-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).
Get with Gene and Slartibartfast I bet they know who it is. They have a special program to weed out sock puppets.
Bda Let’s just put it this way. Those sockpuppets have tried to inflict a lot of damage while their owner claims to be a victim. All for now. I am running late again.
ooohhhhh I’m tellin. Was it Ay Swathmore Mom
Right…. confirmed you and your multitude of sockpuppets posted my street on this blog. Go bag to selling whatever it is you sell these days.
Apparently you did not read…. You’re attacking the poster… Read… Please do not attack the poster…. Thank you…. Now must do something else…
“9 or 10 largest insurance company”. Thought the the poster was saying the top 9 or 10 companies not the ninth largest life insurance company. It currently provides life insurance not health insurance and it is non profit. My mother had it.
Thanks for the personal attack…. But read this in your leisure…Founded in 1901, catholic health insurance is the nation’s 9th largest fraternal benefit society, Catholic Life insurance benefit membership has grown every year for decades and today serves many members in every state.
CATHOLIC LIFE INSURANCE helps individuals and families achieve financial security through life insurance, IRAs and retirement annuities. catholic health insurance also offers volunteer opportunities that enhance their members’ lives and benefit their communities. Founded in 1901, Catholic Life Insurance is the nation’s 9th largest fraternal benefit society A not-for-profit fraternal benefit society, catholic health insurance is owned and operated by their members. While the common bond for most members is the Catholic faith, Catholic Life Insurance welcomes everyone. They are independent of any Catholic institution Catholic Life insurance continues to grow and thrive in the commercial insurance marketplace. Compare Catholic Life Insurance quotes with other providers Now! Major insurance companies we provide quotes for include State Farm, AIG, Geico, Allstate, Progressive, Mercuryand many others.
AIG, Berskhire Hathaway,Travelers, All State, Hartford are the largest insurers. They are publicly traded. Have nothing to do with the catholic church.The largest healthcare insurers are United,Wellpoint ,Blue Cross and Aetna. Again they are publicly traded and have nothing to do with the catholic church. Short on facts …….
Thanks Gene! I did get your email. I was just concerned that it might be a larger problem.
The timing and spacing of pregnancy has a direct effect on increasing positive, healthier maternal and child outcomes, and decreasing negative outcomes; that is why not one insurance corporation has asked for an exemption to including contraceptives in their plans. -CEJ
Well said… Spot on.
(I think that it may be time to repost the “Sluts” vid that Woosty posted yesterday…)
Woosty….
In the early days, I made that mistake myself… 😉
raff,
Check your email. Since JT isn’t on sabbatical, I didn’t just go ahead and put the offender on the blacklist but I did copy JT on the information. The email contains circumstance which he may or may not consider mitigation.
Anonymously Yours1, March 10, 2012 at 12:20 pm
Wootsy…..
——————————
someday AY, you’ll get it right… 😉
You know it’s kinda funny when you think about it…. But the Catholics own the 9 or 10 largest insurance company in the US…. Or maybe even the world… I kid you not….
Gene H.1, March 10, 2012 at 11:35 am
———————————
and yet, Viva la difference….
Elaine,
Funny Jeff didn’t like that line; I thought it was great!
Anon & Woosty,
Great comments.
Jeff@10:46,
“There are no-cost alternatives that are 100% effective. Simply avoiding the activity which results in pregnancy precludes the necessity of the contraceptive.”
Guess that puts you in the abstinence only camp, or are you still able to claim: “I did not have sex with that woman!” with a straight face!
How is that working out for you?
The timing and spacing of pregnancy has a direct effect on increasing positive, healthier maternal and child outcomes, and decreasing negative outcomes; that is why not one insurance corporation has asked for an exemption to including contraceptives in their plans.
Wootsy…..
Because Jeff is a Beck wanna be….. If I recall Jeff Beck was quite a talented musician with the yardbirds…..claptons claim to fame….if I recall….
The First Amendment has what has been described as four prongs
Congress shall make no law….
:
1. Freedom of religion–“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting free exercise thereof;”
2. Freedom of speech– …”no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;”
3. Freedom to assemble- and to petition the government–no law abridging — …”the right of the people peaceably to assemble,” and to
4….” petition the government for a redress of grievance.”
One could argue that speech and press are two prongs but that is neigher here nor there on this issue. The freedom of religion is the prong in question here.
The issueis who owns the Freedom of religion prong? The church or the individual? And where the twain shall meet whose right prevails?
Surely a church has the right to exist and to proslytize, and certainly a wise litigant would name the church member whose rights were squelched as a party if the right to proselytize was squelched. But here the church is dictating freedom of religion to its employees!
The issue might be different if the Church was expelling members for not having enough babies, for using condoms, for buggering altar boys, or reading comic books in the pews during Communion. But for an employer, and here the church is an employer first, to dictate birth control to its employees is not protected establishment of religion or freedom to exercise religion. It is the opposite of the freedom to exercise religion.
Dividing up a prong for First Amendment purposes is sometims necessary. Speaking of prongs, take the Rush Limbaugh statement on the air as a member of the free press, that the law student is a slut and a prostitute. Can she sue the prong for defamation or is he protected by the free speech and free press prong. This is an example of a real prong employing one.
Enough said, I have to get back to my pasture and grow peas.
“Why do you insist on telling those who live in the “burbs and county” what they should do with their bodies?” Jeff
———————————–
I don’t. Idon’t conflate arguments at cross purposes. I have lived, at different times, in all 3 places. So I know the effect of the lifestyles on ones working body. That’s all. Except that you don’t seem to know the differences…. 😉
lol, AY, regarding (Jeff’s dream of?) “self-procreation”
(It’s good “to lurk” sometimes.. )