Catholics protest mandate to cover birth control
January 30, 2012 at 8:00 pm in Grand Forks Herald
Ruling ‘casts aside the First Amendment,’ says Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo DioceseLocal Catholic leaders joined a nationwide pushback against a new federal health care mandate this weekend, claiming that forcing insurance plans to cover birth control violates their religious freedom. Continue Reading
This is so unfortunate. Catholics would broadly support Democrats if it weren’t for the abortion issue. Everything else the Church believes in matches the Democratic platform. Social justice, education, taking care of the least among us, stopping killings…
I do think that claiming this is a 1st Amendment issue is a stretch. It doesn’t force Catholics to have abortions. It doesn’t force Catholics to stop protesting abortions. It makes them cover it in their insurance programs. I haven’t heard them protest paying taxes (yes, Catholics pay taxes) when those taxes support the death penalty. It almost seems like this issue is being pushed by the GOP, and the Church is just a political puppet.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48 
30
When God said be fruitfull and multiply there were probably only a few million people on earth. If he came back today I think he’d say enough is enough folks. I gave you a brain for a reason. This earth can only support so many people.
I support insurance companies having to pay for birth control. It’s a lot better option than the alternatives of actual abortions or putting more unwanted children into this world. I personally think it should be free for all Americans. We need to help the poorer Americans afford the birth control they need. If we don’t we’ll continue down the path of people who can’t afford children having more children. I realize the churches don’t like this, but it’s not right to doom children to lives of poverty either.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
60 
25
If our government can force a church, or other religious organization, to participate in something that is against their beliefs then they can force them to do anything. Guess there goes religious freedom in this country.
Hot debate. What do you think?
45 
43
Religious organizations actually are exempt. Nothing in the law forces the Catholic Church to pay for birth control for nuns and priests.
There are however organizations associated with the Catholic church which would be required to cover birth control for their employees. That would be things like a hospital that is associated with the Catholic church.
Latest statistic I saw said 98% of Catholic women use some form of birth control during their reproductive years. Guess there is a reason we see very few families of a dozen or so kids anymore.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48 
21
Well, that’s the Aquila argument Glen — and just like his superiors he’s being a pious hypocrite.
First, this is not really about the government telling the catholic church what to do, so much as the government stopping the catholic church forcing its religion on everybody. That’s a big difference!
Second, the catholic church has a long history of wailing about the religious freedom clause of the 1st amendment while simultaneously ignoring the establishment clause. For example, it wants to take taxpayer money for its adoption programs and church schools, but is unwilling to play by the church-state separation rules when it uses the money.
Finally, when it comes to promoting “freedom,” the church wants keep its freedom to treat women like farmyard breeding stock, and to doom thousands to death and misery in the third world just because it believes condoms are the epitome of evil.
That’s the ugly reality behind this pious wailing, and these self-styled moral leaders should be ashamed of their distortions and dishonesty.
….talking of which, cue the ubiquitous solon (aka “zardoz”) to jump in and prove my points.
Hot debate. What do you think?
46 
33
Well…I guess you pretty much said it all…I was ready to jusp in at the first paragraph stating this was a violation of their religious freedom…..Talk about going way off base in an argument about the issue…..
In a way it’s not unlike those fundamentalists who continue to insist that the media and people in general are attacking Christianity…..When basically it comes down to anyone who doesn’t agree with their beliefs are in the camp of the enemy so obviously they are attacking Christianity. When if they ever could mirror themselves…They’d see it’s them attacking everything that’s not of their belief….
Like or Dislike:
18 
9
How does the Catholic church get off dictating policy for non Catholics? They seem to think they can.
Birth control is a health care issue, not religion. Does the Church have a problem with Viagra? Doubtful. So why are women relegated to second class status? It is their bodies, their health, their lives. Quite often women get stuck with raising the kids. Where is the help from the man dominated churches and governments then?
Ever notice the same people that are against birth control are also against abortion (Pro-Life for 9 months) and programs that help women after giving birth and with children in general?
How can women break even, let alone come out ahead with so many people trying to stack the deck against them.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
49 
30
So yet once again the Bishop believes that he belongs in the bedrooms of people that ‘work’ for him. Sorry to tell you Sir, but the ONLY bedroom where you are in control is your own.
Good job to HHS mandating that this type of action needs to happen. While I do support a womans right to choose, I would hope they would choose birth control first.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
45 
24
Insurance should support the needs of the insured…not the needs of the employer of the insured.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
32 
16
1. No one has a right to health insurance according to the constitution.
2. The 1st amendment states that government cannot infringe on the free exercise of religion, even religion you don’t like.
