Birth control is good for women, their children and families.

It's a Catholic hospital --- religion --- the religion condemns birth control. Why would anyone want to force them to provide it? Go to another hospital if you want an abortion … there are hospitals who provide these services. In China at one time they were killing every child born into any family that already had two children. Is this our next law in America? Don't force on a religious group what that see as evil. Hey, maybe we can make all Mormons drink coffee and alcoholic drinks and other stimulating drinks under the guise that it's good for them. Religious freedom? The Government forcing us to do things the government’s way is just another step toward complete communistic control.

Then why didn't the Catholic Church make any kind of a stink when many of the States mandated them to provide the very same birth control? Why only now when it is made a Federal mandate do they protest? It makes it look like they care more about having a federal election wedge issue than care about birth control, the way they are finally complaining this way.

(and birth control helps prevent abortion)

And not only can Mormons still avoid coffee, but Catholics can still choose not to take that birth control. Still. And mothers can still choose to have 13 kids.

There is nothing "communist" at all in providing modern health care to all women in the U.S.

The law doesn't force Catholic hospitals to actually provide birth control. The law only mandates that the hospitals pay for insurance that covers birth control. Big difference!

employee insurance, that is

And the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops isn't whining and crying because of "religious freedom". They want to stop everyone from using contraception whether they are Catholic or not. The USCCB wants all businesses to be exempt from providing insurance that covers contraception.

The White House is "all talk, no action" on moving toward compromise, said Anthony Picarello, general counsel for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "There has been a lot of talk in the last couple days about compromise, but it sounds to us like a way to turn down the heat, to placate people without doing anything in particular," Picarello said. "We're not going to do anything until this is fixed."

That means removing the provision from the health care law altogether, he said, not simply changing it for Catholic employers and their insurers. He cited the problem that would create for "good Catholic business people who can't in good conscience cooperate with this."

"If I quit this job and opened a Taco Bell, I'd be covered by the mandate," Picarello said.

The contraception mandate is about only one thing: Employers that offer health insurance as a benefit have to include contraception in the coverage. There are exceptions for purely religious institutions. It's only when religious groups operate things like hospitals where the primary function is not religious that health insurance is required to include contraceptive coverage. There are two things to consider here. Hospital employees practice a variety of faiths, many of which have no problem with contraception. Catholic employees can exercise their free will not to use the contraceptive coverage.

OMG! I don't care what religion I am, I am a mother of 2 children, I have had 2 pregnancies in my lifetime... ya I probably got really lucky, I could not have handled being a mother of 8 or 6 or 5 - maybe 3 if that was the plan, but I was blessed with 2 - 1 of each.. a girl and a boy and someday I hope to have grandchildren, but regardless of my "religious" beliefs, that 99% are man made laws - yeah man made, MEN who have never experienced, 40 weeks of pregnancy, labor or delivery.... I have a message for you, "BACK OFF" cuz you idiots know nothing!! I would have been a terrible mother if I had 8 children! I KNOW that... and if it was not for "birth control" it could have been a different story that wouldn't allow me to be here posting about it!!! My kids are ok, I did my best...

Yea Kimmie! I raised four. I had my last one when I was 40 years old ... it took me a long time to figure out where they came from. (and I am not Catholic, LOL) What a joy they have all been. All grown now with children of their own. Tonight I am dog-sitting two dogs belonging to grandchildren while they are on a trip to Arkansas. Us grandmas are still needed (LOL). I am a Ms Lee and not a Mr Lee. I get the feeling from reading the comments that no one agrees with my opinion.

So if I become a church and start a business (non-profit but I get a huge salary) I can hire people to work in my business and provide heath insurance that doesn't cover heart trouble or cancer because that would be against my religion. Is that what the Catholic Church is saying?

The argument reminds me of the play/movie Beckett where Thomas Beckett argued that church law trumped the king's law. The king disagreed.

This is now, Roman Catholic law VS U.S. Federal public health policy law

(and for some, religion VS Obama)

Of course Thomas a Becket was murdered in his church for defying the king. I doubt that the present administration will do that. :)

I think the rights of non Catholic employees ought to be considered here.

I agree with Nippy.

"Ever wonder why the days women having 8-13 kids in America is over (as a norm anyway)?"
(They smartened up?) My 88 year old mother in law resents that she had 6 children... and has said she would have rather had only 3. She won't name who :) She is Catholic. I was done with 3 myself, then God sent me Jordan for good measure.

