How can one “compromise” with an administration that makes up the rules as it goes along?  That’s one (of many) problems with Obamacare—it grants the administration the power to grant waivers (or not) based on nothing more than whimsy.  Accepting this now just postpones the inevitable.

Brilliant.
“But for the rest of us, and most bishops I believe, it’s too late (indeed many of us warned this was coming for a long time). This bear isn’t going back to sleep any time soon. She’s been hibernating long enough and it’s time for a new Spring time in the Church.”
Thank you for making the initial analogy - which may help so many who just don’t know what’s going on (do any of us really know what’s going on?)
I for one usually don’t remark much on matters of government, because I think the whole system is corrupt, and just gets me irked.
But I refuse to be quiet on this. Even if I didn’t care so deeply that we will be forced (all of us in one way or another now) to pay for other people’s contraceptives, sterilization and abortions (and I DO)... just the fact that we are about to face a new America with tyrranical rule is frightening enough to stand up and take names.

Assuming you work for a Catholic (or any) religious institution, assuming “[the insurance company] bases its rates upon the expenses incurred within your pool of employees,” if no one within that pool utilizes contraception, how does it affect your expenses?

It seems to me that your biggest complaint is that you don’t trust your co-workers to be Catholic enough to soothe your conscience. It sounds like a deeply personal problem that reflects your own insecurities about your faith and it’s ability to motivate participants to do “the right thing.”

Excellent analysis of what is going on, the Devil is a word smith, the wizard of double speak.  I just can not fathom why our church leaders keep following this idiot.  Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

Right on!!!

You can’t dance with the devil; if you do, you’re going to get burned!

What more can you expect from a person who is working toward becoming a Dictator? God has no place in his life—only evil and lust are his friends. Do you remember a Russian leader many years ago who said “We do not have to destroy you, you (USA) will destroy yourselves from within”?
By the way I did not drink beer in college because I was under age. I did not want to break the law. The group I associated with were there to learn and to help improve our society. Having the older one buy the beer was asking someone to swin…...

Actually…adding preventive/contraceptive care causes premiums to DECREASE.  So…how does the Catholic Church spin that one? Hypothetical Bishop: “We should not be forced to pay for a provision of health care that we have a moral/religious objection to.”  Response: “You actually won’t be paying for it—it will actually cause you to pay less for other provisions of health care.”  Hypothetical Bishop: “We should not be forced to pay less for health care because we have a moral objection to a provision that we will not be paying for.  Wait?  What?”

The religious freedom argument is a straw man.  It’s a distraction from the fact that the Church will be discriminating against it’s non-Catholic employees, and a ploy to force others to live by it’s faulty theology/morality.

This is a great analogy…even the foggiest amongst us should be able to grasp that Obama is playing a shell game with our First Amendment rights given this terrific analogy!

Thank you Matthew for being right on, but poor Leigh, Elizabeth & Deacon Don(key) and all of the others that think that they are mocking the Church, but, it is God that they are mocking and we know that GOD WILL NOT BE MOCKED and one of these days, they will meet Jesus face to face, and it is to HIM that they will have to answer to. I just bet that they won’t be so smug and arrogant then. Tell us deacon don(key) with your false story: just how will destroying people with drugs, etc. that not only kills the baby, but also kills the mother save money. The great use of condoms have caused the increase of STPs, divorce, suicide, abortions and they are also horrible carriers of disease and they pollute our landfills and water ways. I don’t know what you are drinking, but it must not be beer to be so confused. Birth control is A SIN and to force anybody to pay for someone to be sinning is an even greater sin & for those of you that see no problem here, you are just as guilty.  Wake up and get right with Jesus while you still have a chance.  +JMJ+

Elizabeth you post made no sense. The ads for the children and the need to feed them is called charity which everyone should do. We care for the mothers, fathers and children just like the Bible and Holy Mother Church teaches us to. The government is not my moral leader and must stay our of our moral teachings and anything else that is God’s and not governments..

We also care for the earth that God created. People are crying for us to limit our footprint here on earth ok what would you think if every day someone contaminated our fresh water and thus the ocean with arsenic (it is a naturally produced mineral) into your drinking water supply?
Well, if you won’t accept the Biblical or church teaching reasoning, with the birth-control hormones that you and other women take you are contaminating the drinking water of everyone on earth. Look it up this as is from the the DEP information. What you take in goes out it is scientific fact.

As for our house we will continue to follow the teachings of the CHURCH and remember that JESUS believes that life starts at conception. After all it does not say in the Holy Bible that he knew you after implantation. The Bible says I knew you in the womb.

