Actually, the act is called Respect the Rights of Conscience Act, H.R. 1467, sponsored by none other Senator Boy Blunt-head, as I like to call Roy Blunt, a Baptist from Missouri, and H.R. 1179 by Representative Jeff Fortenberry. Both of which cater to the strongly religious and are intended to amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to protect rights of conscience.
Blunt-head’s proposed act states that a health care plan shall not considered to have failed provided it covers preventive medicine, yet does not violate the sponsor or the health care provider’s religious beliefs. Notice, these same religious people did not take issue when it came to treating children, despite the parents’ religious dogma, but this bill could overturn even that.
(A) FOR HEALTH PLANS- A health plan shall not be considered to have failed to provide the essential health benefits package described in subsection (a) (or preventive health services described in section 2713 of the Public Health Service Act), to fail to be a qualified health plan, or to fail to fulfill any other requirement under this title on the basis that it declines to provide coverage of specific items or services because–
`(i) providing coverage (or, in the case of a sponsor of a group health plan, paying for coverage) of such specific items or services is contrary to the religious beliefs or moral convictions of the sponsor, issuer, or other entity offering the plan; or
`(ii) such coverage (in the case of individual coverage) is contrary to the religious beliefs or moral convictions of the purchaser or beneficiary of the coverage.
This means that birth control is not covered if you are Catholic or work for the Catholic Church. Thus, if you work for the Catholic Church, wanting contraception, and the Catholic Church gets this passed, you cannot have it. Now, this could mean, if you work for the Mormon Church or go to a Mormon hospital, if they have such a thing, you might not get a much needed blood transfusion, because this whole act, which Boy Blunt-head, a Baptist, sponsors, caters to religious institutions. Fortenberry’s does not read any better. Thus, people could die if congress passes either of these acts.
The Catholic Church, who gives out so much misinformation, wants people to sign a petition in support of this act, because they oppose contraception in any insurance they provide their employees. The article stated that the patient care act makes no exception to the religious and their beliefs, forcing to pay for health care that is against their religious moral beliefs.
"It is little or no comfort that, rather than being forced to propose such coverage, religious organizations will simply have it imposed on them," Cardinal DiNardo said. "The argument that they will not really have to subsidize the coverage, because insurers will offer it 'free of charge,' runs up against the reality that this coverage will be integrated into their overall health plan, and subsidized with the premiums paid by employer and employee for that plan."
He added: "The Administration's rule makes no provision for the rights of insurers, even religiously affiliated insurers, but places responsibility for enforcing the mandate more squarely than ever on their shoulders. This is a radical departure from current law, under which a health plan that excludes contraception can be sold even to federal employees if the carrier has any religious objection to such coverage."
In the video on United Conference of Catholic Bishops' (USSCB) website, a Catholic priest discusses, after a brief pause in the beginning, abortion and contraception, stating that the president ordered religious institutions to pay for this coverage. This is not quite accurate. The insurance act Obama compromised on concerning contraception, has insurance companies provide it, but the Church does not pay for it. In fact, churches themselves do not need to provide the coverage, only hospitals and other institutions. This priest provides so much misinformation that it is not funny.
Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, president of the USCCB, sharply criticized the decision by the Obama administration in which it "ordered almost every employer and insurer in the country to provide sterilization and contraceptives, including some abortion-inducing drugs, in their health plans….Never before has the federal government forced individuals and organizations to go out into the marketplace and buy a product that violates their conscience. This shouldn't happen in a land where free exercise of religion ranks first in the Bill of Rights."
USSCB listed its objections to the HSS regulation, of which they call “serious objections”.
First, we objected to the rule forcing private health plans — nationwide, by the stroke of a bureaucrat's pen—to cover sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion. All the other mandated "preventive services" prevent disease, and pregnancy is not a disease. Moreover, forcing plans to cover abortifacients violates existing federal conscience laws. Therefore, we called for the rescission of the mandate altogether.
Second, we explained that the mandate would impose a burden of unprecedented reach and severity on the consciences of those who consider such "services" immoral: insurers forced to write policies including this coverage; employers and schools forced to sponsor and subsidize the coverage; and individual employees and students forced to pay premiums for the coverage. We therefore urged HHS, if it insisted on keeping the mandate, to provide a conscience exemption for all of these stakeholders—not just the extremely small subset of "religious employers" that HHS proposed to exempt initially.
Granted pregnancy is not necessarily a disease, but overpopulation is, especially when it can lead to the extinction of the human species, through food and water shortages. Pregnancy can also contribute to disease that only occurs during pregnancy. Disease is something that causes dis-ease for people and yes, pregnancy could fit the definition, depending on the woman and/or baby's condition prior to birth.
1. a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavourable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment.
2. any abnormal condition in a plant that interferes with its vital physiological processes, caused by pathogenic microorganisms, parasites, unfavorable environmental, genetic, or nutritional factors, etc.
3. any harmful, depraved, or morbid condition, as of the mind or society: His fascination with executions is a disease.
4. decomposition of a material under special circumstances: tin disease.
For some women, pregnancy causes Toxemia, HELLP Syndrome, and other illnesses, only related to pregnancy. In the case of HELLP Syndrome, the only way to save the woman, and possibly the baby too, is to force the woman’s body to deliver the baby. If the labour is not induced, then both the woman and child often die of this condition, which only happens in pregnancy. The emphasis, below, are mine.
The main treatment is to deliver the baby as soon as possible, even if the baby is premature. Problems with the liver and other complications of HELLP syndrome can quickly get worse and be harmful to both the mother and child.
Your doctor may induce labor by giving you drugs to start labor, or may perform a C-section.
