facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Bishop Murry’s letter appalling



Published: Fri, February 10, 2012 @ 12:00 a.m.

Bishop Murry’s letter appalling

As a Roman Catholic, I am ap- palled by Bishop Murry’s letter that was distributed to every church in the Youngstown Diocese last Saturday and Sunday. The letter pertained to the recent ruling by the U.S. Department of Health, which announced that all employers in America must offer their employees health-care coverage that includes drugs used for the purposes of sterilization, abortion and contraception.

Hypocrisy is a bad word in the human vocabulary, and our Catholic Church is full of it. Insurance companies must offer equal coverage to every employee, and they must be cognizant of the fact that there are many workers of various religious denominations, atheists and agnostics. The Department of Health’s rule covers everyone getting drugs and services for sterilization, abortion and contraception. Essentially, people should be able to buy needed drugs and services and health-care insurance should pay.

An enormous number of couples use some form of birth control, and difficult as it may be for some people to accept, there are serious situations in which a woman may need to have an abortion, which, by the way, is a legal option in this country.

The population of this Earth is over 7 billion people, of which one-third lives in poverty, and millions upon millions are starving. In the face of this abomination, the Catholic Church is still clinging to a policy against any form of birth control.

Bishop Murry’s letter states, “We cannot, we will not, comply with this unjust law...” Well, the truth of the matter is that we cannot “cherry pick” which provisions of the health-care law we choose to comply with. The truth is also that we are not a flock of sheep fearing death, ruin and excommunication just because we do not agree with the Catholic Church. The ultimate truth is that we have been given tremendous gifts by God, two of which include the ability to reason and our own free will. We must use these to think for ourselves, distinguish bad from good and help our fellow human beings.

We should not teach people to disobey laws. They are made to protect every citizen of any faith or no faith. This act is unworthy of a church.

I do not want our bishop or any leader of the Catholic Church to derail any medical reforms for citizens of America. I am grateful that we have a government that is trying to protect every citizen with health care so that they can get the medicine, treatment and services needed, including contraception, sterilization and abortion.

We should recoil from hypocrisy and enjoy the freedom of religion and from religion that is a protection of our Constitution.

Valentino DeVito, Girard


Comments

1Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

I also wrote a letter to the Editor about this. While listening to the Bishop's overwrought language, I realized that most of us women in the seats were being hypocrites, as we already have access to contraception through our secular employers.
I left.
Permanently.
There are other Christian churches that do not promote one political party or even talk much about politics.
Two of them are within yards of my former parish.
I hope my letter gets published.

Suggest removal:

2paulparks(235 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Val,

I am so sick and tired of "so-called Catholics" who are anything but.

Be what you are - but you aren't Catholic!

Suggest removal:

3Photoman(1004 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

If thousands of exemptions have already been approved by the Obama administration, should we not be able to give an exemption to Catholic institutions?

Suggest removal:

4300(554 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Imagine if the church had put this much energy into fighting the rampant pedophilia within its ranks?

The Catholic Church has been keeping people in poverty for centuries, and when you look at the most corrupt places in the US, you'll notice a large Catholic population (and for the record, I'm a Catholic).

I'm still on the younger side, but I hope I'll live long enough to see the Catholic church implode on itself when the older generation in its 80s/90s isn't there to fill its pews.

Suggest removal:

5AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

For you defenders of the Catholic Church and do not want insurance to cover contraceptives: If you use or ever used any type of contraceptive you a hypocrit and a lier to yourself and your church.

If an insurance company covers contraceptives , just choose not to use them. What is wrong with that?

It is OK to disagree with our local Bishop.

Suggest removal:

6300(554 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Jessie, the church has fought tooth and nail the entire time, and has even declared bankruptcy in a few cases to avoid paying any decisions against them.

Throughout the 18 years or so of their attempted indoctrination, I never once met a priest who was truly a decent individual. I did know a few nuns who truly were good people, but half of the priests I knew were alcoholics. I can't vouch as to any them being pedophiles, since my father refused to ever let me or any other family member alone with any of those men.

The Church supported slavery, Nazism/Fascism, imperialism, and does all it can to ensure that Africans don't use condoms (for some reason, the only people who still listen and follow a lot of what the church says).

I'm not about to become a Protestant or anything (which you really do come off as a Protestant rather than a Catholic in your posts), but I'll enjoy the day when the Catholic hierarchy realizes that practically nobody under the age of 60 respects them or their fairy tale beliefs.

Again, if the church had put this much energy into weeding out their pedophile priests as they've done for this issue, me and millions of others wouldn't view them as the enablers that they really were.

Suggest removal:

7walter_sobchak(1909 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

300,
How true! I, too, will enjoy the day that God says adultery is OK since there are so many out-of-wedlock births or murder is OK in Somalia since it is the order of the day. The church on earth is comprised of mortals that are all sinners.The priests that I know are all good men with the best of intentions in their hearts. In fact, judging from what I see at the liquor store, my pastor likes vodka while I prefer bourbon. When the Catholic church establishes the rules that govern the flock, it must be done for the universal church on earth with respect to all people and cultures. Now, the problem with the pedophile priests was not one in that the church did not do ebnough to identify the culprits. The problem was that the church did too much and tried to conceal the problem.

But, here's the truth. The Catholic church has endured many problems and has emerged stronger and more vibrant. Did you ever hear about this little things called the Crusades in which the pope sanctioned the killing of Muslims? What about the Inquistions? Yet, many of the hospitals in the US over the past 100 years were done through the auspicies of various dioceses or religious orders of the Catholic church with much indigent care provided. What amazes me is that these items of conscience such as contraception are now somehow deemed a right of the masses that must be provided for by someone else!

BTW, Barack Hussein Obama showed some real backbone today and buckled to the pressure from the Catholic church and its flock. Must be an election year! Catholics are a very large block of swing voters!

Suggest removal:

8valleyred(1097 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

I SUPPORT Bishop Murray's letter 100%. He was correct in writing such a letter against Obama's HHS mandate!