I will continue to pray for the mothers of the children that never were given a chance.

Why would it be free, and I have a hundred dollar deductible on an emergency room visit? Methinks the priorities are mixed up!

@Deacon Don: your comment about causing premiums to decrease is mixed.  Adding *truly* preventative care (e.g., cholesterol & diabetes screenings, mammograms, colonoscopies) would make a profound (positive) impact on the overall cost of health care (provided that once something was found early, people would actually heed the advice of their primary care provider).  However, contraception is NOT truly preventative care.  It works to prevent pregnancy (nevermind that it does so in a myriad of illicit ways), but pregnancy is actually NORMAL from a physiologic standpoint.  Contraception “breaks” that which isn’t broken in the first place.  Follow the lead to its logical conclusion here - the use of hormonal contraception actually INCREASES the following: rates of breast cancer (especially triple-negative, an aggressive form typically found in younger women), stroke, blot clots (in the legs and the lungs), liver cancer, cervical cancer, cholesterol & blood sugar (metabolic) abnormalities, AND abortion.  (I can cite studies if anyone requests it, but just look at the PDR for most of these if you’re interested.)  But it shouldn’t be a big surprise that the rates of cancer would increase when one takes a WHO-classified Class I carcinogen to “treat” fertility… This would therefore INCREASE the premiums and overall cost of healthcare, rather than decrease it.
***
From a purely $ standpoint, consider the following: using NFP to regulate birth has an overall, one-time cost of about $20-75 depending on the method and teacher.  The “Pill” costs an average of $35, every 4 weeks (13x per year) for as long as someone will use it—up to 20 years, perhaps.  That’s $455 PER YEAR just for the prescription.  And for those who are simply uneducated about NFP (a.k.a. Fertility Awareness), the efficacy rates are extremely high (over 90% for almost all methods) and carry no side effects whatsoever.

Buried in all this is an UNMISTAKABLE LIE THAT THERE IS NO CHOICE that we must use contraception. This no choice is said to even TRUMP THE FIRST AMENDMENT. No tolerance. No freedom.

The point here is: Why are we being forced to pay for someone else’s sexual habits.  Insurance has always covered necessary surgery and test that prevent disease.  Most insurance doesn’t even extend to that which we truly NEED, such as dental and vision coverage, at least not without added expense.  The Obama administration is demanding that we pay for your “play” habits and then cover all expenses that arise from it, including that “inconvenient truth”.  I have no problems paying for coverage for real health needs but, the coverage we are being forced to pay here is all part of a person’s OWN ELECTION.  Never has the US gov’t had the right to force anyone to pay for another person’s pleasure against the will of so many that consider this a sin.  Elizabeth, Kathleen, and Don - don’t pretend that is the Catholic Church doesn’t provide this, you won’t be able to get all of these things somewhere else.  That’s just silly.  And if you don’t like the limitations of the health care provided by your employer, do what everyone else does in the same case: opt for a different job.  You have that freedom. You have that choice.  But don’t go ramming YOUR morals (or lack thereof) down OUR throats!

Elizabeth..54% of the people who have abortions were using birth control at the time. The pill is classified as a carcinogen by the world health organization. If birth control is so effective, why the huge numbers of unwed births. there’s no “free” birth control, either the taxpayers or the customers of the insurance company pay for it in higher premiums. Then there’s the whole issue of the government forcing us to buy healthcare-not a role of the government-or face fines.

@Elizabeth, “If they’re fool enough to want to do without” is another way of saying “there is no choice”.
That is NOT TRUE. And the major reason why most Catholics have used contraception.
Once they understand how NFP really does work and the benefits to marriage, things will be different.
We may have a totalitarian president to thank for that. :-)

You forget that the compromise does not exempt the businessmen and organ-
izations that do have a well formed conscience.  It still forces them to adhere to this regulation and is still aqainst the first amendment, forcing them to go against their conscience.  I also agree that unless it was in writing and gave us back our first amendment rights, I would hope that people would not be fooled by these tactics.  Divide and Conquer. 
Ave Maria.

I couldn’t believe it until I read it, but this mandate actually covers sterilizations too.  You can get a tubal ligation (“tubes tied”) with no co-pay and no deductible.  Searching the web this morning I found that the price could range from $1500 to $6000 for that.  If the insurance is going to pay every penny, which end of the range do you think the price will be?

But that’s not what makes this illegal.  It does not matter how stupid you think our theology and teachings are, it doesn’t matter whether or not you agree with us.  It is our teaching.  The federal government does not have the authority to compel religious people to violate the teachings of their church.  Even if 99% of the members of the church want to.  Even if 99% of the states already do.  Even if 99% of religious organizations would be happy to.  The federal government simply does not have the authority to compel even 1 person to do this.

