-Submitted by David Drumm (Nal), Guest Blogger
Bishop William Lori, a representative of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, testified before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that mandating insurance companies cover contraception is like mandating kosher delis serve ham sandwiches. Lori likens the obvious health benefits of not getting pregnant to the claim that “pork is good for you.” Lori calls this the Parable of the Kosher Deli.
The beauty of Lori’s Parable is that it can be used to argue against any health insurance coverage mandate.
If an employer is a Jehovah’s Witness and insists that any employee health insurance plan not cover blood transfusions then any employee who wants that coverage could have to find another policy and pay its entire cost out-of-pocket. Any employees who do not share the employer’s worldview are penalized for those different beliefs.
While Lori makes much of the employer’s freedom of conscience, does not the employee possess that same freedom of conscience? If an employer insists on an employee health insurance plan that covers abortion in cases of rape or incest, and a Catholic employee objects to paying even part of the cost of the insurance, would Lori still support the employer’s freedom of conscience? Or would he suddenly discover that employees deserve the same freedom of conscience?
While many consider an employer’s place of business to be private property wherein the employer rules as king, that business makes use of roads, bridges, infrastructure, law enforcement, etc., paid for by the government. Without this government support, businesses wouldn’t survive. In return for the services provided, the government gets to set standards of behavior toward competitors, customers, employees, and the environment.
This is not a new issue, as evidenced by the Supreme Court case of Reynolds v. United States in 1878. For a unanimous Court, Chief Justice Waite wrote:
Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices.
The freedom of religious expression requires the freedom from control of that religious expression from those holding different religious beliefs. If one demands freedom of religious expression for oneself, then one must give up control over the religious expression of those holding different religious beliefs. If one demands freedom of conscience for oneself, then one must give up control over the conscientious beliefs of those holding different conscientious beliefs. One cannot reasonably complain about the denial of freedom of conscience when one’s denying that freedom to others.
H/T: Jonathan D. Sarna, Sarah Posner, Adam Lee, Kashif J. Powell (pdf).
@Woosty
“If you live in a city then I would say yes, a gym membership is probably essential as a preventative and healthy life-style choice.
In the ‘burbs and country? Not so much.”
So you want to “penalize” those who live in the country by not providing them with a gym membership?
Why do you insist on telling those who live in the “burbs and county” what they should do with their bodies?
@Elaine M.
“Just because you don’t think certain things are necessary to a woman’s health–it doesn’t mean they aren’t.”
And because you don’t think going to the pub (yes. my beer should be covered too) is necessary to my health, doesn’t mean it’s not.
Summary:
Elaine thinks the health insurance benefit provided by my employer should cover my cab ride home after a night at the pub, and Woosty thinks my gym membership should be covered too.
Any other voluntary activities that I might choose to engage in that should also be covered? I don’t want just the things I enjoy to be covered. I want my fellow employees to get their fair share.
Ronnie wants our employer to cover his parachute. (he likes to jump)
As I said in the beginning this whole Sandra Fluke thing was no fluke. I hope it blows up in their face.
As we reported last night, “The Factor” believes that the Sandra Fluke contraception controversy was manufactured to divert attention away from the Obama administration’s disastrous decision to force Catholic non-profit organizations to provide insurance coverage for birth control and the morning after pill. That might very well be unconstitutional.
Anyway, we’re having trouble tracking down just who is sending Sandra around to the media. It’s very strange. So far, the 30-year-old activist has appeared on eight national news programs where she was not challenged at all. Last week, we called Sandra on her cell phone and invited her on “The Factor.” She didn’t call back, very unusual. There was no other public contact for the woman, just her cell phone.
A man named Mike has booked her on a few programs, but we can’t even get his last name. And Mike doesn’t provide call-back numbers to those with whom he speaks. So Mike, who are you? And why the subterfuge?
Now, late today we found out that Ms. Fluke is now being repped by the progressive PR agency SKDKnickerbocker where Anita Dunn, the former Obama communications director is the managing editor… a-ha.