I am in awe that someone would call such a letter appalling. As a Catholic, there is nothing appalling about it.

Suggest removal:

9AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

walt,

Its funny how you use Obama's middle name, but nobody elses.

Suggest removal:

10AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

AHH I see you pay tribute to Obama

Hussein meaning and name origin

Hussein \hu(s)-sein\ as a boy's name is pronounced hoo-SAYN. It is of Arabic origin, and the meaning of Hussein is "good; small handsome one". The name of a prominent person in Shiite Islam and a royal name in Jordan. American President Barack Hussein Obama.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Popularity of Hussein

Hussein is not a popular first name for men but a very popular surname or last name for all people (#22190 out of 88799). (1990 U.S. Census)

.....

Hussein , is an Arabic name which is the diminutive of Hassan, meaning "good", "handsome" or "beautiful".

Suggest removal:

11Westsider(222 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

It is called separation of church and state for a reason. The Catholic church is an extremely large employer and should not be forced to subsidize a method of treatment that goes against its fundamental teachings. People have a right to work where they want - if they are dissatisfied with the benefits package offered by a Catholic employer - don't work there. I knew Obamacare would bite everyone in the butt eventually because no overall good can come from the government getting too involved in our lives.

Suggest removal:

12walter_sobchak(1909 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

AAC

Just trying to be accurate. Issn't BHO better than just BO? Sorry, maybe I will just use the name he used as a child in Indonesia, Barry Soetoro.

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."
Billy Shakes

Suggest removal:

13doubled(210 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

President Obama listened to the concerns raised by the Catholic leaders and has revamped the bill so that the employees of these loosely affiliated catholic businesses (hospitals, universities, etc) can just get their contraceptives directly from the insurance company - and the employer doesn't have to offer it in their plan... Since there are many, many of these businesses that have been offering contraception in their group plans for years, and will continue to do so, this only affects the ones that complained. In the end, our president listened to their concerns and initiated a compromise that will provide women with access to contraception, but the catholic businesses won't have to cover the cost of it....Our president gets his wish that women are provided with good health care, and the catholic businesses get to keep their money....Everybody gets what they want, except the gop/tea leaders, who wanted a political fight.

Instead, our president used compromise - something foreign to the gop/tea party, to reach an amicable solution to a problem, and in the process of exhibiting such leadership, he diffused any chance that the gop/tea had of making political hay out of a concocted religious argument, and instead focused on solving the real issue, which was providing our female citizens with safe and affordable health care options. The matter is solved, and will be forgotten in a week.

Suggest removal:

14olddude(201 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Barry just put the cost over to the ins. companies side. So we will all bare the cost whether we use contraceptives or not.. Great.. In 10 years, half the people on a private insurance plan now will not be able to afford it and will be on Obamacare or medicaid or medicare. What kinda tax increase (or national debt) can pay for all this....INSANITY once again

Suggest removal:

15ladiesrule(17 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

I am a Lutheran. I agree with Westsider.It is called separation of Church and State! Why do you think Rabbis and other religious leaders have joined the Catholic Church in protest.

Suggest removal:

16JS(651 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Well Valentino DeVito, what would life be if we couldn't kill the unborn or prevent their conception? Barren? Oh, that's the way it would be if there were no births.

Suggest removal:

17HaydenThomas(208 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Why anyone would belong to the Catholic church, an entity that is so out of touch with reality, and one that not only permitted the molestation of children but acted as though the priests involved were not miscreants of the worst kind, is just not a thinking human being. It's time humanity quit following these frauds and started to think for themselves.

Suggest removal:

18AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

28 states already went by this law. Nobody caerd til they can Blame Obama.

Suggest removal:

19doubled(210 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

jessiedavid, you have accomplished an amazing feat....you wrote a well organized post, with proper punctuation, grammar, and verb tense...yet every one of your factual assertions was completely false...That takes some impressive ability to lie and still maintain your cool...you must practice a lot.

I remember your posts on SB5..you filled the comments with lie after lie and it did no good for your cause. In fact, it probably turned a lot of people over to the good side - yet you still don't get it do you...when you lie over and over again, without any basis in factual reality, no one will ever believe you, even when you think you're telling the truth.

Suggest removal:

20jmagaratz(166 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

JFK HAD IT RIGHT......"...ABSOLUTE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE...."

ENOUGH OF THE RELIGIO-NUTS OF THE REPUBLICAN RIGHT AND DEMOCRAT IDIOCY FRINGE

Suggest removal:

21Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

For those who weren't in Mass, in my parish, the Bishop's letter was read on the heels of Sunday readings that featured the 34th Psalm,: "The Lord hears the cry of the poor, Blessed be the Lord," and the Gospel in which Jesus cures Peter's mother-in-law ( free of charge). My initial response was dismay that Catholic institutions were not already voluntarily providing full health coverage for those under their wing.
In the pews around me, the Bishop's remarks were generally being directed to families who themselves already have coverage for contraceptives because most parishioners are employed in secular workplaces. So while we exercise our own consciences in making personal health and moral decisions, perhaps with the advice of our local pastor, we are urged to deny that opportunity to our Church employees, many of whom are not Catholic, and thus not subject to religious pressure to forgo protection.
The whole matter stinks of hypocrisy. And really, there has been way too much talk of politics from the Church lately. (They are also sponsoring a bill in the Ohio legislature to remove public school funding to parochial schools via vouchers for middle class families in good school districts.)
Good Lord. I go to Jesus to get away from this temporal stuff.

Suggest removal:

22Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Westsider: You said, "if they are dissatisfied with the benefits package offered by a Catholic employer - don't work there. "
Easy to say -- but not so easy to do if you are a hospital worker here in a Valley dominated by HMHS, (Humility of Mary Health Systems.)
And do you realize that on THEIR side, the Hospital System would not be required to follow the mandate if all of their employees were Catholic? So they could "easily" solve the problem by hiring only Catholics. That is, easy to say, not so easy to do if you want the best practitioners. Some of them are, yes, Jewish or Muslim. So St. E's wants them. Such a dilemma.