Well said!  Thank you.

JMJ I have seen all kinds of surgeries on TV. Heart, Brain, Eye, Lung, Knee, Hip, Stomach, etc. If Abortion is Okay, then why haven’t we seen it on TV? If taking a birth control pill/morning after pill is okay and considered womens health care along with Abortions, then why isn’t it on TV? Over Fifty million Abortions and not one procedure on TV!!!+patrick

“Oh, and you aren’t in the womb until implantation.”—by “Elizabeth”

Then where are you ?

Did you pass biology ?

What compromise? It’s only rewording of the s.o.s. We need to take the warning of what happened in Illinois to heart and not let ourselves be lulled back to sleep. To borrow from your article a bit, the sleeping Mother “bear” needs to come fully awake and defend her cubs. The poachers have surrounded us.

After this, Obama is going to insist that we cease discriminating against women by ordaining them priests, too. And then, of course, gay marriage will be mandated—they are already trying for that in the military. For that matter, he has forbade the pastoral letter on the subject of mandating abortion and contraception,  by the Military Archbishop to be read by any military chaplain at Catholic services. In a heartbeat, they just lost freedom of speech.,

History shows that Obama is doing today exactly what Hitler did in the mid 30’s.  He is riding over all legislative bodies, ignoring the constitution, ruling by executive mandate, and no one dares to move against him.

Constitutions, laws, legislative bodies mean nothing to this man.  He does what he wants.  Things are going to get bad—real bad and ugly, I fear.

GR

Strange how people who consider Catholic Faith to be “faulty theology” designed to “appease peasants and slaves” are spending their time on a Catholic website.  I’m not a Muslim, and I don’t hang out on Muslim websites; what would be the point?  Actually, I’m glad that this whole thing is happening.  Time for the Church to spew the lukewarm out of her mouth.  Maybe we can then go to Mass and not see a couple dozen Obamination bumper stickers in the parking lot.

Really, had not thought of that perspective, what are you non Catholics doing here any way, could you just be doing your father’s work?

“Maybe we can then go to Mass and not see a couple dozen Obamination bumper stickers in the parking lot.”

Oh, yes. Those bumper stickers.

I’m generally not one to spit in public, but I believe I may have to do some tomorrow. I think I can make spit land on an 8-inch paper with Sauron’s name on it.

Sr. Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, wasted no time in saying Obama’s “compromise” was great.

She gave Obama the cover he needed to get Obamacare past the last few holdouts in congress who didn’t want taxpayer-funded abortion. Keehan said there was none. We now know different (ie, Morning after pill, Ella, RU486-clone)

Keehan went against the bishops and was rewarded with a pen used to sign Obamacare into law. Isn’t it amazing how cheap a soul can be sold for?

[“I just haven’t fallen for a religion designed to appease peasants and slaves”]

Well then, my dear little Princess… I certainly hope that you and your silly royal court enjoy living in very *HOT* weather.  LOL

Great post, Matthew; thank you! Just want to add my nickle’s worth in response to the non-Catholics/dissenters/trolls who posted earlier. First, why do you have a problem with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution? Whether you choose to PRACTICE a particular faith or none at all, our country’s founders put it in for everyone’s benefit. Second, on the topic of contraception, are you aware of the very real pollution problem—and related medical problems—they are causing to our water sources? Doubt it? Research some scientific journals and you will find the studies that the secular press are loathe to report. Third, NFP is NOT the old “rhythm method” of old and it works. There are benefits to its use even the non-religious could appreciate. An Orthodox Jewish friend, who follows the dictates of her faith regarding marital relations, once confided to me, “The discipline IS spiritual, but it also keeps the romantic aspect special.” Fourth, the statistics from Planned Parenthood’s own Guttmacher Institute show easy availability to birth control pills has NOT reduced the number of elective abortions. Fifth, to accuse the Catholic Church and faithful Catholics of not caring about babies after they are born, or for the poor, or the hungry is just contemptible. There is NO other religious entity that has done more others.

Rosemary, you were so correct about the divide & conquer http://www.freep.com/article/20120212/NEWS07/202120561/Analysis-President-s-retreat-on-birth-control-turns-tables-on-opponents
Would somebody please do something about Catholic Healthcare and their CEO who undercuts our bishops!

http://www.christianforums.com/t7472792/
Sister Carol Keehan, head of the Catholic Health Association, makes almost a million dollars a year in salary. She had to resign from the board of a Catholic Hospital over her abortion views. She supports Obama.
Health insurance is intended to provide treatment for illnesses.  It is an optional choice to engage in sexual bulimia,(binge on sex, purge the baby) and use of contraception. Those who choose to do so, should pay for their own choices.