I heartily endorse birth control as I do not think abortion should be used as birth control.... I don't think the Catholic owned and run businesses should be forced to do what they don't believe in. If the government is providing funding to them, not insurance payback, well then they would have a say.

I think a lot of Catholics use birth control now and at one time, believe it or not the Vatican had money invested in a birth control corp.. (see the book "In God's Name") I can understand how they may feel if they have anything to do with giving out birth control they will be accountable for something to God... haha, they already are.

But as far as it goes, Public schools because they collect Government support are much different than Private schools that don't. I think if the Catholics are forced to do this, then they would set a precedent in other areas and I don't think the Government should be such a super entity it seems to be. I worry about the school voucher programs being the loophole for the Government to insert control too.

>I think a lot of Catholics use birth control now

We can tell, they don't have those big families anymore like they used to.

One of my friends who was raised in a Catholic family thought that it was pretty darned amusing that he, his sister, and brother were spaced four years apart. It was convenient to have only one kid in college at a time. Funny how that happened. :)

When it comes to birth control, I think people need to use a little common sense. Yeah, it's against some religious beliefs, but, those church leaders aren't going to help raise and feed those children. Grown people should do whatever is best for them, regardless of laws and religion. Most of us can agree that abortion isn't the way to go, so, birth control shouldn't even be an argument.

Oddly, I see this argument used in conservative family groups: "Obama forcing Catholics to provide abortion" and it's not that at all.

Agree whole-heartedly with you!

I hate when people confuse birth control with abortion. The first helps to prevent the second, as you've said. You'd think some of the religious people who oppose it would take a moment to think logically and realize this, but zealotry is, unfortunately, the complete opposite of logical thinking.

Logic flies out the window too often ....

Yes birth control is very very good for women! I don't take the pill just to prevent pregnancy. I take it because I have endometriosis and would hemorrhage to death without it. Birth control saves lives!

I knew a women who took birth control pills just to control her moods. She literally went bananas with lots of tears and some smashing things, once a month. She couldn't hold a job that way. She couldn't have a life that way. Birth control pills cured her completely of all that.

Not for all women. BC pills would kill me and almost did. I can't take them...and found out the hard way. There are other ways to prevent pregnancy though (I only have 2 kids).

There are other ways to prevent pregnancy though (I only have 2 kids).

Yes and every woman should be able to choose what method works best for them not be discriminated against when payment of those methods is at issue.

All women should have access to birth control with no co-pays, no matter where they work!

I disagree

The cost of birth control, even with insurance, can prevent many women from using it. I know a lot of people who have a $90 copay on one month's supply of birth control pills.

from bluejay blogs

But for some, the cost of birth control to protect them is one of the main problems. According to healthinsurancerates.com, the average woman spends $30 a month on the pill. But the pill can range from $15 to almost $70 a month for one pack. There are the one-step pills for emergencies such as Plan B and Ella, but cost $50 and you have to be 17 years old or over to purchase it over the counter. Many students may not have health insurance that covers the cost of the pill. And what student would want to spend their extra money on a birth control plan?

Huffingtonpost:

Birth control is critical to the well-being of women and their families. Studies have shown that women who have access to contraceptives and use them consistently have a greater chance of graduating from high school and establishing careers. When women lack access to contraception, they experience many disadvantages, including achieving less education and earning lower salaries. These disadvantages also affect their children, who are less likely to finish high school and have higher rates of incarceration.

Under the current system, women with health insurance have to pay a deductible before they get any coverage for birth control. And once the coverage kicks in, they still have to make a co-payment every time they refill the prescription. For women struggling to keep food on the table, contraception becomes an unaffordable luxury. The new system eliminates this burden for the millions of women who will be covered under new health insurance plans.

And as in my case many women need it for health reasons. As a matter of fact I know just as many women who take it for health reasons as I know women who take it just to prevent pregnancy.

Just taking it to prevent pregnancy is as big a health reason, as any, also.

Amen Peter! Forget 13 kids, I don't even want one.

Yay! There is a new hashtag on Twitter #iusebirthcontrol. Women from all over are sharing the different reasons for why they use birth control and how it has made their lives better.

A lady I know had her tubes tied, and needed birth control for hormone control..

In fact, most Catholics support the mandate.

"A majority of Catholics (58 percent) support the contraception mandate generally. While Catholic Church teaching proscribes the use of artificial birth control to avoid conception, 98 percent of Catholics use contraception, according to separate surveys."

There are Catholics all over Twitter right now using the #iusebirthcontrol hashtag.

And?