Suggest removal:

23muf65fin(27 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

WHO IS THIS GUY?
Birth control is a MAN MADE LAW .
Are you a married man?
DOES HE KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON IN A FAMILY!
BULL CRAP!
BISH, DID ALL THE PEOPLE THAT ATE MEAT ON FRIDAY GO TO HELL?
90 TO 95 % OF Y-TOWN CATHOLICS
HAVE OR STILL DO PRACTICE BIRTH CONTROL. REMEMBER BISH IT IT A MAN MAN LAW!
CONTINUE YOUR CRAP AND NO ONE WILL BE IN YOUR CHURCH!

AMEN

Suggest removal:

24AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

JD,
why would I vote for Obama?
1. He stopped the finincial crises from continueing.
2. the military that Bush put us in wars with, he is ending.

3He himself is not alone in the spending spree, The Dem's and now Repun congress are at fault also.

4. if the hospital you work at offers benefits, you DO NOT have to USE EVERY BENEFIT OFFERED TO YOU. Just do not use birth control and don't take that right away from those who want the coverage.

You want free America, but the church is telling employess you MUST PAY CASH for birth control.

BUSH gave wall street $800 BILLION dollars.

Clean Energy is best way of the future. But you don't complain about BILLIONS given to OIL companies in taxes, from the repubs.

Maybe DOUBLE watched too many repub debates and he learned to attack, thats all the repubs know to do.

Suggest removal:

25AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

I am a Caholic. I wonder how many Catholic men/women ever used any type of birth control.

I bet the percentage is pretty high. Why take away a benefit that many people use?

Suggest removal:

26LovinLife(20 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

The only hypocrisy here is all of you who claim to be Catholic but do not follow the clear teachings of the Church.

You are moral relativists practicing situational ethics, and are simply not Catholic. When you are a Catholic you do NOT have the right to make your own moral choices regardless of church teachings.

You say that the Church has no right to pick and choose which laws to follow. First, that is patently false. The Church has always taught that unjust laws that go against natural law need not be obeyed. Should the Church in China support "one child" laws?

But more importantly, as a self-proclaimed Catholic, YOU do not have the right to pick and choose which moral teachings you will follow.

So, set aside the religious aspects of this, our president does not have the right to impose this. No one is being denied access to these things, just free access. These are elective things - the morning after pill is not health care. Where in our constitution or anywhere else has anyone been guaranteed free access to this stuff?

Furthermore, your claim that there are serious situations where a woman needs to have an abortion is false. There is no medical condition that requires the active aborting of a baby.

Finally where is your concern for women when it comes to the fact that contraceptives kill many women each year due to increased risk of cancer, heart attacks, stroke, etc.? Read what Dr. Martin Luther King's niece Alveda writes on this subject.

Suggest removal:

27JMHO(146 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

After reading these posts I had to sign up. Those of you bashing the Catholic Church are missing the ENTIRE point of all of this. No matter if you agree or disagree with the Church's teachings, or are Catholic and do not follow their teachings, THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHT TO IMPOSE MANDATES TO ANY RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION. Let me get this straight.....Prayer in school and hanging the Ten Commandments in City Hall is a violation of "Seperation of Church and State", but the Fed. Gov't imposing mandates on religions isn't? OK, got it.

Suggest removal:

28Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

"Primacy of conscience" is a Church teaching that calls the final authority in any moral decision-making must always be one's conscience, even if said decision is contrary to church teaching.

The degree of Church adherence to this doctrine was one of the disputes that led to the Protestant Reformation, so I don't see how Jesse David could be both Catholic and Protestant. Some Protestant denominations hold the teaching in highest regard, which obviously Catholics do not.

Never the less, when a gynecologist considers that the result of an additional pregnancy would be the likelihood of a disabled child and disabled or dead mother, leaving her already existing children without care, even the Catholic doctor will prescribe a birth control pill.

As to Catholic use of contraceptives, a few years ago, the National Catholic Register published its own poll of Catholics on many issues. However, the issue of contraceptives caught my eye. It revealed that only 2% of women of childbearing age in the poll were NOT using contraceptive measures.
Remember, the Church bans even condoms.
Here's some reliable sources on Primacy of Conscience:
http://www.catholiceducation.org/arti...
http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/rat... (By the Pope himself)

Suggest removal:

29Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

I should have said that the mandate to provide coverage for contraceptives does not mean that an individual is being forced to use the coverage. With coverage, the decision would then be up to the individual's conscience -- informed by Church teachings, but still freely made by the individual.

As to the poster above me, remember that these large Catholic institutions are commercial enterprises covered by many laws already, and tightly intertwined with government grants and entitlements like Medicare. Get real. The Mandate does not compel places like Church offices to provide coverage for employees, only these businesses that employ large numbers diverse employees.

Suggest removal:

30tonne(199 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

It is the duty of the Bishop, by the very nature of the office he holds, to uphold church doctrine. As Catholics, we cannot pick and choose which teachings we want to follow. At the same time, as individuals having the gift of free choice, we can and often do make decisions in our personal lives that are contrary to what our faith teaches. Thus the paradox and thus the reason many American Catholics have left and are leaving the Church. The decision to practice contraception is an extremely personal one as is the choice to abort a pregnancy. These are matters for the individual conscience and are, ultimately, if one is a person of faith, between the individual and their God. Seems to me that the Church, in choosing to accept public funds for its hospitals and other health care facilities, wants to have its cake and wants to eat it, too. Tax dollars come with lots of strings attached. Looks like the Church has some serious thinking to do.

Suggest removal:

31jmagaratz(166 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Bishops teach, govern and sanctify.

So far it appears that their teaching ability is non-existent as many of their students (parishioners) would probably fail their tests.

As far as governing, it is obvious that many Roman Catholics are refusing to grant their Bishops governmental authority over their private decisions.

What's left--sanctify. How about eliminating "you" and replace it with "spirit?" Now that would be a really radical step.

Suggest removal:

32LovinLife(20 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Education Voter, in good faith I must point out that your statements about primacy of conscience are not correct.