“It is an optional choice to engage in sexual bulimia,(binge on sex, purge the baby) and use of contraception. Those who choose to do so, should pay for their own choices.”

Diseases which can be prevented, treated, managed or improved by estrogen and/or progesterone supplementation: pulmonary hypertension, uterine cancer, breast cancer, menopause, estrogen deficiency (which can lead to infertility, underdevelopment of secondary sex characteristics, breast cancer and uterine cancer), multiple sclerosis, coronary artery disease in post-menopausal women, amenorrhea, dysmenorrhea, and endometriosis (all of which can prevent a woman from becoming pregnant, while careful treatment and management with “the pill” can enable a previously infertile woman to have healthy children) and possibly Alzheimer’s disease (new research is starting to show results).

And that’s just what I can think of off of the top of my head.

So yes, for some women “the pill” (AKA estrogen and/or progesterone supplementation) can be a health necessity. And that’s ignoring all the women for whom it might be unsafe to practice natural family planning because of serious health risks which an unplanned pregnancy might complicate (such as severe hypertension). In cases of menstrual cycle problems, the pill can actually improve fertility and allow conception to happen by regulating hormonal cycles and allowing ovulation once cycles have been properly established.

And to head off the dissenters:  I’m Catholic, I’m married, I have a daughter, I’ve never had an abortion, and I’m a nurse. Next question please.

Jeanniemac,
If we go by your line of thinking (and yes I am Catholic), you say that it’s optional to engage in sexual bulemia - and that “those who choose to do so should pay for their own choices.”  By the same thought, then it would follow that those who get pregnant and don’t abort should have to pay for the pregnancy costs.
I believe in ffreedom of religion - and I love the Church, but there are times (having lived in other countries with other religions) where I have to wonder if (the pro life Catholics) are trying to say that using even birth control should not be acceptable because of religious beliefs, then it seems to me, we’re trying to say that everyone needs to follow our “Catholic” religious belifs - which I have a hard time understanding how that is right in this country.  Not everyone in America is Catholic - and many of those who are don’t even (all) agree with this.  Hey, I do wish that people who aren’t the same religion understood and agreed - but the fact of the matter is that not everyone is the same religion or has the same beliefs.  And coming out and saying that everyone has to listen to us because we’re Catholic and this is the only true religion and our beliefs are right and everyone else’s is wrong is just not what this country was founded on.  This is not the CUSA (Catholic USA) nor is it the (PUSA) Protestant USA - we need to respect how others believe - otherwise, I don’t see how we can ever expect others to respect our religious beliefs or even attempt to understand them.  Just as I don’t want someone else’s beliefs crammed down my throat because that’s not right, it isn’t right for Catholics to force someone to abide by our beliefs.

Pregnancies are rightly covered under insurance plans because getting pregnant is a natural event for human beings. Contraception and abortion pills are intended to thwart the consequences of coitus while allowing the pleasure thereof.  To believe that contraception and abortion are evils,is not a subjective issue, wherein the good or evil of the issue is a matter of opinion. When a person, knowing that the sex act is the means of reproduction, still engages in it, either for the pleasure, or to make a statement of equality, they should be ready to take the consequences.

Obama is ready to turn and twist laws to gain his objectives. It is very possible that he WANTS the Catholic church to close the doors of all of their hospitals, schools, adoption agencies, etc., so that his government can take them over in full control.  The fact that the government would then have to pay the costs of running the institutions would be solved by raising taxes.  Or, Obama may simply say, that, unfortunately the Catholic Church chooses not to provide medical care, housing, etc. to anyone, so therefore you all have to suffer because of them.  He would continue to give free contraception and abortion because that would accomplish the global elites purpose of “reducing the surplus population”

The real issue in the HHS mandate is the intrusion of the government into private businesses.  Insurance companies MUST provide free contraception and abortion pills, at their own expense?  The government does not have the authority to do this.  The government does not have the right to force religious institutions or any employer to provide free contraception or abortions at their own expense. 
This is an attempt by Obama to gain control of religious institutions and businesses. It is part of his agenda to establish a dictatorship.
March 23, 1933 Hitler passed his Enabling Act which made him a dictator.
March 23, 2010 Obama passed his Healthcare Ace which makes him a dictator.

