Exactly, these corporations that are involved in commercial activity cannot avoid these kinds of mandates. Otherwise, we would see companies affiliating with religions in order to avoid any regulation they desire.

If you are religious, fine, don't use birth control. But if you are an employer, you have to cover it.

Just because the coverage is there it doesn't require you to use it, religious or not.

Pretty far fetched to say that companies would automatically assimilate with a religion to pursue the exemption. Maybe smaller companies would, but no large corporation that sells products would ever dare to cross that line, only limiting their market with the products they provide.

Considering the mandate might be found unconstitutional i am pretty positive that this would be found unconstitutional as well.

Actually, you all are wrong. Just recently the Supreme Court in a 9-0 vote upheld that a Christian church (I think Lutheran) was allowed to fire an employee in their church after she had left with sleep apnea, which is recognized as a disability. She felt that she was wrongfully terminated and should have been protected by the Americans with Disability act. She sued and it went to the Supreme Court where in a very unusual 9-0 vote with no dissent the court disagreed and explained that religious organizations are not obligated in matters of ministry related to their religion, to follow a law which every public company does have to follow.

AdSol, that was a church. That's different than a business.

That being said, I find it pretty appalling that they were allowed to discriminate against a woman with disabilities, but that's neither here nor there.

Physicians prescribe birth control pills for several medical conditions unrelated to preventing pregnancy. So if I'm an employee at a religious company, I can't use my health insurance to fill my prescription for women's hormones to treat endometriosis? Or I suffer severe menstrual migraines -- can't I get my prescription filled for a drug that prevents those (birth control pills)? Severe menstrual bleeding? An ovarian cyst?

If there is any compromise on this legislation, there won't be any insurance coverage for these important disabling medical conditions, What's next: are these companies going to require women who want to fill a prescription for birth control pills to get a note from their doctor that their intended use is NOT for preventing pregnancy? Doctors aren't usually required to specify what a drug is prescribed for.

Are these religious companies going to exempt their health insurance from paying doctors who do a D&C because it really may be an abortion? What about diaphragms, IUD's, Nuva Ring, implanted hormones, condoms, etc.?

This issue is much broader than just refusing to cover birth control pills used to prevent pregnancy.

Toasty McGrath,

The U.S. Military "fires" those who reach the age of 60 - Mandatory retirement (with a waiver for extenuating circumstances); age discrimination at work. But it appears the government can "legally" discriminate against soldiers based on its belief that you can't perform after reaching 60. Then the same discriminatory government will deny religious groups the identical right to enact policies that conform to their faith's tenets. Note the hyprocrisy in this comment from the article by Senator Kirsten Hillibrand, D-NY: "I am dumbfounded that in the year 2012, we still are fighting about birth control,"..."Our opponents will look for any excuse to impose their ideology on women's rights." Not one Catholic, Evangelical, or Mainline denomination is "FORCING" women to abstain from contraceptives or abortions. However, each can, and does, define the accepted doctrines, beliefs, and accepted behaviors of those professing allegiance to their faith's community. Ms. Hillibrand, and her supporters, cannot produce a single woman, outside the walls of a faith community, who can substaniate a claim that ANY Faith Based group or institution attempted to force her to forgo her rights as a U.S. Citizen in regards to accessing or purchasing reproductive health care . Ms. Hillibrand on the other hand seeks "to IMPOSE" her ideology (everyone should have to fund women's reproductive rights, even if opposed to those "values" based upon their Biblical convictions, organizational charters, and their 1st Amendment RIGHT to practice their faith without government interference) upon FAITH BASED Organizations and Institutions.

The FAR LEFT is going to lose this fight.

I can't wait for the shellacking to continue in this upcoming election.

Catholics, why don't you get rid of all your pedophiles first before you try to tackle anything else?

You will absolutely lose this stupid suit. Catholic women still have a choice. No one is forcing them to do anything.

.

20% of Republicans now leaning to Obama!

SRC: Google: WND leaning

This is about a government telling its citizens how to practice their religion. The constitution states the Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" Congress gave the authority to set rules about the affordability care act which they are using to have the Catholic church spend its funds on insurance for contraceptives and the Plan B drug . This is a clear violation of the constitutional right to practice Catholicism freely.

From the Vatican down, it's all about the money!

Baloney. I think you just say that because you have some anger and guilt issues. It's VERY easy to find out what any Catholic church does with the money contributed by the faithful. People who don't participate much may not realize it (and it's obvious YOU don't realize it) but ignorance doesn't change facts.

I happen to know a lot of Catholic priests (from and in five different continents). It's not about MONEY for any of them. (Ironically enough, many of them take a vow of poverty.) It's easy to vilify people you don't know, but again, ignorance doesn't change facts.

Catholics, why don't you get rid of all your pedophiles...

That's EXACTLY what the Church is trying to do.

• That's why the Caholic Church has waived all statutes of limitation regarding such cases.
• That's why the church hierarchy has been instructed to cooperates in every investigation around the globe.
• That's why they are opening up cases that date back a century for scrutiny.
• (Most of the criminals are long since dead, you knew that right?)
• That's why every Catholic Parish is required to teach classes on recognizing pedophiles.
• That's why no one at a Catholic church is allowed to work with children unless they take the class and pass a background check.
• That's why all Catholic seminaries have been instructed to tighten their screening standards.
• That's why there's a new push to delve into psychological testing (when a priest is celibate, it doesn't matter that much what his tendencies are, but once you know that a FEW priests WON'T remain celibate, and that some of those might have a thing for CHILDREN, it matters a great deal more.)
• That's why Dioceses offer free counseling (or to pay for counseling services) to any victim.
• That's why Dioceses have paid BILLIONS of dollars in so-called 'restitution' to people who claim to be victims (and let's face it, a lot of victims never come forward, and some who do were never victims).

And the only reason for any of that is to eliminate – or at least minimize to the fullest extent possible – the chances that any child will be harmed from now on.

You might not approve of the methods being used (but I'd be willing to bet that is mainly out of your own ignorance of what is being done), but the effort is a sincere one, at all levels.

Okay, I'm seriously starting to be frightened. Between forced sonograms, the attacks on PP, and all of these attempts to twist business into religion in order to block contraception, is starting to feel like a direct attack on me and womanhood in general.

These are our bodies. And in the case of the women who work for these BUSINESSES their livelihoods. Why does the church's freedom to religion trump my freedom from it? When you enter into business you leave the realm of pure religion and move into the realm of law. And that law, says I have rights too.

My body, my job, my sexuality, my health, my equality and protection under the laws of this nation, can not be subjugated to the whims of a church, unless it is a purely religious matter within a purely religious setting. This isn't. This is business.

I. Have. Rights. Too.

Toasty, I agree ...

Churches themselves would remain exempt, but when it goes into effect Aug. 1, the rule will require church-affiliated universities, hospitals, clubs and the like to cover "all [federally] approved forms of contraception."

This is as it should be. The churches should remain exempt. I agree with that. People who work for a church are, most generally, of that faith and know the "rules".

However the other places ... universities, hospitals, etc. ... employ those of many faiths (or of no faith). Those places are also subject to other federal laws such as OSHA, wage & hour, etc. Most receive federal funding (our tax dollars). They are not allowed to discriminate in hiring practices by race, religion, etc. Therefore, they should have to follow the same health insurance mandates as every other organization.

The vast majority of Catholics have always used birth control and always will. When the Pope , cardinals, bishops and priests start talking about the subject all the membership hears is bla bla bla bla bla. All this will do is force people to pay for their birth control pills by themselves. Smart Catholics that work for the profit making companies that the church runs should just take the money that they will have to pay for their birth control out of the envelope they put in the collection plate. If it cost my family a extra $500 a year because the church denies me the medical benefit I'll just put $500 less in the envelope. THAT ALWAYS GETS THEIR ATTENTION! Now the FLDS church should sue because the marriage laws violate their religious beliefs. A smart@ss priest actually told me once that he did not have to explain what they did with the money I gave them in the collection plate. I immediately cut the amount by half at the next mass.

This is about a government telling its citizens how to practice their religion

OMG No it isn't. Grow up

This is about an employer trying to force a moral code and their religion on their employees. Why do you support a Lutheran woman from getting the pill with her insurance when she works as an accountant at a major catholic hospital because he boss wants to impose their religious beliefs on her?

Actually Dan, it's more about the right of the troglodytes who dictate the rules in the Catholic church to impose their religious concepts on the vast majority who do not agree with them. The fact is that 98% of American Catholic women (and they are the only ones whose opinion should count) approve of and use birth control. The question then is whether or not their rights are to be subordinate to those of the Pope and the College of Cardinals (most of whom are not American citizens) who think sex that does not lead to reproduction is a sin. Why not give the women the choice? If they agree with the Church, let them opt out. That would be true freedom to practice your religion in accordance with your own values and conscience.

The Catholic Church is thinking that they have found a way to get back some of those MILLIONS OF DOLLARS that had to pay for all their priests MOLESTING CHILDREN. They now are so sanctimonious as to say that Catholics do not use birth control. Oh Please! That is like saying that everybody in church always does what the bible says, or that the really put into practice what they preach.

I would believe in an ALIEN FROM VENUS first.....

Organized religion at it's best: PURE HYPOCRISY.

It is NOT about their stupid religion. It's about fair health care laws for women.

While I'm actually for the promotion of birth control, I wonder why the real issue was never presented in this article. The real issue being why is birth control a health issue at all? Ok, so if you get pregnant, you are uh sick? So preventative measures like birth control is the same thing as getting a flu shot, or a vaccine?

So, if birth control isn't a health issue, then what else should be covered? Hey, how about all personal hygeine products. Isn't that important to our health? Why aren't those covered by insurance? How about haircuts, clothing, shelter? Those are all important to our health. Shouldn't those be covered too? How about good food, clean water, education. See the fine line we dance around every day about what the government should do for every citizen because we have rights?

I really wonder if the issue that should be fought at the supreme court level is simply that birth control is optional because procreation is optional. They are both 'choices' we should be allowed to make without having taxpayers or governmental laws interfering.

Institutions are not people. People can have religious beliefs. Institutions cannot.

Robeson,

Birth control (BC) is preventative care. It is far cheaper to provide BC than to deal with either unwanted pregnancies, or unhealthy pregnancies. Think of the woman who's married and knows she carries a certain genetic trait that could lead to a lifelong illness in her child, or lead her to have serious health complications if she becomes pregnant.

In addition, BC is more than just contraception. It can regulate menstruation, that for some women can be debilitating.

To not see BC this way, is to deny women their sexuality. Without BC, we would forever be held hostage to our wombs.

This is about employers and the insurance coverage they offer their employees. Some Catholic employers are pretending this is about an attack on their religion. There is nothing stopping these Catholic employers from practicing their religion - PERSONALLY - unimpeded by government regulation.

I simply can't escape the irony of a group of people falling back on their faith. This faith includes believing their lord and savior was the child of a Jewish Virgin and an invisible being. Oh wait, the Pope changed his view on that, didn't he? This faith includes believing that you cannot eat meat on Friday. Oh wait, the Pope changed his view on that, didn't he? This faith includes believing the rhythm method is a viable and acceptable form of birth control. Oh wait, that's even crazier than Jewish Virgins and Fish Friday's.

Get a grip, Pope. Falling back on faith in Invisoguy is just too much. There is no reason the government should cater to such irrational beliefs and delusions.

I think you just say that because you have some anger and guilt issues.

Honestly now, what Catholic doesn't?

Sarah: The Catholic Church and many many groups and organizations in the United States do not support abortion. The Catholic Church has never in its history supported artifical means of birth control - they have the legal right to their beliefs and are protected under the Constitution of the United States.

That affiliated organizations follow the tenents of the Catholic Church is within their right to do so - also a protected right.

Your rights do not outweigh the rights of these organizations and the hundreds of millions of people that support them.

Do not be concerned - this is not about you or your "rights" You can continue your slaughter of the millions of unborn every year. Your off the hook - you do not have to face the consequences of the mistake, failures and miserable decisions you made in life - you just pass those off as an "oops" as you destroy the life of another unborn.

This is a huge deal to the Bishops and the Catholics who hate Obama. To the average Catholic who ignores the Bishops (and they are the majority) it's no big deal. BTW -- I'm a Catholic.

Ternan,

No, that would be true if this were simply about the Catholic church. This is about businesses, that our supported through our laws and our government, and ergo are subjected to our laws and our government.

Abortion, has absolutely nothing to do with this issue. It is either a measure of your ignorance of this issue, or your deliberate attempts to stir the pot, that you would even bring it up.

The church, per se, is not being forced or told to relinquish that belief. They are being told, that since they've established businesses that perform services, employ citizens, and act outside of religion, they too have to follow the law.

The church also disapproves of childbirth outside of marriage, should they be allowed to fire all the women who had children without husbands?

The church also disapproves of gay people, should they be allowed to fire all the gays?

The church, if it follows the Bible which of course it does, also believes mixing types of fabric is an abomination, should they be able to fire anyone who wears a cotton-poly blend?

If this is all about "religion" in its pure form and tenets, as you suggest, than you must believe all of the above. Do you have a problem with them being subjected to OSHA, to the EPA, to The Civil Rights Act??? Of course not, although we could find elements in their Bible which are in contrast to all of those laws.

This is about business.

Ternan, really ? Sarah has slaughteres millions of unborn every year ????? I tell you what, why don´t you go lay down, elevate your feet and put something cold on your head. Something really really cold.

Well said, Sarah.

Ternan:

Try to understand this. No one - absolutely no one is asking Catholics to support abortion. What the Sebelius rule says is that Catholics may not hide behind their faith to discriminate against others vis a vis abortion. The First Amendment is not at issue here. For you to suggest that is the case demonstrates a serious lack of understanding on your part.

Funny how you didn't notice this when 28 put these rules into effect PRIOR to the federal government.

I would suggest that you never have an abortion inasmuch as you find it so distasteful. However, if I were a betting man, I'd bet you are a male. Hey bub, it's lika da Pope. You no playa da game, you no maka da rules.

Sarah, women are raping and descrating their own bodies. Mind you, a fetus is it's own body, too -- one that is biologically bound to the mother. Killing a fetus is murder is all aspects, or how self-centered a woman or her doctor wishes to substantiate or make a logic-based decision.

Birth control and abortion are unethical "medical" procedures. No other "processes" or "drugs" are used so flippantly to stop the natural, healthy processes or organs in a human body. Birth control and abortion are 100% lifestyle-based options under the guise of a "medicinal necessity."

BS ternan, and the COURTS have already said so when they FORCED the church to eithe rOPEN up its adoption process thru its ADOPTION BUINESSES to gay singles and couples, or no longer get government aid. The church caved and gave up ANY direct connection or control od some adoption BUSINESSES, or closed them.

The catholic heirarchy is now playing a slimy game of politics, and should in fact have its tax exempt status yanked (of course ALL religions SHOULD be taxed anyway), and is doing so BECAUSE IT KNOWS that it would lose, AGAIN, if it tried to take this to court. Even THIS stunt is EXACTLY that, a stunt.

This is not just a Catholic issue. The was a news story today about how many Muslim organizations were very opposed to this change and were saying that they would not follow such out of a manner of conscience. MSNBC doesn't seem to for whatever reason be reporting on that.

Arby,

Lol, didn't you hear??? I eat fetuses for breakfast. I've found they're best if you lightly fry them and dip them in Ranch Dressing.

Stop,

I can't debate someone who's post shows a complete lack of logic, and a deep rooted prejudice and brainwashing. I'm sorry, my mom always says "Don't wrestle with pigs everybody gets dirty and the pig loves it."

Now, if you would like to cease the ridiculous, outdated, rhetoric and ask me some rational questions, we can talk.

Stop the bull - birth control is unethical ???? You know, before I started on the pill, my periods were so heavy, I actually ended up in ER hemorraging( sorry spell check still broken) - bleeding to death. And, when faced with two choices -have a hysteroctomy or take a birth control pill, I choose birth control pill, because you know, once they cut out your uterus, you cannot have children. So birth control actully made it possible for me to have my kids. Wow, what an unethical person I am ... Or maybe you should go lay down with ternan.

Sarah, we should probably ignore these "posters" but is is so hard :((((

Arby,

Did you hear that thunk? That was my head hitting the desk.

Unbelievable. They can be entertaining though.

Sometimes I like to poke them with sticks just to get a rise out of them. Kind of like the Crocodile Hunter.

So let me get this straight, all women who enter churches will now be handed birth control pills on theor way in and forced to take them with their bread and wine, right? NOT!!! But doesn't that sound like the story they are throwing out there to fight this?

My daughter is a nurse in a Catholic Hospital, she is provided health insurance. Birth control will now be a part of that health insurance. What's the big deal? She has a choice, she can use that particular benefit if she chooses, or she could not take that benefit. What's the big deal?

Look, I drive by 3 churches and a synagogue on my 3 mile ride to the grocery store. I have a choice, I can stop in at any of these and utilize their services, or I can continue to the store and ignore them.

They estimate 98% of Catholic women have used birth control at one time or another, right? Why should we let men make the decisions for women? Is it because these men who are supposed to have never touched a womans body know what's better for them? Think about that one for a moment, how many women make the rules for the Catholic Church?

Lol, didn't you hear??? I eat fetuses for breakfast. I've found they're best if you lightly fry them and dip them in Ranch Dressing.

We know sarah, we know..

On a side note, not that I'm catholic or anything, but I don't think it should be mandated that we should have to pay for someone's else's birth control pills. Even if they are known to prevent other problems. That would be like saying are you willing to cover another person's insulin? Because if you are not, then there should be no reason why they should cover your birth control pills. It would be the exact same thing. The fact that this has a religious aspect to it has nothing to do with it and the way MSNBC keeps trying to spin it off as if it is, is just plain wrong.

