February 5, 201214 yr Disagree all you wish. My point is that if you want the Federal govt out of the Church stop partnering with them. The bigger issue IMO is the disingenuousness of doing business with insurance companies that cover the service. I will reiterate , though, that the bigger issue is the fact that the majority of the flock does not abide by Church teachings. THAT is where the time and resources should be spent. While I am sure you are correct, I suggest you have to start someplace in having the flock toe the line and this just might be that place that the Catholic Church starts drawing that line in the sand, so to speak! Far too many Catholics today are "Cafeteria" style type Catholics who pick and choose what rules they want to follow and to ignore. The Church needs at one point to say, either you are or you aren't.
February 5, 201214 yr Author While I am sure you are correct, I suggest you have to start someplace in having the flock toe the line and this just might be that place that the Catholic Church starts drawing that line in the sand, so to speak! Far too many Catholics today are "Cafeteria" style type Catholics who pick and choose what rules they want to follow and to ignore. The Church needs at one point to say, either you are or you aren't. The problem is, TOG, this does NOTHING to make the flock toe the line. This ruling only impacts the Catholics that work for a Catholic hospital. What % of the total US Catholic population can that be? Has to be less than 1%. Secondly, the Church can play hardball with the flock and it will only have a negative impact. Either people will continue to be "cafeteria Catholics" or they will simply leave the Church.
February 5, 201214 yr Disagree all you wish. My point is that if you want the Federal govt out of the Church stop partnering with them. The bigger issue IMO is the disingenuousness of doing business with insurance companies that cover the service. I will reiterate , though, that the bigger issue is the fact that the majority of the flock does not abide by Church teachings. THAT is where the time and resources should be spent. The bigger issue is the government compelling a business to provide a service they do not wish to provide. Whether it is a religious institution or not. The flock and the disingenuous anything doesn't matter. We're not talking about not wanting to providing health care in a life or death situation. We're talking about forcing a business to provide a personal choice decision service. Birth control, abortion, plastic surgery. All personal choices. Should hospitals be forced to provide plastic surgery?
February 5, 201214 yr Author The bigger issue is the government compelling a business to provide a service they do not wish to provide. Whether it is a religious institution or not. The flock and the disingenuous anything doesn't matter. Like it or not the Church is helping fund contraceptive services and abortion by doing business with big insurance companies. When that is addressed THEN the Church can complain about this ruling. You can't scream "we don't want to provide services" and then tell the accountant to pay the premium to Humana, BCBS, etc.
February 5, 201214 yr Author The bigger issue is the government compelling a business to provide a service they do not wish to provide. That is a great debate topic. It doesn't apply to this thread since I said the Church has bigger issues to handle first.
February 5, 201214 yr Like it or not the hospitals are providing NECESSARY services irregardless of who is paying for the service. These are not necessary services. They are personal choice decisions. There are multiple facilities that provide the service. No one is being deprived of having the service available.
February 5, 201214 yr That is a great debate topic. It doesn't apply to this thread since I said the Church has bigger issues to handle first. It absolutely does apply to this. You're defending a wrong of the government by blaming the church's issues.
February 5, 201214 yr 1. Could be. They only have so many people to deal with all of the issues so any dealings with this take away from other issues. 2. For me? No. I still get to exercise my religion as I see fit. No Catholic is having his/her religious freedom denied. Disagree with you on no 1. On the second, do you not think that it is a restriction on the church? Seems to me being forced to facilitate what is against your doctrine would be a major restriction.
February 5, 201214 yr The problem is, TOG, this does NOTHING to make the flock toe the line. This ruling only impacts the Catholics that work for a Catholic hospital. What % of the total US Catholic population can that be? Has to be less than 1%. Secondly, the Church can play hardball with the flock and it will only have a negative impact. Either people will continue to be "cafeteria Catholics" or they will simply leave the Church. It's up to the Church as to where they start toeing the line at and I am guessing this is the starting point of that line and if you are a "cafeteria Catholic" are you really a Catholic? You can call yourself one but are you really a member of the Catholic Church, if you only follow the rules of your choosing?:idunno:
February 5, 201214 yr 1) Is this preventing them from addressing bigger issues? 1) No--not preventing them from addressing bigger issues. Yes there are bigger issues. But the Church cannot stand by and ignore this issue. They must make a clear stand to all of their flock on their position. The Church will likely never win this fight. Even to the "Cafeteria Catholics" this announcement by the Catholic Church should not be a surprise to anyone. The church has always "Played Hardball" with the flock, but the flock keeps growing....you still need to get to Mass early to get a parking spot and a seat! Those who clamor for separation of church and state. Do you not feel that the state is stepping into the churches business? I think it is indeed stepping into the church's business. So it follows that if the state can force these Catholic institutions to pay for services for their employees that are against the Church teachings, then the state should begin to provide tax dollars to the Catholic schools.....(whoops. Apologies to all, wrong thread.)
February 5, 201214 yr That is a great debate topic. It doesn't apply to this thread since I said the Church has bigger issues to handle first. It does not matter if it is small or large. The government is forcing the Catholic Church to do something it does not want do do. To say it is not the biggest issue for the church is a pitiful excuse to ignore the trampling of the 1st Amendment.
February 5, 201214 yr I know this may be shocking to some, but I do think it is an overstepping of the bounds of government. When you go to work for a Catholic organization you should be aware of the restrictions that may be placed on the procedures or prescriptions covered by the "Church's" insurance plan. Given that, it begs the question as to why insurance is tied to ones work. We should have a very different system so that folks can afford to go buy it on their own, or we should have a single payer system, that people pay for. the other question that is begged (???) is whether or not gay kids can go to St. X or Trinity on "scholarship"? Can the diocese deny them access to the education? Can they deny access to the schools or insurance to gluttons. Why is it only birth control?
February 6, 201214 yr Author 1) No--not preventing them from addressing bigger issues. Yes there are bigger issues. But the Church cannot stand by and ignore this issue. They must make a clear stand to all of their flock on their position. The Church will likely never win this fight. Even to the "Cafeteria Catholics" this announcement by the Catholic Church should not be a surprise to anyone. The church has always "Played Hardball" with the flock, but the flock keeps growing....you still need to get to Mass early to get a parking spot and a seat! I go to one of the largest parishes around. 5 minutes before Mass about 25% of the seats are available.
February 6, 201214 yr Author It does not matter if it is small or large. The government is forcing the Catholic Church to do something it does not want do do. To say it is not the biggest issue for the church is a pitiful excuse to ignore the trampling of the 1st Amendment. You just summarized it for me. We're more worried about the 1st Amendment than we are about the actions of the flock.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.