President Obama is pulling a fast one on the religious community but they are not all buying it, thank God. Obama’s sleight of hand is this: push the costs of contraceptives and abortifacients onto the insurance companies, insurance companies paid for by the religious organizations. Obama kept the mandate but made it indirect.
The problem will always come down to the mandate in the Obamacare bill which requires everyone to pay for contraceptives, abortifacients and full fledged abortions (that’s coming) that go against the core values of many American people. Hey, he did it to the Kenyans, why not here? Read here: Obama Tramples On Kenyan Beliefs
They – the left – have no right to make everyone pay for what they believe to be true. The lame excuse that it is now about women’s health is absurd. Any woman who has a “health” problem requiring contraceptives and abortions, can easily obtain them. How many people have to pay for these things again and again? For the most part, we are being made to pay for peoples’ careless sexual romps.
There are innumerable ways for women to obtain these, apparently at taxpayer expense now. What is happening here is the government is saying – religious entities will not be allowed to run any “health-connected” organization unless they give up some of their religious beliefs. According to the new Progressive Constitution, which the left hopes to implement by 2020, the Bill of Rights should all be relative and most everything is a right for which the collective must pay.
This is not about contraceptives and the Catholic Church, it is about the government seizing power over a religious institution and depriving them of freedom of religion. In addition, they demanded that the Archbishop remove the last line of his letter to be read to congregations, falsely labeling it as “seditious.” I wonder if he will be classified as an anti-government terrorist by Janet Napolitano. This is clearly a violation of freedom of speech.
Archbishop Timothy Dolan reluctantly said it was a good first step as he said he needed time to think about it.
The Catholic Health Association and Catholic Charities said they were satisfied with the President’s response. That’s disappointing because they are willing to pretend they are not supporting something because it is now indirect and costs will be shared by others who may not believe in this. How sad. What are they going to do when he forces them to perform abortions?
Obama has appeased liberals Sister Keehan of Catholic Hospitals and Father Larry Snyder of Catholic Charities USA and he has succeeded in dividing and conquering yet again. He must be laughing at the Catholic Church, which he obviously holds in low regard. He is dividing them as he has the country.
There is no doubt in my mind that Sister Keehan and Father Snyder have some differences with Catholic teaching, want to turn a blind eye, are missing the point, or they just want this to end. What they don’t get is they just gave up some of their religious freedoms and the line must be drawn in the sand, here, now! This is absolutely an invasion for freedom or religion and speech. It will continue to get worse.
The bishops (USCCB) did not fall for it but are left with far less ammunition and Obama obviously doesn’t care what they think. The bishops truthfully said that the revised plan “continues to involve needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions, and to threaten government coercion of religious people and groups to violate their most deeply held convictions.”
Here is what the Bishops have to say.
Bishops Renew Call To Legislative Action On Religious Liberty
Regulatory changes limited and unclear
Rescission of mandate only complete solution
Continue urging passage of Respect for Rights of Conscience Act
WASHINGTON – The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) have issued the following statement:
The Catholic bishops have long supported access to life-affirming healthcare for all, and the conscience rights of everyone involved in the complex process of providing that healthcare. That is why we raised two serious objections to the “preventive services” regulation issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in August 2011.
First, we objected to the rule forcing private health plans — nationwide, by the stroke of a bureaucrat’s pen—to cover sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion. All the other mandated “preventive services” prevent disease, and pregnancy is not a disease. Moreover, forcing plans to cover abortifacients violates existing federal conscience laws. Therefore, we called for the rescission of the mandate altogether.
Second, we explained that the mandate would impose a burden of unprecedented reach and severity on the consciences of those who consider such “services” immoral:insurers forced to write policies including this coverage; employers and schools forced to sponsor and subsidize the coverage; and individual employees and students forced to pay premiums for the coverage. We therefore urged HHS, if it insisted on keeping the mandate, to provide a conscience exemption for all of these stakeholders—not just the extremely small subset of “religious employers” that HHS proposed to exempt initially.
Today, the President has done two things.
First, he has decided to retain HHS’s nationwide mandate of insurance coverage of sterilization and contraception, including some abortifacients. This is both unsupported in the law and remains a grave moral concern. We cannot fail to reiterate this, even as so many would focus exclusively on the question of religious liberty.
Second, the President has announced some changes in how that mandate will be administered, which is still unclear in its details. As far as we can tell at this point, the change appears to have the following basic contours:
·It would still mandate that all insurers must include coverage for the objectionable services in all the policies they would write. At this point, it would appear that self-insuring religious employers, and religious insurance companies, are not exempt from this mandate.
·It would allow non-profit, religious employers to declare that they do not offer such coverage. But the employee and insurer may separately agree to add that coverage. The employee would not have to pay any additional amount to obtain this coverage, and the coverage would be provided as a part of the employer’s policy, not as a separate rider.
·Finally, we are told that the one-year extension on the effective date (from August 1, 2012 to August 1, 2013) is available to any non-profit religious employer who desires it, without any government application or approval process.
These changes require careful moral analysis, and moreover, appear subject to some measure of change. But we note at the outset that the lack of clear protectionfor key stakeholders—for self-insured religious employers; for religious and secular for-profit employers; for secular non-profit employers; for religious insurers; and for individuals—is unacceptable and must be corrected. And in the case where the employee and insurer agree to add the objectionable coverage, that coverage is still provided as a part of the objecting employer’s plan, financed in the same way as the rest of the coverage offered by the objecting employer. This, too, raises serious moral concerns.
We just received information about this proposal for the first time this morning; we were not consulted in advance. Some information we have is in writing and some is oral. We will, of course, continue to press for the greatest conscience protection we can secure from the Executive Branch. But stepping away from the particulars, we note that today’s proposal continues to involve needless government intrusion in the internal governance of religious institutions, and to threaten government coercion of religious people and groups to violate their most deeply held convictions. In a nation dedicated to religious liberty as its first and founding principle, we should not be limited to negotiating within these parameters. The only complete solution to this religious liberty problem is for HHS to rescind the mandate of these objectionable services.
We will therefore continue—with no less vigor, no less sense of urgency—our efforts to correct this problem through the other two branches of government. For example, we renew our call on Congress to pass, and the Administration to sign, the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act. And we renew our call to the Catholic faithful, and to all our fellow Americans, to join together in this effort to protect religious liberty and freedom of conscience for all. Read here: Catholic Culture