In response to:

Will Obama Allow Americans to Practice Catholicism? No!

ZealousConscript Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 9:45 AM
There is of course a simple answer to this problem. If Catholic (or really any) institution does not want to provide certain healthcare services to their non-Catholic employees then they should be in full support of a public option in US Healthcare. That way employees can get the healthcare that they want, and religious business do not have to provide it. Of course if you are against this solution and the mandate to provide contraceptive and other services then what you really want is for business owners to force their religious beliefs on their employees.
Stan432 Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 2:01 PM
So if an entity is religiously in disagreement with a government mandate, one that is medically optional, then they must support a public option? Huh?

An act of not providing something that some employees may want (but can still easily get on their own) is not forcing by any measure. And even if it was they are Catholic institutions. I imagine that you would insist that crosses be taken out of rooms, or priests not be allowed to roam the halls. This is how freedom disintegrates.
ZealousConscript Wrote: Nov 22, 2012 12:25 AM
Straw man. While I may not find a crucifix of any particular importance to myself, I'm certain someone does. Its just a piece of wood. As long as I have access to healthcare I want, why should I care what's on the wall?
chemurdered Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 9:55 AM
McGovern Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 9:53 AM
Another stupid argument.

You wrote, "what you really want is for business owners to force their religious beliefs on their employees."

No one is forcing the employees to have certain religious beliefs. They are free to believe what they want.

According to your way of thinking, every employer who shuts down the office for Christmas Day is forcing their religious beliefs on their employees.

ZealousConscript Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 10:07 AM
Hmm, you make a good point there actually. Of course, there are many employers who stay open on Christmas Day. So are they violating their employees religious rights? It's an interesting argument and a fair point. Kudos. But you must admit, an business or institution that doesn't want to provide certain health care benefits in their employees insurance is requiring their employees to adhere to a religious belief that may not be their own.
McGovern Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 10:11 AM
And those employees are certainly free and able to work for another employer.

I don't like the hallway color at my place of employment. However, the boss picked the color. He's forcing me to adhere to his color preferences.

My option? Either live with it or go work somewhere else.
ZealousConscript Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 10:26 AM
Bad example. Hallway color, other than being irritating, doesn't effect (affect? I've never got that down) you outside of work. What we're talking about here is your health decisions and what role you're bosses personal beliefs play in them.
As for working somewhere else, it's great that in this economy that you're able to just pick another job, but for the people who rely on their health insurance, that's not often the case. Ultimately I think this a reason for religious employers to support a public option in our health insurance industry, that way this isn't even an issue. Don't like you're companies health insurance? Fine, use the public one.
McGovern Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 10:32 AM
No one is telling employees they cannot use contraceptives.

No one is forcing employees to go without an abortion.

No one is forcing employees to make health decisions contrary to their beliefs.

Contraceptives can be purchased for under $12 a month. Abortions can be performed at Planned Parenthood, subsidized, for under $200.

Why should a religious institution be forced to pay for these options?
ZealousConscript Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 10:46 AM
But I'm not suggesting that a religious institutions should pay for these, what I'm suggesting is a public option health insurance that would provide an alternative to employer health insurance. That way religious business owners and religion based institutions are free to provide the healthcare they are comfortable with, while allowing employees who do not share their faith or beliefs to have access to health insurance that will meet their needs.
eddie again Wrote: Nov 21, 2012 2:20 PM
there are private insurers who will provide any insurance coverage an american desires. why do we need public options?
ZealousConscript Wrote: Nov 22, 2012 12:19 AM
Well let me amend that. We need one of three things. 1) A public option 2) Universal Healthcare, doing away with the need for insurance at all (unlikely, but I think the idea holds merit) 3) A restructuring of the regulation on insurance companies (not doing away with regulation but changing it to insure that there is no monopoly and a certain level of care required by all providers etc)

"Catholicism teaches that it is a sin to use, provide, or otherwise support contraception."

These words are not from the Catholic Catechism or a sermon by a Catholic bishop. They are excerpted from the preliminary injunction U.S. District Judge Robert H. Cleland issued last month temporarily stopping the Obama administration from forcing a family-owned outdoor-power-equipment company to comply with an Obamacare regulation that requires virtually all health care plans to provide women (but not men) with co-pay-free coverage for sterilizations, contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs.

The judge stated the Catholic teaching on contraception as an undisputed fact of the...