# Religious Stance on the UHC Bill **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 19, 2010, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063 "2010-03-19T21:20:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![smithsb](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smithsb/32/12107_2.png) [@smithsb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smithsb)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2010, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/1 "2010-03-19T21:20:57Z")
First off, I’m not religious and don’t follow any boards other than this one and a another related board. I’ve got no insight into current church positions. What’s the general religious position on universal health care legislation? (Let’s say Christian position). Are they for it, against it, have no real unified stance? Based on the actions and deeds of that Jesus fella, the leaders should be up in arms charging through the streets backing this measure. Taking care of the sick and poor; charity and all. That would be my understanding. Is the Republican shout of, “No Abortions”, sufficient to gain unwavering loyality on all subjects? I understand there was carping by some religious leaders toward the end of Bush II about craping on the environment to aid business. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2010, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/2 "2010-03-19T21:27:14Z")
Here is the Catholic church’s stance…dunno about others: > [@](#): > > The president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which opposes the Senate bill up for a House vote this weekend, warned that some forces are trying to use the rift to push the legislation through Congress. > > \ > > The disagreement among Catholics has to do with whether the bill would allow federal funding of abortion. > > The U.S. bishops believe it does and said they “regretfully” opposes the bill even though they have been pushing for health care reform for more than four decades. > > SOURCE: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/19/AR2010031902864.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/19/AR2010031902864.html) So, seems they would be for it but for abortion. Perhaps this is a bit more nuanced: > [@](#): > > On the issue of health care and abortion; many leaders on the “pro-life” side (including the Catholic Hospital Association, a large group of Catholic sisters, and several evangelicals – including me – have analyzed the bills and concluded that the language of the Senate bill on abortion (that will be operative in the new legislation) does adequately protect the principle enshrined into law by the Hyde Amendment, which prevents the federal funding of elective abortion. Others, including the U. S. Conference of Catholic Bishops oppose the bill because they still believe it doesn’t go far enough. But many have pointed out that the provision of health care for millions more women and children will itself be a strong pro-life measure that will reduce abortions, and this bill specifically provides critically needed support for pregnant women. > > SOURCE: [A Flawed Step Forward on Health Care Reform | HuffPost Latest News](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-wallis/a-flawed-step-forward-on_b_506342.html) ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2010, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/3 "2010-03-19T21:31:20Z")
What do you mean by “the UHC bill”? I didn’t think the US health care reform bill came anywhere close to universal coverage. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2010, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/4 "2010-03-19T21:41:45Z")
To add: My guess would be religions will choose which way to go based on the abortion issue. Different religions (and divisions in a religion) attach varying degrees of importance to that issue one way or another. Note the Catholics cited above are apparently all for health care reform but the abortion issue trumps that for them (which is odd since the bill really does not change anything about abortion…I guess they want to use it as a wedge…get their support for including more strict anti-abortion language). As a result I suspect you will find them all across the board on this depending who they are. Otherwise it is more a political question and what it might cost them as a business to provide health care to employees under the new reform. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2010, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/5 "2010-03-19T21:45:52Z")
I frequent a number of Christian blogs/news sites. There’s quite a range of opinions, as in the general population. My own impression is that the anti-HC bill people either outnumber those in favor, or are just louder about it. But there are a significant number of folks who also support the bill for the reasons you state. There is no question that the abortion issue is a stumbling block for many, and if that particular part of the bill was strenthened there would be even more support for it. Christians just aren’t monolithic enough to give a simple answer to the question. ---
**Author:** ![smithsb](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smithsb/32/12107_2.png) [@smithsb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smithsb)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2010, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/6 "2010-03-19T23:53:32Z")
> [@scr4](#): > > What do you mean by “the UHC bill”? I didn’t think the US health care reform bill came anywhere close to universal coverage. I realize that. Just many people/media outlets refer to it that way. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/7 "2010-03-20T02:42:40Z")