All this contraception etc. is just a smokescreen to eliminate our First Amendment Rights.  They are after the Second Amendment, too.  Then will they go on to the Third????

Jeanniemac: I would agree with the sexual playground caused by contracteption should be faught IF Viagra was also not covered.  The Biships seem to not have a problem with it’s coverage.  Give MEN a long lasting toy while not allowing WOMEN to protect against playing with it seems sexist.  Seems sexist to us outsiders, like many things in the Catholic church.  Only one woman is important to the church and she is a perpetual virgin.

Do contracteptives really lower health care cost, or are many costs simply ignored in such comparisons, such as the costs to treat:
*sexually transmitted disease including HIV and AIDS
*blood clots in arms, legs and lungs
*perforated uterus
*infections
*subsequent infertility
*etc.
I think the secular desire for “free love” and the insane global drive to reduce the “people pollution” produces many flagrantly flawed studies and statistics.

@Elizabeth,
With all Christian Churches teaching that contraception was immoral until 1930, all Popes in the 20th Century having reiterated the Teaching, this being the constant Teaching of the Church for 2000 years and the vast damage contraception has done in society since 1968… You want what?? LOL
Tell me, Elizabeth, do you think the Church is just a human organization, or do you think it is Divine with human members?
Didn’t Christ say “I will build My Church”. Didn’t He rise from the dead?
- I really don’t think you have to be an advanced theologian to figure this out.

Contraception is not even Biblical. For all you atheists and progressive “Catholics,” I know it doesn’t matter. But, by what authority are YOU justifying the use of contraception? Science? “Overpopulation?”

I challenge any non-Catholic Christians and Jews and others to find where in the New or Old Testament that SPECIFICALLY allows for contraception. So, why ALL Christains/Jews are not united on the prohibition of contraception is beyond me - particularly since most non-Catholic Christians use the Bible as their source for how they behave morally. But, at least many Jews and non-Catholic Christians are standing with us on the issue of First Amendment violation, which is the REAL issue here - not contraception…

@Rafael - you are exactly right…the issue at hand is not contraception - it is the government mandating what you may or may not purchase.  Please read the Storman’s v. Selecky case in the 9th Circuit (Goggle it and it will come up).  If the government can tell a privately-owned business what it must sell (Plan B), they are not going to stop there.  This adminstration is about dictating/mandating and removing our liberty.  Enough is enough.  We must push back…Elections will be here before we know it…Educate yourselves, and vote for freedom.  Under the Health Care Law - most decisions are given to HHS ... and we see how well that is working for us.

ELIZABETH: you information that you are getting is just a bunch of lies. Guttmacher, as all of us know, is a hidden part of “planned parenthood” and just as “PP”, has never been know to tell the truth. You have been brain-washed or are you just brain-dead?  Just because you are in a lustful “marriage”, which is a marriage without God & refusing to allow His children to come into the world. When people use birth control, they are on in a slippery slope straight into hell. GOD WILL NOT BE MOCKED as you are now doing and the price that you will pay will be your soul. If you were brave and wanted to find the truth, you could get onto the A.L.L. sight, but, this would ruin your sex for fun. KRISTEN: Birth conrtrol is not just a CATHOLIC issue, it is from God Himself. Read the Bible and also dwell on the Commandment: THO SHALL NOT KILL and ask the Holy Spirit to show you what this means.  +JMJ+

Jane,

Let’s just hope the liberal judges on the US Supreme Court stand with religious freedom on this. Kennedy is the swing vote. You can’t trust Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan for certain, although, they did stand united 9-0 on the recent case, Hosanna vs…. case,  which was religious freedom case. So, there’s hope. That case, too, was defended by the Beckett Fund. They’re awesome!!!

[Professor Janet E. Smith, who is among the world’s foremost researchers, writers, and lecturers on the Church’s teaching concerning contraception, provides a good illustration of how easy it is for people to adjust to the darkness of their own ignorance. When Dr. Smith, who teaches philosophy at the University of Dallas, in Irving, Texas, introduces the topic of contraception to her students, the overwhelming majority indicate their disagreement with Church teaching. But when she asks them if they are familiar with the reasons the Church offers in condemning contraception, she finds few, if any, who are. When she asks them whether they think they are entitled to an opinion, let alone a fair opinion, on a subject about which they have read and thought little or nothing, she finds that they begin to look a bit shame-faced.

Pressures to conform to the world’s way of viewing contraception come from many sources and are very powerful. Pope Paul VI made note of this in Humanae Vitae, the Church’s most definitive denunciation of contraception. “It is not surprising,” he wrote, “the Church finds herself a sign of contradiction—just as her Founder. But this is no reason for the Church to abandon the duty entrusted to her of preaching the whole moral law and the law of God.”]

