Child rapists shouldn’t have a say on how contraception should be funded.
Federal law does not require any employer to provide health insurance for its employees. Some states do require employers to provide health insurance for certain classes of employee, but that’s not what were talking about.
However, your point regarding Christian Scientists (equally applicable to Jehovah’s Witnesses, for that matter) is a good one.
Accepting that this is true, how is it relevant?
Or did you mean to imply that because some Catholic priests were child rapists, the entirety of the American Catholic church, lay faithful, priests, and religious, are all barred from any say in the formation of this country’s laws?
I think you mean the “Christian Scientists”. The Monitor is a secular newspaper, despite the name and origin.
That’s all well and good, but what about Catholic priests?
Ideally people who rape Catholic priests shouldn’t be writing laws either.
Ontopic: The businesses that the churches own aren’t required to provide insurance. If they choose to, they should have to offer the same insurance that the law mandates for everyone else.
As I said before in another thread, should a business owned by a Jehova’s Witness be able to provide insurance that doesn’t cover blood transfusions? If not, why should the Catholic Church get a cutout?
In any case, 28 states have laws where businesses owned by churches are required to provide contraception coverage with their insurance. 8 states require the churches themselves to do it.
The reason the Bishops saw fit to throw a tantrum here is political. They want to seem besieged, because they are angry, bitter old twats. Look at the response they provided to Obama’s very reasonable compromise:
Its got random bolding like a Tea Party email. This is just the work of some Bishops that hate Obama and want to raise a stink. If this were an actual issue, they would have been bitching in all those other states.
Well, the bible and picture are ok, most commercial buildings have rules against open flames.
And if you are not covering female specific meds, then viagra and its ilk should also be off the menu. Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.
Frankly, as with Christian Scientists, the insurance is provided, nothing makes you use it. A christian scientist is not being forced to go to a doctor and accept a blood transfusion or whatever, and nothing is forcing the woman to use birth control or get an abortion.
The catholic church needs to just suck it up. To be frank, most people are not even thinking about anything religious at any given time, nor are we actively conspiring to persecute any specific religion at any given time.
As I said over in the Daily Show thread in CS about this matter, the absolute best summation I can find is this quote from a NYT Op Ed:
When listening to debates on this whole issue, there is a lot of emotion and arguments tend to get muddled. That quote so perfectly and succinctly cuts right to the heart of the matter, imho.
Bricker, when the Virginia state law requiring Catholic universities and other institutions who provided insurance to include contraception as part of their insurance was signed by Gov. Allen in 1996, were there protests? Was it attacked as a “war on religion?”
No.
Because there is no such law.
There is a law in Virginia that requires every insurance company to offer contraceptive coverage to the companies that select them, but no requirement for the companies (to include “Catholic universities and other institutions”) to accept that offer or provide it to their employees. (See Va Code § 38.2-3407.5:1. “Coverage for prescription contraceptives.”):
The only mandated contraception coverage in Virginia is created by Va. Code § 2.2-2818(B)(5), § 32.1-325 and § 38.2-3407.4:2; it applies only to state workers.
Been reading something slanted, have you? Better to go to the source.
Nah, looked at a cite above. I had no idea it was slanted, honestly.
In turn let me apologize; that line of mine came out pretty snarky, and I didn’t mean it that way. Sorry.
Forget the Church affiliation part. Why does the federal government have the power to require insurance companies to pay for birth control and abortions, period?
Beats me, my issue is more to do with the fact that Religious institutions think that they’re above that law in a way normal people aren’t.
Commerce clause?
I have no idea, honestly. Seems like a good guess.
In my mind stock-issuing corporations have shown that they will screw employees every chance they get. Being amoral, solely interested in pleasing stockholders, they pretty well fit the definition of a sociopath.
So it’s not surprising they have to be watched and checked on at every turn. The free market will not protect American workers well enough.
Seems like maybe commerce, to me. Or the general welfare. That one’s not invoked much, though, is it?
Many states already have the provisions that Obama made into federal law. I remember when this issue flared up a couple weeks ago, it was noted that 20 something states have laws that mirror what Obama did. Religious didn’t get all uppity over that. In an article I read around that time, some religious guy said that was because its a state issue
So let me get this straight, crazy religionists, its ok for the state but not the fed to “force” you to pay for contraception?
Shit, they just get dumber and dumber. I also love how on the Daily Show, they showed a “panel” of religious leaders discussing the question on Hannity. All old men, each one of whom think they know what’s best for women
Because it has the power to regulate interstate commerce, which as you’ve previously admitted includes regulation of the health insurance market (under Wickard). This is not a new type of federal regulation. See, for example the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978*, which requires health insurers to cover maternity expenses on the same basis as other types of care.
*and which already required health insurers to cover contraception, according to the EEOC.
The Christian Science Monitor is owned by the Christian Science Publishing Society, which is under the authority of the Christian Science Board of Directors.
My question still stands.
Yes. Very valid point.
I should have asked, “Why does the President have this power?” It’s undisputed (at least by me) that Congress does.
Looks like they do now, asshole.
I’m not sure that’s entirely settled.
As I asked above, how does the President get the authority to order insurance companies to extend this kind of coverage?