You may also receive:
A blood transfusion if bleeding problems become severe
Corticosteroid medications to help the baby's lungs develop faster
Medications to treat high blood pressure
Pregnancy is a serious condition, which I refused to die for and I refuse to let any other young woman die for. Thank the doctor and nurses at St. John’s Hospital for giving my sons’ father and me a choice twenty years ago. I also thank the doctors and nurses at that hospital for saving us both, by inducing labour, but if pushed came to shove, that doctor would have honour our choice in saving my life. Lastly, thank nature for menopause!
Prevention of pregnancies assists in helping families afford to survive. Too many children and parents struggle to feed and cloth them. I wonder if the Catholic Church and Fundamngelicals would like to support all those children, just take the burden off the parents?
Prevention also saves lives, especially if a woman is high risk. I do not know a single woman who wants to die and leave behind children. If giving birth means sacrificing the woman's life, then prevention is extremely important.
Amongst all this insanity against contraception and abortion, as well as misinformation, with the Religious Reich wanting to usurp our government and declare a war on women, which could kill many women, we hear a sane voice. The FFRF released a statement today concerning this act that gives religious institutions a foothold into government.
Annie Laurie Gaylor asked some good questions of women still in the Catholic Church.
Why are you propping up the pillars of a tyrannical and autocratic, woman-hating, sex-perverting, antediluvian Old Boys Club? Why are you aiding and abetting a church that has repeatedly and publicly announced a crusade to ban contraception, abortion and sterilization, and to deny the right of all women everywhere, Catholic or not, to decide whether and when to become mothers? When it comes to reproductive freedom, the Roman Catholic Church is Public Enemy Number One. Think of the acute misery, poverty, needless suffering, unwanted pregnancies, social evils and deaths that can be laid directly at the door of the Church's antiquated doctrine that birth control is a sin and must be outlawed.
While she addresses her open letter to Catholic women, I think the same questions, with the same statements after the questions, one could address the Religious Reich as a whole, including any woman who supports Santorum and involved with Evangelical Fundamentalism. Many Fundamngelical religious women need a good dose of rational thinking and an education concerning their health.
No self-respecting feminist, civil libertarian or progressive should cling to the Catholic faith.
Or any other religious dogmatic Christian cult that forbids women the right to health care that includes contraception and even a life-saving abortion. In fact, it is a shame more women do not take up the motto, “No Gods, No Masters”. Religious Extremism, whether it is Catholic, Fundamngelicalism or even Islam, damns a woman to death, especially and including in childbirth. Giving birth, although natural, is risky business and the more pregnancies a woman has, especially if they are very close together, the more likely her life becomes at risk.
Any woman can find this information that I am stating on almost any site that caters to women’s health, such as Planned Parenthood, NARAL, RH Reality Check, and other women’s health organizations. Women really do need to research and learn about women’s health and not blindly follow a bunch of misogynistic patriarchal men.
However, women are not relevant in the house committee discussions concerning our own health.
“Just when you think the U.S. House of Representatives could not be more ridiculous, here comes a hearing on contraception to which women are not allowed to talk about the importance of birth control,” Keenan said. “When it comes to women’s health and privacy, the committee would rather listen to eight men than one woman who supports contraception. Something tells me people may view these lawmakers as out of touch, with their constituents and with reality.”
Gaylor continued, in her open letter, to state that what the Catholic Church is doing, is nothing more than a modern day Inquisition. Unfortunately, other radical religious groups are standing along side the Catholic Church in this modern day Inquisition and as said, “It needs to stop!” They too are using various tithes and donations to fight against Obama concerning women’s health.
Obama has compromised, but the Church never budges, instead launching a vengeful modern-day Inquisition. Look at its continuing directives to parish priests to use their pulpits every Sunday to lobby you against Obama’s policy, the Church's announcement of a major anti-contraception media campaign — using your tithes, contributions and donations — to defeat Obama’s laudable health care policy. The Church has introduced into Congress the “Respect for Rights of Conscience Act, ” a bill to place the conscienceless Catholic Church's "rights of conscience" above the rights of conscience of 53 percent of Americans. That the Church has "conscience rights" to deny women their rights is a kissing cousin to the claim that “corporations are people.” The Church that hasn’t persuaded you to oppose contraception now wants to use the force of secular law to deny contraceptive rights to non-Catholics.
Any religious group or patriarchal men, including the friggin' pope, who denies women heath care rights and choices, can go suck an egg, as far as I am concerned, but supposedly, 51% of people in this nation are women. Even if some of the 51% refuse to think for themselves and reject superstition, there are men who are supportive of women and their health care rights. Not all men want umpteen children nor do they wish for their wife to die in childbirth as a sacrifice. Add to that, women of various liberal churches, such as the Episcopal Church, as well as their husbands would stand against the Catholic Church.
However, as Stardem stated, our forefathers did not write the Establishment Clause to support religion in our government, but prevent religion from running our government. Again, the Catholic Church gives out misinformation on this issue.
The establishment clause was designed to prevent the Congress from establishing a state religion, while providing the individual the right to exercise religious beliefs as they see fit.
Thomas Jefferson wrote, "Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of an established religion tends to make the clergy unresponsive to their own people, and leads to corruption within religion itself. Erecting the 'wall of separation between church and state,' therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society."
An individual on Democratic Underground had this to say about the act:
This looks like a real shit storm on the way:
He is right too, because this demeans so many people, especially women.
Women’s bodies are not fertile grounds for Theocracy to rain down on them and impregnate them with religious dogma. There never was an Immaculate Conception. Such a story is just a myth, which no woman can ever live up to and the misogynistic patriarch created it to demean women, placing them in subservient roles.