You may not have read the articles you referenced but the first one states clearly that "conscience is not the final arbiter of what is morally right, nor has the Church ever taught that it is."

Tonne, you start out correctly but then I think you stray a bit. True, all moral decisions are matters for the individual conscience, and that is not limited to abortion. If I decide to kill or rob someone, the same is true.

The choice of whether or not to believe in Christ as your Savior is also a personal choice, You are fully within your rights if you choose not to believe in Christ, but if so, you are most certainly not Catholic.

The Church has made it abundantly clear that there is no circumstance where abortion is the correct moral choice. The fact that many "Catholics" practice birth control and abortion is not relevant to the issue of whether or not it is okay for each individual Catholic to decide for themselves whether to follow Church moral teachings. You can choose to be one of those who act against the teaching, but you can't pass it off as being in line with Church teaching because your conscience told you to do it.

Suggest removal:

33Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

LovinLife,
I tried to make it clear that Primacy of Conscience has a more prominent place in Protestant Denominations than Catholic.
However, it is also a teaching of the Catholic Faith. When one personally meets her savior for judgment, she will be standing there alone, not next to her Bishop who will explain that he made her decisions for her. The Bishops clearly state in any source about primacy of conscience that the responsibility for moral decisions is hers. Teaching can enlighten that decision, but ultimately it is the person's call.

Suggest removal:

34Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

And LovinLife,
Teaching and advising on morals is different from carving one gender out of provisions of health care coverage.

As of last Sunday, I am in the process of joining another Christian Denomination. I don't care if you feel triumphant that I have been forced out of the Church, or not. But I would point out that it is not people who are not really listening to the service who leave, but those who have a sincere faith. I was one who was a volunteer at the Church, and who used the sites (not the specific page) I posted in my teaching of CCD.
I even remained while the Church actively worked to damage the resources of my impoverished students in their public school by pushing for vouchers for a few. I'm pretty sure that during my final judgment, the question of whether I was a Republican or Democrat will not come up.

Suggest removal:

35whitesabbath(738 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Stoke up the fire ....

Suggest removal:

36Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

JesseDavid,
You are full of it. The Catholic Hospital does not unwittingly get deceived into making money. You insult their intelligence.

They want the money. They want the power. Of course.
The Catholic Bishops ARE a "self serving powerful interests/interest group" who "cleverly, in many discreet underhanded ways, intertwined Church/and State."

For instance, do you think Jon Boehner, Dewine, Voinivich, et al weren't influenced by Catholic contributers and lobbyists like David Brennan to create Ohio's voucher system for schools?

You think that Christian Evangelicals haven't made today's Republican party what it is today, in comparison to the party of Eisenhower and Nixon?

You ought to look to your own forked tongue, and I mean that as a fellow Christian.

Suggest removal:

37Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

White Sabbath, I'll just remind you of your own words just two days ago, and I quote:
"keep talking to GOD let us know who's going to hell thanks. Glad you have a direct line......... just saying <----- that reflects your mentality."

Suggest removal:

38Fred(130 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Barack Obama has the support of the people and will have no problem in getting reelected. His second term will be where new legislation supports his wishes.

Suggest removal:

39AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Let me try to understand taking away one's rights. If I work at a hospital as a care giver, why is it that the hospital will not let my insurance company pay for my contraceptives? Seems to me the hospital is taking away my decision of insurance for contraceptives , not the Govt. The Govt is the one trying to make sure I can still recieve what I desire.

Recently being at the St E's hopsital ther seems like a lot of women working there from the ages of 20-45. For some reason the catholic church wants to take their choices away from them by not covering contraceptives if thats what they desire.

Remenber it is churches that also fight the casino's and gambling. Well except when it benefits the church. Then gambling is OK.

Suggest removal:

40AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Jessie,

If millionaires such as Romney pay 14% taxes what is wrong with people making $20,000 paying a smalled percentage then him.

Suggest removal:

41Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Exactly right. Another Average Citizen, the ruling wasn't making anyone buy contraceptives who didn't want to.

Hey, Saturday afternoon and "On the Waterfront" is on. What a great priest the Karl Malden character made! Someone who stood up for the working people. Pat O’Brien in “Angels with Dirty Faces"; Bing Crosby in "Going my Way" and "The Bells of St. Mary's".

Those were the days.

Suggest removal:

42salem26(13 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

I can't believe we have come to this point. Some Americans actually beleive that under the Constitution, they are entitled to free birth control. Someone please state which article of the Constitution allows the President and Congess to manidate that all employers must buy a any product (insurance in this case) or face huge fines. What ever happened happened to the day where people had showed some self control, and if they wanted to engage in sex they bought their own birth control?

Suggest removal:

43AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Ok repubs have it your way. But you will be the first one complaining about having children out of wedlock. Whining and complaining about welfare and more taxes to take care of the children.

Suggest removal:

44Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Salem, Under the Constitution the Congress can pass a law. Under the Constitution people can be expected to follow it.
What a shocking point.

Suggest removal:

45Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

By the way, an employer doesn't have to buy insurance. They can self-insure, as my employer does.

But we would probably have single-payer health insurance now if the Republicans weren't so dedicated to the insurance industry.

Suggest removal:

46doubled(210 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

FOX NEWS POLL -- as of this past Friday....61% FAVOR our president's plan to provide women with contraception coverage....37% OPPOSE....Good goin tea party, on top of alienating voters over 63 b/c you threaten to dismantle medicare, you've also managed to alienate a large portion of yet another large voting group , women. Nice work, keep it up. At this rate, Romney will at least have the millionares and those militia guys voting for him (or are they off the grid?)

Suggest removal:

47doubled(210 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

and jessie, you gave your opinion, not facts...there's a difference, which i will continue to remind you of, and there's your answer to why i supposedly "attack"

Suggest removal:

48GTX66(343 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Obama's mother should have used a contraceptive device.

Suggest removal:

49AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

mfc.

News flash. Catholics use birth control and pay for it.

For the taxpayer area, an ounce of prevention is worth 18 years of cure.