Bull****

It is obvious that you know absolutely NOTHING about the female body and how it functions. Many women NEED to use BC, because some women CANNOT carry a baby to term without severe health ramifications---Do yourself a favor, "google" hyperemensis gravidarum, HELLP syndrome, and peripartum cardiomyopathy.

Funny how people are saying "it's the law - you have to follow it." I suspect many of these people are the same ones who found Proposition 8 offensive and were glad to see it overturned. Simply because something is the law, doesn't mean you fall in line and blindly follow it. If you don't like a law, you fight it.

Can someone explain why we are still giving these "churches" a tax-exempt status?

The Catholic church has obviously turned into just another arm of the Republican party. How can you push all of these political agendas and still be tax-exempt?

If they are involved in changing laws, it's time they pay their fair share.

I love it when these nut-jobs claim the almighty higher ground. It's about time we do away with organized religion anyway. Anybody the prays to the unknown boogie man is just plain crazy in my book. Be a good soul, take care of your fellow man, take care of our planet, give back to society. I don't need a guy in Rome, that wears a pointy hat, pointy shoes, and a dress, telling me how to be a good catholic.

peace out...

OK so will the medical coverage at these church owned companies still provide the men with prescriptions for Viagra, Cialis or other ED meds, if those men are single? my exhusband is nurse in Catholic hospital, can he still get his Viagra meds covered on his prescription plan ( shockingly the answer is YES)

@Stop the bull@!$%#, what about a tubal pregnancy? it is common practice to remove the fallopian tube ( along with the implanted embryo), not calling that immoral, or if a women has a bifurcated uterus ( split, 2 sides tyopically a smaller side and if an embryo implants, if it is not removed, it ruptures and both mother and POTENTIAL child die)...

Unhappy,

I also have to contribute my money to your prostate exams. That's how the mandate works. Here we go again. Every single one of us will at some point use healthcare, ergo we have three opitons...

1. Continue what we have now, where we have universal access to healthcare, but only those of us who are insured pay.

2. Continue to have universal access to care, and make sure we all pay into the system.

3. Limit care to only those who have insurance.

Preventative care, is just that, preventative. It stops us from having to react to more expensive and more dangerous conditions. It's like changing the oil in your car, yeah you have to pay the $30 every three months, but it's cheaper than buying a new engine every five years, and your car lasts longer.

Preventative care has not been focused on before now, for two reasons...

1. We have a fee for service system. That means, the healthcare industry doesn't get paid until you get sick, and they make their money off of the treatments they give you.

2. The healthcare industry is exempt from anti-trust laws, so they have complete control over the system, as opposed to normal market forces.

Now, when you put this together, even with the most ethical doctors, fee for service maligns their interests with those of the patient.

The patients interest lays in remaining healthy, but the doctor's, even ethical ones, can't make money unless the patient gets sick.

This Senator really sums it up very well:

"I am dumbfounded that in the year 2012, we still are fighting about birth control," said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y. "Our opponents will look for any excuse to impose their ideology on women's rights."

Personally I'm amazed that between opponents to Roe v, Wade and the "creation-ists" there is this noisy ridiculous contingent trying to drag the rest of humanity back into the dark ages. Choice is here, science is here, it's here to stay. Get used to it.

I think the issue is whether the Catholic Church should be required to pay for BC and abortions, which goes against their teachings. They absolutely should not be required to financially support these things, and there are other places to work. Also, I am not a Catholic but I am sick and tired of people bashing the Catholics over the pedophiles nonsense. We live in a sick world, and there are bad apples everywhere. I have read numerous articles lately about teachers that have molested kids. Where are all the attacks on teachers??? It seems a lot of people seem very selective in who they attack. Sarah, I would not be surprised if you do eat fetuses for breakfast. You obviously care only about yourself. Just go back and read your post. Its all about you.

CAL USA said:

The question then is whether or not their rights are to be subordinate to those of the Pope and the College of Cardinals (most of whom are not American citizens) who think sex that does not lead to reproduction is a sin.

And isn't that ridiculous! My husband and I married in the Catholic Church 10 years ago, and when we took the required "classes" this is what they "taught" us. We looked around us, and every single couple in the room was shaking their heads in astonishment. This Catholic rule is just not normal. Does that mean that women past child-bearing years can no longer have sex with their husbands because it would be a sin? It's a bunch of horsepucky.

With that said, I am all for this bill to require ALL employers to cover federally-approved contraceptives in their insurance plans.

You can continue your slaughter of the millions of unborn every year. Your off the hook - you do not have to face the consequences of the mistake, failures and miserable decisions you made in life - you just pass those off as an "oops" as you destroy the life of another unborn.

Ternan,

Kinda like the millions upon millions of people slaughtered by the Catholic church during the crusades, all in the name of God? He must have been so proud.

If abortion really bothers you... just think of it as another "Crusade". We are just following the example Catholics have set for us. It is a holy "Crusade" against the unholy abominations growing inside women.

Hey... look at that. We have something in common.

Mollyhart, I know that not all women need birth control. The small majority who use it for other reasons were planning on using it anyway to prevent pregnancy. Very few women use it without needing it to prevent pregnancy. Maybe you should get your head out of the sand before you speak.

The fact is if it is considered a drug that is used during pregnancy, do you think the Catholic Church would be opposed to it? No, I didn't think so either.

Another thing, I notice a lot of the women on this site bring up some obscure reason for using birth control as a way of helping the female body function in terms of hormones, but the fact of the matter is most women who take birth control use it to control one thing- pregnancy. All of your little arguments can't change that. And if you are not willing to pay for someone else's insulin, then there should be no way they should pay for your birth control.

I worked for a huge pharmacy corporation and they wouldn't pay for my birth control pills, but they paid for Viagra for men. Totally wrong!

The law is not forcing women to take the pill, they simply want it to be a prescription that insurance companies would cover. There are so many good comments above from people that think logically instead of jumping to a religious issue. Birth Control pills are prescribed by so many different medical reasons. From acne to serious menstrual cramps on and on. In fact my friends daughter has a large 2"inch cyst on her ovary. Instead of Doctor directing her to have immediate surgery to preform hysterectomy (Which is exactly what they did in my situation) she is recommending oral contraceptives. I can't believe with all the problems in the world the church's biggest concern is women making their own decisions to take a birth control pill. Regardless of the reasons..

Stop the Bullsh1t

Birth control and abortion are 100% lifestyle-based options under the guise of a "medicinal necessity."

So when you or a family member gets cancer or some disease, you shouldn't get medical treatment because the medication is 100% lifestyle based solely on the fact that you don't want life to play out naturally. if God wanted you to live he wouldn't have given you a disease/cancer prone body. is that right?

Unhappy,

Mollyhart, I know that not all women need birth control. The small majority who use it for other reasons were planning on using it anyway to prevent pregnancy. Very few women use it without needing it to prevent pregnancy. Maybe you should get your head out of the sand before you speak.

Really, how do you know this? Where did you get this information?

Another thing, I notice a lot of the women on this site bring up some obscure reason for using birth control as a way of helping the female body function in terms of hormones, but the fact of the matter is most women who take birth control use it to control one thing- pregnancy. All of your little arguments can't change that. And if you are not willing to pay for someone else's insulin, then there should be no way they should pay for your birth control.

Neither can your assertions be taken as truth, proof, your factual. Provide your sources.

Catholic institutions are under the control of a Bishop or Catholic Religious order. The Catholic Church is a Religion. As such, even as a hospital, they are not a secular employer, but a Religious employer. The First Amendment of the Constitution guarantees the Free Exercise of Religion. The Federal Government is forcing the Bishop or the head of a Catholic Religious order to purchase something that their Religion has always said is intrinsically evil--one reason is artificial birth control causes people to fornicate or have an adulterous affair who might otherwise not engage in these gravely sinful acts because of fear of pregnancy. As a result, the Federal Government is forcing a Religious leader to pay for something that such Religious leader feels could lead someone to gravely sin. By forcing them, the federal government is not allowing the Religious leader to practice his or her Faith freely. This would make this narrow exemption unconstitutional. I think the current members of the US Supreme Court will agree--probably 9-0 because the issues in the recently decided Hosanna-Tabor vs EEOC case are fairly similar. In the end, it will be up to the majority of justices on the US Supreme Court's opinion--no one else's--unless there is a constitutional amendment or federal legislation that disallows this narrow exemption to the Democrats' Health Care law that they passed. Of course, the US Supreme Court could find the whole healthcare law unconstitutional because it forces everyone to purchase health insurance. If that happens, this would make the need for an exemption to the Democrat's Healthcare law moot.

Nice try Sarah, but again you are too assuming. The truth is there will always be something that another person would like to have in their insurance. This is opening a big door in health insurance companies. Would you be willing to pay for someone's drug and alcohol addiction treatment? Since this comes down to a question of behavior, everyone should be willing to ask themselves how far would we go to pay for someone else's choices. I'm sure men everywhere are not too thrilled with paying for your pap smears or your mammograms? That is something that you need to ensure your health. But birth control is different. It is more governed by behavior than anything else. Perhaps it would be logical to put in into a health plan if it is only used as a way to control hormones and nothing else. In other words, not to prevent pregnancy.

@JH-###### (post 1.9) Think again. Look what happened with the Komen fiasco, when they tried to pull a Right wing attack on womens rights and had to do an about face. The Right wing nutjobs are going down hard in November.

Here is my problem with this mess, the President had made a deal with the Church that was going to allow them to be exempt then when back on that deal.

I think the Church should provide coverage. However they were told that they wouldn't and there for should not have to.

Unhappy,

Nice try Sarah, but again you are too assuming. The truth is there will always be something that another person would like to have in their insurance. This is opening a big door in health insurance companies. Would you be willing to pay for someone's drug and alcohol addiction treatment? Since this comes down to a question of behavior, everyone should be willing to ask themselves how far would we go to pay for someone else's choices. I'm sure men everywhere are not too thrilled with paying for your pap smears or your mammograms? That is something that you need to ensure your health. But birth control is different. It is more governed by behavior than anything else. Perhaps it would be logical to put in into a health plan if it is only used as a way to control hormones and nothing else. In other words, not to prevent pregnancy.

Translation: I can't provide sources. I don't have any. I subscribe to the fallacy of proof by assertion, and I'm really hoping to distract you with another post full of nothing but what I can pull out of my butt.

P.S. I'm not thrilled to be paying for your Viagra or prostate exams, but shucks that's the way it works. What makes your body more worthy of coverage???? Obviously, it isn't your superior intellect.

The smart thing for the Republican party, is to minimize the arguments over social issues.

They will lose with Santorum.

Unhappy-

The "reasons" why a woman takes BC is of nobodies concern. Who the hell are you to try to mandate someone else's uterus, or her ability to conceive. Nor you or the Catholic church has any business trying to force your beliefs about BC on to someone else.

BTW--I am willing to pay for someone else's insulin, just as I am willing to pay for their birth control, considering they are both just as important

@unhappy hate to break it to you, but you probably ARE covering someone's insulin...no where does it say that there is not a copay for birth control, just like any other medication covered on the prescription plan...so if you are on a company sponsered health insurance plan, part of the premiums DO cover any and all drugs included for coverage in the prescription...and yes there may be a copay for all those drugs covered, including birth control pills...

It is time to end the tax exempt status for ALL religious organizations. Leave only the sincere to preach.

right on. toasty, I say we start taxing their asses and give them something to really bitch about.

There really has never been a convincing argument as to why churches should be exempt from taxes. We all have to pay our fair share except peoples' fairy tale clubs for some reason.

Shalom--no, the Catholic Church, when it starts a commercial business, cannot take that commercial business under the cloak of religion.

Let me put it to you this way--let us say that the Catholic Church wins this one. That is, the Catholic Church can make its own rules for its own religious organizations, regardless of what the federal laws are. Can they ignore minimum wage laws? Can they ignore OSHA requirements? Can they allow people with no medical license to operate in their hospitals?

If your answer is "no"--then you have to make a case for why some federal mandates are enforceable and others are not. If your answer is "yes," then there is a fun little side effect to this.

That means that clinics in Kansas, which are currently prohibited from performing abortions unless they have the same kind of equipment that a major hospital has for its surgical suites (even though they are performing routine, outpatient care), could affiliate with a church and no longer have to abide by those rules. The clinics in Texas that are currently required to describe an ultrasound could affiliate with a church and avoid the rules.

Remember--anyone can start a "church." The Westboro Baptist Church is a collection of people in a single family who have "churchified" their finances so that they do not have to pay taxes. Anyone can start a church--the doctor and his/her workers can start a "Church of Bodily Modification" and then not have to abide by federal or state or anybody's laws. Anyone can do that--and they can run their businesses under the umbrella of their "churches" which are exempt from laws (including, by the way, taxation).

There is no such thing as an "authorized" religion in the US. Anyone can start a religion--it can have one member or two members or millions. One does not have to prove any degree of "sincerity"--there is very little that anyone has to "prove" about their religious views.

I do not think that it is in the best interests of society to allow any "church" to run a business which is then magically exempt from federal statutes. I would hope that even the Supreme Court will be able to see that businesses run by churches should not be exempt--if they don't, then don't be too surprised when all the abortion clinics run by Planned Parenthood associate themselves with the Metropolitan Community Church to evade all local, state, and federal laws. Have a great day.

My parents were good people. They practiced (half assed) their religious beliefs. Among those beliefs were ; one should never take Gods name in vain, one should never covet his neighbors wife, one should be always truthful, one should never row and fight etc.,etc. When it came to the law however, there was nothing half assed about it. Didn't make a damn if the law was contrary to their religions tenents, they damn well observed the law. Now, in honor of my parents deference to the law over religious claims, I say, if they could so easily discern, and honorably accept the precepts of their countries law over tenents of their religion, aye gwad, the Catholic church can so likewise acquiesce. This religion, nor any other, has any Gwaddamn business controlling the "right of choice" their members use to control family size. Such a high handed, overbearing, and bullying rulership of its following is nothing short of pulpit despotism. This government must meet, and crush, this very unholy challenge, mounted by this backward, power wielding, bone worshiping, gang of antiquitized peddlers of abstract sooth. We are a country of secular law. Gawddamit!, all Gods Chillan gotta obey the law!

I think they're exempt because they fall under not-for profits, which makes this even more ridiculous. If they want that tax break, follow the same rules not-for profits who aren't affiliated with a church follow.

Otherwise, get out of business and go back to being a church. They can preach their misogyny as much as they want, and no one will say boo to them.

I wanna know where all these Republican politicians were when this was passed in 28 different states. This is obviously nothing but a manufactured outrage, being used as a wedge issue in an election year.

IndieParty you should really look at the Catholic Church does before you regulate to the Republican Party. What would you think of an organization that every day is out on the streets feeding the poor and helping the homeless find a home.

What do you think of an organization that on a regular basis attempts to help those work their way though foreclosure problem.

What do you think of an organization that fights against capital punishment.

What do you think of an organization that regularly helps unwed mothers. Yes they do fight against birth control but they don't forget those who allowed the baby to go term.

Why did the United States government work with Catholic Relief Services when the earthquake hit Haiti. They did it because they were already there when it happened.

This is an example of some tea party republican. Yes they are against birth control and abortion. Yes the Church allowed pedophiles to operate within the Church. Please don't get me stated on that one but it does seem to be working hard to insure that this never happens again.

To suggest that it cares only for itself and not anyone else is on the very surface a lie. The fact that there are public services for the poor in the inner cities is because of the actions of Catholic Relief Services.

I always find amusing the argument that the Church should lose its tax exempt status. If the Church were to be taxed, because of its charitable work, would probably receive a refund.

Translation: I can't provide sources. I don't have any. I subscribe to the fallacy of proof by assertion, and I'm really hoping to distract you with another post full of nothing but what I can pull out of my butt.

Sarah, Please provide the resources that birth control is only used for preventing diseases associated with hormones and not for preventing actual pregnancies. Where are your resources?

If you can't provide any then your argument is irrelevant.

Mac,

You are partly right. We are a nation of laws for the most part. However, much of what comes out of DC is not lawful. For example, nothing in The Constitution makes it lawful for our government to provide Foreign Aid. Yet it is spooned out by both parties annually.

This dictate is in clear violation of the 1st Amendment. The Administration and all of its fanatic supporters clearly recognize this. But they don't care because they would rather force their wanton desires on others then follow the law.

Saw a really scary poll on O'Reilly last night. Of those surveyed 50% backed the Catholic Church and its stand for Freedom of Religion, 10% were undecided, and a whopping 40% backed Tyrant Obama trashing one of our most Sacred Rights.

Those are your DemocRat faithful and social leeches who make up the Occuputz Movement. This country is facing a very grim situation. Either these greedy Statist Bastards will be defeated at the ballot box, or we will have another Secession with or without a second Civil War.

You all are missing the point! IS birth control a medicinal necessity for women? NO It is an drug that women use for planned parenthood and other reasons.

If it were a health issue for women I would say OK. But it is not. The dummycrats that put this into HCR have way over stepped their bounds on this one.

Sarah,

"Misogyny," really? Shows how ignorant you are of the truth.

The Catholic Church elevates the status of women. The Catholic Church regards Mary as "Mother of God," "Queen of Heaven," and "Immaculate Mary."

Of course the one that would irk you and your ilk is "Blessed Virgin."

Catholic institutions are under the control of a Bishop or Catholic Religious order. The Catholic Church is a Religion. As such, even as a hospital, they are not a secular employer, but a Religious employer.

As soon as the Catholic (or any other facility) collects one penny of taxpayer money -- they must follow the law. And as we all know, Catholic hospitals and educational institutions DO get tax money in one form or another.