3. This forces the Church to pay for abortion, make no mistake that is what this is about, and gives no conscience clause. No one should dictate to the Church. The Church has the right to choose according to the constitution and no one is forced to work for the Church. If you don’t like Catholic teachings that is just too bad, the Church has the right under the constitution to practice its faith.
4. This means that the government can force religious people to act against their conscience on matters of faith and morals. So say goodbye to exempt from military service as a CO. This has never been done in our history. The government has always recognized religious exemptions. Until now.
5. This eliminates the 1st amendment. There will be no religious liberty for anyone once this is done. That may appeal to those who hate religion or the Catholic Church. But it won’t stop there. You’ll be next. If you don’t like the 1st amendment then repeal it. This is simple religious persecution, now coming out into the open.
Hot debate. What do you think?
33 
33
As I predicted (above) solon the great (cherry picker) wants to interpret the COTUS — the 1st amendment in particular — as a license for the catholic church to impose its dogma on everybody. For somebody who has previously claimed to be an attorney with two masters degrees, and an IQ of 142 — solon (aka “zardoz”) certainly has a pretty poor understanding of the very law he claims to practice.
Notice I specify the church in my criticisms — not catholics in general. Most catholics I know are quite reasonable people, and I count many among my friends and colleagues. The only thing I don’t understand about them is why they still appear to support their out-of-touch leadership the statistics on use of birth control being a classic case in point.
Here’s a suggestion to the catholic church: Use the money you are currently spending on campaigning against gay marriage to pay the teachers in your schools a living wage. That, to most reasonable people, would be a double act of actual humanity.
Hot debate. What do you think?
25 
26
I’ll try to clarify so that readers can understand solon’s distortions and/or dishonesty:
1. This new mandate does NOT apply to houses of worship.
2. It does apply to institutions like church-related colleges, hospitals and social services agencies that serve the general population, hire large numbers of non-Catholics and receive substantial amounts of taxpayer support. They will be required to adopt health plans that provide birth control to those employees who want it.
Thus, #1 follows the free exercise clause of the 1st amendment, and #2 follows the establishment clause of the 1st amendment. In other words, the mandate is constitutional — and solon and Aquila either don’t understand the COTUS, or are deliberately being dishonest. I’ll leave Area Voices readers to decide which!
Hot debate. What do you think?
21 
18
It isn’t about receiving federal money. It is being imposed on virtually everything and everyone. Don’t you believe in freedom and conscience? The cotus says freedom of RELIGION not just worship. Religion includes much more then just worship.
Hot debate. What do you think?
16 
14
Solon: “Religion includes much more then just worship.”
No kidding! Your posts emphasize the truth of that statement — with the “much more” including denial, deception, distortion, dishonesty, and shameless attempts to suggest that everybody should be subject to Vatican control! It’s “moral leadership” in action folks!
The Catholic church in the USA might have a shred more credibility if it quit political lobbying to get OUR taxpayer money to use for ITS religious purposes. Hint: that’s a 1st amendment issue!
Hot debate. What do you think?
16 
16
COTUS…coitus?
Ironic, ain’t it?
Like or Dislike:
13 
14
or title is well deserved, “Solon the GREAT”
Like or Dislike:
6 
13
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
22 
32
Actually, the church is against ALL birth control, except periodic abstinence – as in the rhythm method.
98% of Catholics cannot agree with that stance, because 98% of Catholics use some sort of birth control.
This is the Church trying to force its members to comply. And again, the Republicans will jump on board because it will make a whopping 2 issues they have in common with the Catholic Church. Glenn Beck was talking about this before the media picked it up, if you needed more convincing. Never mind that hundreds of the Church’s other issues align perfectly with the Democratic party; stopping animal abuse, protecting the environment, building community, honest dealing, charity, …
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
13
Kyle is correct on this one. Anything that interupts the cycle of procreation is prohibited by married people as well. Unmarried people are prohibited from sexual activity. Even masturbating is prohibited, whether you are married or not. No kidding. All of this is strictly practiced by all catholics
.
Hot debate. What do you think?
23 
9
The hypocrisy of the church is well known. In that if you aren’t married you are to go against your hereditary urges, but your not supposed to use birth control much less have sex. and oh but that other thing will make you go blind…
you can be excommunicated and branded a whore by the church if you are a woman and have a child out of wed lock.. You can be denied the ability to partake in communion. Do we notice that nothing ever really happens to the men in these situations… hmmm.. why would that be? hmmm.. maybe because the whole organization is controlled by men.