Suggest removal:

50Askmeificare(700 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Cheers for Valentino DeVito of Girard!

The catholic church is nothing of what it should be.

The catholic church harbors pedophiles and elitist ideologists who say they care and are helping, yet only once a year sit publicly at the head of a table during a public forum and cast opinion and judgement upon its followers.

As evidenced by Bishop Murry’s letter, Bishop Murry must step down as Bishop before he leads his followers to certain disaster.

I suggest Bishop Murry, and any priest, leave the service for their own good before charges are brought upon them for harboring pedophiles and money laundering and more.

My, my. A crazy story makes the truth sound crazy.

The catholic church harboring pedophiles, laundering money, engaging in secret acts. Next thing you know, the church may be engaged in murder.

OOPS! RIP John Paul -

and the thousands of human lives the church killed because these human beings did not join the church.

Suggest removal:

51southpaw(8 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

The hypocrisy of the right never ceases to amaze me. They love to cite "separation of church and state" when it protects their particular religious beliefs, but refuse to believe it should apply to any other faiths...like Muslims for instance. Part of the problem, I suspect, is that they do not understand the doctrine.

"Separation of church and state" simply means that the government cannot stop you from practicing your personal religious beliefs and it also cannot sanction or sponsor any particular faith. It doesn't mean that religious institutions can operate in the United States without any concern for our laws. You are more than welcome to follow the teachings of the Catholic Church in your own life. The minute you want to open a business in the US, you are subject to our laws. I'm sure most of the right would not support the Catholic Church if they decided to use slaves rather than paid employees. We outlawed that practice a long time ago, but it is sanctioned in the Bible.

The point is, if you want to personally refrain from the use of contraception, that is great. The government cannot force you. But, you don't have the right to deny others access to it because it is against your beliefs.

Suggest removal:

52espnlooop(24 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Obama has has openly opposed Catholics, Christians and Jews. One thing he will NOT do is oppose Islam in any way! You get what you vote for.

Suggest removal:

53southpaw(8 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Letstryagain:

President Obama was not trying to "trample our freedom" when he mandated that birth control be made available to all; he is preventing religious employers from trampling on our freedom.

Also, for the record, contraception and even abortion can be a lfe sustaining procedure to which the religious right is trying to prevent access. If you do not believe me, look up the medical definition of "ectopic pregnancy."

Again, the new mandate is not forcing religious institutions to provide abortions or hand out contraceptives. It is merely preventing them from denying their employees access to these services.

Suggest removal:

54Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Let'sTryAgain,
From your post, it seems that even you, yourself, recognize the silliness of replacing birth control pills with ethanasia. Yea. Kind of a leap there huh?
Let's try again, going in another direction. What if the employer decides he doesn't believe in vaccinations or cholesteral medications? After all there is no sickness before taking the medication.

Suggest removal:

55jarule(1 comment)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

I remember sitting in the pew a few election cycles ago when my when my beloved parish priest told us how we had to vote for president based solely on the abortion issue. I normally bristle at any one telling me how to vote so I took it with a grain of salt. It's like hey lets save the unborn at least till they're 18 so we can march them off to slaughter at one of our endless wars.
They never say NOTHING about war and why there are poor people still., lest it upset their apple cart

Oh well , I still love you Mother Church, with all your faults, you're still the best thing going.

Suggest removal:

56ytowntk(5 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Most of us Catholics, based on my interactions with my catholic friends, believe in birth control, capital punishment, allowing priests to marry, drug testing for people on public assistance, school prayer,reopening Catholic grade schools (kindergarten thru 8th grade) at the expense of the the Catholic high schools which do a poor job of teaching the Catholic doctrines and separation of church and state. If these devout Catholics do not want birth control then have them adopt all the unwanted babies born out of wedlock and pay the hospitals for the medical costs.

Suggest removal:

57bsdtwd(40 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Now the right wing zealots have to fire up their old culture war since the economy is improving. Red meat statements, all baloney, has now permeated the Catholic Church hierarchy enough to have Bishops write to the Editor. The Catholic Church has plenty of other things to clean up/worry about. Like: their traveling pedophilia circuits. This is how they steal/destroy the lives of young children by transferring these kiddy predators from town to town and State to State. Or their treating of women as second class citizens. It's called hypocrisy and the Catholic Church, all the way to Rome, are specialists at these true attacks, for centuries. Nothing short of a cult, as they term the Mormon Church. Enough of the Obama bashing at any cost. Wake Up. Don't listen to the right wing hate. They'd rather have the economy tank, than give Obama credit for anything. They are the Anti Americans.

Suggest removal:

58Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

http://theprogressivecatholicvoice.bl...

Suggest removal:

59ohio48(17 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Dear, Mr. Devito ~ One word comes to mind here: Heresy (from Greek, which originally meant "choice") is an accusation levied against members of another group which has beliefs which conflict with those of the accusers.

Sir, you may not agree with your Catholic leaders, you may even take birth control against the teaching of your faith, and you are free to call the bishops names, as would a child in middle school, because we live in a beautiful country that allows you that kind of freedom.

Where I see you are wrong is in your poorly formed logic. You are okay with the government denying your church their constitutional right....their freedom...to practice their faith in the manner in which they have for centuries.

The only hypocrite I see here is you, Mr. DeVito. While you want to enjoy your freedom, and you boast of the freedom of all those people who demand that others pay for their healthcare, you are perfectly okay to deny your bishops and all Catholics who happen to disagree with you their rights. Here is a shocker: There are many who support your bishops, many of which happen to NOT be Catholic because they know their government has crossed the delicate line.

Nobody is denying any American ACCESS to their pills. You could walk to your nearest free clinic or Planned Parenthood and find plenty there. What you have a problem with is that you want everyone to have it free. Oh, but it's not!...some poor schmo will have to foot the bill. Let's just add that to our list, shall we?: we've been asked to bail out banks, deadbeat home owners, free pills, free healthcare for all, free ___________(just fill in the blank). Enough alaready. I'm tired of having to pay for everyone's free stuff.