Aussiegirl: "non-practicing catholic"? Now that's a hoot! Kinda oxymoronic don't you think? Or maybe just moronic.

Sometimes I wonder why people are so against Sharia Law, when they allow Catholic Law [ethics] in their homes.

The existence of the level of ignorance on this vine is simply unbelievable. When the women who sought to be employed by these institutions, they were aware of the Catholic churches stance on the use of contraceptions and abortions. Obviously, the cost for contraceptives is not prohibitive since the majority of women affililiating themselves as practicing the Catholic faith have used contraceptives. There is not going to be some "mad stampede" of companies starting religions to not provide contraceptives when they already provide that benefit. Quite honestly, if you don't like your benefit package for whatever reason, you have the right to pursue happiness with another employer. And, the audacity that this will lead to other violations of federal laws is beyond stupid.

This kind of situation arises because we have not diligently enough maintained the separation between religion and government. The public supports religious institutions with tax dollars in various ways (Office of Faith Based Initiatives, School vouchers, Deductions for contributors etc.), when the original idea was that they should be self-supporting. They want to take tax dollars but withhold services without regard for public health care or settled public law, subject only to religious sentiment. People shouldn't take jobs the performance of which will conflict with their personal sensibilities.

Birth control and abortion are unethical "medical" procedures. No other "processes" or "drugs" are used so flippantly to stop the natural, healthy processes or organs in a human body. Birth control and abortion are 100% lifestyle-based options under the guise of a "medicinal necessity."

I don't know what percentage of women on bc pills are on it to prevent pregnancy, but it isn't 100%. I took bc pills to stop having a period every day for months. I suppose I could have had a hysterectomy instead, but putting me on the pill was safer and cheaper. You consider that "unethical"? I consider it healthy for me

Sarah, Sarah, Sarah - you do error greatly.

No, that would be true if this were simply about the Catholic Church. This is about businesses, that our supported through our laws and our government, and ergo are subjected to our laws and our government.

For the Catholic Church as most churches the Jewish faith, it is not about business it is about ministry. Ministry to their own people, to their neighbors, to the lost. This administration arrogantly doesn't care what you call what, all they see is that their opinion is supperior to the church's and there is no reason they shouldn't step in to stop a "prehistoric" practice. That is what the US Constitution in conjuction with the Bill of Rights was supposed to do. This group doesn't even care about that apparently.

I also think you need to study the history of artifical means of birth control. An hour two using Google doesn't count either. It's not pretty. I'm not against using it, but as a save all it, is not good. On the area of the pills, the biggest problem with it is the imitation formulas. Women's biochemistry is far more sensitive to men's and tinkering with it WILL cause problems. It is safe, in that it won't kill you, but your odds of reproduction problems actually increases, but not as bad as totally unprotected sex.

Birth control pills are used to try to help with certain reproductive problems. Perhaps more than most people know, but not as much as others think. Using them to control my wife's reproductive issue was a disaster. They clearly made her condition worse. Knowing what my wife went through, I am uncertain that giving this to early teens is such a great idea because their reproductive systems are still developing.

It all comes down to the very plain simple fact that needs to be observed by all the people, organizations, and businesses: "Separation of Church and State"!!

And it's too bad that we don't have a separation of the 1% elite/business and State.

So does the state pay for a man's condoms? Because if they don't, then it really is the same thing.

Humm... Has anything good or helpful towards the development of the human race ever come out of religion? I've been looking, searching through history and the only thing that religion has brought us is persecution, tyranny, pedophiles, and you guys know that I could go on for hours citing the atrocities that humanity has suffer in the name of religion. We should all be sick and tire of the Hippocrates religious zealots.

brendan-4,

You wrote, "Considering the mandate might be found unconstitutional i am pretty positive that this would be found unconstitutional as well." That's not how the Constitution works. The only real constitutional issue involved in the healthcare reform act is whether, by enacting an individual mandate, Congress exceeded its authority under the Commerce Clause, which has been the general source of power for Congress. The answer to that question has nothing to do with whether the Sebelius rule offends the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The Commerce Clause issue is much more dicey because the individual mandate presents a novel issue about what has been called "the stream of commerce" while the Sebelius rule supposedly violates the right of Catholics to practice their religion freely. I read recently that New York has had a similar provision that has always been upheld by New York courts specifically because the church-affiliated organizations are simply business open to the public and not an interference with the right of Catholics to worship as they see fit in Catholic churches.

Michael L. Marowitz
J.D., J.S.M. (Master's in Law with emphasis on constitutional law, Stanford Law School, 1981)

Commonsense....It all about the money and control imo. The catholic orgs do not want to pay out any more money than they have to from the look of things.

Well I suppose it is easier to control poor people. After all, they are more apt to believe anything they are told, rather than question the info they are being given. With education the person is able to ask questions and think for him/herself and improve one's lot.

By the way, why is it that it took the Catholic church so long i.e. years, to do the things you list that the catholic church is now doing re the pedofile issue and is only now taking moral and financial responsibility for same? Why weren't they reporting these sex abuse issues to the police etc? Why is it that many of these parishes have filed for bankruptcy as a means of protecting their properties/assets? Why is it that the only monies that will be paid out to those harmed, will be up to the amount of church insurance coverage?

Isn't this only about some men trying to have control over women, keeping the old partiachy/ men in control over women thing going?

How are these folks different from those who may practice eg. sharia law, or have other religious beliefs or practices eg female circumcision, multiple wives, etc?

Why should some religious groups/catholic church in this country be given an exemption from following the law of the land yet other folks who are not catholic or christian etc must follow the law of the land?

Anyhoo, the more children one have, the less that one have to give to or have for each child and yourself.

How many children do rich people have these days? How many children do they give up for adoption? How many rich people's children do you see in commercials 'looking for a sponsor' like shown in these save the children ads, which show children living in filth, homeless, hungry, unable to go to school so remain uneducated etc?

Watched a doccu recently about a woman who had 13 children and her daughter told her about birthcontrol. Even although the woman lived in a predominantly catholic country - I think it was in the Phillipines- she went against the priests/church teaching, and obtained birthcontrol which is provided free, because the massive amounts of people who are so poor, - some living in cardboard boxes and in squalor- they cannot even afford to feed themselves or their families.

The wealthy folks there can afford to purchase birthcontrol privately etc and for the most part have only about 2 children. In such a overpopulated country there was no sex education, and any teaching was about using the rhythm method, the more the better method and the temprature method even although the poor cannot even afford a thermometer. But apparently that is changing, where the poor are now being taught about pregnancy prevention/sex education etc. It is not only the women who want to limit how many children they have but also the men, who also want a better life for their children.

Think the Dugger family would have 19 children if they were not getting funding from a reality show? Or would it be ok for them to use the public safetynets like welfare etc?

This is the 21st century, the world is overpopulated as it is and abstainance have never been shown to work. There are many other methods of pregnancy prevention including the condoms, diaphrams, etc yet there are many people- even in a 1st world country like the USA- who are against even teaching about pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease prevention?

What is amazing is that there are people -including religiousity folks - would seem to prefer to see these children and their parents living in abject poverty unable to afford to feed themselves or have decent food, eating garbage, unable to afford a better life, clothing, shoes, education, proper shelter, etc. and oftentimes these same anti-choice people are equally anti- public safetynets, anti-welfare, anti any help to these poor folks, rather telling them to go find a job.... even with their limited to lack of education.

The question is WHY?

Peace..... wisdom..... freedom...

david enough of your Catholic church lies. If your Catholic Church is truely interested in just performing charity, it should stay out of public policy matters. Do you see 'Red Cross' or 'UNICEF' meddling with people's freedoms ? Also, Red Cross or the Bill Gates Foundation(dont remember the exact name) are true charities that undergo federal audit. Let the Catholic Church open up its books and show how much it spend on 'true charity' and how much was spend on covering up pedophiles and threatening the victims. Until then, stop this charity nonsense. You can't use charity as an excuse to support your bigotry, oppression and discrimination and your trampling of other people's freedom.

oz flying monkey , it doesn't matter that you consider this healthy for yourself, because these Christian aka Catholic zealots think they can judge other's decisions based on their stupid bronze age fairy tales. Well their doG asks them not to judge others, but these arrogant fools just at every chance to judge others as immortals. What hypocrisy from the right wing wackos

3thirty3 your brain and intellect are equal to Sarah's stupidity, wait Sarah's stupidity levels are very low.

People forget that PEOPLE have rights, Organizations have NONE. Organizations exist to serve PEOPLE and that includes church based organizations. People have the right to worship (or not worship) the god of their choice and follow the dictates of their conscience in such matters as THEY see fit but that right does not extend to any organization. THAT was the entire purpose of the 1st Amendment Establishment clause, to allow PEOPLE to follow their own conscience in matters of faith. HOWEVER ORGANIZATIONS, including Churches are NOT PEOPLE and have no rights to deny the Liberties and Rights of People, and that includes matters of Birth Control and Health Choices. The Catholic Church is overstepping it's bounds by this move, but with the Supreme Court having already given Corporations the status of "Person" in it's Citizen's United ruling I can see them giving Church Organizations more rights than people as well. Where will it all end? With people being slaves to organizations? Or people finally standing up and saying ENOUGH!!! If your religious beliefs dictate to not use birth control then don't (and contribute to further over population, a worse crime and a violation of being good stewards of the earth) but if you're hiring people then honor the rights of those people.

Commonsense...you are wrong. The church IS all about the money. I have been a Catholic all my life and have not once heard it not be about the money. I have known well more than 5 priests. They all say give more money. I have had one church refuse to allow my children religious education because I could not afford to pay the $70 per child plus books ($25 each). And that was after I was volunteering my time with the Knights of Columbus. I have heard my priest in my current church actually tell someone they are not giving enough money every week. So, I dont know where you get your information, But it is about the almighty dollar with the Catholic church.

I agree with Sarah...if I remember the right person. This has to do with institutions beyond that of a normal church. This has to do with universities and hospitals and such, where those working may or may not be of the same faith. Should the be penalized for not believing the same thing? Oh, thats right, according to the church, they are heretics! So why not burn you all at the stake? Wait, the church aplogized for that...they became accepting of the other religions...well, as long as it suits them. SCSDD! I am so ready to leave this so called religion and practice what I believe on my own as I am so tired of their hypocrisy!

Ippster, that is a tale told many times over, not just about Catholicism but many Protestant churches as well. When a friend of mine was going through a severe illness and was in the hospital, no one from her Southern Baptist church visited her or did anything to help her. However, when she didn't make her monthly offering, she got a letter in the mail about it. She sent a letter right back disolving her membership.

I have never been harassed about money where I go now. Then again, it helps that everyone in the organization is a volunteer, there is no paid clergy, and the monthly operating costs for our congregation an the other one we share a building with are around $1500. (lights, gas, insurance, and some maintenance)

Thirty3,

Still nothing substantive to add??? Still just insults??? Coward, seriously, grow up, you're making a fool of yourself. You know, when someone follows me around slinging uncessary insults at me, it usual means there either jealous, or have a crush and don't have the maturity to deal with it. Really, I'm not worth the effort or attention, but I would really appreciate you not stalking me anymore.

Unhappy,

I never said it was only used for medical issues. I said it was preventative care. Can you post me where I said it was only used for medical issues?

DB,

For the Catholic Church as most churches the Jewish faith, it is not about business it is about ministry.

Ministry doesn't run a hospital, heath care executives do. Ministry doesn't have a human resource department, businesses do.

These are filed as non-profits, which is a business and fall under business law. It doesn't matter what the intent in the heart of the Catholic officials are, they filed as a business and get a tax break as a business. They EMPLOY people. They don't minister to their employees, they EMPLOY them. Their ministry is in the church, these are not churches.

Joe:

The Catholic Church elevates the status of women. The Catholic Church regards Mary as "Mother of God," "Queen of Heaven," and "Immaculate Mary."

That is Bull-crap. Have you seen a woman bishop? Cardinal? Pope? No, they cannot, women are not even authorized to perform mass or to hear confession. The Catholic church regards Mary as the mother of God (big lie, Mary was the mother of Jesus, and Jesus was God's son therefore Mary could not be the mother of God or Jesus and God would be brothers).

Joe,

That's the dogma the church has sold to uneducated people, since it beginning. It keeps the powers that be and the establishment in place, by justifying all types of bigotry, fear, and prejudice.

That's why science is the church's worst enemy. It explains things that before were only explained through church dogma.

And, riddle me this... Divorce is a huge no-no in the church, why aren't they making a big deal about having to employ divorced people??? Perhaps because conservatives and republicans don't buy into that dogma with as much vim.

And again, why all the kerfuffle now? Where were these bishops when this passed in 28 states?

Oh, yes, that's because it's an election year, and every last one of them, including both parties are playing politics. It's just a same they're playing it with women's bodies.

rrobeson

While I'm actually for the promotion of birth control, I wonder why the real issue was never presented in this article. The real issue being why is birth control a health issue at all? Ok, so if you get pregnant, you are uh sick? So preventative measures like birth control is the same thing as getting a flu shot, or a vaccine?

So, if birth control isn't a health issue, then what else should be covered? Hey, how about all personal hygeine products. Isn't that important to our health? Why aren't those covered by insurance? How about haircuts, clothing, shelter? Those are all important to our health. Shouldn't those be covered too? How about good food, clean water, education. See the fine line we dance around every day about what the government should do for every citizen because we have rights?

I really wonder if the issue that should be fought at the supreme court level is simply that birth control is optional because procreation is optional. They are both 'choices' we should be allowed to make without having taxpayers or governmental laws interfering.

THIS.

Boy you can tell when an issue can really affect the left. They go at it like a bunch of rabid dogs hunting. They see this has the propensity to become a major issue. They will go at this the way they did with the Komen issue. brute force until they either get their way or this issue will become unstoppable.Any issue that could affect Mr. Obama's re-election will be attacked in force on all blog sites.

There really has never been a convincing argument as to why churches should be exempt from taxes. We all have to pay our fair share except peoples' fairy tale clubs for some reason.

Toasty, the reasoning behind it was so the government couldn't control the churches by taxes. In a weird way, that makes sense and I can actually understand the reasoning. However, that is NOT in the Constitution and can be changed.

What I object to is the church (all of it) being exempt from local property tax. I'm OK if the church does not pay for SCHOOL taxes or INCOME taxes. But property taxes in most areas are what pays for things like infrastructure and emergency/police services -- all which the church expects without paying.For example, if there is a fire, the church certainly expects a response.

What that means is that we ALL pay for religion -- whether we practice it or not.

You can look at it in this, admittedly, simplistic example.

Let's say a town has 80 houses, 10 businesses and 10 churches. That makes 100 entities. Fire protection costs $1000/year. That's $10 for each entity. Fair, right? Of course. Everyone is sharing equally.

Now let's say that the churches are exempt (as they are). Now each remaining entity must pay $11.1 for fire protection for all. In essence, the remaining entities are paying a $1.11 church tax. They don't have a choice and this happens all of America EVERY day.

One "counter" to this point I have heard, church members already pay property taxes. That's right, most do ON THEIR HOMES. But business owners also pay property taxes on their homes AND their businesses. Thus churches wanting public services should pay for them. They pay their electric bill, why should they not pay their other bills?

So, if the Catholic Church wants to complain about their BUSINESSES following the law, and about it being a violation of the First Amendment, I suggest perhaps starting a movement to rid of us the unconstitutional, HIDDEN church tax and see what happens.

That is a very respectable argument, Beth.

justice,

Mary is just the great example. The Catholic Church honors women and their roles in life. The fact that it does not ordain them as priests is not a dishonor. Just as it is not that men cannot become nuns. As for our Blessed Mother, you would do well to understand Christianity and the Trinity.

Sarah,

Try to get past your hatred of the Church. Losing that rage would help you think more clearly.

Please enlighten us as to what qualifies you as an expert on Catholic Dogma. Life experience as a Catholic? Years of Catholic Education? Or perhaps an Advanced Degree in Religious Studies?

FYI, science is not an enemy of the Church. Quite the opposite. Science has verified that life begins at conception. That is the root of what this argument is about.

The Church wants all marriages to last. It also recognizes there are some legitimate reasons for divorce, like adultery. (BTW, it also would like all marriages to be in Holy Matrimony, but recognizes most are not without in any way condemning them). But divorce, with or without Annulment, is not cause for Eternal Damnation. We are all sinners who need saving.

As to the timing, you have but to look to the administration and their ongoing onslaught against Human Rights. There has always been blowback from The Church against Unconstitutional Infringements. This one has simply been bigger because the Obamunists have made it so.

This isn't playing politics with womens' bodies. A very low percentage of women use BC pills for medical reasons (like my granddaughter does for ovarian cysts). The vast majority just want to be able to have intercourse, be it marital, adulterous, or fornicative, with much less likelyhood of incurring pregnancy. There is no good 'Reason' they should not pay for that themselves.

The Catholic Church honors women and their roles in life.

As long as said roles remain subservient to the Church's concept of what's appropriate for women, which, let's face it, is extremely antiquated in the context of modern society. I don't know how anyone can reasonably argue that the Catholic Church has not institutionalized the practice of gender discrimination for centuries.

But, Joe, it's preventative care! They cannot control themselves! The minute they see something they want to sex up, they are taken over by a flurry of hormones! They MUST be on CONSTANT, 24/7 Birth Control to prevent all of these unwanted births that end up costing more in the long run! Don't you see?? There isn't TIME to run to the store and buy contraceptives!

Maybe we should all be spayed and neutered like dogs, if we're going to act like it. Yes! This is the answer!

*sarcasm off*

Joe,

I've already posted all the reasoning's why, as have numerous other people here.