> [@smithsb](#): > > Based on the actions and deeds of that Jesus fella, the leaders should be up in arms charging through the streets backing this measure. Taking care of the sick and poor; charity and all. That would be my understanding. I just wanted to point out that, understanding that different Christian groups and denominations have different views of this subject, nearly all of them have not waited for the government before moving on healthcare themselves. The Catholic Church administers 625 hospitals in the United States alone, along with numerous other clinics, hospices and care facilities. Other denominations like the Adventists, Baptists, Presbyterians and others are also heavily invested directly in healthcare. So differences of opinion over a particular piece of legislation should not be interpreted as a rejection of Christ’s admonition to care for the sick. One way or the other. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 10:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/8 "2010-03-20T10:12:35Z")
The Senate bill does not allow Federal funding of abortions. Anybody who claims it does is flat-out lying. If the US Conference of Catholic Bishops is actually claiming that the Senate bill allows Federal funding of abortions, then they are lying as well. But I’ll give anybody here a chance to prove me wrong. Provide a cite to the section of the Senate bill which allows Federal funding of abortions. Not to an article from liars. A cite to the actual language in the Senate bill which provides Federal funding for abortions. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/9 "2010-03-20T10:29:41Z")
I know a guy who flat out told me that the only reason he votes Republican is because of the abortion issue. He says it trumps all else, as, “You can not build a foundation of government on killing the innocent.” I tried to explain that very few if any Republicans that ride on the pro-life ticket ever plan to do anything about it, but he didn’t really seem to care. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/10 "2010-03-20T10:42:18Z")
I guess I should clarify that the Senate bill, like the House bill, allows for Federal funding of abortions in the case of incest or rape or if the mother’s life is at stake. If anyone can find language in the Senate bill that provides Federal funding of abortions outside those exceptions, please provide it. ---
**Author:** ![figure9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f0a364/32.png) [@figure9](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/figure9)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/11 "2010-03-20T12:04:25Z")
> [@](#): > > I guess I should clarify that the Senate bill, like the House bill, allows for Federal funding of abortions in the case of incest or rape or if the mother’s life is at stake. For many religious people these are not adequate justification for abortion. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/12 "2010-03-20T12:18:23Z")
> [@figure9](#): > > For many religious people these are not adequate justification for abortion. True but thankfully that crowd is not big enough to affect policy. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/13 "2010-03-20T18:32:43Z")
> [@figure9](#): > > For many religious people these are not adequate justification for abortion. That’s great and everything, but then those “religious” people should be honest about what their objection is, rather than falsely trying to claim that the Senate bill provides funding for abortions while the House bill doesn’t. Both bills allow for funding under those circumstances. For example, apparently Stupak was on Hardball a few days ago claiming that the Senate bill overrides the Hyde amendment. I didn’t see the show, but if he actually claimed that, then the man is a liar. I was under the impression that most religions frown on lying, but that seems to not be the case. Finally, if there is anybody who is actually out there who objects to abortion when the mother’s life is at stake, then as far as I’m concerned, they are either kookoo or deeply immoral, and should be ignored. ---
**Author:** ![Caveat\_lector\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@Caveat\_lector\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caveat_lector_1)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/14 "2010-03-20T18:46:19Z")
My understanding of is that the bishops say that senate bill does not ban funding abortions in community clinics while the house bill does. The only answer to that I’ve heard is that abortions are forbidden by the current policy of the clinics anyway, but not by any law. However, my understanding is that the bishops say that policy is too changeable and they want it forbidden by law. I’d give cites but the above comes from an NPR discussion I heard a few days ago so I don’t have text. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/15 "2010-03-20T19:28:57Z")
> [@Caveat\_lector\_1](#): > > My understanding of is that the bishops say that senate bill does not ban funding abortions in community clinics while the house bill does. The only answer to that I’ve heard is that abortions are forbidden by the current policy of the clinics anyway, but not by any law. However, my understanding is that the bishops say that policy is too changeable and they want it forbidden by law. I’d give cites but the above comes from an NPR discussion I heard a few days ago so I don’t have text. Well, if that’s what they are saying, then that’s another lie (I don’t know if this is exactly what they’re saying, so I can’t be sure). AFAIK, the Hyde Amendment prohibits abortion funding (with he exceptions already stated) from any HHS trust funds, and the community center funding goes through an HHS trust fund. Here’s an article which covers the issue: [http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/11/the-senate-bill-funds-abortions-nope-and-its-more-pro-life-th/](http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/11/the-senate-bill-funds-abortions-nope-and-its-more-pro-life-th/) Relevant