So, this whole deal comes back to the White House, at least indirectly. So, let’s run down what we know. Sandra Fluke is a former head of the group “Georgetown University Law Students for Reproductive Justice.” On February 9th, a group called “The Feminist Majority Foundation” arranged for Sandra to appear at press conference criticizing the Catholic bishops for objecting to President Obama’s contraception mandate.
After that, Congressman Elijah Cummings, the former Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, invited Sandra to testify in front of the House Oversight Committee. But she was turned down by the chair, Congressman Darrell Issa, because she had no expertise in the church/state subject matter.
Nevertheless, Ms. Fluke went to the hearing and afterward complained to ABC News that she had been denied. A week later, Nancy Pelosi staged a mock hearing starring Sandra. After which Rush Limbaugh made derogatory comments elevating her to left-wing martyrdom.
So it seems there is a powerful presence behind Sandra Fluke. And as the polls show the controversy has benefited the President of the United States, who is on the ropes with the church deal. This is all the more amazing because the controversy Sandra is embracing is completely bogus as I explained on “The View” today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
O’REILLY: Do you guys know what Title 10 is? Do you know what Title 10 is?
JOY BEHAR, CO-HOST, “THE VIEW”: Explain it.
O’REILLY: Do you what it… ok. So it’s in motion now that if you need birth control and you go to a federal clinic you get it.
ELISABETH HASSELBECK, CO-HOST, “THE VIEW”: Yes.
O’REILLY: That’s under Title 10 of the Public Health Act.
BARBARA WALTERS, CO-HOST, “THE VIEW”: Right.
O’REILLY: All right, so there really isn’t any… nay problem. You can get it and then if you don’t want to drive down to the clinic you can go to Wal-Mart or you can go to Target and get it for $9 a month. So to insert this into a giant Obama care bill seems to be unnecessary to me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O’REILLY: And by the way the ladies were respectful and we had a very good and necessary discussion.
Now “Talking Points” believes that very quietly President Obama will pull back on his demand that the Catholic Church cover contraception. He has snatched victory from the jaws of defeat and would be foolish to continue flogging an unconstitutional mandate.
Mr. Obama knows the polls say many American women now believe he is protecting them. For that he can thank Sandra Fluke and whoever is running her.
And that’s “The Memo.”
http://nation.foxnews.com/bill-oreilly/2012/03/08/factor-investigation-ex-obama-official-running-sandra-fluke
If you live in a city then I would say yes, a gym membership is probably essential as a preventative and healthy life-style choice.
In the ‘burbs and country? Not so much.
Jeff,
Just because you don’t think certain things are necessary to a woman’s health–it doesn’t mean they aren’t.
Is my gym membership necessary too?
—————————————–
I don’t know Jeff, that depends on you.
Is a gym required to maintain your health?
@Woosty
“Why not, your labor pays for his…..”
So you think my gym membership should be mandated to be covered under the health insurance benefit provided by my employer?
Can I also get the safety equipment I need when I ride my dirt bike? (a lot of fun, and great exercise too)
Jeff,
“I think my employer should be required to provide health insurance that will cover my cab ride home after I go out for a night at the pub. (A voluntary activity that I really enjoy)”
So…talk to your employer already! Or walk home. It would be good exercise.
@Elaine M.
“In many instances, birth control pills ARE necessary to the health of some women who are diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome and endometriosis–among other medical conditions.”
I don’t have a problem with providing coverage for those women. I don’t think many employers (including religious organizations) would have a problem with providing that coverage either.
“And sometimes birth control pills are also “necessary” to the health of women who may face serious medical problems should they become pregnant.”
I do not agree with your classification as “necessary”. Further, oral contraceptives are not 100% effective. If becoming pregnant poses a seriously medical threat, the activity which could result in such should be avoided. (much like I won’t mandate that my employer provided health care insurance cover my safety goggles for when I grind metal in my basement)
Jeff,
Why not, your labor pays for his…..