I don't hate the church, I'm just not willing to buy into it's dogma. You brought your religion up when YOU addressed ME. When you do that be prepared for me to answer. You're more than welcome to believe all the dogma you want, but your church and your religion, will never be a part of my life. I would save myself the time it takes to proselytize to me if I were you.

There is no ongoing onslaught against anything. First, they demonize Obama for his Christian pastor, than they insist he's a Muslim, now he's trying to take down all religion? Make up your minds.

This "onslaught" is nothing but Republicans causing a ruckus in order to take over the White House come November. You have no good answer for why Republicans didn't bring this up, when it was passed in 28 states, because there isn't one, that supports your position and illogical belief.

They didn't bring it up, because than, as now, it wasn't an attack on religion. The only difference is that now, it's an election year.

So many comments, where to start!?

Unhappy,

Man, you are seriously unhappy... That being said, you are truly showing your ignorance. I know that not everyone has science background but it's so easy to look up. From my own personal knowledge birthcontrol is just that. Hormone balance. There are only two hormones that regulate the menses cycle (you probably don't even follow that and it probably makes you feel weird doesn't it?). They are estrogen and progesterone. There is no way around it. Regulating hormones with a drug will prevent pregnancy. If you knew anything about the science of female reproduction you would understand but since you probably do something like accounting for a living it never came up. I feel sorry for you (for many reasons but in this case) because you accuse Sarah of assuming when you are the one who assumes: assuming that women don't really need birth control etc. You're the one who lacks reason and logic. Do you even really know what those things are rather than fancy words? Again, I feel sorry for the wifully ignorant but they also make me angry. Angry that they refuse to educate themselves for the betterment of themselves and everyone around them.

I am Catholic and I am fine with birth control but NOT fine with abortion. The two things are absolutely different!!! I don't understand why people lump the two together. I believe that Catholic hospitals etc should have to cover birth control in the health insurance coverage of their employees along with viagra (if my husband had ED and he worked for a Catholic run business I would definitely wish he could get cheaper prescriptions for it because sex is an important part of a relationship).

I would be happy to pay for someone's insulin shots. My father takes insulin every day now that he's 74 and in pretty good condition despite his many preexisting problems. I would want him to be covered (if he didn't have his own business/ was "retired").

Sarah: keep up the good work!! You're so awesome!

P.S. I also went to Catholic school my entire life (Joe) and I used my reason to come up with my decisions. You don't always have to believe what the Church or your priest tells you (to vote for anyone but Obama because he is the antiChrist). Use your brain, God gave it to you.

MGates ~

'I am Catholic and I am fine with birth control but NOT fine with abortion. The two things are absolutely different!!! I don't understand why people lump the two together.'

Being Catholic, do you believe that life begins at conception? If so, you should consider the fact that this mandate not only covers contraceptives such as birth control pills, but also morning after pills. If you believe that life begins upon conception, these are effectively abortion pills.

Shadow,

Or we could all just accept behaving like dogs as normal. Like Kobe. You know, if that arse turns you on then hit it bro. And who are the decent among us to criticize such slutiness. lol

Sarah,

The problem is that your position is of typical liberal symbolic emotion and lacks all matter of substantive 'reasoned' conservatism. Obama hasn't been demonized. He has been properly criticized for claiming not to be aware of the radicalism of a preacher who 1) married him 2) baptized both his 'punishments' and 3) who's church he claimed to have attended religiously (pun intended) for 20 years. His claim is simply unfathomable. FYI, Obama won the Catholic vote in '08; thus this is in no way a Republican attack against him. You are right about one thing. It is an election year. Which is why Obama got himself into this mess by pandering to his hellbound base.

Gates,

You might need some reeducation. The Catholic Church has not made voting against Obama Church Doctrine. But if you want to be a 'Practicing Catholic' in 'Good Standing' with the Church, then even though you recognize that as a fallible human you will sin every day, you must except ALL Church Dogma as true and correct. You don't have to like that. But it's a fact.

The Federal Office of Prison's can discriminate against hiring you if your past the age of 35 because of they have a mandatory retirement age of 55. You must have enough time to put in a full 20 years in order to receive full benefits. Whether you plan to work in a Federal Prison for 20 years or not you still have to have that option. I was denied a job at a Federal Prison in Atwater California because I was 38 years old, even though I was more than qualified for the position. Two different laws one for the government which makes it ok for the Federal Government to discriminate and one law for a private company which makes it a crime to discriminate.

Well FN, it's like Toasted said in the very beginning, "DAMNED law."

Folks.........this law does NOT force Catholics to use birth control!! The "Catholic Church" is using the old incense and mirror trick to get out of providing ANY health care.........Duhhhh.....most Catholics USE birth control and I hope that includes the priests who molest boys using by using condoms.

I was a practicing Catholic until I found religion and realized that the Catholic "church" is a business of selling mumbo jumbo to whoever wants that ole time religion. The Catholic hierachy is a business and one that is hypocritical and will not recognize that their followers are not "following".

A natural healthy birth is what the health care providers should be supporting. They are just happy to pay for birth control as it is much cheaper for them than the cost of a hospital supported childbirth. This mandate is an insurance company support. Follow the money.

But the law does force the Church to pay for birth control, in opposition to its beliefs. As far as I know, the Church does not oppose the use of hormones to treat conditions like PCOS and endometriosis.

People rail against the Church and say that it teaches that sex is only for procreation. So, what other purpose would sex serve, then? Recreation. OK, so are people now saying that health insurance should cover recreational activities? Should we pass a law that says health insurance should cover my weed habit and a new big screen TV? I mean, it's recreational, right? Health insurance is used to insure health. It's not a pharmaceutical expense plan. I have yet to hear of an instance where someone needed to go to the ER for lack of sex.

this law does NOT force Catholics to use birth control

No, but it forces them to PAY for it. And that isn't right.

By the way, insulting one religion in particular, or religion in general is not a good way to attract people to your point of view, even if they DO use birth control.

Because eliminating the MANDATE would not eliminate ACCESS.

Religious organizations have a basic Constitutional right to believe as they do.

The Catholic hierachy is a business

Baloney. The Church has founded non-profit schools and hospitals around the country because they are furthering what they perceive to be their mission. Not to make money for 'shareholders'. The fact that you switched religious affiliation (or ditched it all together) does not change the facts.

Fair enough, zupercram, but why stop with birth control? Get Congress to pass a law that blocks Health Insurance from paying for Viagra. After all, the majority of users are well past the age of fathering children.... just like most of our Representatives and Senators.

CAL, I wouldn't oppose a law that blocks health insurance coverage for Viagra one bit. In fact, I would support it. No double standards here.

It's clearly the government overstepping its powers to force matters-of-belief (or conscience) onto a church. Well all the God-haters love to cite "separation of church and state", so those same goons need to allow the Catholic Church to use its constitutional rights to "separate state from church."

The government can't force any court or person to try someone for the death penalty. The government can't force you to pay money to a political candidate you find repulsive, unethical or morally unjust. And, "pro-women" groups can't force their liberal views and mandates on others, including fellow women who find abortion as repugnant and an abusive of the woman's very reproductive system that separates her from the other gender.

common sence, this law does not force catholics to pay for birt control. It forces their affiliated BUSINESSES to cover birth control for their workers. See the difference - church -business -church -business. Once you open a commertial entity , you have to obey all the laws related to that entity. It is really that simple.

Jesus never said that people can't use birth control. This 'belief' was created by the Papacy. It's similar to the fish on Friday rule.

Contraception is the #1 best way to relieve famine, overpopulation, poverty and war. It should always be distributed along with the knowledge of how to use it to women in countries who need food aid. This is just plain common sense.

The Catholic Church along with other well meaning organizations has created a massive humanitarian disaster in 'developing nations' because they distribute food aid without birth control pills. Pressure needs to put on the Catholic Church to reverse this antiquated Papal decision.

@zupecam health insurance ALREADY covers recreational activities...break your leg skiing? covered...get lung cancer from smoking?..covered...and yes overdose on illegal drugs...covered...

Catholic doctrine should apply to church MEMBERS....if the church needs to employ lay people because there are not enough Catholics to work for them, then isn't an infringement of those LAY employees religous rights that the church is imposing on them? I think if the Church wants to be exempt from following the healthcare mandate, then they can choose to no longer be exempt from paying taxes...1 exemption, not both...

what about Christian Scientists.. they don't believe in doctors, human health care, leavingf it all to GOD.. does that mean non members who work in for example their reading rooms can be denied ANY health care since that using it would violate their beliefs!!!!!

commonsense....

this law does NOT force Catholics to use birth control

No, but it forces them to PAY for it. And that isn't right.

Why the hell not? The government is forcing all employers to pay for it, not just Catholics. Are you saying that the government shouldn't force ANY employers to pay for any health coverage, or only those that are Catholic?

Government forces employers to take care of their employees. That's nothing new. If you want to be against that, then fine. Otherwise, you're only suggesting that the Catholic church should get preferential treatment because of their religion. THAT would not be right. It would also be unconstitutional.

Besides, nobody's forcing the Catholic church to hire anybody. If they can't abide by labor laws, then they should not be employing people. Otherwise, they need to suck it up and follow the law just like everyone else does. The fact that you don't believe a law is just does not give you the right to be exempted from it.

The smart thing for the Republican party, is to minimize the arguments over social issues.

Social Conservative, has become a synonim for gay, racial, female and religous bigot.

Thants in part to the Tea Party.

Or the word liberal has become a synonym for christian bigotry.

This is bunk on the part of the Catholic Church because no one is being forced to take birth control. Your God would frown on the moving priests from continent to avoid prosecution for child molestation more than offering coverage for birth control.

In the same church lessons are available on the rhythm method. Is that not birth control or an attempt at it?

Pandering to religions will be the end of this country. Christians view themselves as a "persecuted minority", as do Jews, Muslims, pagans, etc.. You want to be tax exempt? Shut up.

The government should NOT dictate what we can, or can not do, and to dictate what should or should not be included in such a clause, is borderline Nazi crap. The government has to get the hell out of peoples lives, and just run the country. health insurance from an employer is a benefit, not a right.

The workers working for religious based employers should be the ones to speak up. I am assuming that currently their policy does NOT include paying for these services, and still they are employing people. So if the employees want that coverage now, they should speak up. Again, they currently are without these benefits. I could care less what polls say about how many Catholics pay for birth control. This issue should be worked out within the church not by government. If the employees are happy with their current situation then leave it be. Why pick a religious fight? If the employees are not happy with the absence of these benefits, then let them speak up or find another employer.

Really, aren't any of you getting darn sick of the government meddling in every single aspect of our lives? I feel like they are staring in my window now. When is enough enough?

Silly lawsuit by the most ungodly group of so called "Christians". Don't believe me? Why do you think they dress and wear jewelry only a rapper would be proud of? I will not have the Catholic Church dictating to me or my daughters. Let them get out of the healthcare business and the education business and stick to preaching if they don't like it. The world would be a better place without the Catholic church selling forgiveness, harboring criminals and raping our children.

This law has been in effect for years. The church is exempted. Only their secular offshoots have to pay. This is a non-issue. This is also a way for the republicans to take your mind off the fact that they are trying to raise taxes on poor people in a few weeks. Stay focused on the real issues and let families decide what is best for them.

This law is not a war against anybody or any religious faith, it simply states that hospitals cannot refuse to give their patients any medical care because of their religious belief. President Obama's administration didn't create this law, the Bush administration did. With Bush as president nobody called it a attack on religion. Republicans have known about this law long before President Obama was elected, but now, all of a sudden it's a problem. Don't believe the crap republicans are saying because this is just one more thing to be added to the very long list of republican lies.

pfscott: This is a particular church who is an employer, challenging a host government of secular laws. You've got it ass backwards. This church is attempting to "dick" around in the affairs of a secular government.

tac210, I don't believe your argument accurately parallels what I was saying about recreational activities. Let's say some unfortunate gentleman gets a penile fracture (it happens, saw it on Discovery Health once, ewwwww) while engaging in pre-marital, i.e. "recreational" sex. Should his Catholic-sponsored health insurance cover that? Absolutely. This is the difference: your argument confuses the effect of engaging in recreational activity with the ability to engage in it in the first place.

ArbyH - You use the word "affiliated" which implies that the business supports the tenants of the parent organization. Regardless, the real question lies in why they were once exempted but now the government wants to "mandate" it.

For myself it isn't a question of birth control or other health issues but rather on the government trying to entwine their secular agenda on healthcare vs anothers religious core belief towards a small part of healthcare.

Your argument about the business being "required" to provide certain services flies in the face that all current insurers already have restrictions on what they will cover and at what price. Isn't the end result really based on the charters upon which these affiliated businesses were formed or if they are self insured?

Are you all just crazy people??? Where has this world gone? Republican retoric is just ridiculous and I cannot believe the people who listen to it. I love the way everyone wants the government out of their lives....sure. So it's easy - if they don't want to supply their employees with health coverage that covers a woman's right to seek any gynocological services she chooses - then DO NOT accept one singe red cent from the government to run your hospital, school, etc etc... Use your Catholic money. No medicare reimbursements, no medicaid, no federal subsidies, no tax breaks, no non-profit state tax relief - no government at all right. I'm sure your hospital/school can run just fine on it's own - Go for it.

@zupercam using or not using birth control does not affect the ability to participate in recreational sex...it affects the ability of a pregnancy as a result of said recreational sex, thus making it recreational rather than procreational...your original statement that i was responding to was "ok so now people are saying that health insurance should cover recreational activites"...and I simply pointed out that indeed health insurance DOES cover recreational activities.

@ dan-2035414- Dude it is NOT about healthy birth or insurances not wanting to pay. It's a choice, if a chick is paying for health benefits, shouldnt she have the CHOICE to choose how she uses those benefits? She is paying for those benefits monthly after all. And if she so chooses how to spend those benefits on birth control let her, it's HER body, it's HER money and it's HER RIGHT to CHOOSE what she wants to do.

So you're saying that the Catholic church should be able to open as many businesses as they please, hiring non-Catholics and serving non-Catholics, but that they should be able to dictate that everyone who works there must abide by Catholic doctrine in all aspects of their lives?

That's not on the employment application.

Kris Craig, As you stated, "Government forces employers to take care of their employees." Did you skip post #2.3 above? Caring for employees does not mean that offering recreational activities should be required.

The Catholic Church IS THE ONE who is sued on weekly bases due to its homosexual. pedophile priests!

What a bunch of hypocrites when 98% of Catholic women practice birth control. Why don’t they just admit that the Catholic religion is a dying religion that no one even listens too anymore?

I denounced the Catholic religion a long time ago. What are all you good Christians going to do Burn me as a witch? LMAO!

tac210, The bottom line is that birth control is not essential to maintaining one's health and survival. Whereas, a broken legs and lung cancer are vital issues. Your still confusing effect and ability to participate without consequence. It would have more of a parallel if health insurance covered some sort of skiing apparatus that guaranteed no broken legs, or covered a pill that allowed one to smoke and not get cancer.

My uterus, my business, my personal health. Stay the hell out of it. There are instances where birth control is not used for that purpose. Some women have a condition called menorrhagia which is very debilitating and is effectively treated with birth control for those women who do not want ablation or hysterectomies because they still want to have children. Time for the Catholic church to get out of the dark ages and into the 21st century with the rest of us. The Black Plague is not decimating their flock anymore.

pfscott

The government should NOT dictate what we can, or can not do, and to dictate what should or should not be included in such a clause, is borderline Nazi crap. The government has to get the hell out of peoples lives, and just run the country. health insurance from an employer is a benefit, not a right.

What in the hell are you talking about? Birth control is an option. Did someone force a BC down your throat? Why is it that when ever the government doesn't capitulate to the Churches demands, you drag out that "Nazi" crap? Are you comparing the Holocaust with an employer being required to have certain things covered on insurance. What about mammograms or prostate exams? Should they be covered. You have to check that religion stuff at the door and realize that there is a separation of church and state.

The Catholic church is clear on how they view abortions, and birth control. You can strongly disagree, but then you do not have to become a member, nor do you have to work for any religiously based employer. Those people that are members SHOULD abide by the tenets of the religion or frankly they are hypocrites which seems silly since they could easily find another church that mirrors their own beliefs. So why is Pelosi a Catholic when she clearly disagree with their belief system? She is in fact a hypocrite.

If the church pays for these services, they become hypocrites as well. Offering those benefits and then paying for them is supporting their use. I fail to see how on earth the church can preach one thing and then be forced by the government to do another. Again, this issue should be within the church and their members to either change or to abide by.

pfscott

The government should NOT dictate what we can, or can not do, and to dictate what should or should not be included in such a clause, is borderline Nazi crap. The government has to get the hell out of peoples lives, and just run the country. health insurance from an employer is a benefit, not a right.

I agree 100%!!! The Government should stop wasting their time trying to make abortion illegal too. In your own words, "get the hell out of peoples lives", right?

I love it when people keep telling us the gov't needs to get out of our lives, except of course, if it's to fit their agendas.

I implore everyone to watch on youtube.com...The Fall of the Republic this will open your eyes

I implore everyone to watch on youtube.com...The Fall of the Republic this will open your eyes

Thank you to the church for standing on the word of God. Too many people are afraid to stand up for their religious beliefs and it is a sin. The Bible teaches that if you don't stand up for what is right you are as guilty as those doing what is wrong. If this country doesn't start standing for the principals of God, we are going to have God's wrath come upon us. It is already happening. Wake up America. Read Isaiah 9 and 10. Look what happened to Israel when they didn't obey God. Remember, for God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believed in Him has everlasting life. John 3:16. Also in Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. God please bless America and bless Israel.

