The US Conference of Catholic Bishops – which aspires to tell the secular government what to do, and has much success in doing just that – has a campaign for religious libery, by which of course it means the USCCB’s liberty to tell everyone else what to do. It’s pushing for a “Health care conscience rights act” – and we all know what they mean by that. They want Congress to make it a law that they have a “right” to refuse to do their jobs if that involves medical treatments they choose to have “religious” objections to. They have a fact sheet on the subject.
The right of religious liberty, the First Freedom
guaranteed by our Constitution, includes a right to
provide and receive health care without being required to
violate our most fundamental beliefs.
No it does not. No no no. That is not a right. There is no “right” to practice medicine while refusing to do part of the job because of your made-up religious scruples. The right that matters here is the right to get medical treatment on equal terms with everyone else. There’s no “right” to refuse to serve people of color or LGBT people or women, for example. There’s no “right” to refuse to perform abortions or dispense contraceptives.
Especially since
1973, when abortion became legal nationwide, federal
lawmakers have worked in a bipartisan way to ensure that
Americans can fully participate in our health care system
without being forced to take part in abortion or other
procedures that violate their conscience.
Then they need to stop doing that, and do the other thing. They need to ensure that all patients are served and on an equal footing with all others. Period.
But the need to improve current laws is clear, because the
right of conscience is still under attack:
· Under the new health care reform law, the federal
government is demanding that almost all health plans
fully cover female sterilization and a wide range of
drugs and devices to prevent pregnancy, including
those that can cause an early abortion. Even
individuals and organizations with a religious
objection to abortion, sterilization or other
procedures are forced to take part.
· A Catholic agency that for years had provided
excellent service lost its federal grant to serve the
victims of human trafficking, because it could not, in
conscience, comply with a new requirement to
facilitate abortions and other morally objectionable
procedures for its clients.
· Dedicated health care professionals, especially nurses,
still face pressure to assist in abortions under threat of
losing their jobs or their eligibility for training
programs.· In some states, government officials are seeking to
force even Catholic hospitals to allow abortions or
provide abortion coverage in order to continue or
expand their ministry.
This is why members of Congress of both parties are
sponsoring the Health Care Conscience Rights Act (H.R.
940, S. 1204). The Act would improve federal law in
three ways:
1. Correcting loopholes and other deficiencies in the
major federal law preventing governmental
discrimination against health care providers that do
not help provide or pay for abortions.
2. Inserting a conscience clause into the health care
reform law, so its mandates for particular “benefits”
in private health plans will not be used to force
insurers, employers and individuals to violate their
consciences or give up their health insurance.
3. Adding a “private right of action” to existing federal
conscience laws, so those whose consciences are
being violated can go to court to defend their rights.
(Current enforcement is chiefly at the discretion of
the Department of Health and Human Services,
which is itself sponsoring some attacks on
conscience rights.)
All House and Senate members should be urged to
support and co-sponsor the Health Care Conscience
Rights Act, so our First Freedom can regain its proper
place as a fundamental right protected in our health care
system.
They have to be stopped.
Why do the bishops’ opinions and prejudices outweigh those of people who have no problem with abortion and contraception? Why do the bishops get to make medical decisions on matters which, as celibate male bachelors, they only deal with in a theoretical manner? In short, who died and made them gods?
And, the bishop will get more, and more, and more. The state – the elected officials – will always bend over backwards to appease the church. It’s in the nature of the beast, that is, the arithmetic of the election. As long as religion outnumber reason.
How do we get around this? Get the state out of our hair in education, employment, healthcare… Hobby Lobby decision shows we need to get rid of the employer-based health insurance system
Of course, that may not be palatable to many who religiously believe in the power of the state to solve all their problems!
The Roman Catholic Church used to be the metagovernment of most of Europe, and they never forgot. The bishops don’t have the power of a government (derived from the ability to kill anyone who refused to obey their orders) any more, but they never lost the arrogance.
Shaker Srinivasan:
Though it does not do so optimally, the government is what keeps religious beliefs from further infringing upon our rights. If you remove government from the equation, how in the world are we supposed to prevent schoolboards from infusing creationism into the class? Who are women, PoC, and queers going to turn to when they’re screwed over by their employers bc of the sex, race or sexuality?
Sniff Sniff, I smell a libertarian.
Tony, I commend your good sense of smell. And through that, you already have a sniff of the answer to your question 🙂
Shaker, I completely agree that we need to get rid of the employer-based insurance system. A European centralized system would work far better. That’s what you’re saying, right? Right?
Shaker:
I was hoping you would provide the answer, bc I’m not a libertarian and I find that philosophy unworkable (not to mention odious). You seem to think it would work, so please, can you answer the questions?
If you remove government from the equation, how in the world are we supposed to prevent schoolboards from infusing creationism into the class?
Who are women, PoC, and queers going to turn to when they’re screwed over by their employers bc of the sex, race or sexuality?
These are reasonable questions to ask, and if you think libertarianism is the answer, then explain how. Also, simply asserting that the free market will sort it out is not an answer.
What sleazy double-speak.
The Employees are the ones losing their health insurance because Employers want their religious beliefs to revoke others’ rights to fair treatment.
Religious Employers and women individuals are on opposite sides,
As a teacher, i object to the silly spelling rules. I also feel deeply about the subjunctive case, which I deem unnecessary and a cruelty. Therefore I refuse to teach this to my students as a conscious objector.
What do you say I’m fired? Discrimination!!!!!!!!!
This shows the whole depth of their cruelty and disdain for women. So we’re talking about human trafficking. Forced prostitution. Rape. Women who are pregnant as a result of rape. And they want to force these women to carry the pregnancy to term, re-experiencing the abuse they suffered each and every day because a pregnancy is something you can hardly ignore and then they call this “excellent care”.
Oh, wait, I forgot: the supply of Irish and Spanish babies has dried up in recent years. Let’s find another group of women who need to be rescued via enslavement so there are enough little babies you can sell to good catholics.
brucegee
Repeat after me: Europe is a continent, not a country. Europe is a continent, not a country. Europe is a continent, not a country.
There are many very different systems in Europe. About as many as there are individual countries. Though they all seem to work better than the US system….
These guys just use religion as an excuse to get out of anything they don’t want to do.
Vote with your feet. Catholic hospitals are driven by dollars just like any other.
http://pictoraltheology.blogspot.com/2014/07/non-prophet-heathcare-systems.html
You can choose to be a doctor.
You don’t get to choose if you need a doctor.
Patient’s rights therefore trump doctor’s rights.