I fail to see how what the majority of Catholics do or do not do should affect the decree of the Church to which they voluntarily belong. +shrug+ If they are Catholics they are in disobedience.

However, that is between them and their God or their church.

But their opinion and what they do or don't do doesn't have a thing to do with whether or not Catholic charities and such ought to be under this mandate. If Catholics or anyone want that kind of coverage, search out an insurance company that offers it ... but if you do want that kind of coverage don't expect it from the Church.

Then again ... it remains to be seen which one will give in first on this issue. Obama (who most certainly has virtually stabbed the Catholic church in the back ... since Obamacare is already passed and he doesn't need them anymore?), or the Church (which has given in or "toned down" the religious character of Catholic institutions for years in order to able to qualify for government grants).

+shrug+ Obama is wrong but the Church ... well, If you agree to carry a scorpion across the stream, you are going to get stung ... ... no matter what he promises you before the journey, while you are both still on the shore (or before the bill passes).

>Obama (who most certainly has virtually stabbed the Catholic church in the back

The federal government isn't making the catholic hospitals and universities do anything that many states were already making them do. How is it that we got no protest at all when the states made them do it but it is "Obama stabbing them" when the federal government does the very same thing?

How is it that we got no protest at all when the states made them do it but it is "Obama stabbing them" when the federal government does the very same thing?

Perhaps because the states never promised not to and/or perhaps they, along with Democrats like B. Stupak were promised that (if he/they supported Obamacare) that Federal dollars wouldn't fund abortions and perhaps they and their organizations would be exempt from participating in regard to that and contraceptives in any case? (re: "Appearing Wednesday night on Fox News, Stupak made clear he opposes the Obama administration’s insistence that religious-affiliated organizations are not exempted from the law’s requirement that health insurance plans cover contraceptives.). +shrug+

Just a guess, but the situation in which Catholics find themselves now in regard to the mandate could make anyone feel like they've been stabbed in the back (which is why I stated it that way).

I'm against the mandate for a couple of reasons, however; I am not sure how much I sympathize with the Catholic feelings of victimhood being expressed so voiciferously these days. Here are two articles that express similar views to my own.

Liberal Catholics Who Supported ObamaCare Surprised They’ve Been Betrayed
Thursday, February 9, 2012 • 3:08 pm
From this one, I like the first 'comment' by "Judith" It goes like this:
She sailed away on a pleasant summer day
On the back of a crocodile.
“You see”,said she, “he’s as tame as he can be,
I’ll float him down the Nile.”
The crock winked his eye as she waived them all goodbye,
Wearing a happy smile.
At the end of the ride
The lady was inside.
And the smile on the crocodile!


The Bishops, the Cardinals, the Axe, and the Scorpion

Peter Joseph Swanson Feb 9, 2012, 5:05pm EST
>Obama (who most certainly has virtually stabbed the Catholic church in the back

The federal government isn't making the catholic hospitals and universities do anything that many states were already making them do. How is it that we got no protest at all when the states made them do it but it is "Obama stabbing them" when the federal government does the very same thing?

It does matter what the majority of Catholics think and do. "The church" is not the bishops and cardinals and popes. It's the community of believers.

Aniko you said: It does matter what the majority of Catholics think and do. "The church" is not the bishops and cardinals and popes. It's the community of believers.

My foray into Catholic study was some time ago and I can't speak on it with total confidence; however, if you mean what it seems you mean, what I can say with some confidence is that even if most of the "community of Catholics" practice and believe in and tolerate abortion/ birth control etc and whatever else might be tucked within the pages of the debacle that is Obamacare and might at some point become an issue for the Church ... I doubt that that "practice" or "belief" has yet been passed down to enough generations or tolerated by and/or preached from enough Catholic pulpits or even voted on or had letters sent or recommendations made or sponsorship offered and/or whatever else it takes to qualify as part of the tradition of the "living magisterium". IF I've named it in an understandable (if surface) way and IF that is where you are going with it. ?

In any case let me explain further what was in my mind when I said what I said ...

I fail to see how [at this moment in time] what the majority of Catholics do or do not do should affect the decree of the Church to which they voluntarily belong. +shrug+ The teaching of the Church [at this moment in time] is what it is.

And until it changes, those Catholic who practice behaviors that go against Church doctrine are probably in disobedience of their own chosen Church's doctrine. +shrug+ However, that is between them and their God [and/]or their church. They have the choice to stay in the Church or leave it if they are unhappy with the doctrine.

Further, the obedience or disobedience, on whatever scale, of Catholics to Catholic Church doctrine is not a matter for government to concern itself with or for it to dictate or mandate .

