I understand and agree that this is an unacceptable assault on religious freedom.  But can someone please explain something to me—previously, many Catholics have had private insurance which covered contraception.  Their insurance premiums, which in part were used to pay for others’ contraception, were not morally illicit.  It’s also true that Catholic’s tax dollars go to medicaid, which covers contraception in many states.  I believe these things are considered merely “material cooperation with evil,” and as such, are not sinful.  Why, then, would it be sinful for Catholic institutions to comply with this mandate (when it would seem only to be material cooperation with evil, rather than formal, direct cooperation)?  Thanks for helping clear this up with me!

This entire article and accompanying documents should be permanintly posted on every parish bullitin board and required reading in grades 11 and 12.

Confused Catholic: I don’t feel it will be sinful to follow the law, if the law stands up. As you said, all of us pay certain amounts of money into various pooled resources, some of which are used for things we consider immoral:not just contraception but war, torture, etc.

BUT I do feel it would be sinful not to stand up to preserve our religious freedom in this country. To allow such a massive intrusion on our religious liberties to be imposed upon us would be a sin of omission, as far as I am concerned. Once this imposition is allowed, other ones, unthinkable to us now, are surely on the way.

The principle of cooperation with evil is something to consider.  We can never “formally” cooperate with evil because that would mean agreeing with it.  “Material” cooperation is when we disagree with the evil being done.  It is permitted under certain circumstances, but we ought to avoid cooperating with evil as best we can.  We must be pursuing a good that cannot be otherwise easily attained.  We are to avoid giving scandal.  Immediate material cooperation (cooperation in providing something that is necessary for the evil action) is only permitted under duress.  Mediate cooperation is such that the cooperator is helpful and contributing, but the primary agent could get along without the cooperator.  There are two types of mediate cooperation:  proximate and remote.  Basically, the more important our contribution to the evil being done, the greater justification we need to cooperate.  I think it’s too early to start applying this principle.  Also, it would be applied differently to different people and organizations.  Catholic hospitals caving would cause scandal while an individual in a large private company might not give scandal.

I would think that ANY Catholic institution that covers contraception and any and all abortifacients would be direct cooperation with evil.

Please consider signing the petition started by Frank at Why I Am Catholic.  https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/!/petition/rescind-hhs-dept-mandate-requiring-catholic-employers-provide-contraceptivesabortifacients-their/lBxr7SdP?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl

Also: contraception leads to abortion; and abortion is the murder of a child yet to be born.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxRl3qTrd44&feature=relmfu

Wouldn’t it be great if we could have the health care system allow Catholic institutions to fund and teach NFP; has anyone done a savings calculation on this?

How about the fact that imposing your particular beliefs about contraception is an imposition of your faith on a NON Catholic working at a hospital corporation owned by the RCC?
The RCC is causing them to have to expend money for contraception and other services, thus a monetary damage can be calculated.
With that they are going to sue the employer and challenge the rules.  There will class action lawsuits by non-catholic women being subjected the dogma of the RCC.  Have fun explaining that to a jury of woman!

@ConfusedCatholic - Because in the case of someone who takes his employers insurance because he chooses to, he still has a choice. That individual Catholic can decide to take the insurance or not. With the HHS mandate a Catholic employer who employees non-Catholics, MUST provide the insurance whether he himself/they themselves approve of it. The employer is not offered an option of giving them an alternative insurance plan. So he either provides something he himself is against, or he doesn’t provide insurance at all.

like

I think we should contribute to public education, unfortunately, wikipedia is often what people outside are turning to for authoritative information, and articles on contraception, even natural family planning, are clearly written with an anti-church point of view

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_on_birth_control
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_contraception
I googled “why catholics are opposed to birth control”
and those two were the first results

also see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_control

I think we need to start Natural Family Planning as an ongoing instruction, tied with ‘Theology of the Body’, by John Paul II in all American Catholic parishes.

The other is to have more instruction on personal spiritual life, to have a monthly time out with the Lord practicing prayer, almsgiving, and fasting to grow in more love with Him, and to control our carnal appetites.

@reintro: I don’t know, I looked at the Wiki articles you posted to see if I could work on them, and they seem to present both sides fairly.

The morning after pill is an abortifacient and is covered under this mandate. What happened to Obama’s executive order that Obamacare would not pay for abortion and would respect conscience?

Because Catholic employers usually are over 50 employees large and more often over 500 - they can design their own policies to include or exclude certain coverage. That is why the mandate is a big deal.

One thing that was brought up in this conversation by the WH was that ‘churches’ would not have to be under the mandate, only those institutions who employ non-catholics. I belonged to a parish where at least one of the office staff was non-catholic so would the mandate apply then? There have been comments by some that these institutions should only employ only catholics then they would not have to worry about the mandate - if they were to change policy and only employ catholics, how long do you think it would be until someone filed a discrimination lawsuit? How do you think they could advertise for employees, ‘only catholics need apply’?  The argument does not wash. Catholic means ‘universal’, all are cred for, all are treated equally in employment.  The mandate is not the only part of the healthcare law that will violate the conscience of the faithful.