Hey, there! Log in / Register
Imagine if women in a state-funded health plan couldn't get referrals for a legal medical procedure
By adamg on Sat, 03/07/2009 - 9:53am
Cardinal O'Malley makes it perfectly clear on his blog: If Caritas Cristi and a partner do win a contract to become the default provider for the state health system, women will be on their own when it comes to abortions or emergency contraception:
... Caritas Christi will never do anything to promote abortions, to direct any patients to providers of abortion or in any way to participate in actions that are contrary to Catholic moral teaching and anyone who suggests otherwise is doing a great disservice to the Catholic Church. We are committed to the Gospel of Life and no arrangement will be entered into unless it is completely in accord with Church teaching. ...
Still, he adds that he is asking the National Catholic Bioethics Center to review the arrangement.
Via Michael Paulson.
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
an idea
The Boston Archdiocese could agree to cover the cost of all future public assistance, education and health care premiums for any babies born to Caritas health plan members, until age 18.
That still wouldn't give women in their plan equal access to healthcare. But it's clear the Archdiocese thinks it knows better than women and their doctors what kind of health care they should have. If the Church wants to treat us like children, they should step up and be the parents.
This is probably not the place for the abortion wars, but what the Church thinks is the moral difference between denying a woman who's been coerced into sex an abortion and, say, forcing a guy with two healthy kidneys to give one up to a stranger on dialysis is beyond me.
Just Say No
To religious control of public money.
I have no problem with people and families following the dictates of a religion I don't believe in personally. I do have a problem with my tax dollars resulting in true believers restricting the legal and best medical care options for people who may or may not share their belief system.
Sounds like a major violation of church and state separation to me. The state should not compromise on this one.
This should really be a
This should really be a no-brainer.
In question are services that our laws and overall society consider to be elements of provider health care. The Roman Catholic Church is well-documented as being fundamentally opposed to these elements of health care. The Cardinal reaffirms that general opposition when addressing the immediate matter.
Yet they want state money to be a health care provider that is required to provide those services they oppose (quite literally) religiously. Perhaps they need to rethink their core competencies, and get out of business sidelines that don't fit?
Some people might want to give state money to their favorite religion, but if that means further compromising our health care system and the basics of our constitutional government, the politicians need to tell those people "no."
Besides saying "no" being the right thing to do, it avoids exposing the state to legal liability. Watch the multi-million lawsuits fly when distraught patients ask for emergency contraception and the health care providers throw up barriers.
Holy fucking shit, Swirly
You and I agree on something.
Toll the bells.
Menage a trois
Swirly, Will, AND me on the same side?
Clearly the Archdiocese has more important things to deal with right now other than taking over healthcare dollars...like getting all of the faithful to the Mount of Olives in time for Final Judgement and the Second Coming.
Besides abortion
They're not even allowed to talk about birth control or other aspects of sexual health outside of marriage.