Let's get this straight. Goods and commodities aren't "rights" afforded to anybody. That includes birth control pills.

What is a "right" in our country? Go back to school, crack open a dusty book, along with your dusty brain and read the 1st amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Bishops are Americans too. They have a right to 1) Speak freely to the people are charged with leading 2) petition their government with their grievances 3) practice their religion without government intrusion, PROHIBITING them to do so (that includes forcing them to pay for a good or service in which bishops feel violates their conscience)

Oh, and this "accommodation" that Obama announced recently: He must think we are all stupid. Nothing is free. If the insurance company pays, and not the private organization, then that only means they pass the cost through PREMIUMS. I smell lawsuit....multiple lawsuits.

Suggest removal:

60ohio48(17 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Oh, and if you don't understand the definition of heresy in my previous post, let me say it in another way:

1) adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma 2) denial of a revealed truth by a baptized member of the Roman Catholic Church 3) an opinion or doctrine contrary to church dogma

Mr. Devito, you are free to examine your own conscience.

Suggest removal:

61Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

First of all ohio48
Healthcare insurance is cheaper WITH contraceptive coverage than WITHOUT.
How can this be?
It is because insurance companies know through statistics that a pregnancy is far more expensive and the cause of far more side effects than birth control.
Secondly, it is rather droll for a non-member of the Church to be accusing a member of, of all things, "heresy".
By virtue of your status as an Evangelical or Protestant Christian you are the follower of someone the Church previously declared a heretic, and thus probably a heretic yourself.

Suggest removal:

62Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

In all fairness, there were two new letters to the editor today that deserve equal attention as Mr. DeVito's. Here is the first:
Editor:
I am a Catholic. I also have used birth control. That’s hardly a shocking confession; despite our church’s position, Catholics use birth control in roughly the same percentage as do non-Catholics and have for years.

Today, however, the extreme right is trying to make a political issue out of the requirement that Catholic hospitals and employers offer health insurance plans that include birth control as a paid option. I can’t see too many of my fellow Catholics being outraged by this alleged assault on our religious freedom. Nor should they.

Years ago, Catholic hospitals were created and run by religious orders for charitable reasons and because most private and public hospitals refused to offer operating privileges to doctors who were Catholic — like my grandfather. (Jewish doctors suffered the same discrimination, which is why generous Jewish philanthropists and congregations created so many fine Jewish hospitals.)

Now, such discrimination is not only illegal, but non-existent. Consequently, our Catholic hospitals have become Catholic in little more than name. They are largely owned and run by corporations, primarily according to secular business principles. They are staffed not by nuns, but by lay people — most of whom are not Catholics. Why then is it an attack on religious freedom to require them to follow the same rules as other employers? Why shouldn’t they offer insurance plans that let their employees decide for themselves whether their conscience permits them to use birth control?

I respect my bishops’ right and obligation to teach what they believe is morally correct even when they appear out of step with most of their congregation. I hope, though, that they will not allow themselves to be hijacked by right wing ideologues who have seized this issue only to undermine the president with false charges of religious discrimination.

Jack Filak, Poland

Suggest removal:

63Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Here's the second:
This kind of courage reminds me of the time when Cardinal Jaime Sin, the archbishop of Manila, Philippines, called to action the Filipino citizens to take to the streets in defense of our freedom that President Marcos took away during his oppressive dictatorial regime.

Sadly, I cannot say that the Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation’s president took the courage to stand up for what is “morally” right by their donors by buckling down to the intense political backlash it got from withdrawing funding to Planned Parenthood. How ironic it is that the foundation that was established to promote advancement of the treatment and cure for women afflicted with breast cancer has become the political conduit of a pro-choice, feminist movement that hides under the cloak of protecting women’s rights.

Well, courage is defined as the mental or moral strength to venture, persevere and withstand danger, fear or difficulty. I believe the Catholic bishops have that down pat.

Marisha G. Agana, MD, Warren

Suggest removal:

64ohio48(17 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Nope ~ not protestant. I am Roman Catholic. I know my faith. I know the church's doctrine....studied it for many years. I know that many here are openly denying the TRUTH of the church's doctrine, while at the same time, you are forgiving yourself for denying that truth. We are responsible, as disciples of the church to always speak the truth. This is not a judgment. This is the Catholic faith. I am not speaking to protestant Christians or those not of the Catholic faith.

Suggest removal:

65ohio48(17 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

It may be cheaper insurance because now we have decreased the amount of pregnancies? I didn't know you had a crystal ball. You are assuming that all other diseases: including breast cancer in which the "PILL" creates. Yes, I know this ~ as someone who loves someone fell victim of it. There is a warning label attached to some birth control pills: this MAY cause breast cancer.

Still, here is the point: If you pay $1.00 or $500 towards premium and if any of that money goes towards abortion or presciptions in which you oppose, you still pay. Plain and simple.

Suggest removal:

66ohio48(17 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

correction: "You are assuming that all other diseases will not cause premiums to rise: including breast cancer in which the "PILL" creates . Yes, I know this ~ as someone who loves someone fell victim of it. There is a warning label attached to some birth control pills: this MAY cause breast cancer."

Suggest removal:

67Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Just telling you why the insurance companies, not me, charge less when birth control is included.
By the way, while women, mostly women who smoke have problems with blood clots while using the birth control pill, most women are aware of the noncontraceptive benefits of birth control pills which include: protective effects against endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer, benign breast disease, ovarian cysts, ectopic pregnancy, pelvic inflammatory disease and anemia. In contrast, most women are aware of the pill’s positive effects such as effectiveness, safety, viable option throughout reproductive years, reversibility, menstrual benefits, decreased hirsutism, and acne improvement. Also available is a ‘progestin only’ birth control pill that lacks estrogen, and is commonly referred to as “the mini-pill”. This progestin only pill is primarily used for women who can’t use estrogen products or those who are breastfeeding.