28 States right already have a 'mandate' as far as supporting healthcare, which INCLUDES birth control (a prescription drug), at organizations which 'hide' under the auspices of RELIGION. Catholic hosptals ALREADY allow such healthcare, as do some major Catholic universities. A Church is a Church, a Business is a Business, unless you are saying a Hospital IS a Church, in which case you would be wrong.

The church is against birth control, right?

The church is against homosexuality, right?

The church will fight tooth and nail against birth control.

The church will spend millions to hide pedophile priests who molest boys.

Where will the hypocrisy end? When will people take off their blinders?

"David Axelrod, a senior adviser to President Barack Obama, said the administration is willing to work with Catholic universities and hospitals to find a way for them to cover contraception without abridging "anyone's religious freedom,"........So far, the administration hasn't said how it plans to do that."

So far, the Obama Administration has simply said "Do it or else".

I guess that's their idea of 'compromise'.

What's next - Requiring Muslim and Jewish schools to serve pork for lunches because 'it's healthy for them'?

This is just another example of the Democrats overreaching with their 'Obamacare' - As I recall, Nancy Pelosi said "We have to pass it to see what's in it". I guess we're finally finding out what's in it.

Laura-2104788

Thank you to the church for standing on the word of God. Too many people are afraid to stand up for their religious beliefs and it is a sin.

So tell me, when the church has known of the child molestation that has gone on for centuries by it's own priests, and done nothing to stop it, but spent millions of dollars to hide it and never condone it, was that also the church standing on the "word of god"?

28 States already have this "mandate".

NO ONE says "USE IT"? ?

HAVE IT "AVAILABLE"? ?

Is it a prerequisite of all Catholic employees to be Catholic? Since the Constitution forbids discrimination against religion in the hiring practice, not all employees will be Catholic. The question to ask, do religious organizations have a right to mandate all employees follow their beliefs? To me, it's hypocritical for a Christian to say we are all "the Body of Christ" but only if you believe what they believe.

If all these Catholic employees are not using birth control, then it's no money out of their pocket because no claims will be filed. It's not forcing them to go against their faith, it's allowing those that don't buy into that belief to be covered.

Keep your religion out of my government. We have seen through-out history (and even today) the horrors of religious governments. John F. Kennedy swore that his Catholic faith would never interfere with his duties to serve all of the American people to the best of his abilities. I don't recall that same pledge from George W. Bush that depended heavily on the Christian Right for his election.

Such a politician isolates himself to only those that fully support his religion as his oath of office requires him to represent all of the people. Why would anyone elect such a sinning liar that violates both his professed faith (and his oath of office) the moment he assumes office?

Keep your religion out of business. Christ did not sell his fishes and loaves to the multitudes. Mohammad did not prohibit images of himself to lock up the market because he was selling figurines and paintings in his likeness. Moses did not seek publication rights and royalties for The Ten Commandments.

Keep your government and business interests out of my church. I go there only to reaffirm my faith. A government agent spying from the seat behind me is an affront and violation of my religious rights, regardless of the Patriot Act. Your business card on the church bulletin board tells me that you are like the merchants that Christ angrily threw out the temple. I will avoid your business at all cost.

I don't understand the controversy surrounding this issue. Any church that enters the business community by serving the public should expect to follow the same rules as any other business that serves the public. Their freedom of religion applies only in their churches. Not in the public square of free enterprise or public office. By all rights, tax exemption and other special rights for such businesses are clearly unconstitutional.

Perogatives of "Personhood" vs the un*Constitutionally Dyslexic (and throw John Boehner and "his" House of Accomplices in that one, too!) It's not specifically a "Woman's" issue or a "Religious" issue; and this is just another example of a problem created by the Supreme Court throwing "legal impossibilities of Personhood", like a big fat juicy bone to the Dogs, creating these "one-sided only" and "one size fits all" consumed statements and questions. It's an "Individual gender-neutral/religious neutral Personhood" issue; which is actually the key and necessary "definative line" that satisfies the Constitution, in this case, to make the separation of Church and State possible. All these Religious Affiliations that Boehner spoke of and Boehner, himself, and his Controling Accomplices are all in an "incredulous and indignant" Constitutional dyslexic convulsive "seizure" uproar because they're looking at the MO of the Constitution like it's there to deceive, exploit, extort and rob from"The Individual" to invade the boundaries of others in order to K-O and CONQUER, including the actual "Individual and their Personhood" and force them to do whatever is needed for the good and gain of whatever side or Cause wants to WIN! and gain the most benefit for themselves, with Congress's aiding, abetting and blessing. It's a really stunningly foreign concept to them that it doesn't work that way and "We the People of Personhoods" have to continue to have our heads banged against the wall while they continue to try and make the Constitution work their way or "We the People of Personhoods" have to STOP this INSANITY and throw every one of their ignorant-of-convenient, deceitful, misleading, misrepresentative, lying, cheating, corrupt, contaminated, money-mongering, criminal a$$es OUT! John Boehner and "his" Majority of Accomplices all took an oath to uphold and defend this Constitution. IT IS JUST INCREDULOUS, INFURIATING AND A CONTINUED INSULT TO ALREADY INJURED INTELLIGENCE that this Boehner guy and his Accomplices keep taking us around and around and around THE ROSEY and putting us through this. GET OUT! GET OUT! GET OUT!!!!!! We need a new CONGRESS!!!!!! (House and Senate)

Nobody's Religious beliefs are being infringed or violated. Everybody gets to continue believing what they believe and practicing what they practice, including birth control, if they do. AND, actually, the flip side of the issue that is the real side that needs to be addressed is "for" and "about" The Individual and The Church is actually asking the Federal Government to contain, control, regulate, restrict and prohibit a select Individual/s personal beliefs, behaviors and choices "for" The Church. Not only would that be impermissible under the Constitution, it's ABSURD and it is astoundingly and outrageously ABSURD that Congress, again, doesn't know any better than to be involving the American People, as your convenient collective of Individuals, as distractions and deflections in it, for you! The only thing the Federal Government is doing is mandating that not only options for gender/religion neutral "Individual" choice be there, but that also neutrally clear and unhindered access to an Individual, private and "personhood" choice "for" the Individual is there, also.

Go work on your Bill to Ban Congress from Insider Trading! Or has it already gone through but is being quietly kept away from the Press and Public knowlege? Or have I missed a quick blip on it?

Witchking: The Church is to uphold God's word. The church is made of people who are flawed but the Word of God is not. Therefore the church has every right to uphold its tenants of Biblical Truth.

Just because the members of the church don't practice the church teachings does not eliminate the Truth. it just shows you how weak individuals are. I don't think this only pertains to Catholics but to all religious members. May God help us all!

Let's say the Pope decides tomorrow that washing hands before preparing food is immoral. And say the Catholic church owns restaurants that serve the public.

Should the government "get out of the way" on that issue as well?

Hope the church sent a memo out to all their priests..the latest news.

Fox News commentators must be proud for socially engineering this issue on behalf of the Christian Right.

And I agree ...It's time to take away the tax-exempt status of these megachurches.

Look everyone knows that the Catholic Church was a hideout for gay men for many years; who by keeping celibate thought they could remain pure in thought. I guess that didn't work, because now those same gay men were molesting children. For people to constantly blame the Catholic Church is ridiculous.

The Catholic Church should not be forced to pay for Birth Control pills for women, anymore then the Catholic Church should be forced to pay for a man's condoms. This is something that is governed more by behavior than anything else.

Wildcatwest

Contraception is the #1 best way to relieve famine, overpopulation, poverty and war. It should always be distributed along with the knowledge of how to use it to women in countries who need food aid. This is just plain common sense.

That sound intellectually superior, but the bottom line is that people just want to have "fun" without getting any one of the results to be responsible for - especially when the commitment to a kid is actually a lifetime anymore.

If this matter does not illustrate "Stand for something, or fall for anything" nothing will. When did thinking Americans cease to understand it is their PRIVATE financial responsibility to pay for their most PRIVATE personal choices in the most PRIVATE decisions of their life (sexual behavior in their bedrooms and family planning) and not my bill to pay and certainly not my church's bill to pay? (Since this is just more of the same "it all comes down to money" that seeks to have me now pay for others what I have paid for myself for years if I wanted that produce- it's just more "I want but I don't want to pay myself, I want you to pay for me" junk of the welfare state and its entitled (not!) plebicide.) And that's just the superficial and concrete money piece of this issue. By far the more substantial and aspirational aspect of this is, why should I (and my church) have to pay for the poor choices and bad habits of others who apparently want a free pass on their apparent lack of SELF-control in matters of sexual behavior? Both common sense and sound moral teaching (that has stood the test of time - unlike the crap coming out of Wash since the early 1970s) would suggest that if you do not want a child at this time, or ever, the way to do that is to stop or never start having sexual relations until you do want a child or you are ready, willing and able to parent and support a child, and until you are in a solid, married relationship that supports the best interests of the child. It's that simple, really. Certainly cases of rape, incest and health of the woman are special circumstances - that are ALREADY addressed by EXISTING law. There is no need to enact any change in policy to address those. It is so hypocritical that the same people, who would howl if smokers, drinkers (like casual sex addicts/buddies, smokers and drinkers are arguably another group with poor choices and a bad habit) asked for the public at large and the church at large to pay for the products they want to indulge in and would be better off without because they might make betters choices - and avoid STDs and unwanted pregnancies by just keeping their legs crossed, nonetheless expect me, as a taxpayer, and my church, against every sound moral, emotional and physical health reason the church knows, to pay for the products they want. No. Just no. My church contributions should NOT be extorted by a government that could not run a dog pound to pay for your contraception, that I object to on both moral and fiscal grounds. No. If you want to make the poor decision and indulge your bad habit to have sexual relations outside of marriage, when you can't afford to even support yourself, much less a child, and when you are so unstable that you can't control your own behavior when you are only hurting yourself - and risking bringing an unwanted pregnancy into the world because you are so out of control - don't look to me or my church to pay for your free pass. Buy your pharmaceuticals, your smokes, your booze, your other bad habits and pay for them yourself. Leave me and my church alone....Further, it is not the responsibility of me or my church to financially bail out a fiscally profligrate government that is as irresponsible and out of control as the sexually libertine "constituency" that that bad government wishes to curry favor with come November with this latest Wash. overreach crap. It is not my fault, or the fault of my church, that the government is broke - because it could not run a dog pound - and now wishes to begin a slippery slope of more "takings", now from my church. No. It is laughable (and quite telling) that the same people who are so eager (and wrong) in other situations to cry, "separation of church and state" have no problem with this desperate money grab in desperate economic times - that were CAUSED by Wash. and its "constituent" pets. You want to be separate? Pay for your own bad habits and poor choices - and that includes your family planning products, cheapskates...It is a matter of money to the secularists, who from top down have no clue what true religion is, and who, in fact, hate true religion. However, to those with higher aspirations and goals, of which I am one, this assault on the central CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS of RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, is an abomination and it cannot stand. If this needs to go all the way to the so-called Supreme Court, so be it. The right of conscience trumps ALL in a FREE society. If anyone thinks otherwise, he or she is apparently brainwashed into accepting a USSA and an Amerikia. Fortunately, many of us Americans will NOT accept this sort of tyranny without exercising all of our CONSTITUTIONAL rights.

Hate speech against Catholics is no better than hate speech against blacks or gays. Take another roll in the mud you jolly trolls. Then hurry back on line with another reply. Yes, you can look in the mirror first but don't gag!

This requirement does impinge on the Catholic Church's (and other faith communties that oppose contraception) belief system. The issue is the use of Church money (in addition to the individual employee's contribution) to provide a reproductive service that is not required to maintain a healthy life. The Catholic Church should have the right not to provide that coverage. Everyone makes a point that not all employees are Catholic and that is true, but they are working in a Catholic institution (college, hospital etc). If the individual understands that birth control services are not covered by the institution's health care and still agrees to work there, no blood/no foul. A person does not have to work there. People avoid joining the military all the time because they do not want to abide by the rules and regulations of the US military. No one is forced to enlist, just like no one is being forced to work in a Catholic institution. If you don't like the health coverage, look for employment elsewhere. Some of the comments about no health coverage at Scientology Centers would apply the same way. If you go into it knowing you will not have health coverage, you made that choice. As far as the comments about a religion sponsoring murder or other serious crime having exemption from the law is simply taking something to the ludicrous. Opposing birth control is not against the law. People should have the right to believe something (which is not illegal) and not have the government impose its will upon them. And we as a society should not make people believe the same things we do through legislation.

In my opinion, faith is your preferred association with God. Churches are for you to learn, reaffirm and strengthen your faith. Problem is, churches are created by man, and include too many "man - rules". They have become like little countries, with tons of rules, leaders, elders, idols, traditions - taking away from your personal association with God, and distracting you with all the hype that goes on in church. Churches are always pressing that other religions are wrong, and theirs is right. My church (not Catholic) pastor beat up his wife, who promptly divorced him. He was put on probation by the "mother church" for a few months, then "voted" back in as pastor. Our church is now dying, people leaving it at an alarming rate. It's hard to listen to a man, giving you advice how to live your life, when he doesn't live it as he should. Churches have homosexuality, greed, bigotry, adultry, running rampant in it's congregation, including its leaders. I still go to church, because compared to everything else, it's my best way to strengthen my faith in God. I just have to weed out the bad parts of my church, and save the good. It's kind of like the US - even with all its negatives, it's still better than most other countries. I still think having something to believe in makes my life better, and my life is proof of that.

Laura-2104788 please stop your invisible doG nonsense. Just because you believe in some ludicrious and stupid fairy tales should not mean others are entitled to respect it. I can act in whatever way I wish and it might anger your doG. But, I don't give a rodent's posterior because, hell what I don't believe your doG exists. So, take your 'doG's word' argument somewhere else

D B Akron

So your position is that sex is only acceptable for procreation.ise it's a "sin."

zupercram

Kris Craig, As you stated, "Government forces employers to take care of their employees." Did you skip post #2.3 above? Caring for employees does not mean that offering recreational activities should be required.

Since when is birth control a "recreational activity?!"

Ok, so if your son gets injured during a Little League game, you're saying that the employer should be allowed to refuse to cover the child's hospital care because he was injured during a "recreational activity?"

Medical care is medical care, period. It is not up to the employer to decide whether care prescribed by a doctor is "worthy" of being covered or not. That's between the patient and their doctor. If the employer can't accept the fact that they have no right to get between a patient and their doctor, then they should not be offering health benefits at all.

If the "old America" is one where women are discriminated against in the workplace, then good riddance.

agreed, damn right good riddance to old america if it means discrimination against women in the workplace, heck any discrimination between US Citizens in any place in the USA has to go as well.

Why women's rights? Does that mean Catholic men are allowed to use contraceptives...?

<.<

probly not, there fanatical view is always to prevent pregancy is not to conceive, they think sex is not for pleasure, its for breeding, not to be enjoyed, that goes for all backward groups of the Victorian way of thinking and earlier.

With the war against women by the GOP in full force, what choice do we have except to stick with a humane man that understands! We have fought for years and years!! Now the idiots want to take it all away. This is just ONE problem. Yes, as a woman, I will vote for whomever supports womens rights. And as a catholic, this doesn't "force" me into taking birth control, it give me a choice. The "FATHERS' of the church realize we are damn tired of their bully ways with women. I still have a FREE CHOICE, given to me by God. Church seems to forget that little point. They can't brainwash us as easily as they did when I was a kid many many years ago. And yes, I went to catholic school, church, 1st communion, confirmation, marriage and my kids were baptized in the church. No matter how you look at it, this is an all out war against women.

I also have freedom of choice and there are many women on this site who are members of the GOP. For you to say that only women in the democratic party knows what to do is completely wrong. The truth is most women do not want to pay for someone else's birth control, unless they are using it too. It raises everyone's rates.

SandyV, I am glad to here that you realize that the people who sit in the pews ARE the church. The priest is there to serve you, not be served BY YOU. I am very happy to hear that you continue to practice your faith in a way that honors your humanity, womanhood and dignity.

Humanae Vite, Paul VI's encyclical against artificial contraception was a shocker. Approval had been recommended by the council but the Pope just couldn't go for it. In the post Vatican II age, the church is once again struggling to pull itself out of the middle ages. IMHO the election of Benedict XVI was a huge step backwards (but to be expected since JP II filled the college of cardinals with conservatives).

Organizations like EWTN are seeking to turn back the advances of Vatican II. Mother Angelica is an ultra-conservative. I heard her once use scripture to show how it will forever be impossible to allow women to be ordained. It was the most twisted interpretation of scripture I have ever heard!

Oh, BTW I'm a Benedictine monk....and this monk says to you: You GO girl!

Pax Vobiscum

Do you want to know how to make a liberal squeal? Tell him the truth. The truth is that the number of children a woman has is inversely proportional to her intelligence. In simpler words, the dumber she is, the more kids she will have.

This is the way to dumb down a nation, smart women using birth control and stupid ones not. Ah well, more democrats that way.

No teacher can teach a kid much, with the iq of 70. So, no sense wasting your money on education.

@ IWonder above: Dumbing down...NO! It is to help persons of lower IQ and less fortunate including others to plan a family they can afford to have.

When will religion ie. Catholic Church and Evangelicals realize that it is us taxpayers and vets that are paying our Congressman to do the "work of the people which includes upholding the Constitution which allows the expression of religious freedom". It is not religion that provides us with a constitution. Consequently, this "birth control" thing is a non-issue. Except that it will drive the far right voters to the voting booth in DROVES this fall. And for the media to keep this issue alive is just "baiting" and an effort to find another "shock and awe topic" to keep the audience pinned to the TV . The result of course is to give Progressives a bad image to the far right. The media is not bringing people together it is antagonizing many including myself!

So all the smart educated Mormon women who have 6-10 kids are now somehow now dumb?