Neither does their behavior have anything to do with whether or not the Church accepts the mandates or continues to fight them. Church doctrine is Church doctrine ... for the foreseeable future - unless the Pope has changed his views?

I'm saying the church is the community of believers, and you're saying it's an authoritarian hierarchy in which whatever is said on top has to be accepted by everyone below, or they're "disobedient". Of course, the people on top would like to have it that way, and are doing their best to run the RCC according to that model. But I don't have to accept that model as the correct one, and neither do Catholics who disagree on particular doctrines. They can stay and try to change things (an option not apparent among the ones you mention).

Catholic doctrine is not government business, to be sure. Ensuring that workers are treated fairly is.

That the majority of Catholics have no problem with contraception is an important point when people claim Catholics' freedom of religion is violated. It's individuals who have freedoms, not abstract entities, so what those individuals actually believe matters. For the same reason, it's also an important point when claims are made that Catholics have been insulted.

Nonsense. Doctrine is Doctrine. The Church is entitled to it. That you believe that everything is Life is as the Wind blows, doesn't make it so.

And, what a vapid and obfuscating statement that "the majority of Catholics have no problem with contraception is an important point when people claim Catholics' freedom of religion is violated."

How convenient for you, that you've left out the overriding Issue...Abortive Medicines. You come very close to forcing me to call you liar.

aniko,
Catholic doctrine is not government business
and government has no business in any religious doctrine.

pointing to the obedience (or lack thereof) of people to a particular denomination has no bearing on the doctrine, dogma, or canons of said religion.

in the case of roman catholics - parishners that are only partially obedient, used to be called protestants, and still are in reality, whether the individuals admit it or not.

Agreed, Del. She applies the same convoluted logic to doctrine that she does to The Constitution, as do all misguided Leftists: she thinks it "breathes," and therefore can be changed by any petulant, whining Leftist who dislikes what it says...

The bishops and cardinals are entitled to set doctrines, and the people of the church are entitled to have their opinion about them, Mark-John and DN. They have the full range of choice: they can leave the church; they can stay and ignore what they don't like; or they can work on changing things. Things do change, even in the Catholic church, and they change in response to what people believe, stand for, and want their church to represent.

People--actual human beings--cannot possibly be insulted by the institution of a policy they agree with. Abstract entities cannot be insulted, because they're not sentient beings. If you have an argument against that, you could provide it, Mark-John.

I have no idea who it is that believes "everything is [in?] Life is [0?] as the Wind blows" or what that even means (I don't think I speak that language). It is also not clear what instance of me (as opposed to a generic "Leftist") saying anything about the Constitution you might be referring to in your comment above.

"And until it changes, those Catholic who practice behaviors that go against Church doctrine are probably in disobedience of their own chosen Church's doctrine."

I guess this confirms it~I'm going to HELL!

I'm all for it. I'm tired of my tax money going to breeders.

I am overwhelmed...it happens, I am sorry, but parents have alot to do with it...our children are out of control...I have children, I am a Happy Grandmother, but they were raised and waited to have children of their own...don't make me go out on the deep end...Peter please...

Actually, I think it would be to the benefit of ALL childless women not to have to contribute to the education of children. Women have had many choices over the past 40 years including using the pill to prevent pregnancy. What I don't get is why our government is involved with religious issues.

>why our government is involved with religious issues.

From our government's point of view it's a only a public health policy issue based on science.

Those things clash with religion from time to time.

Yeah, your right. My problem is that I don't understand what religion has to do with my health choices, but then I am not of a religion that would forbid me to persue health care of any kind.

MLM, the government should not be involved with religious beliefs.
...One religion forbids blood transfusions.
...A few forbids invasive surgery.
....It may not interfere with your religious views, but we have to respect the beliefs of others, or else, our beliefs may be violated next.

Eeek! I hope the religious groups that don't believe in blood transfusions and invasive surgery don't ever run hospitals and schools!

If they did, they could still not chose that for themselves but to expect that of all their students and employees would be just too much!

Ed Da Head Toker, I agree with you. Did I misunderstand the theme of this essay. Sorry Peter Joseph Swanson if I didn't get what you were writing about.

Maybe what our government should do is deny wellfare to women who have babies to get all that money. What I see are too many women who don't give a darn about the kids they produce because for them they are simply a means to insure they do not have to work.

Peter, this has been one comment laden post.
Congrats!
You have ticked off braid dead bigots!!
Hip Hip HOOOORRAAAAAAAAAAAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*bows*


LOL