Indications for COC use include: heavy, painful or irregular menstrual periods, recurrent ovarian cysts, premenstrual symptoms, cyclic headaches, or cyclic depression, family history of ovarian cancer, birth control reversibility, recent delivery and not breastfeeding, endometriosis, chronic anovulation, acne, hirsutism and need for emergency contraception.

Suggest removal:

68Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

When referring to the Bishop's letter, it would be more correct to say his signature on a form letter produced by someone at the US Conference of Catholic Bishops.
You can read the letter at this link:
http://www.ohiocathconf.org/home_fram...
Scroll now to the middle.
You can see that the letter is the same as signed by various Bishops, although some customized it a bit.

As for courage? To sign a form letter intended to flex your organization's influence in an election year? Don't know how much courage that takes.

To be the Bishop who voices opposition to the pac, now that guy would have guts.

Suggest removal:

69Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Sorry, I should have said SOME women could have problems with blood clots. I never had any problem, and never knew anyone who did.

Suggest removal:

70RustOnMyBelt(114 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

DiVito is yet another supermarket belief shopper. Many try to create God in their own 'image'. If you don't like the rules ,join another club.Bashing the Pope,Bishops or others in the club isn't the way to go on issues like this one.Seriously- find one you do agree with.There are plenty of choices out there.

Suggest removal:

71Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

falconeddy,
I clicked on that (728) comments link after your name. Talk about spewing hate and spit!

Suggest removal:

72briant(57 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Hmm..

Sounds like the number of "CAFETERIA CATHOLICS" is growing....
Someone stated that 95% of people in Y-town are Catholic...That was probably once true. No way today... If so, why did THREE churches just merge into one effective today?

I agree that there has always been a high number of Catholics in the area...but it seems the numbers have diminished due to the thousands of drug infested criminals and their offsprings over the last three decades...

Lots to worry about..

More importantly, lots to PRAY about..

Anyone know where STAN has been???

Suggest removal:

73newsmaker1(127 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

The issue not about birth control or abortions, they are readily available in this country. If fact, teenagers now get abortions and their parents are not made aware of it.

1. Dictators and the U.S. Constitution are mortal enemies. The Founders of our country purposely insured our rights come from our Creator, not from man, This is what seperates our Constitution from others, The Founders understood that at some point a Dictator would begin to weaken our God-given rights.

We have seperation of Church and State, the 1st amendment is a limitation on the Power of the Federal Gov't.

Obama does not have any legal power to define religious organizations, their beliefs, their ministry or what he wants them to pay for...Obama is all about Control and weakening the Church. Dictators always reduce a Church's effectiveness and control the Press.

Obama is not the King.

Obama lied to Father Jenkins at Notre Dame.

Obama lied to Democrat Bart Stupak-Mi and his 21 votes needed to pass unconstitutional Health Control act.

Obama is slowing changing the Constitution by saying..
We have Freedom of Worship, instead of we have Freedom of Religion. Communist China has Freedom of Worship, as long as its in a State-controlled Church.

Suggest removal:

74vor2011(14 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Interesting the number of people on here, Catholic or not, passing judgement. I might be mistaken, but Jesus was tolerent. He taught turn the other cheek... judge not... treat others how you want to be treated. It is ironic what so many believers are willing to do to protect the sanctity of life, but how ignorant we can all be to other adults.

Suggest removal:

75JMHO(146 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

@ newsmaker

Right on! I tried making the same point earlier in the discussion. It's not about whether you agree or disagree with the church's teachings. It's about the gov't imposing mandates on a religion. A clear violation of the constitution.
But the obama koolaid drinkers want to make it a "health" issue and give cover for the "chosen one".

Suggest removal:

76walter_sobchak(1909 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Newsmaker1,
Couldn't agree more! The Bill of Rights does not give the citizens any rights. It merely states that the mentioned rights already exist from God and that the government shall make no laws restricting those rights and the free exercise thereof.

Suggest removal:

77ohio11pm(23 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. -Pastor Niemoller

We must defend the Church's rights and remember the proper function of government is limited only to those spheres of activity within which the individual citizen has the right to act. By deriving its just powers from the governed, government becomes primarily a mechanism for defense against bodily harm, theft and involuntary servitude. It cannot claim the power to redistribute the wealth or force reluctant citizens to perform acts of charity against their will. Government is created by man. .

In general terms, the proper role of government includes such defensive activities, as maintaining national military and local police forces for protection against loss of life, loss of property, and loss of liberty at the hands of either foreign despots or domestic criminals.

Should I force another to pay for birth control or abortion? Should I force another to give charitably? If I shouldn't as an individual have the power to force the choice on someone, the government shouldn't have the power.

Suggest removal:

78Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Oh please.
Let's talk about what it is, without the hyperbole and cliched Nazi comparisons.
The Churches do not have to have a full healthcare plan for their employees. Neither do the small parochial schools where every employee is of the same faith.

The rule applies only to the big businesses affiliated with the Church, but not really a Church, such as hospital systems and large universities. When the Church owns a business aside from the Worship centers, it must follow rules for business.

Suggest removal:

79Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

As Catholic hospitals and universities already do in about half the states.

Suggest removal:

80Ypboy(50 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

I know Valentino DeVito and he is NOT a Roman Catholic!!!!!!

Suggest removal:

81tonne(199 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

LovinLife -- I never said that I thought birth control and abortion were okay nor was I trying to pass the decison to engage in one or the other as being in line with Church teaching. I merely stated that, ultimately, the decision to utilize them is a matter of personal conscience; that these decisions come from our ability to make free will choices; and, further, that it is this ability that creates a problem for many American Catholics. The first two concepts are not my own, but are the result of a discussion I had with my confessor several years ago. I did not include all moral choices, just these two, as they are specific to this discussion. However, I do I believe that the gift of free will came from God, the Father, which, I think, is in line with Church teaching. As for accepting Christ as my Savior, where do you get off impying that I have not. For you to presume to know that based on what I said in my posting is not very Christian of you. Finally, who are you to pass judgment on my or any other person's standing in Church.

Suggest removal:

82jls5795(2 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Although there are a few sensible, reason-based comments sprinkled throughout this thread, the vast majority of comments are idiotic ramblings of "Catholics."