As a liberal I say you're an idiot IWonder.

Very idealistic mr.mike, look at reality. How long has planned parenthood been beating the drums? Is the problem getting better? No it is getting worse.

Air castles don't really exist, mr.mike, get your head out of the clouds and try putting your feet on the ground where the real world is. Hey, look around, it could be worse!

No pbh, the mormons, catholics and such are the reason we haven't already gotten too stupid as a nation to continue to exist. It's changing though, won't be long.

Oh and pbh, it makes me quite happy to be called an idiot by an admitted liberal, you made my day. :)

Oh and pbh, it makes me quite happy to be called an idiot by an admitted liberal, you made my day. :)

personally having been catholic and having a mere mortal telling me what i can and can not do is bs. the catholic church is all about the ignorance of its sheep. who are they to dictate birth control oh yea i forgot the preist like molest and rape little boys so that makes the majority of them fags!!! talk about deadly sins!!!! i am a woman and no man is going make me get pregnant..and that s exactly what the birth control issue is in the catholic church . sex is for propagation so there will be more in numbers of future sheep that will do as they are told in essence religious enslavement. i thought slavery was abolished in this country. obviously not in the vatican. what happene to separation of church and state???? i also agree that there should an opt out on birth control with all these medical insurers that like to screw us anyways for money of services that we dont need or use. just like if you look at your auto insurance policies you find that you pay 2.00 amonth for uninsured motorist... what does that mean you paying for nothing i went to the state insurancecommissioners office to find out what that is.. and they said it does do anything if you an accident the other is not insured it doesnt do anything so we are paying insurance for something we do not use nor need. i would extremely love to have a million customers giving 2.00 each month for nothing would nt you???

Um maureen, I agree with some of what you said I think. I personally, being an atheist, think that almost all religions were designed to subjugate women and salve men's conscience. Don't get the idea that I think I know everything, I'm not at all sure that I know anything.

Whether I know anything or not does not change the fact that, given a choice, smart women have less kids. That is too bad, but I am not one to try to force anyone to do anything.

"This is about whether the government of the United States should have the power to go in and tell a faith-based organization they have to pay for something that they teach their members shouldn't be doing. It`s that simple," Rubio said.

No, you NITWIT. This is about not allowing special economic treatment to religious people. Everyone else that isn't Catholic related covers these expenses. There is NO reason that businesses should get away with not paying.

Religion is the root of all evil, not the opposite as they so easily have everyone believe. Catholics are the worst offenders....they don't care about any other religious beliefs but don't step on theirs, no matter how archaic they are. This should be about one thing and one thing only...better and available healthcare in this country. Not about profit...or religion.

An Independent Thinker

It all comes down to the very plain simple fact that needs to be observed by all the people, organizations, and businesses: "Separation of Church and State"!!

And it's too bad that we don't have a "Separation of the 1% elite/business/lobbyists and State".

Spoken like a true atheist who only wants people to act like them! If there is supposed to be freedom of religion in this country then Catholics have a right to express that too. Especially when they are being forced to pay for it.

Unhappy, no body is asking the Catholic church to stop preaching its bull manure. It can preach all its lies and the sheep can swallow all of it in their 'religious' church setting. When the Catholic church establishes businesses, which is not a 'religious setting', all we are asking for is the church shouldn't be allowed to discriminate and enforce its bigotry on secular citizens. Your freedom of religion doesn't supercede others freedom from it.

Hmmm...

Hindering the reproductive process and facilitating the reproductive process.

Yea...that's the same.

Hindering the reproductive process and facilitating the reproductive process.

So the church has a double standard when interfering with the reproductive process is involved? Good or bad, isn't any kind of medicinal involvement frowned upon, I mean with god being so magnanimous and loving surely he wouldn't discriminate...

YourShadow- Many women who have irregular cycles use birth control to regulate their cycles so that they may become pregnant in the future... Oral contraceptives have more than one benefit and are for some a medical necessity.

Actually the more equivalent to birth control pills would be the use of condoms. Does the insurance cover that too? The truth is very few women use birth control pills for other diseases or to regulate their periods. The majority use it for what it is supposed to be- birth control.

Unhappy, you are obviously misinformed, the truth is many many women, and even teenage girls that are NOT sexually active use birth control to regulate their menstrual cycle and make it tolerable.

Both my mother and my sister used it for those reasons as well as The Pill is used for TX of menorrhagia, controlling the growth of uterine fibroids and endometriosis but Nikiz, unfortunately, you're barking up the wrong tree with that loon who refuses to listen to facts of any kind while screaming from the bully pulpit of Glenn Beck, Faux Noise and the Karl Rove "trolls" who pollute these forums daily. Sad lot they are as well as the "low information crowd they look to reel in" with their empty rhetoric like the type who were hungry for more at CPAC yesterday and will be again today.

This is WHY we must get the facts out there to the moderates and independents who will not feed on this crap.

I have come face to face with religion and the birth control issue. Because of an inability to be able to afford health insurance for myself, I was directed to a low income medical clinic, to help with an abnormal menstral cycle. This can normally be controlled with the use of birth control pills. This clinic was church run, which I did not know prior to my appointment. I was told, "We do not do birth control here because we believe that it aborts babies." This is a direct quote. Instead I was told that maybe this was a sign for me to have another child. I already have one 19 and one 4. I was told I wouldn't be able to have anymore after my oldest was born....but it happened. Due to the economy, and lack of work, we can barely afford to care for our small family. Top that with me turning 40 later this year, a pregnancy at my age and at this time is not a good idea. So what gives any reglious facility the right to tell me to pop out more children, when my health and that of a baby could be at risk? There is no way we could afford any more children without the assistance of welfare, which we do not want to use.

While yes, birth control does prevent pregnancy, it also regulates the menstral cycle and is used most often for that. My oldest daughter, 19, is still a virgin but has had to use birth control since she started her cycle, to regulate it. Without the assistance of birth control, we run the risk of hemorraging, not to mention the cost in buying tampons and pads which takes away from other more important costs such as bills and food. For the record I have always backed up birth control pills with condoms.

Each and every day the faith I have loved tries to drive me away. I was sexually abused by a priest, still all I did was leave his parish. This wasn't talked about in the 1970's. My own family refused to believe me. Even when I went to a Catholic High School Teen pragency was so high they passed out Condums. I still go to Mass on Holidays and In BoysTown In Chicago I can attend a Gay Friendly Mass. The old people running this church never look at reality. We are abused. Some of us are Gay. Most of us use contraception to prevent pregancy and STD's. I'm sadden at the fact it 2012 and instead of changing Bishops would rather kill the Church. No American Catholics who has gone against the Church should or will ever feel guilty. Weakup Father ordinate Gays, Women, Married Men, or face your own exstinction. It's not the message of Jesus the Church seems to be sending it's religious bias. Don't make me a protestent by your narrow minds. Jesus is not about guilt and sorrow, have you learned nothing. Christ is a merciful God not a biggot. Judgement day what will the true Lord say?

sickandtired pretty sorry to hear your story and hope your situation improves. But the right wing religious Christian zealots don't care about reality, as they drown in their ancient superstion and hogwash. All they will say is that you killed babies or your immoral, because you decided to use birth control.

Mr. "frothy mix" would have torn you apart for this story S&A. Sorry about your troubles and hope for all of us the crazies don't get elected in 2012 as I have a 10 and 8 year old daughter. My ten year old knows "everything" already from her modern "liberal mom" who didn't have kids until I was 38 and 40 years old and AFTER I was married at 35.

Abstinence was'nt keeping me childfree all those years before.

"Hmmm...Hindering the reproductive process and facilitating the reproductive process.

Yea...that's the same."

Actually it is, apparently when it comes to a womans reproductive cycle and medical intervention she can do nothing to intervened God's will. But when Gods will says, nu uh you ain't getting it up men are allowed to intervene medically.

Special exemptions have always been upheld for those who hold religious beliefs. The Muslums at my work have special exemptions from state laws because of the law that protects those beliefs, its for-profit, you want to set president here? I guess I can force them to follow the state laws. I wouldn't because I respect those beliefs over the law as long as it doesn't cause harm. The Catholic employees themselves do not want the coverage. Why should you force them to get it. The whole forcing coverage thing is unconstitutional in the first place. This is not free choice, nor does it stimulate competition, which is the American way in the first place. Those who want or need it would still be free to get it, just don't force everyone to get it because you need it or want it and want your insurance to pick it up. More freeloading, the funny part is you end up paying more on your premiums for group coverage than if you went in to planned parenthood and got it yourself.

Ummm, shouldn't it be up to those with the plans to determine whether or not they will use contraceptives covered by their insurance?

How about offering it to employees as an option?

Why would the Church feel the need to ban such coverage for its employees outright? Seems a bit insecure to me. It should be up to the employee.

Jesus said it himself: Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. If the employees are believers and choose to follow the dogma of the RCC, then let them make their own decision - otherwise what would it be worth to their soul?

The Muslums at my work have special exemptions from state laws because of the law that protects those beliefs

Which exemptions are these? I'm quite curious.

The Catholic employees themselves do not want the coverage. Why should you force them to get it.

Why not make it an option then? They can choose to have the coverage or not.

The Catholic employees themselves do not want the coverage.

Not according to all the polls I've seen - the majority support the decision to require coverage.

The whole forcing coverage thing is unconstitutional in the first place.

Not really. Those that are required to provide coverage, under this plan, are religious affiliated businesses (such as Universities and Hospitals) - not the churches themselves. There are exemptions in place for the Churches. btw - over 20 states already require this coverage. In fact, 8 states don't even allow exemptions for Churches. The federal government is expanding the requirement, with an exemption, to all 50 states. Why has the Church not thrown a fit over the 20 states that require it? Seems awfully convenient that it would become a problem now, doesn't it?

I am Catholic, but I have to say that in some ways the church is so hypocrytical. If the church wants to stand a firm stand on an issue, stand a stand on child molestors who lurk in the halls of many parishes dressed in colorful vestments in an attempt to disguise who they really are. It is way beyond time for the catholic church to lift its head out of the sand of the dark ages. The majority of catholic women use contraception of some type, and for those who elect not to, fine, that's their choice, and men absolutely should keep their mouths out of the issue of what a woman does with her body. Women don't tell men what to do with any parts of their anotomy. The pretense fight has been raged for generations, and it's way past time to put a stop to it. This is more hype about a rightwing battle that is out of step with the majority of the people in the United States. Again, to the catholic church, take a firm stand on child molestors; find a way to rid the church to stopy recruiting men of this ilk into the priesthood from the start because that would be cheaper than having to settle law suits that come after the fact.

nearly all sexually active U.S. women had used birth control. That includes 98 percent of Catholic women, the study reported.

Now that we recognize the hypocrisy in the church we have priest that are molesting children condemning birth control! This is too bizarre.
If the Catholic church can hide and protect pedophiles in all good conscience they should be able to justify following a federal law facilitating what Catholics do anyway.

The Catholic Church has ZERO credibility, they need to shut their collective mouth when it comes to children, they lost their right to speak on the issue of children about 1000 swept-under-the-rug priest molestations ago.

No matter what the decision reached by the Obama administration, there is no threat of limiting access to birth control.

Regarding comparison of birth control to Viagra, nobody has proposed making it free of charge to everyone. Why don't we make high blood pressure medication available for free? It would have a much more positive effect on the population of American women than "free" birth control.

Regarding access for the poor, that isn't the issue here because they are currently covered by Medicare, Planned Parenthood and other systems, not to mention some public schools where condoms are available for free.

I believe that they should remove the requirement for birth control be included in all insurance policies completely. I do agree that exception should be made for birth control pills so they are considered with other drugs (like blood pressure medication) when used for health purposes.

People forget that the Pilgrims came to this country, not to escape religious persecution, but to be allowed to practice it freely. And there has always been some of that in American Catholics (of whom I am one.)

What the Catholic TV organization is suing for is simply the right to use a paycheck to force both Catholic and non-Catholic employees to abide by religious beliefs to which they donot subscribe. In the overall population of women in this country, 91% have used birth control. But if you look at only Roman Catholic women, that rises sliughtly to 92% who have, at some time during their reproductive years, used birth control. The Catholic Church seeks to make it as expensive as possible for their employees, by using a government-regulated process, to cause Catholics and non-Catholics alike to obey religious strictures that only a tiny percentage of women subscribe to. This is a blatant attempt to use government and politics to blur the line between Church and State and is specifically forbiodden by the First Amendment.

Lest you think that this sort of this is new or unique to AHA, here is a first hand story: My wife was, for years a Medical Technologist and employed by a Catholic Hospital. Our family was on her policy because it was a better deal than mine (I worked for Blue Cross which had horribly bad insurance.) My wife had serious trouble with heavy periods (to the point of anemic) since her teen years. Physicians prescribed birth control pills as the standard treatment. The hospital refused to allow the insurance company to pay for them. It turned out that the hospital was actually collecting for the birth control pills and keeping the money through its bookkeeping practices. My wife had about six D&C's for the same problem. The hospital refused payment from Blue Cross approved the payments because they "feared" that D&C's might be used to perform "accidental abortions." (I just had BCBST pay us directly because I worked there.) Finally, my wife had to have a partial histerectomy to resolve the issue. By that time I had wised up and actually had double coverage. My wife's Catholic employer refused to accept payment from BCBS as well, but again, I just got them to cut me a check. This was all about six nuns who ran the administration of the hospital trying to force their dogma down the throats of people who did not agree with them.

If the Catholic Church and the GOP want to make hay with this, I say, "More power to them." If they want to fly in the face of the real world and try to crush individual religious freedom, they will find that both the GOP and the Catholic Church will be hurt much more than anyone else. Just remember that 91% of women do not see birth control as a legitimate political issue.

I would remind people also that 28 states currently have the same requirements in state law. Those 28 states account for about 80% of the population. And why is the Catholic Church not suing them.

All Churches have an exemption in these sorts of circumstances, provided only that they hire only workers of the same faith who agree with the policy. You cannot force a Jehova's Witness employee to have health insurance that pays for blood or transfusions. A Buddhist monk cannot be forced to provide meat in a convent restaurant. Etc, etc. But when churches go beyond the church walls, they enter the realm of what is Caeser's. Jesus was very, very clear on the point. "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's..."

The whole issue of "religious freedom" in this country is often no more than a desire impose one religion on non-believers or believers who may believe differently. People want prayer in schools even though it has never been banned. (Anyone who ever failed to study for a big test knows that there is no way to stop prayer in the schools.) It would be perfectly acceptable, for example, to have a morning prayer over the school loudspeakers that rotated between the major religious and included secular inspirational messages. The problem is that the advocates of school prayer, want only their own sect's prayers. A Hail Mary would be out of the question as would a Buddhist meditation or a Shinte blessing. Even displays of the Ten Commandments follow a similar line. There is no public prohibition of the display of the Ten Commandments per se. The issue is that the advocates insist on only the Protestant "version" and will not accept the Catholic "version" (the verses are numbered differently) or the Jewish version (which does not include numbering or an indication that it is ten.)

It is the American way to try to disguise religious oppression as a form of religious freedom. It is not!

Too many posts to respond to and I'm too lazy, so:

'So the church has a double standard when interfering with the reproductive process is involved? Good or bad, isn't any kind of medicinal involvement frowned upon, I mean with god being so magnanimous and loving surely he wouldn't discriminate...'

I have NO CLUE if medicinal involvement in general is frowned upon in the Catholic Church, as I'm not Catholic. But my GUESS is that the Church isn't frowning upon medicinal involvement, but rather that people are exploiting medicinal resources to prevent birth, allowing them a free range of sexual pleasure without that pesky result of 'children'. After all, CLEARLY sex isn't to have kids...it's to feel good!

This has nothing to do with religious freedom. This is about every employer having to follow labor laws regardless of their religion.

This has EVRYTHING to do with religious freedom! The government is telling religious organizations that regardless of their beliefs they must follow this mandate.

Why is birth control covered by insurance in the first place? This is part of the problem of why our insurance system is out of whack. Insurance should be primarily focused against catastophic care and preventative care, like annual physicals.

This has EVRYTHING to do with religious freedom! The government is telling religious organizations that regardless of their beliefs they must follow this mandate.

No, they are telling an employer engaged in commercial activity what to do. If you are operating in commercial activity in our country you give up certain rights. Churches, non-profits and individuals maintain their religious freedoms, but a company is a different matter.

Insurance should be primarily focused against catastophic care and preventative care, like annual physicals.

Most consider birth control "preventative care". Ever see how much money the insurance company pays for a delivery of a baby? Not to mention the $200k+ it costs to raise the kid...

It's about mandating that employers offer health insurance that pays for contraceptives.

Why stop at free condoms? Why not free toothpaste?

This has EVRYTHING to do with religious freedom

You are SO CORRECT. This has everything to do about the religious FREEDOM of an employee NOT to have the employers religious beliefs forced upon them by restricting their access to health care.

Why do you support the church FORCING their beliefs on their employees?

Why stop at free condoms? Why not free toothpaste?

Well first, insurance isn't free, the employee(r) pays for it so the contraceptives aren't really just free.

And second, why not free condoms and toothpaste with your insurance? Sounds like preventative care, which is usually cheaper and would drive down the cost of everyone's insurance. Why are you against lowering the cost of health care through preventative care?

Kris: do not be naieve - this is all about religious freedom if you think otherwise you out of touch with reality.

"This has everything to do about the religious FREEDOM of an employee NOT to have the employers religious beliefs forced upon them by restricting their access to health care.?

We The Corporations - This does not restrict access to artificial birth control. It simply does not allow the government to force a religious institution to pay for something that is a sin.