I think my employer should be required to provide health insurance that will cover my cab ride home after I go out for a night at the pub. (A voluntary activity that I really enjoy)
Jeff,
In many instances, birth control pills ARE necessary to the health of some women who are diagnosed with polycystic ovary syndrome and endometriosis–among other medical conditions. And sometimes birth control pills are also “necessary” to the health of women who may face serious medical problems should they become pregnant.
Bdaman1, March 10, 2012 at 10:13 am
Sure Frankie thats why they are closing post offices, very profitable.
—————————————
a lot of what the PO used to do has been outsourced.
when an agency treats its employees well it still has to compete with those other businesses that act like despot cretins towards thier employees….
@Woosty
“I’m not sure the majority of us can survive a government that takes 20+ years to find a solution to the issues that are NECESARY to the health of its citizens.”
Necessary? Birth control bills, for the purpose of pregnancy prevention, are “necessary” to health care?
Is my gym membership necessary too?
Thursday, 8 March 2012
Remember the Ladies
As you read the following letter, in which Abigail Adams boldly asks her husband — future U.S. President, John Adams — to “remember the ladies” when drafting new laws or else fear rebellion from the female population, bear in mind that it was sent over 200 years ago, at the start of the American Revolutionary War — a time when women had very few rights to speak of.
At the time of writing, John Adams was away from home working as the Massachusetts representative to the Continental Congress; a few months later the Declaration of Independence would be adopted, due in no small part to his efforts. His 31-year-old wife, meanwhile, was at home caring for their four children.
http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/03/remember-ladies.html
Should homeowner’s insurance cover the cost of taking down a perfectly good fence?
Should auto insurance cover cutting the roof off of your car?
While there are some who would take advantage of such coverage, do you think it would be fair to have the entire pool of those insured absorb the costs of these items in their premiums?
Should employers who provide health insurance be required to provide coverage in order to break that which is functioning normally?
The purpose of contraceptives is to break that which is functioning normally. While oral contraceptives can be use to treat (correct) other maladies (which IMO should be covered), the coverage of contraceptives solely for the purpose of birth control should not be. There are no-cost alternatives that are 100% effective. Simply avoiding the activity which results in pregnancy precludes the necessity of the contraceptive.
“If an employer is a Jehovah’s Witness and insists that any employee health insurance plan not cover blood transfusions then any employee who wants that coverage could have to find another policy and pay its entire cost out-of-pocket.
That is correct. The employer has chosen to provide a benefit for his employees. The extent of that benefit is at the employer’s discretion. If you want something more, it is your choice to acquire it, and your obligation to pay for it.
Knowing that the author of the blog post is a male, I would like to know what items are currently covered by his health insurance plan that would not be necessary if he voluntarily avoided an activity? What future activity do you intend to engage in that you think your employer should be force to include in your health care insurance?
“Any employees who do not share the employer’s worldview are penalized for those different beliefs.”
That’s just silly. No one is being “penalized” here. Everyone is receiving the same benefit. If you want more than that benefit, go out and pay for it. No one is stopping you. No one is discriminating against you because you hold different beliefs.
This is not a new issue, as evidenced by the Supreme Court case of Reynolds v. United States in 1878. For a unanimous Court, Chief Justice Waite wrote:
“Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices.”…
—————————————–
I’m not sure the majority of us can survive a government that takes 20+ years to find a solution to the issues that are NECESARY to the health of its citizens. Allowing the citizenry to become ill when conditions go south is not a good plan to keep the Country strong….and I don’t care if you call it a ham sandwich or a zombie pope….
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/forum/may96/background/health_debate_page1.html
@ James your right and thats what has people upset about the post office closings because they are closing them to the people who aren’t hip like me.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/14/us-usa-usps-idUSTRE81D0M620120214
Mike please explain to me how I am jacking the thread, seriously.