For those of us who value equality, integrity, morality, and factual truths, we are entirely sick of religious radicals impeding on the progress of this country. You rail against healthcare (I thought it was a Christian tenet to provide for less fortunate people?), you rail against science (But don't you all use medicine?) and you rail against homosexuals (Don't you preach love and peace?).

If you have an actual qualm with President Obama's healthcare plan, than by all means please voice your opinion. Just don't do it in the context of religion. Your religion, or at least the way you are projecting it, is clearly a front for your insecurities.

Suggest removal:

83jls5795(2 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

To follow up...

I am not passing judgment on those who believe in a god or in a higher power. But what I have a hard time rationalizing is the steadfast, unwavering belief that many of you contributors have in your Church. You, time and time and time again, place "The Church" ahead of objective truths. You value the Church more than you value any spiritual connection to a higher being.

Do you really feel this way?

Or are you just a product of The Church's ancient and expansive propaganda campaign. Look through the volumes of history and you will find a long and revolting history of The Church, and of all organized religion. It is hard for me to believe that my fellow humans are so easily duped into believing what you're fed.

Open your eyes.
Wake up.
Read a book.

Suggest removal:

84LovinLife(20 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

Tonne, I was using "you" in the general sense and not directed to you specifically in my point about not believing in Christ. I apologize if you thought I was referring to you specifically. I was making the point that anyone is free to choose Christ as their Savior, and anyone is free to choose to be Catholic. If they choose not to choose Christ, they cannot choose to be Catholic.

The point is that the Church throughout its history has taught that the moral truths dictated by the Magisterium are inspired by the Holy Spirit and are true.

Everyone has the free will to choose what to do in any moral decision. If, with their conscience well-informed of Church teaching, they choose to do otherwise they will be judged accordingly. It is not my place to judge nor to speculate how far the mercy of our loving God will go.

jls5795...wow. You say you are not passing judgement on us Catholics, then call us all naive, illiterate and stupid. Hate to see what you would say if you were passing judgement!

The Church, like any human institution, has some bad people in its history. That reflects on the people, not the truth of its teachings.

I for one would far rather subscribe to the teachings of my Church than to subscribe to a moral relativism where each person determines for themselves what is moral. We don't value our Church ahead of objective truths - our Church teaches us what is true.

Suggest removal:

85Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

uh huh
In 1964 and 1965, for instance, the bishop of Mobile-Birmingham, Thomas J. Toolen, forbade priests and nuns to take part in the march on Selma (they marched anyway); Cardinal James McIntyre of Los Angeles silenced three of his priests for speaking on race problems from the pulpit; Father Daniel Berrigan was ousted from New York by his Jesuit superiors for his public opposition to the Vietnamese war (as rumor had it, because of the displeasure of some members of the New York hierarchy); Bishop Edward J. Maginn of Albany stepped on Father Bonaventure O'Brien, a Franciscan from Siena College, for complaining too loudly about Negro slums in Albany.

Suggest removal:

86Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

WHEN?
... for instance, [the Bishops] sharply denounced the increasing federal participation in birth control programs. Their statement occasioned bitter protest among many non-Catholics and a heated denial by a number of federal agencies of the bishops' charge that these programs are or would be coercive. Yet hardly anyone seemed to notice the limp response among American Catholics to the words of their supposed religious guides. A few Catholics were outraged at the bishops' statement (pointing out the total lack of evidence to back up their charge of coercion), but most simply failed to respond in any way at all. The bishops might as well have been talking to themselves.

Answer: 1966
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/...
(Also the source of my post above)

This time, the noise is coming from the Republican Party in the middle of a primary race, and the Bishops are heady with perceived power. Here is Archbishop Dolan this week:
"This may be one of the more well-oiled and effective protests that we’ve waged to something a president has done, which is why it’s getting attention, and I’m glad it is."
I'll just let his words stand for themselves without my uninspired comments.

Suggest removal:

87choicelady(15 comments)posted 2 years, 7 months ago

This ruling applies to secular employers and to public institutions even if they are run by religious groups. Why? Because the latter come under the Constitution as public accommodations and take TAX PAYER money to operate. When everyone is thus affected, discrimination cannot be permitted. The Obama administration has not violated Catholic or conservative Evangelical rights because they are not mandated to provide the contraceptive coverage - insurance companies are.

Protestants and other people of faith as well as non-believers have deeply-held moral and family values in which contraception and family planning are highly moral and ethical parts of our makeup. It is part of our care for creation to protect the earth's resources and to engage in responsible parenthood. It's not up to priests or bishops to denigrate OUR values that are as moral and grounded in faith principles as Catholic ones.

But so long as these institutions serve the public and especially if they accept public money we all pay, they must be equal to their employees, no exceptions.

One way out? Close your doors to non-Catholics or whoever is not of your faith. Hire only from within your faith as a purely religious institution. And take not one thin dime from the rest of us. Then you're a religious body and exempt from this ruling. But if you're not willing to do this, you must be equitable to us all. And by the way - abortion is already NOT covered in any way by public funds due to the Hyde Amendment. So you'll never be asked to fund that or provide that to anyone. Get over the victim role - you are not being persecuted.

Suggest removal:

88mnascar(36 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

If over 80% of catholics practice birth control. Don't you think the Bishop needs to look in his own back yard before finding fault elsewhere? Get your own people to practice the followings of your church.

Suggest removal:

89AnotherAverageCitizen(1174 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Obama started Obamacare, not some guy called Barry.

Oh by the way Obamacare was taken From Romneycare. Be care what you ask for.

Suggest removal:

90FifthAve(168 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Devito, yours is a powerful letter. I hope it reaches the good Bishop's eyes.

Suggest removal:

91CommonSenseGuy(37 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Thank you Bishop for standing up for the 1st Amendment rights of Catholics!

This nation was founded for religious freedom and now for the first time in our nation's history, a President is forcing a religion to violate their beliefs.

If Obama is willing to be this radical during an election year, what will he do if he's in there for 4 more years?

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport