Roman Catholic Bishops vs. Religious Freedom

[Kulindahr]

Nothing new, really -- they've been this way for a generation or more. But worth nothing what they're up to:

The Catholic hierarchy is trying to fundamentally change the legal understanding of individual liberties, weighting the supposed rights of religious institutions more heavily than individual rights.

What's the concept?

The bishops are attempting to create the idea that the First Amendment is really a blank check for religious institutions to do what they like with public funds, when in reality these time-tested protections are for the individual’s freedom to worship, and freedom from religion.

It's a slick plan, except they have one problem:

None of [their] positions are in line with the beliefs of Catholics in the United States, placing the bishops well outside the mainstream.

If the laity wake up and obey their consciences (as Roman doctrine says they actually should), the bishops are going to find they no longer have money to support their conspiracies.

If.



read the article

 

[Jack Springer]

I wonder how the writer's response would be to banning circumcision like Germany just did?

German court bans circumcision of young boys | Reuters

Response from the press and liberals to banning circumcision would be completely different.

Telling a religion that they are forced into using products or methods (abortion) that are against one of their basic beliefs is religious persecution.

It sounds like the writer just has it "in" for the Roman Catholic Church.

An easily dismissed article, then.

 

[Jack Springer]

The mandate imposed by HHS requires all health care plans to provide for birth control and products that are designed to cause an abortion. That's the reason the RCC and others are fighting the mandate.

People in the USA must be allowed to practice their religion.

Some background ... HHS head Kathleen Sibelius was a fanatic supporter of late term abortions in Kansas making it a mecca for late term abortions nationally and internationally.

 

[Telstra]

The mandate imposed by HHS requires all health care plans to provide for birth control and products that are designed to cause an abortion. That's the reason the RCC and others are fighting the mandate.

People in the USA must be allowed to practice their religion.

Some background ... HHS head Kathleen Sibelius was a fanatic supporter of late term abortions in Kansas making it a mecca for late term abortions nationally and internationally.

Not when it is harmless to other people.
Its like saying Sharia law(religion) must be allowed.

 

[chrisrobin]

Kansas a "mecca" for late-term abortions my ass:

Late-term Abortions: Facts, Stories, and Ways to Help | RH Reality Check

Kansas law is strict on the issue of late-term abortions.

Kansas law requires that such procedures can only be performed after viability if two independent doctors agree that not to do so would put the mother at risk of irreparable harm by giving birth.

 

[Kulindahr]

If Rome wants insurance that fits their doctrines, there's an easy way to go about it in a free country: start their onw company, employing only their own people who sign a statement of agreement with those doctrines, and offering coverage only to those who also agree.

But wanting government money to support them while not being thus proper participants in a free country is nothing but religious oppression.


If Rome wants it known that they disapprove of same-sex marriage, they have preachers with pulpits, they have advertising.

But wanting to pass laws requiring everyone to conform to their doctrines is religious oppression.



Jesus made a sharp distinction between God and Caesar. Rome, despite protestations, has never learned to. Insofar as they cannot, they desecrate the message they claoim to bear.

 

[Jack Springer]

Kansas a "mecca" for late-term abortions my ass:

Late-term Abortions: Facts, Stories, and Ways to Help | RH Reality Check

Kansas was one of the few places in the USA where a woman could get a late term abortion. Dr. Ann Kristin Neuhaus of Kansas had her lost her license to practice medicine because of lying about the needs of young women wanting an abortion. She fed Tiller with pregnant women.

She and Tiller were interested in only one thing -- doing the abortion. They didn't care about the young girls other than that.

In stripping Neuhaus of her license, the board accepted the findings of an administrative judge, who concluded in February that Neuhaus "seriously jeopardized" the care of her patients. The case against her involved mental health exams done in 2003 on 11 patients, ages 10 to 18. The judge said Neuhaus' records didn't contain enough information to show that she did thorough exams.