Read entire article here:

http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/dem/dem_03contraceptioncath.html

Matt- Thanks for another great post as you continue to track this issue.

The timing of this is uncanny. In my diocese we have a Catholic Men for Jesus Christ Conference coming up on Feb 25th. I am certain the halls will be buzzing on this topic and those that attend will leave galvanized to support our Holy Mother Church in this fight.

As a side note, I would be very happy to provide additional details about the rally to any men in or near the Diocese of Trenton, NJ (or anywhere for that matter) who would like to attend.

Keep up the great work and God Bless!

To all who are trolling here eager to hammer the Church ... would you be just as eager to force all taxpayers to pay for true *universal* healthcare.  You know, the kind *everybody* can use (e.g., toothbrushes, toothpaste, cough syrup).  Why is it just the kind of “healthcare”—contraceptives, abortion—sought by the sexually active?

And while we’re at it, while I know of many hospitals started, supported, maintained, paid for by Catholics, is there one founded by atheists? 

Take a look at who cares at the street level, at the inner city level, at the migrant camp level—it’s Catholics.  When the progressives like our esteemed president and the HHS secretary are getting the big bucks on the speaker circuit, Catholics will be still take actual care of the poor, homeless, sick, pregnant, elderly, terminal ill. 

And progressives will still seek to find some compassionate way of “removing” the life unworthy of life and having the government (i.e., the rest of us) pay for it.

The answer is simple—change your employee hours to part time and don’t provide insurance. Other corporations are doing this all the time.

ChuckU,

I wish it was that simple. I get what you’re saying. But, the underlying issues still remains: government intrusion into religious liberty. We still have yet to see the end-of-life issues that are in this Obamacare. Plus, even with a part-time staff, they can still mandate us to perform abortions, euthanasia, etc… all in the name of “health care” and “patient’s rights”. If they win this victory, there will be no stopping them. That’s why Obamacare needs to be repealed and Obama needs to be defeated. There is no compromising with these people. Adn they’ve just proven that. Their objective is to get the Catholic Church - and other religions - out of the healthcare industry, education, adoption, etc.. Once they can create a void, they will fill it. And they are targetting the Catholic Church first because they are the largest religious institution providing all these services.

Some Catholic institutions have chosen to close rather than obey Obama’s laws.  An adoption agency closed rather than give children to homosexuals.
It could be that Obama is counting on having Catholic institutions close, so that their influence is diminished.  But, instead of closing, they can simply refuse to obey an unconstitutional law, and refuse also to pay any fines.  The government is being sued for its unconstitutional laws, and Obama should be impeached for breaking his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

ederal law is not God’s law. Federal law is not even the Supreme Law of the Land. The only Supreme Law of the Land (to this date) is those laws that are passed pursuant to the constitution—and by constitution, this means not only the US Constitution, but also the State constitutions. Our founders stated emphatically: unconstitutional laws are null and void and have no effect.

Where the federal government assumes power that was given to the state governments by the people of those States, should the States sit back passively and let unconstitutional federal laws dictate to the state governments and to the people what they will do or not do? Any State willing to shirk the trust placed into their hands by the people is as guilty of treason as those federal tyrants who have trampled on those protections, powers and rights. State response should be in direct proportion to federal encroachments. Without this formula actively used, the tyrant always prevails.

JEANIEMAC,

Exactly! Great points! And as far as I can tell, the Obama Administration IS trying to impose ITS morality upon us - which, could be argued - is a violation of the Constitution which says that “Congress shall not establish a religion.” The wall between church and state was created to protect religions from the will of the state - not the other way around. All rights come from God. So, even these “women’s rights” and “worker’s rights” come from our Creator. So, why God would allow His laws to be violated - or shown in stark contrast to - his other rights is beyond me. Why would God allow a woman the “right” to commit murder? That does not make sense. “Women’s rights” vs committing murder: Which one is morally superior? Murder wins that arguement. God gives us rights. But, we don’t have the rights to violate His moral laws - not without consequences at least. The fact that this administration is trying to make the case that “women’s rights”  and “worker’s rights” are morally superior - and take presedence - over religious freedom is a direct contradiction to the Constitution. Women have the right to work wherever they wish. But, they also have to respect the rules of the place they work. They don’t have the right to TELL the employer how they have to behave, barring of course any harrasment practices, for instance. Employers have rights too. That’s what’s great about competition: If you don’t like the Catholic Church’s policies, go work somewhere else. For that matter, if you don’t like the Catholic Church’s stance on contraception, go to another faith. These “progressive Catholics” stay in the Church with the mission of changing the Church. And now they’re trying to use the law to do so.

