old perverts want to deny women the right to contraception

New York Times:

Bishops Were Prepared for Battle Over Birth Control Coverage

When after much internal debate the Obama administration finally announced its decision to require religiously affiliated hospitals and universities to cover birth control in their insurance plans, the nation’s Roman Catholic bishops were fully prepared for battle.

Seven months earlier, they had started laying the groundwork for a major new campaign to combat what they saw as the growing threat to religious liberty, including the legalization of same-sex marriage. But the birth control mandate, issued on Jan. 20, was their Pearl Harbor.

Hours after President Obama phoned to share his decision with Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan of New York, who is president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the bishops’ headquarters in Washington posted on its Web site a video of Archbishop Dolan, which had been recorded the day before.

“Never before,” Archbishop Dolan said, setting the tone, “has the federal government forced individuals and organizations to go out into the marketplace and buy a product that violates their conscience. This shouldn’t happen in a land where free exercise of religion ranks first in the Bill of Rights.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/10/us/bishops-planned-battle-on-birth-control-coverage-rule.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2


I suppose calling the Bishops perverts is sacrilegious since I have nothing to prove they are child molesters themsleves.


12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

DCKit

(18,541 posts)
1. I think the bishops must've lost their faith in the Holy Trinity.
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 08:21 AM
Feb 2012

After all, if the Trinity can't overcome a little birth control in order to bring about the next immaculate conception, what good are they?

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
2. Forcing people to buy insurance was never a good idea.
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 08:52 AM
Feb 2012

A single-payer plan would have avoided this problem. The government certainly can force people to pay taxes. Then, under a single-payer system, the government can make the services and needed medications available to everyone. It is then up to the choice of the individual whether she or he wishes to take advantage of the services offered. Problem solved.

Ultimately the Archbishop is right. “Never before,” Archbishop Dolan said, setting the tone, “has the federal government forced individuals and organizations to go out into the marketplace and buy a product." That's true, and it's offensive to the Constitution.

-Laelth

liberal N proud

(60,334 posts)
3. This ruling just says they have to cover it through any insurance they carry.
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 09:42 AM
Feb 2012

It isn't forcing the groups to provide insurance.

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
7. Indeed.
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 09:56 AM
Feb 2012

It's just saying that if, as an employer, you choose to provide health insurance to your employees, then you must purchase insurance that provides certain services and medications that you find morally objectionable. The employer could choose to simply not provide health insurance. The employer does have that option, but is that what we want?

Besides, my point was that a single-payer system would avoid this mess.

And I maintain that forcing people to buy insurance is a bad idea and hostile to the Constitution.

-Laelth

sinkingfeeling

(51,444 posts)
9. So if Obama put in a single payer system tomorrow, would it include coverage for
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 11:16 AM
Feb 2012

birth control, as the 98% of women want? If so, then what's the difference? The Catholic Church would have to object to that as well.

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
12. I certainly hope the U.S. single-payer system would provide contraception.
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 09:59 PM
Feb 2012

Those Catholics who were opposed to contraception could choose to simply not get it.

It's much more offensive to tell the Bishops that they must buy it even though they believe it to be immoral.

-Laelth

 

AngryAmish

(25,704 posts)
5. In the end Catholic institutions will just not provide insurance for their employees
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 09:52 AM
Feb 2012

Pay the fine and let their employees but insurance on the market.

Either that close their doors. Nowhere is it written that they have to do these things.

CTyankee

(63,901 posts)
6. We have to get over this handwringing. Sure, we all wanted the public option if we couldn't
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 09:54 AM
Feb 2012

have single payer. But guess what? we don't live in France or Germany or Sweden. We live here and must deal with this. I think we'll eventually get there but right now we have to stand up and fight this, not sit and sniffle about how awful it is that we don't have single payer....

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
8. It is quite simple. Require any insurance company offering insurance
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 11:07 AM
Feb 2012

in the US to offer birth control.

Laelth

(32,017 posts)
11. I choose not to "get over" things I find offensive to the Constitution.
Fri Feb 10, 2012, 09:56 PM
Feb 2012

And I find the health insurance company enrichment act utterly offensive.

-Laelth

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»A bunch of grumpy old per...