Neuhaus provided second opinions Tiller needed under Kansas law to perform some late-term abortions at his Wichita clinic. Until his death, Tiller was among a few U.S. physicians known to terminate pregnancies in their final weeks, and Neuhaus provided second opinions for him from 1999 to 2006

.

Kan. doctor loses license over abortion referrals - Yahoo! News

... your ass on a plate.

 

[Kulindahr]

So TIller may have been a murderer -- but is he a Roman Catholic bishop?

 

[jackoroe]

The article appears to make a fundamental misinterpretation of what it means to be Catholic.

None of these positions are in line with the beliefs of Catholics in the United States, placing the bishops well outside the mainstream.

The Catholic Church isn't a democracy where all the parishioners get a say as to what church doctrine should be. The church and any church, has a right to be free from government interference. That's what the separation of church and state is about. For example, while gay marriage should be legal, churches should not be forced by the government to perform same sex unions if it is inviolate of their religious beliefs. Similarly, they should not be forced to provide birth control to employees if it is prohibited by their beliefs.

Dozens of suits have been filed by the church against the Obama adminsitration for violations of their religious freedoms. Whether or not people support the issues cited or not, they will certainly find the heavy handedness of big government more egregious and dangerous to all of our freedoms.

Catholics sue Obama over birth control mandate - New York Daily News

 

[Kulindahr]

The church and any church, has a right to be free from government interference. That's what the separation of church and state is about. For example, while gay marriage should be legal, churches should not be forced by the government to perform same sex unions if it is inviolate of their religious beliefs. Similarly, they should not be forced to provide birth control to employees if it is prohibited by their beliefs.

Dozens of suits have been filed by the church against the Obama adminsitration for violations of their religious freedoms. Whether or not people support the issues cited or not, they will certainly find the heavy handedness of big government more egregious and dangerous to all of our freedoms.

Catholics sue Obama over birth control mandate - New York Daily News

If they want federal dollars for running their enterprises, they have to follow federal rules, just like anyone else does. And they have an avenue for getting out of the insurance situation: running their own all-Catholic, all-consent company.

 

[palemale]

The article appears to make a fundamental misinterpretation of what it means to be Catholic.



The Catholic Church isn't a democracy where all the parishioners get a say as to what church doctrine should be. The church and any church, has a right to be free from government interference. That's what the separation of church and state is about. For example, while gay marriage should be legal, churches should not be forced by the government to perform same sex unions if it is inviolate of their religious beliefs. Similarly, they should not be forced to provide birth control to employees if it is prohibited by their beliefs.

Dozens of suits have been filed by the church against the Obama adminsitration for violations of their religious freedoms. Whether or not people support the issues cited or not, they will certainly find the heavy handedness of big government more egregious and dangerous to all of our freedoms.

Catholics sue Obama over birth control mandate - New York Daily News

The Catholic Church, and any other religious organization, that claims they are the victim of anti-religious bigotry by the US government is full of shit. They want to use federal dollars to further their religious bigotry. They do not have to worry about any entanglement with federal law and regulations if they simply eschew receipt of any government money. It's that simple. "Render unto Ceasar . . .."

 

[chrisrobin]

Isn't this the same crapola that everyone was worried about when JFK was running for president? JFK's been dead for almost 50 years but the issue lives on!

I think freedom from religion is as essential as freedom for religion.

 

[Kulindahr]

Isn't this the same crapola that everyone was worried about when JFK was running for president? JFK's been dead for almost 50 years but the issue lives on!

I think freedom from religion is as essential as freedom for religion.

Not quite. That was a worry that Rome might give orders to a president. This is a matter of churches having already wormed their way into getting government dollars, and now wanting -- and actively engaged in trying -- to dictate to the government how those dollars may be spent.

And I think JFK would echo Palemale: if you don't want to take government orders, don't take government money.