There is so much back and forth on this about who is telling who what to do with their bodies.  President Obama, an elected official with term limits, has no right to withdraw my, your or the Church’s First Amendment rights.  If you allow that to occur, the government will then be back to withdraw more of your constitutional rights.  That is why this is an important fight.  It will be a very small comfort that you got your birth control pills for free.

Eileen - you are right.  This is not about birth control, et al.  It is about the government telling institutions and businesses what they may or may not do.  The government does not pay my taxes nor my healthcare. The government has no right to mandate healthcare…however, the Obama health care law does that by giving HHS the authority to mandate whatever the heck it wants.  Citizens of this country should be afraid - read the passed bill - it is frightening.  Then, read Humane Vitae.  I read a great article today (wish I could remember by whom) saying the government will next make us by broccoli - that you must provide it - whether anyone eats it or not.  School lunches went up in price to be in line with new government mandates…it is just nuts what this government is doing.

@Elizabeth - True; however, the Minimum Wage cannot be increased willy-nilly (technical term).  Congress must enact the raise.  The Health Care Law gives HHS the power to control healthcare…Congress gave away its power in the bill…Read the bill.  The EPA can make rules…however, Congress must pass the regulations.  On another note, I found this interesting:  Interesting:  From tubal.org:  between 750,000 and 1,000,000 million women each year undergo tubal ligation for the purpose of birth control.  According to Planned Parenthood, the cost of a tubal is in the range of $1,500 to $6,000 per procedure.  The “free” procedure your insurance will be required to pay for on average will cost between $1,312,500,000 and $5,250,000,000 (yup - that is billion).  I don’t think an insurance company will provide this for “free;” nor will any physician.  Someone is going to have to pay for it - and it will not be me.

Elizabeth:
The government does not force Quakers to fight in wars.  There is a huge difference between not allowing someone to do something which has been found unlawful (plural marriage, human sacrifice) which might be construed as a religious practice by some, and forcing someone to do something that violates their religious/moral beliefs.

I believe the quote “You are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” was attributed to our Lord Lord and Savior Jesus Christ…

For those in favor of the mandate, the claim that “women’s health” is morally superior to the killing of an unborn child goes to show how far you are willing to go. Whether you agree with the Catholic Church or not - and their freedom to preach AND practice this - you need to look at this from the standpoint of moral superiority. Those in favor of the mandate are claiming that “women’s health” takes precedence over an unborn child’s rights. At least a woman can choose whether she wants to practice contraception or not. An unborn child who gets killed in his/her mother’s womb: Who’s standing up for their rights? What “choice” does he/she have? That’s why ALL issues go back to the right to life FIRST. That’s why it’s also FIRST in the Declaration of Independence. Also the Right to Life takes priority over the Freedom of Religion. ‘Cause without life, you have no other freedoms and rights.
Dick Morris made the wise observation that the left changed the issue from abortion to contraception because they know that they can’t win the battle on abortion. So, he said that the left made the issue that of contraception because they will have a more favorable chance of winning the issue on popularity. Most people do not object to contraception, as compared to the amount of people that object to abortion. In other words, what the underlying argument says is, “You can be in favor of contraception and be against abortion at the same time.” Most non-Catholic Christians are against abortion but practice contraception. Sadly, there are - let me stress - “baptized” Catholics that are also against abortion, though, practice contraception. So, the left has a “stronger” chance at accomplishing this objective if they can take the attention off of abortion and make it about “women’s rights, women’s health” via the “popular” vehicle - even among “98% of Catholic women” -  of contraception.
Finally, I feel that 2 very subtle points are being missed here. This arguement feeds right into the mentality that says CHILDREN ARE A BURDEN and that practitioners of contraception are essentially CLOSED TO LIFE. Contraception is the means to the end. This is the mentality of the CULTURE OF DEATH. Also, use of contraception is the ULTIMATE rejection of a woman and male because you are NOT accepting their fertility. You are in essence saying, “I love everything about you EXCEPT your fertility.”

The contraception mandate infringes on the 1st Amendment right to the free exercise of religion. As such, it is unconstitutional.  Because it is unconstitutional, it is null and void.  Therefore employers can simply ignore this unconstitutional law and refuse to pay any fines.

