BAH!

The days of anyone having to take orders from the Catholic Church ended in 1517, when Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-five Theses to the church door.

What moral authority can American Catholic bishops claim? ...these men who enabled the worst pedophilia scandal in the history of the world.

Thanks, but I'll use my own brain to think.

In the words of Indigo Montoya, "I don't think that word means what you think it means."

Pious - 1) Devoutly religious; 2) Making a hypocritical display of virtue.

That's more of a conservative description...not a godless liberal!

Providing insurance that provides contraception is a ridiculous reason to feel like your conscience is being violated. Your not the one taking the birth control or even paying for it, at least not directly. If your religion/deity is so picky that he'll mark it against you because someone who works for you uses contraception, you may need to rethink things.

Making a hypocritical display of virtue ... is exactly what I meant.

I hope you don't find it too rebarbative for me to suggest that would be the virtue of liberalism.

But then again .... we probably have differing ideas of the meaning of liberalism.

BTW - I'm not a Rick Santorum pro-lifer.

Have a good weekend Ursula.

Just some food for thought. If everyone is always complaining about keeping religion out of government, shouldn't the government stay out of religion? Not taking sides, just something for folks to think about (instead of Catholic bashing which is a national sport like baseball)

Providing insurance that provides contraception is a ridiculous reason to feel like your conscience is being violated.

Well it also requires Catholic employers to provide for sterilization, abortifacients, etc. ... and no doubt abortions in the next step.

Your not the one taking the birth control or even paying for it, at least not directly.

We all pay for it ... why are libs always confused whether there is a difference between paying for it directly or in-directly?

Regardless, I just don't like the idea that the federal government can tell me I have to subsidize free birth control for the Paris Hiltons. She doesn't provide birth control procedures, screenings, wellness checks for men.

Federal government doesn't have any right telling Catholics either.

Keep religion out of the government and government will keep out of religion. Don't take tax dollars from the faith based initiatives program. And why don't the bishops have a conscience about sexual abuse of boys. Are they against birth control because they need more boys? Really, they have no credibility and they should just shut up.

Bob,

Maybe it's my interest in history, but I seem to recall that the reason so many came to this country was because of religious reasons - they wanted to practice their faith as they see fit. Now, yes, there are always some caveats (underage marriage, multiple wives, human sacrifice, etc.) but aren't we getting away from some the basic tenants of our founding by forcing religions, in this case Catholics, to deny their basic principles by forcing contraception and abortion on them?

Kat,

Yeah, let's just get rid of all those stinking Catholics. Let's round em up and deport them. Everyone knows ALL catholic priests are pediophiles - and who knows what the rest of em are like. (Real smart, Kat)

It would be interesting to know how this is handled in the rest of the civilized world. Is birth control covered in universal coverage nations, and is the Catholic Church exempted from participating, or do they participate in those insurance plans, thus actually covering their employees? This would seem to also be an issue for most all of American's religions.

This issue also supports the argument for a single-payor option. That would allow the Churches to opt out and pay far higher premiums on the private market to get this reduced coverage.

Agreed, Red

I'm guessing that the slap in the face from the Court the administration just got wasn't hard enough.

Last week, in a NINE to nothing decision, the Court reminded the administration that the "free exercise" clause trumped social engineering.

Seems the Lutheran Chirch fired a female minister. She claimed her firing was motivated by her past illness, and violated ADA. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't-

But the Court upheld the Church's right to fire any minister, on any grounds, because of the free exercise clause.

So, tell me, how come the "constitutional professor",( which, by the way, he was not. He was a TA), did not know that in the first place?

And, class, can you see the connection to this case? Hmmm? Now, please explain where the abeyance fits into this problem.

No one is "forcing" abortion or birth control on the church. You don't want to use birth control or have an abortion, then don't! What is required is that you provide the coverage to your employees. Big freaking deal. Your employees will have the choice to use that coverage or not--they won't be forced to do anything. I'm so sick of the whining of the Catholics and other religious groups. As many have pointed out, birth control isn't just used to prevent pregnancy--it's also used for other health issues and it should be covered. No one is making anyone violate their conscience. Yeesh, just stop acting like big babies about EVERYTHING and grow up already!

Hey there bigot

How do you feel about muslims?

How about letting each religion believe the way it wants to believe, not by public opinion?

How about any religion can believe what its members want to believe as long as it doesn't try to act as a government or governmental agency? How about any religion can believe what its members want to believe as long as they comply with laws that apply to everyone else and not whine about how their beliefs entitle them to special exceptions?

You are right Nathan. That's why the Catholics stop helping adoptions. They were told they had to break with some of their core beliefs. And, rather than do that, they just closed up shop. They might do the same with hospitals. That make you happier?

Do you know why people came to this country to start with? Look up why so many faced great hardship to come here. And, after you read about that, think how you are turning us back into what they were escaping from to begin with.

This isn't just a Catholic issue. It is a freedom of religion issue. You don't want religion in government. Neither do I. But, the government cannot tell a religion to give up its core beliefs. If you do, you set us back to the European countries our forefathers were escaping persecution from.

Look up "Lemon Test" and "Strict Scrutiny".

This rule has a valid secular purpose and compelling interest. It was not created simply to advance or restrict any particular religion or belief. Its primary effect is to reduce unwanted pregnancies and abortions and to improve general health, especially in this case for women, again not something that advances or inhibits religion.

Its only religious discrimination if you think the government has no compelling interest in the health and economic welfare of its citizens or in promoting equality and nondiscrimination in general. Saying "You're discriminating against us by not letting us discriminate against others" is not a valid defense because it is self contradictory.

Nobody forced Catholic adoption agencies in Massachusetts to close; the agencies themselves (or more correctly, the authoritarian Church hierarchy above them) decided that it was more important for them to maintain their discrimination against gays and lesbians than to help orphans. That was their decision, and I think it speaks volumes about their priorities. If Catholic hospitals make a similar decision, closing up shop rather than allowing their insurance providers to pay for birth control for employees that request it, then that will reflect again only on them and their priorities. Most Catholic hospital funding comes from public sources, and if those hospitals close or sell to private or civil owners, the money and care will still be there. Actually, probably better care since the selection of services would be less restricted.

Phine, you are more than welcome to believe whatever you want. That doesn't mean that you don't have to follow the laws. And this is not even remotely a "freedom of religion" issue. I mean really, where do people come up with this crap?? Will you or anyone else be forced to use birth control? No? Then how are your freedoms being trampled on, pray tell? The Catholic Church will have to do what every other employer in the country will have to do: provide good health coverage to its employees that doesn't discriminate against women! No one will have to use birth control, they will just have to option to if needed or desired. Some will use it to prevent pregnancy and some will use it for other health reasons. I find it so laughable that a bunch of ostensibly celibate old men would think they have any business telling women what they can and cannot do about their own health or refuse to provide them with necessary healthcare while I'm sure providing men coverage for drugs like Viagra. The whining and hyperbole are just ridiculous and immature. The religious right is reminding me more and more of a two year having a temper tantrum every time they don't get their way. "Religious freedom issue." Don't make me laugh.