Posted on 08/30/2011 2:23:55 PM PDT by NYer
A few days ago in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune Fr. Peter Laird, Vicar General of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, had a good piece about the mandate from the Obama Administration (HHS) requiring that “contraception” and sterilizations be paid for by tax-payers.
Counterpoint
The Star Tribune’s editorial “Benefits outweigh birth control costs” (Aug. 1) drew attention to an Institute of Medicine recommendation adopted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
It requires health care plans to cover contraceptives and sterilizations [Remember: some "contraceptives" are abortifacients.] under regulations for preventive care created in response to the health care reform legislation passed in 2010. [Let us never forget that the USCCB warned against this, and that Sr. Carol Keehan, beloved of liberals, publicly supported Obamacare against the US bishops.]
This is a troubling mandate. It raises serious questions not only about the nature of health care and employment, but also about religious freedom and public charity.
For the church, one consequence is that the state seems to have begun to define who our neighbor is and the extent of our mission. [Bingo.]
The position of the Catholic Church on artificial birth control is well-known, though not always well-understood. Our teaching is founded in a conviction that every human act is meant to witness to the truth about God and man.
Acknowledging that God, our creator, is love and has been revealed to the full in Christ means not only that there is right and wrong but also that we should testify to that truth so that all men and women might be free and come to have life to the full.
The church does not consider birth control a right of health care, much less a good for human flourishing, because pregnancy is not a disease.
Moreover, to suggest that one may, without consequence, use contraception in pursuit of human flourishing is manifestly contradicted by studies such as the one reported by the Guttmacher Institute showing that 54 percent of women who have had abortions have been using birth control.
Birth control promises a life without consequences, but every action has consequences, and often it is women and children who suffer most when we pretend otherwise.
Under the guidelines issued by the Obama administration, only a very narrow exemption from the contraceptive mandate would be permitted for “religious employers.“ [For how long?]
It would apply only to an organization that has as its purpose the “inculcation of religious values,” that primarily employs persons who share the religious tenets of the organization and that serves primarily persons who share those religious tenets. [But Catholic hospitals serve anyone.]
Thus, organizations such as Catholic universities and hospitals, social-services agencies and Catholic Charities, because they serve people without regard to religious affiliation, would be forced to provide contraceptive and sterilization services.
[Here it is....] In other words, we would have to stop being Catholic if we wanted to serve all men and women, as Jesus did. It would also require Catholic organizations to employ only Catholics, which may be at variance with both federal and state discrimination laws.
This extremely narrow exemption substantially differs from existing conscience-clause protections, which protect individual providers from being forced to perform any service that conflicts with their beliefs.
Absent sufficient regard for rights of conscience, the birth control mandate will force all men and women — and all employers — to carry health “benefits” that violate the sincerely held religious convictions of many.
If this is not rectified, the vast social-service network of the Catholic Church will be imperiled, and with it not only those who are employed and assist us in our works of mercy, but also those who are served: our neighbors.
* * *
The Rev. Peter A. Laird is vicar general and moderator of the curia for the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis.
WDTPRS kudos to Fr. Laird for his succinct summary of the issues.
Ping!
This is another aspect of Obamacare (”care”? about what? what a crock!) the constitutionality of which needs to tested in court. My guess is it is flat out unconstitutional.
Well at least all the Muslim Hospitals in our area will not have a problem with this BECAUSE THERE ARE NONE.
Where are all the phony “separation of church and state” communists? Oh, never mind it is only a one way street with these communists. Government can interfere but nobody can pray without the permission of government. Welcome to the former Soviet Union.
Also “contraception” and sterilizations be paid for by tax-payers. The tax payers are not paying for anything. It's all going towards future insolvency.
They are the greatest killers of humans in recent history.
The administration rebuttal to this is simple:
“What part of the expression ‘government health care’ does the Catholic church not understand? It means health care by the government, *not* by religions or private organizations. It means that government has a complete, total and absolute *monopoly* on health care, and that no one else may legally provide health care.”
Not only will it be flat out unconstitutional, it will also be and is anti-religious.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.