People who work for Catholic employers know what they're getting into. No one is forcing them to work for a Catholic employer. If they want an employer that will cover their birth control, they can get another job. The Catholic Church has never hidden its teachings on artificial birth control or any other social issue.

So they are now making their employess pay out of pocket for birth control pills or they can go to planned parenthood to get them for free. So now you have a Catholic employee walking into Planned Parenthood to get birth control pills (which could easily be for a health condition-- My doctor gave me some to stop ovulation and the resulting migraine headaches). As a parent paying for kids to go to private parochial schools, that's what I would have to do if insurance didn't pay for them. Then I would have to deal with the fallout or job repercussions if someone saw me! If they are for a medical condition, the Catholic church based employer needs to offer coverage!!

RIGHT ON "we the corporations" couldn't say it better. justacatholic the church is full of sin .you people invented it. just be thankful you can run your corporation in the U.S.

This has absolutely nothing, zip, zero to do with religious freedom. 28 states currently carry the exact same mandate. I don't hear the Catholics bitching about that. This simply puts a federal requirement in place that copies what the states have done and are doing. And all they are doing, is saying employers, regardless, have to offer health plans that give women a right to have contraceptive care. This brings all 'employers' in line with labor law and nothing else. This doesn't affect the 'church' at all, only their businesses.

Yes I Can - Where are the religious freedom of the boys & girls that priests have molested over the years. Why are they so outrage over contraception compared to molestation. What hypocrites to criticize Obama on contraception when they have such a history like this and these Republicans clowns that says it is an attack on religion.

Catholicism, and now republicanism. This suit alledges factual immaterialism of all Americas female gender. Any politician really want to go there? Surest way I can think of to guarantee your defeat.

If you are a business, whether it be 'Christian' or not, as long as EEOC is applied there, compliances are in order, period. Churches in themselves have been exempt and STILL would be under this mandate. The word is 'AFFIILIATES' of that religion, NOT that religion.

The laws of the country are higher than the laws of the church. The church officials felt no obligation to stop abuse of any sort until the laws of the land stepped in and enlightened them.

Luke 20:25 - And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are
Caesar's, and unto God the things which are God's.

Hmmmm, seems the laws of man is to be abided, just as the laws of God is to be abided. Meaning, You have your religion and your beliefs, but that does not exempt you from man's laws? If so, then the Church has no argument as to what their 'affiliates' do, according to man's law, period, end stop.

Most consider birth control "preventative care". Ever see how much money the insurance company pays for a delivery of a baby? Not to mention the $200k+ it costs to raise the kid...

So does insurance also cover the cost of condoms? Because if it doesn't, then your argument is irrelevant.

Condoms are NOT prescription Unhappy and they can be bought OTC at the pharmacy for pretty cheap, yet your "devout Catholic MEN who are the ones making the biggest stink" would never buy a box if their LIFE depended on it anyway nor would YOU, you hypocrite so just SHUT UP and quit your trolling.

Unhappy does your doctor prescribe condoms ? If so, he/she should be a brainless Catholic like you.

I am tired of religious organizations getting tax free status and special exemptions because of their religious beliefs.

Agreed, that seems a whole lot like state sponsorship of religion really. If they can qualify for non-profit status like other non-profit organizations then we can talk; otherwise they should be taxed just like any other for-profit organization.

My church can qualify for non-profit status, I'm sure.

Am I in the clear? :P

I am tired of religious organizations getting tax free status

I am tired of golf clubs getting tax free status.

How about non-profit corporations? Are you sick of them getting tax free status?

How about companies that don't REPORT a profit? Are you sick of them getting tax free status?

How about Romney? I'm pretty sick of HIM getting a tax free status! His kids banked a cool HUNDRED MILLION and didn't pay a PENNY in taxes. Not one penny!

Hands off the churches, and hands off the Constitution.

No one wants to tax Churches. As many others have stated, these are not Churches, these are businesses that are either wholly or partially owned by a Church or more likely an organization of Churches like Catholic charities. They are a business and must follow the law. It is not the same as telling a Church that it has to go against it's teaching. It is telling a business, owned by an organization, that it must treat it's employees fairly and play by the same rules as other corporations in the same business. Why should the Humana hospital have to pay health benefits that cover contraception and not the Sisters of Mercy hospital down the street. That gives the good Sisters of Mercy an unfair profit advantage. They can offer lower rates as their expenses are less and they got those lower rates on the backs of their employees because they were denied benefits. People should pull the blinders off and realize that this is not a religious issue, but a business issue.

You got my vote on this one. These businesses are worth billions of dollars and they have billions in land, art, material wealth while millions of people are starving and without the necessities of life. I know they do good works, I know they do a LOT of charitable things but they are still filthy rich and there are still millions with nothing. As long as we have all these filthy rich companies, churches, people and still millions with nothing they/we are not doing enough. Tax 'em.

Exactly, if they are not paying taxes then they need to follow the federal mandate...

Definitely!

What with the world population hitting the 6 billion mark, starvation rampant, water almost used up, why in the world would we want to encourage people to procreate. If we want to continue living on this planet we have to keep our numbers down....

Large businesses, including all of these businsses in the "so-called states that have been mandating this care already" have had their opt-out methods in place for years in getting out of providing coverages they don't like/want in their employer sponsored health plans-(SPD's). It's called self-funding rather then fully insuring their health claims and using a a TPA to handle all the claims/enrollment and UWR of their insurance plan to skirt around the state mandates so this "culture war/manufactured crisis" being waged against President Obama is just that-another MANUFACTUFACTURED CRISIS to deflect away from the gop's dismal record on job creation and their unwillingness to work with him on ANYTHING since he got elected.
And of course the turn coat Blue Dog dems like MANCHIN are siding with the rabid right on this non-issue which is all "sck and awe" and nothing more to sway the totally ignorgant who know absolutely NOTHING about how the commercial health industry really works, nor do they want to. In my home state of WI where I was covered under multiple employer sponsored health plans, including when I worked for TWO health insurers, I had no coverage for birth control products-EVER. WHY? The reason/fact I gave above allowed my employers to not include it. An emplolyer can go the whole gamut further by not having coverage for RX drugs-period and a lot of them do that too so this whole debate is as stupid as the day is long.

I've also seen self-funding allow employers put coverage INTO their plans for things like smoking cessation programs and the RX drugs that go along with those.

Covering wigs for chemotherapy patients

Allowing a yearly benefit towards health club memebrships if a patient was "morbidly obese" and had a physician's note and records that PROVED it.

Same with people getting a home spa in their house-(hot tub partially paid for). I have had to, as claims adjudicator making a pathetic 7/gr back in the early 1990's cover stuff like that if an employer wanted it as a "benefit" on their SPD simply through self-funding because after all, it is THEIR MONEY. WE as Humana are simply their TPA and the coverage is "underwritten by another insurance company". Pay close attention to those ARRP commericals and see who "underwrites that ARRP coverage" that you elderly folks are buying that pays secondary to your MC and you'll find it is United Healthcare GROUP.

Yup, THAT United Healtcare-UHC.

I love this comment 'They do not want birth control, where would they get kids to molest then?'. So right LOL

The Duggars have a few to spare in btwn "appointments with mom and dad".

Er, Joe, if there was one person who hated Catholics like Santorum, it was Oliver Cromwell.

ok, but you get my point.

This is an invented wedge issue. Most of this law was enacted in 2000.

by relatively few you mean the millions that are? MILLIONS and many arent even catholic

What was that figure? 98% Catholic women used birth control. Why not have it part of their health coverage, rather than beating around the bush. How come these women are still allowed in the Catholic Church? I was born and raised Catholic, went to Catholic school for 8 years. It didn't happen to me but, their are hundreds of priests who are sexual predators as a friend of mine was a victim. Divorce is not an option in Catholic Church. That’s just the beginning. If you are still Catholic and are able to tell the difference between right and wrong then get out NOW.

As a baptized, no longer practicing Catholic, I am amazed there is such an outcry about this. I live in a town that had 3 Catholic churches now consolidated into one parish. What don't these men understand? No outcry about ins. paying for Viagara, but don't let woman take care of themselves. would love to know the real % of Catholic women who haven't used birth control of some kind. You don't want abortions, and you don't want women to have access to birth control, but man! it's fine to give out Viagra so men can continue to enjoy sex into their old age, and have ins. pay for that!! How many would be surprised by that? Additionally, this has exisited in some form, in 28 states already....the administration needs to stand it's ground on this! They will do well with the women's vote, even those Catholic women like me, who are sick to death of men dictating how my life should be run. They employ non-Catholics, they should follow the same laws as all other businesses, or give up their tax-free status. When the Catholic church starts supporting all the kids they want to insist be produced, then maybe people would listen to their argument. The Catholics will still have all those illegals who come here just to keep having kids to continue listening to them.The rest of us are smarter than that these days.

Because the equivalent of birth control pills for women, would be condoms for men. Ideally they can serve a different function like helping to prevent disease, but basically people use them for birth control. And that is governed by behavior than anything else. The Catholic Church should not be forced into paying for someone's behavior.

Unhappy, go back to the 1600's where you BELONG and watch a witch burning or something.

Unhappy-1583758, Just to let you know, birth control pills are not the equivalent of a condom. They do have some health benefits for women but the spread of infection is not one of them.

What was that figure? 98% Catholic women used birth control. Why not have it part of their health coverage, rather than beating around the bush. How come these women are still allowed in the Catholic Church?

The statistic about the use of birth control by Catholics is not relevant to this article. The debate is over whether birth control should be covered by employee health plans of church-affiliated organizations, not the health plans of churches themselves.

oh yes. all religion should be stripped of their tax free status, then the influence of the Catholic Church here will crumble, no more money to pay off molestation chargers, to pay for their crystal cathedrals, harbor illegal immigrants, impose their views on non members, you name it, no more tax free status, means far less expensive property ownerships, and a serious drop in the crimes they commit, molestation or otherwise.

Don't forget stripping marriage from the tax code, and only recognizing civil union. If religion really wants to play games with the US, they should remember they've run out of good moral's credit.

Oh yeah, they make the old Pagon Relgion look like the saints and angels they claim to emulate. Granted Paganism has its faults in history, but Paganism's dark history spots is nothing compared to those Catholic Church's darker history leading into the present, or that of every branch of Christianity, or its top rivals, like the darker spots on Islamic History, even Judaism when it was in its hayday. Not saying their members are all super dark and evil, I'm just referring to the unwanted religious nuts among the desirable spiritual fruits. I prefer to be spiritual, rather than relgious. Just call me a Christian, but I simply just accept Christ and let the Holy Spirit do its job in me, which can include guiding my pen as it is now. I am strictly non-denominational, and have friends and family of many faiths, whatever floats your boat is how I see things. Jesus Christ doesn;t hate anyone, but if he ever considered it, chances are good that the Westboro Baptist Church, the anti gay group that protests military funerals, would be the first know, *grins.* Seriously, I believe my words and actions are not so much good or bad as the intent behind their use, which counts even more.

Actually everyone knows that the Catholic Church was a hideout for gay men for many years; who by remaining celibate thought they could remain pure in thought. That didn't work because those same gay men started molesting children. You can't blame the Catholic Church for everything. It's not their fault that so many gay men joined up!

Yea unhappy, first the Catholic Church opposes gay marriage, because it hates gays. Then it lets gay men to molest children. Then it help protect the molesters and threaten the victims. And towards the end, it nothing of their fault ? Well, based on your logic, I can understand why your a sheep that you are :)

@ Unhappy: You can blame them for using their vast wealth and power to attempt to cover up instances of child abuse and sexual perversion, while whisking the offenders away to other parts of the globe without warning anyone of the activities their employees partake in. I don't think many people (outside the church), care that anyone is (or could be?) homosexual, they care that Priests and people who are supposed to be implicitly trusted are molesting small children (Which really has nothing to do with homosexuality).

If you refuse to conform to labor laws, then you have no place running a business. Whether you like it or not, Beek, the government has the full right to enforce laws.

not laws that are illegal and in direct violation of the constitution and yes the constitution - something called freedom of religion

This isn't about religion, this is about labor laws. You can't deny people their legal rights just because your religion doesn't agree with it.

EEOC trumps religion when a Church business 'affiliation' is concerned. A business affiliation is NOT the Church.

Ternan freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. Your religious bigotry doesn't supercede somebody else's right from your bigotry.

You forget the twin, freedom from religion as well. Catholics are a minority in the US, so if there were a state religion, it wouldn't even be theirs. Why do we let them bully us like this?

This country was founded on the notion of freedom "of" religion, not freedom "from" religion that you would have us believe. You are correct, there should be no state government, but individuals should be free to pursue the religion they desire. Forcing individuals and organizations to pay for things outside their belief is imposing state will on religion. There should be a way to opt-out.

No, there shouldn't be a way to opt-out. Show me the figures of how amazingly high insurance policies cost with contraceptive measures, versus those without them. Also show me where this policy forces anyone in any religion to actually USE those benefits.

I agree with B Murphy, sorry adsol, but the first amendment also means freedom not to believe as well as believe as we choose, so it protects the atheists right to choose not to believe. Nowhere in this act does it require those covered to actually use it, just requires the employers to cover it, but the employed don't have to use it. There is no negotiating with fundementalists, and ones with tons of cash are more dangerous than ones without, as they don't have to use alot of violence like the poorer ones do, because they can buy off opposition to their beliefs and look like heroes rather than kill them off and be seen as terrorists. Technically freedom from religious persecution is a form of a freedom from religion too, which is one reason people came here before and after our founding, to escape religious persecutions, so technically they came here to be free from religion, just so their beliefs can be free from those who persecuted them for it.

I throw my side in with AdSol for these reasons. My understanding is that the Puritans came to
these shores in the 1600s to escape "persecution" set upon them by the King of England so that they could have "freedom" to pursue their religious independence from the throne. At that time the Church of England
persecuted those who were not of their faith. Furthermore, our country, as is noted by the Founders, is endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights....and the right to believe in and follow the dictates and canons of a religion of their choice, free from interference by the government for their beliefs and practices, is understood to be included in those rights. If 90% of those who make up a religious faith disagree or may not practice what their church teaches on a particular subject, that alone does not make that teaching or its basic premise false. It is a free will that allows for that disagreement; which also was provided to us by our Creator. That individual decision is between the individual and his/her God, and will be settled in a different time and place. The recent Supreme Court case cited earlier was argued in front of the justices by the current Solicitor General of the United States. It was a unanimous 9-0 defeat for the administration with Justice Kagan taking a slight side-swipe at the administration for even bringing it forward. In this case, the church in question had won the argument. Perhaps it may be the most recent precedent case that the high court will turn to in weighing in on the EWTN law suit, if it reaches them.

I would suggest that most of you should read the Constitution, probably for the first time!! This country was founded with the very first article allowing for freedom of religion. While we won't resolve anything here, the Supreme Court will resolve this and it will be resolved with a resounding decision that this administration cannot force someone in any religion (Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, et al) to violate their teachings. If an individual from that religion chooses to violate the laws of the church, that is their perogative, but the government cannot force the issue.

thrash, NO ONE is forcing the CHURCH to change it's stance on the issue concerning the CHURCH, only ENFORCING the laws as it pertains to organizations/businesses who hide under the auspices OF the Church, thereby trying to exempt themselves from such laws as is afforded THE CHURCH. Since they are NOT the Church, and abide by employment laws, as does every other regular business, and thus abides by the EEOC, they are mandated by LAW to offer coverage. period, end stop.

@ Thrash: I've read the constitution and understand why this law is constitutional. Seems that maybe you're a bit confused. It requires employers to cover birth control in their insurance policies, it does not FORCE anyone to USE that coverage. Forcing people to use birth control, would be a constitutional violation. Not allowing ANY of your employees that coverage, because some branch of your organization objects on religious principle, is unconstitutional. I suggest you go back and read the Constitution again before pretending like you know what you're talking about.

May I also add that it does not require these hsps or places to DISPENSE OF THEIR PROVIDERS to PRESCIBE said products at their facilities either but rather their insurance plans to provide the benefit to the employees who USE them-PERIOD!!! They could then get the poducts prescribed, dispensed at the places they always have but for maybe for the first time will not have to pay outrageous OOP for it, unless as I mentioned in an earler post, the employer self-funds their plan and can opt out of the mandate anyway by choosing not to allow the benefit which if they fully insure their coverage, they WOULD have to abide by the state mandate like in WI.

If it is federally mandated, this would supercede state mandates and our labour laws would apply here? Since WI thanks to the lovely "obamacare hating" Scott Walker and his opting out of provisions of the Affordable Care Act to which we got robbed out of 37 million in federal healthcare grants that he just rejected last month, would we have to follow this anyway? Good question. I tend to think not. Our state is so going down the toilet because of him at this point with jobs shedding to the point we're number one 7 months now in the country for job LOSSES, why stop now Scotty?

Yes America, DON'T believe one WORD of those Americans for Prosperity sponsored ads about how "his reforms are working in WI and how great things are here". It's a bloody stinking MESS and every word in those ads are LIES, LIES, LIES which is why he is flying all over the country selling this crap begging for money to save his job from the "big bad union bosses and all their supposed money here at home and in DC who are out to get him".
We have yet to name a candidate or have an election first. Not ONE ad has aired in WI against him so so much for "that war too". Another pile of BS from the "right".

Adsol freedom of religion also means freedom not to believe in any deity, which in turns means freedom from religion. It all boils down to government not manding people what to believe. But, government can enforce people not to discriminate others based on their beliefs. There is a difference. You can believe all you want, but your beliefs doesn't justify you to discriminate others

Once we let the government infringe on the religious rights of one group, it doesn't take long for the government to infringe on the rights of all religious groups.

I think all employers engaged in commercial activity are required to comply. However, if you are not engaged in commercial activity there is no problem. This has been well established by case law.