Then when you are married you are supposed to ‘have as many children as God will bless you with’ even if you can’t afford them, but you still aren’t supposed to use birth control. However it is then ok to partake of social assistance systems because you can’t afford to feed, cloth and house what ‘God has blessed you with.’ However you can’t vote for someone who has a D after their name who fights for funding of said programs because they are an abomination before God.. Or that is what they would like you to believe. But then we have the clincher because that is ok because the priests will take care of them and ‘love’ them like their own for you.. Isn’t that right Solon. specially if they are boys.
Hot debate. What do you think?
26 
19
Actually everything you just said is false. For example a woman with a child out of wedlock is not excommunicated. The issue is whether the 1st amendment means anything or not.
Like or Dislike:
14 
15
solon: “The issue is whether the 1st amendment means anything or not.”
It does — especially the establishment clause!
Like or Dislike:
13 
13
Wow maverick, wow! You speak as if you or someone close to you has been excommunicated. I have lived a long time and know many catholics, ex-catholics and new catholics but never in my life have I met anyone who has been excommunicated or branded a whore by the catholic church.
The rage and hatred in your post is telling.
Like or Dislike:
18 
7
“Having sex is a choice, not a necessity” I bet you’ll find many 35 and under who would dispute that totally…..Especially males….Few things are a stronger driving force when you’re younger…
Like or Dislike:
12 
12
On the other hand….It is extremely necessary…Or life ends…Unless we all switch to test tube babies (Bet you haven’t heard that old gem for a while)…
One last word…It also comes down to what kind of ol’ lady you have…With the right ol’ lady…She’ll let you know how necessary it is………Or perhaps isn’t….If it’s the latter and you’re all in…Then you’re in the right rligion…Enjoy….
Like or Dislike:
9 
8
The problem with religious doctrines is that they are formed for pragmatic reasons, but once they are written into stone those reasons are forgotten. The Jewish admonition about eating pork, for example, is likely a response to trichinosis. In the First World who suffers from that anymore? Yet it is still followed because it’s a law. As for contraception, when infant mortality was better than 50%, of course having many children was necessary. Once it was declared “God’s Word,” overpopulation was never taken into account. This is likely the reason for the Jewish stand on Onanism too.
Hot debate. What do you think?
22 
12
maverick, In any online discussion where the topic is the Catholic Church, its leaders or beliefs, as the discussion thread grows longer, the probability of a reference to pedophile priests approaches 1 (100%).
Corollary 1: The reference will be not only invalid but inappropriate and abusive.
Corollary 2: The earlier the reference is made, the greater the probability the rest of the discussion will follow the reference down a rabbit hole.
Like or Dislike:
12 
13
Corollary 3: The faster catholic apologists will want to change the subject and/or introduce logical fallacies.
Like or Dislike:
16 
13
There is absolutly no doubt that the catholic church was gravely at fault for the plethora of child abuse travesties of the recent decades. Not all pedophiles are catholic priest, but that’s not the point. The fault of the church was protecting the abusers and not the victims. A higher standard is expected from our religious institutions, the catholic church couldn’t have failed worse than it did in this. The catholic church will suffer, rightfully so, this stain on its reputation for evermore. But through this suffering and eternal shame we hope these actions will NEVER be repeated.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
19 
3
Pedophiles have been clever enough to know that the priesthood is one of the optimal careers in which to ply their trade. A position of authority, with ample opportunity to be alone with young children. A veritable Nirvana for them. That the hierarchy sought to hush it all up, transferring offenders elsewhere without a word, simply demonstrates how they view the priesthood as an good ole boys organization, and the reputation of the Church as more important than the harm done to parishoners. But the latter has been a mindset in action for a millenium and a half.
Like or Dislike:
12 
8
Sort of reminds me of conservatives and the Tee party..
Like or Dislike:
8 
8
Something that suspect hasn’t been hit upon here is how the govt is deliberately nibbling away at religious rights in this country. By forcing church organizations to adopt secular values they are doing exactly that. I also note that many folks make it sound as though people don’t have a choice of which hospital to use. If you want and abortion or birth control, go to a hospital that provides that service, simple as that. On the other side, if a catholic hospital doesn’t want to provide those services which go against their values, don’t take govt money. Unfortunately, the govt knows that these hospitals need Govt money to stay open, so they have no other choice. And don’t think for a moment that the govt isn’t pushing an agenda and using their money to do so.
Like or Dislike:
7 
9
Nonsense! The “agenda pushing” is almost exclusively comming from the religious side. If the COTUS was adhered to, and if the religious activists hadn’t been pushing, then there would be:
- No “under god” in the pledge
- No “in god we trust” on our money
- No religious oaths in courts and political ceremonies
- No government administered “faith-based” charities.
- No ridiculous tax breaks for religion.
As for “nibbling,” the religious right in this country favors chain saws and axes.
Like or Dislike:
11 
6
It is obvious that opponents do not respect religious freedom.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0