Obamacare / Healthcare Reform – News & Discussion

[rus]

Snarf said:
If God hates the pill I wonder what he/she thinks about bj’s?

If your god hates either, get a different god. Or not. Your choice.

[Cookie]

rus said:
From what I can see, this requirement does force religious organizations to pay for abortions.

You’re wrong. Prove it or drop it.

[gramarye]

Twixlen said:
In my eyes, religiously affiliated institutions such as hospitals are required to serve *all* people – regardless of that person’s religion. It would be different if they only served a congregation (directly – I realize that many churches do other things). If anything, it inpinges on the rights of the people who work there to *not* include them.

“Required to serve all people” does not and need not mean required to perform any particular medical procedure. (Except, of course, in Obama’s world, it clearly does.) It means that they cannot choose to treat a Catholic but deny the same treatment to a Jew based on the latter’s religion.

Also – your insistence on adding abortion into a debate about birth control is some Rick Santorum level nutbaggery.

See above. If the federal government can force people of faith to perform one act that violates their creed, why would abortion be different? After all, in pro-choice lingua franca, an abortion is just another “medical procedure.”

[Twixlen]

Cookie said:
You’re wrong. Prove it or drop it.

This. I think there is maybe some talk of it on the extreme right-wing radio/tv programs, but haven’t heard it beyond that. And, the folks that are doing the talking have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

[rus]

Cookie said:
You’re wrong. Prove it or drop it.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/02/06/catholic-league-poised-to-go-to-war-with-obama-over-mandatory-birth-control-payments/

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) — Catholic leaders upped the ante Monday, threatening to challenge the Obama administration over a provision of the new health care law that would require all employers, including religious institutions, to pay for birth control.

As CBS 2’s Marcia Kramer reports, it could affect the presidential elections.

Catholic leaders are furious and determined to harness the voting power of the nation’s 70 million Catholic voters to stop a provision of President Barack Obama’s new heath car reform bill that will force Catholic schools, hospitals and charities to buy birth control pills, abortion-producing drugs and sterilization coverage for their employees.

http://rt.com/usa/news/catholic-church-war-obama-753/

Responding to the Obama-mandated health insurance policies, Catholic leaders throughout America are outraged over what is being perceived by some as a serious assault on their religion. Under Obama’s health care plan, Catholic hospitals and universities will be required to offer free birth control to employees. While the law will not include entities with solely religious purposes, such as churches, it will extend to church-affiliated companies that do not exclusively support a religious-minded agenda.

Under the provision put forth last month by the president, health plans provided by Roman Catholic institutions that cover non-Catholics must front the cost of “all FDA approved contraceptives, including those that induce abortion.” Even if the policy is aimed at only a section of the church, Catholic leaders say Obama’s insurance plan is an attempt to take down the church by infiltrating it with God-less ideals on their religion, and according to some, they won’t go down without a fight.

You’re wrong. Drop it or prove otherwise.

[SusanB]

So basically since many many, hospitals are church-affilated (the only one in Cbus that I can think of that is NOT is OSU/James) female nurses can be totally screwed as far as health coverage for contraception coverage. It’s not like they all can go work for OSU/James.

[Twixlen]

gramarye said:
“Required to serve all people” does not and need not mean required to perform any particular medical procedure. (Except, of course, in Obama’s world, it clearly does.) It means that they cannot choose to treat a Catholic but deny the same treatment to a Jew based on the latter’s religion.

See above. If the federal government can force people of faith to perform one act that violates their creed, why would abortion be different? After all, in pro-choice lingua franca, an abortion is just another “medical procedure.”

Abortion is a medical procedure. And I actually have a huge problem with hospitals that refuse to prioritize the life of the mother over the fetus, in regards to medical care/birthing – which is all of the religious based hospitals in town. And it’s why the women I know generally chose differently for their care – most women don’t want a potential death sentence.

[Cookie]

rus said:
You’re wrong. Drop it or prove otherwise.

Only nutbags call emergency contraception abortion.

[Twixlen]

Rus – they are talking about the morning after pill. Again, only nutbags like Rick Santorum equate that with abortion.

[Twixlen]

Cookie said:
Only nutbags call emergency contraception abortion.

Jinx! We owe each other a gallon of wine.

[Twixlen]

Ultimately – and let’s not kid ourselves here by thinking otherwise – this is one more presser in the efforts of the super-right to impinge on women’s rights to own their own medical choices at every level – and to not pay more for medical care than men.

Then we get into the logical stuff on how much money is actually *saved* when women are on the birth control that works for them – not only in unintended pregnancies, but in ovarian cancer, and a whole host of other medical problems that would have men in bed for weeks.

[gramarye]

Twixlen said:
Abortion is a medical procedure. And I actually have a huge problem with hospitals that refuse to prioritize the life of the mother over the fetus, in regards to medical care/birthing – which is all of the religious based hospitals in town. And it’s why the women I know generally chose differently for their care – most women don’t want a potential death sentence.

Obviously, we’re going to have a difference of opinion as to whether abortion is just another medical procedure. However, since we in the pro-life camp know that abortion advocates call it just another medical procedure, are we wrong to worry that mandatory contraception coverage will morph (even if it hasn’t yet) into mandatory abortion coverage? After all, as you just admitted yourself, there isn’t much of a line there in the eyes of the people advancing these birth control coverage mandates.

[SusanB]

Actually, according to Jewish law the life of the mother is always put before the life of the fetus. So by refusing to perform an life saving abortion on a Jewish woman the health care facility violates her religious beliefs.

[rus]

Twixlen said:
Rus – they are talking about the morning after pill. Again, only nutbags like Rick Santorum equate that with abortion.

Presumably, that’s the same thinking behind the Catholic church and other religious institutions opposition to this new rule.

I disagree with that, but I can see where they’re coming from. I’m still opposed to forcing religious groups to pay for things that violate their principals. I’d also like to see one of these[/url] in every women’s restroom and street corner.

[Cookie]

gramarye said:
Obviously, we’re going to have a difference of opinion as to whether abortion is just another medical procedure. However, since we in the pro-life camp know that abortion advocates call it just another medical procedure, are we wrong to worry that mandatory contraception coverage will morph (even if it hasn’t yet) into mandatory abortion coverage? After all, as you just admitted yourself, there isn’t much of a line there in the eyes of the people advancing these birth control coverage mandates.

Ooh, the slippery slope argument! Fun! And then, would we be wrong to worry that mandatory contraception coverage will morph into mass toddler slaughter?

[Author]

Posts