The issue is requiring these religious entities to pay for things that are against their doctrine. Contraception is not a right under the Constitution but religious freedom is.

When you are an employer engaged in commercial activity then your rights are not the same as an individual. For example, free speech protection is much more limited for commercial speech.

These are not just commercial entities. They include non-profit charitable organizations. If you read the rules that the government put down about this, if my church has a non-profit soup kitchen that serves members of faiths other than mine, I have to follow these rules as well. It's not just about the religious beliefs of those that work for you but those you serve as well.

tazdev, what is your stand on all these anti-abortion bills and attacks on women's reproductive health rights that have been the obsession of this crap congress and in gop held states since LAST JANUARY as these laws are all faith based and you know it!! Nuts like Santorum think they're running for POPE, not POTUS as im Bachmann, Perry and Gingrinch never shut up about this crap. Sorry but ending a woman's right to choose is NOT going to create "jobs" which they NEVER talk about.

tazdev why is your non-profit charitable organisation meddling in public policy related to reproductive rights or gay marriage or abortion ? Does charitable organizations get to enforce their bigotry on society ? Also, does your charitable organizations undergo federal audit of their books like other charitable organisations like Red Cross do ?

and this government REICH is constitutional bound NOT to impose any mandate on religeous beliefs..

simple as that..people wanting contraceptives can easily get them from other means..this socialist president has got to be stopped

Aggie, I guess you will stop making payments for your property taxes then, or does your religion exempt you from paying taxes for schools? You DO know that a percentage of your property tax goes towards schools, whether you have children or not, right? Is THAT Unconstitutional?

Aggie: Businesses ("Affiliates") Must conform to Labor Laws?? Simple, Not "religious freedom", 28 States already have this?? No Body is forcing its "use", just "available"?? Settle down, drink some "Tea"??

Here's where religious freedom comes in... Ladies, if you don't want to take the pill, don't use that portion of the insurance. To the church and any other talking head - shut up and conform with fair labor practices...since when is fair insurance a violation of rights?

Aggie why is your non-profit charitable organisation meddling in public policy related to reproductive rights or gay marriage or abortion ? Does charitable organizations get to enforce their bigotry on society ? Also, does your charitable organizations undergo federal audit of their books like other charitable organisations like Red Cross do ? You Catholics brag about all the charity bull manure, so open up your books and let us know how much of your money was spend on charity, how much was spend on covering pedophiles and threatening their victims and how much was spend on the giving a new gold ornament to the old fart clown in the Vatican you call as 'Pope'.

Fantamdog...Obviously you didn't "get" what I was saying. My point was that YES Catholics DO PAY PROPERTY TAXES, and we are WELL AWARE those same taxes everyone pays goes toward public education. The poster said that Churchs should not be tax exempt....he/she was complaining and saying his/her tax money is going towards churchs, and I was simply reminding him/her that members of all churches pay taxes and support public entities, whether we use them or not. Get it now?

donben: Catholic hospitals, charitable organizations and service are NOT businesses. They are NON-PROFIT organizations.

Srikar: Obviously you don't "get" that this not about the Church forcing their beliefs on anyone. It's about the Government forcing, FORCING, them to PAY for something the Catholic Church does not condone. Someone wants to get birth control devices, meds....let them. Church isn't telling them they can't do as they please. But it is UNContitutional to MANDATE that any religion PAY for that which they don't believe it. Let there be NO LAW...is how the First Amendment begins.

It's NOT about birth control...it IS about the Government injecting MANDATES and denying the FREEDOM of religious practices.

OH, and how about you move on from the pedophile issues. They have been fully addressed and those guilty have been booted from the priesthood, several imprisoned, and millions upon millions paid to victims and/or their families. If you want the dollars and cents of how much was spent on Catholic charities, why don't you ask them? I'm sure they will willingly give you that information. It might take a while though, since it is nationwide and worldwide. If that question was directed to me, well, I can't give you a bottom line amount, BUT I can tell you that percentage wise, it's probably more than the 1% of my income that Obama donated to charity. No matter what the Pope may have, (gold ornament?? You mean like the Pope's traditional ring? What's it to ya? Don't worry about, you're not paying for it. But we are all paying for flying the First Family around the country/world on Air Force 1 to their luxurious vacations, and for the entourage's salary that accompany them....even paid for their dog to be flown to them on a separate flight. Worry about that!

Catholic hospitals, charitable organizations and service are NOT businesses.

Catholic Hospitals, many Catholic Universities and some other Catholic organizations aren't acting as churches - they are acting as hospitals and universities. Since they aren't acting in the capacity of a church, why do they expect exemptions that are meant for churches to apply to them?

Also, there are over 20 states that ALREADY require this - in fact, 8 of those states don't even allow exemptions for churches. So, why is it suddenly a big deal that this is being extended to all states? btw, it is my understanding (though I could be wrong), that the state level requirements for this have been challenged in court - and have consistently been upheld.

Summer......They're not taking a Profit...any income goes into running these NON PROFIT organizations. Facilities, equipment, staff, etc. There are no investors, no dividends, donors, yes, but that is not an investor. They don't MAKE money on their donation as one does with investing in the stocks of a business.

I think if you look closely at some states you will see that these hospitals can administer abortive meds in cases of rape, or perform d&c's in emergency situations. But not dispense condoms, b.c. pills, etc. like a drugstore. And if a patient has coverage under another company's plan, they are free to use that coverage provided by their own insurance coverage for those measures I mention or at their local pharmacy.

Aggie, I didn't mention profit on the part of the religious affiliated organization. In fact, imo, that doesn't matter. The fact remains a religious affiliated hospital is acting as a health care provider - not a church. A religious affiliated university is acting as a school to provide higher eduction - not a church.

Also, no one is asking them to dispense contraception - they are saying that they need to make contraception available to the employees via the employees health insurance.

It's based on an Epistle written by Pope Paul VI in the 1960's, and I've read it. Don't presume I'm not familiar with my BIBLE (not biblos). Maybe you should get more familiar with spelling and grammar.

Not only familiarize him/herself with spelling and grammer, just plain common respect.

TBourlon. For someone so well versed in things theological, I'm surprised you don't know the Greek from whence your "Bible" came.

Moreover, for one so well versed in Catholic tradition, I'm surprised you don't recognize that "no birth control" has been a Catholic stance since the beginning of the church (see, for example, Clement of Alexandria (circa 195), Hippolytus (circa 255), etc.)...and that this view was merely inherited from the traditional Jewish view on the matter.

The Protestants formerly agreed with you up until the population explosion in the 20th century...at which point, the Protestants revisited their position on birth control and found it not theologically objectionable. The epistle by Pope Paul IV you cite is a reaffirmation of the Catholic stance in response to the Protestant change in stance rather than the initial Catholic stance (which derives from Genesis 38:9, Jewish law and those early dogmatic teachings mentioned above...both written by pre-modern men in a world with no medicine, no electricity, no physics and a population infinitesimal relative to the current world population).

Aggie. Question. It it more distateful to deny people access to desired medical treatment purely on philosophical grounds or to attack that philosophy?

wrong-the backlash is from vast majority-ALL women are mad at this-the republicans will die if tehy contineu to align themselevs with the crazy rleigious, sexless old men

I suppose you know all 98 % of the Catholic women. Birth-Control causes blood clot, heart attack and other illnesses. This is not to help women its to get there Social Agenda and Make the Greatest Country in the World anther China. Tell me what has OBAMA done for you personally. I'll tell you what he hasn't done I am making 20,000. less a year since he has taken Office. My ex-husband who is disable has to pay for this doctor because he wont that medicare because they do not pay there bills. He has to pay for his own medicine. Quit watchin MBC, CNN AND do some research. Get out on the street in see what good he's done. Nothing! ALL LIES!!!!!! FROM START TO FINISH. I drive all 48 states and I have seen the closed factories, homeless, house forclosed on. You sit an your comfort zone and have no clue but the lies that are told on this statation and the liberal media. Go to the library and do some research read your constitution. Me I like my freedoms and the right we have here in the USA!! The saying goes you do notLIKE THIS COUNTRY THEN LEAVE IT!!! And another thing if woment use birth-control that is between her and her "GOD" not you none believers.

It appears norman that you have no problem with a secular government interferring in anothers religious convictions on birth control, especially when it hasa been exempted in the past. I see no evidence of right vs left but rather one framed in the context of our constitution.

The Church isn't against birth control. It is against ARTIFICAL birth control. They're NOT saying you must keep popping out babies, just that Catholics should use natural birth control by abstaining during a woman's fertile days, by plotting her most fertile days and abstaining for those days. There are fertility tests, similar to pregnancy testing methods. Maybe not the most fool proof method, but that IS "birth control". Natural birth control. Those who say there is nothing in the Bible about that..well, yes there is. It speaks against men "spilling" or wasting their lifegiving seeds.

Jane from Ohio...I am with you...This Administration is grabbing power faster than it is spending money! This issue is huge! But it is a diversion...Meanwhile back at the UN,... Obama and Hillary are giving away our sovreignity by discussing International Courts,...set to overide our Supreme Court! He wants to be King of the NWO...He is deliberately and systematically destroying our America and I will not stand for it. I will do everything in my power to see this man is removed and put on trial for treason...I love my freedom and I am willing to "refresh the tree" if needed. The gov't has gone to far...

broke, does that mean you will do everything in you power to bring President Bush and V.P. Cheney to trial as War Criminals too? If not, then anything else you have to say means nothing.

Business? No, religion. If you simply say business is subject to the laws of the land then all organizations are subject, even the churches because they are a non profit business organization ... have to be to survive. they fund schools and hospitals and if you do not want to be subject to their belief and wish not to support abortion and contraceptives ... GO SOMEWHERE ELSE for support, treatment, job, or education. SIMPLE PEOPLE. Separation of church and state was developed to permit religious organizations to organize and set their beliefs of faith without interference of the State. This is an obvious conflict.

You can cry women's rights all you wish but the constitution says one right will not impede on the rights of another. Therefore, do you wish to hurt woman's rights or freedom of religion ... you need to do away with the law because it damages the rights of religion which is a direct constitutional right. Exemption solves this and those that wish to work there without those benefits can seek supplemental coverage but the thought of forcing a church whether Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist or other christian based religions to pay for what they do not believe in is REDICULOUS and unconstitutional.

Aggie, yeah the rythym method worked so well and that is why people like my 93 MOL had 8 kids with the last one on the way before my husband's father died of a lingering heart condition before HE was two years old and she was stuck raising them herself on his VA, SS survivor benefits. Tell THAT to all the mothers who had a pack of kids using "natural birth control" with its 60% success rating. Man, you people are so ignorant it isn't even laughable anymore.

But keep on reading the fiction out of your book written BY men FOR men as "truth" while peope like me think for myself thank you. Bunch of dopes you are.

If your though process's are wrong or in error and since you only think for yourself, where do you get your corrections from. Or are you one of those women who are always right!

teresa....Now pay attention...I SAID in my post that natural birth control was not a particularly reliable method, and I my main POINT was that the Church doesn't FORBID ALL birth control. If that method was your in-laws choice, or others' choices, well...........and if it resulted in 8 kids, maybe they weren't plotting it correctly. Or MAYBE, just MAYBE they wanted a lot of kids. Is that any of your business? You got a husband out if the brood, didn't you? If you and others think that the Church INSISTS that a woman conceive every time they have sex, you think wrong.

But since you are not the POPE, you have NO say in who is or is not catholic. Many a priests learned this lesson the hard way. NO catholic PRACTICES his religion 24/7 as they are humans. Just because someone disagrees with you does NOT make them a non catholic. However, you do need to go back to the bible and re read it. Judge not lest ye be judged. Hate the sin but NOT the sinner. Love they neighbor as they self. Yup, you better read the bible as I am sure you haven't. It is ALL about love! forgiveness! taking care of the poor!

What she meant was, she was raised Catholic and is no longer practicing.

My own religious conviction is that God punishes us with disease and rewards us with good health, and that it is a sin to ever try to intervene in his will medically.

Are you saying that my brother, who was married to the same woman faithfully for 25 years, helped anyone in need, and took my Mom and Dad into his own home when they were elderly and put all of his own belongings into storage so that my parents could have their own belongings around them......my brother who lived with colon cancer for 8 years before he died........are you saying that God was punishing him?? That is just sick!

no it just says i dont want to pay for birth control pill and abortions Catholics tv network is saying we provide healthcare if you want abortion or birth control buy it yourself. is that there right .

Really, Mr. Burns? You honestly believe all illness is due to a vengeful God visiting anger on humans? If you really believe that, then I feel sorry for you. There are many good and holy people, of many faiths that contract or develop illnesses. What about babies born with illnesses and various conditions? What sin could that baby have possibly committed that God would punish him/her? Yes, a guilty conscience can manifest physical symptoms but that is you, doing that to yourself.

Not for one second do I believe God punishes us on earth. The judgement comes when our souls leave this earth. And the God I know and believe in is infinitely merciful.

The God you describe is the God of the Old Testament, before the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. Christ came to do away with the old covenant and establish new one. The new covenant is founded on and overflowing with love. His sacrifice took away the fear of punishment on earth and replaced it with love.

So do you really see God's love that way.....that we should fear God more than we love him? If we allow and accept the love of God, then even as flawed human beings, there is no need for fear.

Smlfry2: You are definitely right to think that that is sick for a God to punish people in the manner that you are thinking. Those persons who believe such are confused, ill informed and without any logical reasoning. That is simply painting a picture of a God, the character of which would make any one of the world's criminals looks like super gods. Imagine that some so-called christians who profess belief in a God of love, could turn around and say that that God would punish a teenager who perished in a car-crash after an all-night orgy, with Hell Fire for "Millions of Years". If it were possible, would a human parent or any person for that matter do such a thing? If then, humans would not do such a thing, it therefore makes it that "Mortal man is more just than God". How can the hypocrites explain that?

The God that I serve does not cast any one into Hell Fire for millions of years. God wants everyone to be loving and kind and also obedient to him; God wants to save us from our own selfish ways that are constantly destroying us. He desires our good and that of our friends and neighbors.

This is a total misrepresentation of the God I know and serve. This is only meant to make atheist of otherwise good meaning christian people. Please know that God is always ready to deliver but not to punish or destroy the innocent; not even the guilty. He prefers that ALL COME TO REPENTENCE.

Wait a second frank. Because of 'YOUR' religious convictions, you are forcing your employees to abide by YOUR convictions by taking away THEIR right to healthcare? What is your number, frank, so the EEOC can reach out and touch you. =D

Hey frank burns, you need to go back and meet "hot lips" in the supply tent so Hawkeye and Trapper can play some fun jokes on your useless behind. How nice to know you're proiftting off those premium "savings" from your employees by giving them crap coverage. CROOK!!!

Frank burns, what an idiot you are. I hope you don't have kids, because they would be under terrible risk due to your stupidity. I can't believe that even in the 21st century there would be such stupid fools, who blindly believe in all this 'doG' hogwash.

I think Frank is trying to be facetious to make his point.

sorry frank burns, you obviously forgot this was a discussion of religious things, inherently populated by the 'brain-adjacent'. Perhaps you should have included "begin sarcasm" and "end sarcasm" to clue in the geniuses that you were not speaking with a straight face.

as for me, I'm starting my own church and I'm going to call it the Church of People Who Don't Believe Churches Should Get Tax Breaks. I expect to receive massive tax breaks for it. I will therefore fully embrace the religious tradition of complete, mind-numbingly stupid hypocrisy.

Yeah, well all of you can just go and talk with Senator Boehner. He is backing me on this, since if I can't do it, I would have to go against my religious convictions, and that would be an infringement of my religious freedom.

Frank: When Boner (yeah, Boner, the orange dude) wins a senate seat he will back you up... in the meantime he is a Representative, not a senator (Speaker of the House, does the title rings a bell?)

Your Christ is anyways a wacko who most probably never existed. So your calling something 'anti non-existant' ? I understand why your still a religious sheep :)

Elvis Payne:

The anti-Christ party is at work again..thou shalt not give false statements against they neighbor...oh the scribes and Pharisees are at it again..yes lying against Obama to get in power

What do you expect from the party of no, and the we will do everything in our power to make this a one term president???

Sorry, more & more "for-profit" springing up, even "chains"? ?

Those freaking loan sharks who will charge you $12 for a table of tylenol when you can buy 600 for the same price OTC?

It's the Catholic and some fundamentalist churches that want to make this into an issue because they want a president who caters more to their interests. In 28 states there are already the same or similar requirements in place for religious businesses. Why have the churches not protested in those 28 states already?

Women make up half of the electorate. Ninety-eight percent of Catholic women have used birth control at some time during their lives. Obama had better not walk back this decision if he wants women's support.

This isn't so much about birth control, but GOVERNMENT control in FORCING the church to pay for it. FORCING them to participate in something that is against their conscience, and beliefs. It IS about ignoring their rights GUARANTEED under the Constitution. THAT'S what it is about. Women will do what they want to do.....just don't FORCE the Chruch to PAY for it...it's that simple.

Businesses ("Affiliates") MUST conform to Labor Laws ?!?!

28 States already DO ? ? NO question of religious freedom ? ?

If you know that an organization you are thinking about going to work for will not provide medical coverage for birth control, morning after pills, or abortions... then you can not expect to be covered for them and no government should force them to be covered.

Is their anybody out there that does not know the catholic church is against these things. It does not matter if it is a church, hospital, charity, or school...

If you do not like their STAND... do not work for them... NOBODY is going to force you to accept a job at a Catholic hospital or a Catholic School...

If somebody does force you to work for them.. report them... it is called slavery.... If you want really fantastic medical coverage... go to work for the government