 

[Benvolio]

As i understand it the requirment is not tied to money given to the organization but applies to employers generally. Requiring religious organizations to participate in the aborting of American children is indeed a prohibiting of the free exercise of religion. It imposes the religiou belief of Democrats that the killing of American children is AOK. It is the establishment of one set of religious beliefs as the established religion.
It requires church organizations to pay for abortions of American children.
Simultaneously the Democrats do everything they can to import Democrat-voting immigrants.

 

[bankside]

The Catholic Church and its affiliates pay salaries to people. Once it parts from the money in exchange for services rendered, their say is done. They can't compel people to spend their paycheques only on things the church considers moral. Similarly, they can't compel people to use their health benefits only for things the church considers moral.

It is a transparent and nonsensical stunt. They have every right to advise their membership to decline to use a legal right. But they have no business trying to control the legality of those rights.

So let them say "Please, Catholics, don't have a same sex marriage" and "Please, Catholics, don't use readily available birth control," and "Please, Catholics, don't get a divorce from someone who treats you badly," and "Please, Catholics, don't look at pictures you might find erotic" but they can't enforce it upon their members or their lay employees, and they certainly can't make it the law for everyone else who, using their own freedom of conscience, can happily disagree with official Catholic nonsense on all those points.

 

[Kulindahr]

The Catholic Church and its affiliates pay salaries to people. Once it parts from the money in exchange for services rendered, their say is done. They can't compel people to spend their paycheques only on things the church considers moral. Similarly, they can't compel people to use their health benefits only for things the church considers moral.

It is a transparent and nonsensical stunt. They have every right to advise their membership to decline to use a legal right. But they have no business trying to control the legality of those rights.

So let them say "Please, Catholics, don't have a same sex marriage" and "Please, Catholics, don't use readily available birth control," and "Please, Catholics, don't get a divorce from someone who treats you badly," and "Please, Catholics, don't look at pictures you might find erotic" but they can't enforce it upon their members or their lay employees, and they certainly can't make it the law for everyone else who, using their own freedom of conscience, can happily disagree with official Catholic nonsense on all those points.

Good points. Unless the Church itself is acting as the insurance company, they have no room for complaint -- it's not their money going to that company. And the insurance company is not a church or religious organization with doctrines; it's just doing business. Further, if it obeys the laws of the government, it's doing business in a biblical fashion, by obeying the established authorities.

 

[Benvolio]

Good points. Unless the Church itself is acting as the insurance company, they have no room for complaint -- it's not their money going to that company. And the insurance company is not a church or religious organization with doctrines; it's just doing business. Further, if it obeys the laws of the government, it's doing business in a biblical fashion, by obeying the established authorities.

Insurance is not free. The insurance companies charge more and the church organizations pay more for the abortion pills and contraceptives. The effect is to force religious organizations to kill humans.

 

[bankside]

Insurance is not free. The insurance companies charge more and the church organizations pay more for the abortion pills and contraceptives. The effect is to force religious organizations to kill humans.

Paying a salary has the effect of providing people with an income they can use to purchase an abortion in places where that service is not insured. So, to avoid having the church, as you say, kill humans, should the employees be denied a salary?

Maybe they can be paid in kind instead. That would solve the problem of people thinking for themselves and engaging in unholy decision-making! Staff would submit a shopping list for review. Once the Bishop strikes out anything that appears on the naughty list, it can be sent for approval by some exhalted prelate, and everything will be just fine.

They just can't control the decisions people make within the scope of their own moral autonomy. It isn't their right in a free society. They can suggest. They can hope to influence. They can give advice when asked. But they can't get away from the fact that they won't convince everybody, and that's none of their business.

 

[Benvolio]

The Administration is ordering church charities to pay to kill humans.

 

[Jack Springer]

^^

I'm sorry Mitch, but you're wrong. The HHS mandate requires religious organizations to pay for medical procedures and products that are against their religious beliefs.

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion - US Constitution

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.