“I think the Obama administration forgot that insurance companies don’t have the same capacity as they do to pay for things with money you don’t have and could never pay back. Outside of Washington, things actually have to get paid for by somebody.”
-
LOL Matt, that was beautiful.  I’m sure you don’t mind if I borrow the beer analogy?  It’s kind of similar to the one I use about funding Planned Parenthood: When the college kid writes home for money, (s)he says it’s for the textbooks, not the kegger and the pizza-three-meals-a-day habit; (s)he might even believe that, but it’s still the same person.

Anonymous, keep twisting, you haven’t turned the dough into a complete pretzel yet.  I guess you haven’t noticed that practically everybody who is arguing for the mandate argues that it is precisely because Catholic institutions don’t necessarily have Catholic-only employment policies.  Nice try.
-
“Deacon” Don, assuming I accept your premise (which could very well be true, not that I think cost is at the heart of the issue), how would that change the fact that **they are still being coerced into paying for contraception? **  The one argument you’re calling a straw man is, in my assessment, actually the opposite—the only one that matters.  I suggest you re-examine the others.
-
Julie, actually the secular press are arriving, thank God.  Yahoo published a story about what birth control does to amphibians that I read not more than two days ago.
-
Christina, I’m well aware of that.  But HHS doesn’t care to make any such distinction—nor do I believe they could, as I expect there’d be a sudden epidemic of dysmenorrhea if they tried to limit it thus.  Even then, legitimate uses are often considered “off-label,” are they not?  This is an inherent problem of forcing Catholic institutions to subsidize its use.  It is not anybody’s place interrogate every woman about why she uses it.  Supporters of the mandate argue that this is why Catholic institutions (via insurance) should have to provide it to all, but I would argue that they have it exactly backwards.
-
Rover, Viagra is not designed to be a quasi-recreational drug that enables irresponsible sex.  It corrects a legitimate bodily dysfunction that can be just as troubling to married couples as to somebody fornicating.  In addition, I am unaware that it has the potential to cause an early abortion either.  There is no moral issue about Viagra, not because it is for men, but because of what it does and does not do.  People who use it like a recreational enhancement drug are abusing it, plain and simple.

Anonymous, keep twisting, you haven’t turned the dough into a complete pretzel yet.  I guess you haven’t noticed that practically everybody who is arguing for the mandate argues that it is because Catholic institutions don’t necessarily have Catholic-only employment policies.  Nice try.
-
“Deacon” Don, assuming I accept your premise (which could very well be true, not that I think cost is at the heart of the issue), how would that change the fact that **they are still being coerced into paying for contraception? **  The one argument you’re calling a straw man is, in my assessment, actually the opposite—the only one that matters.  I suggest you re-examine the others.
-
Julie, actually the secular press are arriving, thank God.  Yahoo published a story about what birth control does to amphibians that I read not more than two days ago.

Christina, I’m well aware of that.  But HHS doesn’t care to make any such distinction—nor do I believe they could, as I expect there’d be a sudden epidemic of dysmenorrhea if they tried to limit it thus.  Even then, legitimate uses are often considered “off-label,” are they not?  This is an inherent problem of forcing Catholic institutions to subsidize its use.  It is not anybody’s place interrogate every woman about why she uses it.  Supporters of the mandate argue that this is why Catholic institutions (via insurance) should have to provide it to all, but I would argue that they have it exactly backwards.
-
Rover, Viagra is not designed to be a quasi-recreational drug that enables irresponsible sex.  It corrects a legitimate bodily dysfunction that can be just as troubling to married couples as to somebody fornicating.  In addition, I am unaware that it has the potential to cause an early abortion either.  There is no moral issue about Viagra, not because it is for men, but because of what it does and does not do.  People who use it like a recreational enhancement drug are abusing it, plain and simple.

Christina,
The Catholic church does not have a problem with the Rx of oral contraceptives for legitimate medical use. I realize that the testimony of Sandra Fluke did refute this as she claimed to have severall friends who were suffering beause they were unable to get the insurance company to accept this.
I have to say that I do have trouble believing the testimony of a thirty year old activist posing as a twenty four year old student. I have dealt with insurance companies and know it can be get them to pay up if they see an opportunity to avoid it, so I will accept that it may mean a few phone calls and a letter from the doctor, or in other words, standard proceedure.
The problem is that the Church has always stood against the use of contraceptives for preventing pregnancy. Marriage is meant to produce fruit, children if possible. The sexual act is so sacred that it belongs in the sacrament of marriage, not in college dormitories. The Church accepts the humanity of the smallest person, and rightly objects to it’s being killed.That is also a side effect of oral contraceptives and some intrauterine devices.
This is something that is just wrong, always wrong. It is wrong to support it , wrong to accept it.