Catholic Church v Obama over mandatory health insurance

[FBM]

Prohibits coverage of abortions? I didn't know that.

[hadespussercats]

I'd heard Obama had totally caved, but... I'm not sure about this compromise:
http://bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012 ... story.html

Seems like employers will just ditch coverage, and insurance companies are going to find ways to weasel out of the new obligations to cover the gap.

[Warren Dew]

Prohibits coverage of abortions? I didn't know that.

It was really quite a coup for the large bloc of antiabortion Democrats, who insisted that the Stupak amendment be included in Obamacare with Obama's blessing. The Stupak amendment prohibits government spending on any health care policy that includes abortion, but because of the way the government run health insurance exchanges work, that also directly prohibits any policies offered to individuals or small businesses from covering abortion. New policies for large businesses have to switch to the exchanges as well, which means that in time, essentially all health insurance will be prohibited from covering abortions. Quite a clever maneuver by the antiabortion folks in the Democratic party.

[hadespussercats]

Prohibits coverage of abortions? I didn't know that.

It was really quite a coup for the large bloc of antiabortion Democrats, who insisted that the Stupak amendment be included in Obamacare with Obama's blessing. The Stupak amendment prohibits government spending on any health care policy that includes abortion, but because of the way the government run health insurance exchanges work, that also directly prohibits any policies offered to individuals or small businesses from covering abortion. New policies for large businesses have to switch to the exchanges as well, which means that in time, essentially all health insurance will be prohibited from covering abortions. Quite a clever maneuver by the antiabortion folks in the Democratic party.

Do you know if this includes D and C's, or pregnancy termination for health reasons?

[Warren Dew]

Do you know if this includes D and C's, or pregnancy termination for health reasons?

There are apparently exceptions where health insurance is allowed to cover abortion for rape, incest, and if the life of the mother is at stake, but not if it's "just" the health of the mother.

You didn't know about this either? Not that you should have; I guess the press coverage while Obamacare was being debated wasn't as far reaching as I thought.

[apophenia]

They would be a lot more realistic if they dropped the absurdity of opposing contraception in general,; retaining an opposition to abortion is at a different level...

Contraception and abortion are one of the biggest reasons we are losing to the brown people who make three or five kids for every one we have.

Inconvenient it may be, but it's strategically sound.

The thing is, once they start winning, they stop having as many babies. It's an effect tied to affluence, like a predator-prey relationship, one side can't increase asymptotically, as there's negative feedback involved.

[apophenia]

Awesome. Obama caves once again.

Whether the church likes it or not, not everything the church does is religious and therefore protected under the first amendment. And the church is more than happy to take advantage of this fact, when it suits their purposes, such as getting involved in political issues and so forth. Being an employee of the church is not the same as being a member of the church, and that's the secular part of the church showing itself. Nor is freedom of religion an unimpeachable right. The church can't decide that dumping its garbage in the street is a religious act and hope to get protection. What if the church decided that they were no longer going to buy health insurance for black or hispanic employees, because the pope decrees that they aren't human? There would be no end to the outcry. But of course, the church, where a woman should be seen and not heard, has no problem advocating discrimination that hurts women if it suits them. It's a load of crap. I come at this from the angle of a person with mental illness. Parity for treatment of mental illness has only lately become a supportable issue. For a long time (and still) insurers did not cover treatment for mental illnesses to the same level as physical illnesses. Does the church still teach that mental illness is a result of demon possession? If they did, would it then be proper for them to offer employees insurance that didn't offer any mental health coverage, where at least some coverage is the norm? I don't think so. The reason the church is getting away with this is because they can, not because it's right. Sadly, people within the church and outside are willing to make judgements about other people's lives, basically on the back of their own insecurity about issues of reproductive rights; if the church decided that chemotherapy was against their religion, not a single body in the church would stand with them.

[anna09]

This story pisses me off so much; employers should not be able to pick and choose what medications are deemed "acceptable". By picking on contraception, they're exposing their ignorance to how it works and what its used for. Birth control pills are simply hormone pills that can help women with a variety of medical problems not just preventing pregnancies. What are the women supposed to do who have ovarian cysts?? Or chronic pain during ovulation?? I know from experience, that when you're stuck in bed all day long because you're frozen in pain and vicodin barely takes the edge off; having some religious cunt tell you "sorry, but jesus doesn't like birth control. . . here's another dangerous and highly addictive narcotic for your pain" is infuriating.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Anna, God will reward their suffering in Heaven.

Meaning that we don't have to do anything about it on Earth.

[anna09]

Anna, God will reward their suffering in Heaven.

Oh yea, I forgot about that part.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Anna, God will reward their suffering in Heaven.

Oh yea, I forgot about that part.

It's also good for denying cancer treatments, blood donations, organ donation, and giving a fuck about other human beings.

[Warren Dew]

employers should not be able to pick and choose what medications are deemed "acceptable".

Neither should government.

[hadespussercats]

Do you know if this includes D and C's, or pregnancy termination for health reasons?

There are apparently exceptions where health insurance is allowed to cover abortion for rape, incest, and if the life of the mother is at stake, but not if it's "just" the health of the mother.

You didn't know about this either? Not that you should have; I guess the press coverage while Obamacare was being debated wasn't as far reaching as I thought.

I've been getting too much of my news from Comedy Central.

[apophenia]

employers should not be able to pick and choose what medications are deemed "acceptable".

Neither should government.

Whom are you suggesting should choose what medications are deemed "acceptable" ?

[hadespussercats]

Awesome. Obama caves once again.

Whether the church likes it or not, not everything the church does is religious and therefore protected under the first amendment. And the church is more than happy to take advantage of this fact, when it suits their purposes, such as getting involved in political issues and so forth. Being an employee of the church is not the same as being a member of the church, and that's the secular part of the church showing itself. Nor is freedom of religion an unimpeachable right. The church can't decide that dumping its garbage in the street is a religious act and hope to get protection. What if the church decided that they were no longer going to buy health insurance for black or hispanic employees, because the pope decrees that they aren't human? There would be no end to the outcry. But of course, the church, where a woman should be seen and not heard, has no problem advocating discrimination that hurts women if it suits them. It's a load of crap. I come at this from the angle of a person with mental illness. Parity for treatment of mental illness has only lately become a supportable issue. For a long time (and still) insurers did not cover treatment for mental illnesses to the same level as physical illnesses. Does the church still teach that mental illness is a result of demon possession? If they did, would it then be proper for them to offer employees insurance that didn't offer any mental health coverage, where at least some coverage is the norm? I don't think so. The reason the church is getting away with this is because they can, not because it's right. Sadly, people within the church and outside are willing to make judgements about other people's lives, basically on the back of their own insecurity about issues of reproductive rights; if the church decided that chemotherapy was against their religion, not a single body in the church would stand with them.

Re the chemo bit-- I'm not so sure. Consider Christian Scientists and JW types that don't allow blood transfusions.

But yeah-- discrimination against women is so baked in to most religions that many people just accept that it's okay-- an acceptable part of traditional culture. Whereas anti-semitism or other varieties of traditional bigotry are the outdated small-mindedness these groups simply must overcome to be part of modern society.