quote: > [@](#): > > And contrary to claims by many pro-life groups, any money from a new health care law would be subject to the same Hyde amendment restrictions as money from the Stupak version of the House bill (which allocates $12 billion to community health centers). > > The Hyde amendment has been attached to HHS appropriations each year for three decades to ensure that any taxpayer money HHS disburses will not go to paying for abortions except in cases of rape, incest or a threat to the life of the mother. The language in the Senate bill is not as explicit as the House bill about the path of the money, but the health care center money can only go through HHS and thus must be subject to Hyde restrictions. > > “The Senate bill…provides that this funding is to be transferred to HHS accounts to increase funding for community health centers and does not provide for segregating these funds,” said Timothy Stoltzfus Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University and a top health care expert who has done an extensive analysis of the abortion financing question. “Since all other HHS funding, including expenditures from trust funds, is subject to the Hyde Amendment, these funds cannot be used to pay for abortions.” ---
**Author:** ![NotreDame05](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90ced4/32.png) [@NotreDame05](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NotreDame05)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/16 "2010-03-20T19:54:26Z")
> [@smithsb](#): > > First off, I’m not religious and don’t follow any boards other than this one and a another related board. I’ve got no insight into current church positions. > > What’s the general religious position on universal health care legislation? (Let’s say Christian position). Are they for it, against it, have no real unified stance? > > Based on the actions and deeds of that Jesus fella, the leaders should be up in arms charging through the streets backing this measure. Taking care of the sick and poor; charity and all. That would be my understanding. Jesus advocated men do this on their own behalf, as a result of love for their fellow man, as opposed to the government force a charitable spirit upon people. So I agree with your factual recollection of Christ’s teachings regarding the poor, the sick, and homeless. However, I disagree with your notion Christ’s followers should be advocates for government health care as presently proposed. I do not think this notion follows from Christ’s teachings. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/17 "2010-03-20T20:10:51Z")
> [@smithsb](#): > > I realize that. Just many people/media outlets refer to it that way. Yes, but neither I(nor, I presume, you), are employed by them. The currently proposed health care bill is no by _any_ means “universal”, so let’s not take any shortcuts in language that favor one side over the other, o.k.? ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/18 "2010-03-20T20:25:20Z")
> [@NotreDame05](#): > > Jesus advocated men do this on their own behalf, as a result of love for their fellow man, as opposed to the government force a charitable spirit upon people. So I agree with your factual recollection of Christ’s teachings regarding the poor, the sick, and homeless. However, I disagree with your notion Christ’s followers should be advocates for government health care as presently proposed. I do not think this notion follows from Christ’s teachings. I’m not a Christian, but what about that whole render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s thing? Since the Romans had public hospitals, spas and baths, if you were rendering unto Caesar, then you were paying for public health care. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/19 "2010-03-20T21:33:58Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > Since the Romans had public hospitals, spas and baths, if you were rendering unto Caesar, then you were paying for public health care. The Romans didn’t have public hospitals, at least not until the 4th century, when a Christian widow named Fabiola (later to become St. Fabiola), spent her own money to open one. ---
**Author:** ![Caveat\_lector\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@Caveat\_lector\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Caveat_lector_1)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063/20 "2010-03-20T22:06:29Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > Well, if that’s what they are saying, then that’s another lie (I don’t know if this is exactly what they’re saying, so I can’t be sure). AFAIK, the Hyde Amendment prohibits abortion funding (with he exceptions already stated) from any HHS trust funds, and the community center funding goes through an HHS trust fund. While I’m hesitant to say the bishops are lying (I’ll go with mistaken, confused, or overly pessimistic) I’ll admit that I find the arguments for the pro-lifeness more persuasive than those against. The articles (found on the bottom of the page) definitely did a better job of laying it out than NPR’s guest did as well. He just sounded weaselly like he was trying to hide something. And if the bishops turn out to be right? Well we’ll just to have to fix the bill. I think it worth the risk. > [@NotreDame05](#): > > However, I disagree with your notion Christ’s followers should be advocates for government health care as presently proposed. I do not think this notion follows from Christ’s teachings. Is there a kind of governmental health care that you do think fits Christ’s teachings? What about this current plan opposes His teachings? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/religious-stance-on-the-uhc-bill/533063.md?page=2)