Catholic group backs Obama birth control policy

So everyone believes that the insurance companies are going to give this away for free. That is in addition to everything that your insurance company gives you for free now, I guess.

Is the issue that she makes so much money or that she's Catholic?

When we have politicians wanting to grant personhood to sperm you see how crazy this whole thing is! It's a rare thing to see a family with more than 5 kids, does the Vatican think all those Catholics are abstaining? So they are doing the responsible thing and limiting their family size for their own good and the good of the planet. It's not the church's business.

So once the pricetag was removed, the idealogical oppisition was removed by the corporate arm of the Vatican.

Now thats faith.

I don't understand the whole birth control issue from the standppoint that we need to protect "life", but why not attempt to prevent it from happening if "life" is not wanted? Why did the Creator give us this grest sourse of entertainment called sex if we can't enjoy when we want? Why does sex have to be a thing strictly for procreation? Isn't "Vatican Roulette" birth control without physical devises?

The article says "Insurance Companies are responsible for providing free contraception." The Government is now telling businesses they have to give away the goods and services that they were previously making a profit from. This is no different that telling Domino's they have to give away free pizzas. This is a dangerous and slippery slope my friends.

So glad that Planned Parenthood approved. The fact is that the ability of women to obtain access to birth control was never compromised when it could be obtained from Planned Parenthood

Ok, the insurance company has to pay for it, who is paying for the is paying for the health care premium? It is the same catholic institution, what is the differnece???

"The Fix" still does not pass Constitutional muster as it does not go far enough. Lets be clear, woman's health care can not be defined by reproductive health alone. The exemption that faith-based organizations are asking for does NOT prevent anyone from getting those services on thier own, and the services are NOT cost prohibitive. All costs of the annual checkup required for birth control is covered, the actual pills would not be.

The Affordable Healthcare Act already stands on weak Constitutional ground and is up before the Supreme Court. What we are witnessing is the wholesale giveaways by the authors collapsing the overall bill by the sheer weight of the implementation regulations. Too much was promised to get niche support. It would seem that a prudent and reasonable effort should have been made for incremental change. What we are saddled with now is the result of not knowing what we have til we pass it attitude.

If birth control isn't covered, then Viagra shouldn't be covered. After all, sex is a choice, right? Sex is not a need, right? If birth control coverage isn't required, then pre-natal care for pregnant employees shouldn't be required, and no heath insurance for children of employees should be required. Having children is also a choice, right? And why should employers cover treatment for STDs or any other disease? No, pregnancy isn't an STD or a disease, BUT it does come with all kinds of unpleasant physically conditions, pains, as well as risks to a woman's body, health, and life. Weight gain, fatigue, nausea, swollen ankles, round ligament pains, childbirth pain, not to mention all the potential health risks. And all these things can jeopardize a woman's career/school/life goals. There's no difference between a woman who doesn't want to become pregnant and deal with all the physical pains/risks associated with pregnancy and someone who wants to treat their STD or any other disease because they don't want to deal with the physical pains/risks associated diseases. Why should childless people pay for schools that other people's children benefit from? Yea, let's just keep breeding. Then when we run out of food, fresh air, resources, and fuel, we'll just invade other countries and make it rain bombs on them, and take their resources and their women, right? Who needs to focus on education and improving life quality when you've got the largest military in the world, right? Yea, the Earth's resources are all renewable and limitless, right? Those who do not believe in birth control or believe in having only the number of children that they and the world's resources can support DESERVE to take more from the Earth than those of us who use birth control and decide to not have children or only have the number of children we can afford right? Don't leave the number of children up to your God, leave it up to your paycheck. By the way, doesn't birth control prevent unwanted pregnancies and abortions? No, no one is going to stop having sex, so stop saying "just don't have sedx". Why don't you tell people NOT to have sexual desire then? Even married couples may not wana have loads of children, if any at all.

Birth control PREVENTS abortions!

The Church opposes the death penalty. Should Catholics pay taxes to states that carry out the death penalty?

Elias Crim had a great op-ed in the Washington Times last Sunday about Sr. Carol Keehan, head of the Catholic Health Association. Crim, a consultant for Capital Research Center calls Keehan the "million dollar sister" because her salary is close to seven digits for overseeing the $16 million association. As a "religious sister" rather than a "nun" who takes a vow of poverty, Sr. Keehan is not required to turn her salary over to her order.

Crim pointed out that Sr. Keehan, by giving CHA's endorsement to Obamacare, "contradicted the position of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, a group whose commitment to health care reform is decades old." The bishops, he pointed out, have responsibility for articulating the moral teaching of the Church and their conference opposed the bill because of its expansion of abortion. Several bishops have said Sr. Keehan is sowing the seeds of "disunity" and "confusion" which can hardly be debated when those who champion her are pro-abortion liberals. In effect, Sr. Keehan made herself one of the most effective lobbyists for Obama's massive government takeover of health care which includes billions for funding community health care centers that can offer unrestricted abortion. Some congressmen defended their votes by pointing to CHA's endorsement which effectively became the Catholic blessing. She had that much power as she shook her fist at the bishops.

Sigh...I believe in the Catholic Church. I don't give a rat's #$%$ what the Catholic Health Organization or its head says...

Sounds like a "in your face" compromise to me.

Yes, you all want the government out of your business unless you're trying to force someone else to do something. The government shouldn't be involved in marriage or medical issues, period! If this were Jehovah's Witnesses trying to outlaw blood transfusions, you'd all have your shorts in a knot.

Is it a sin for a woman to have sex if she knows her husband has had a vasectomy?

The Church does not recognize divorce. Are Gingrich, Clarence Thomas, Joe Kennedy, Cuomo, et al Catholics?

I am so happy my insurance bill went up so the catholics won't have to pay.

The issue is not what provided by hospitals/schools. The issue is not who uses the provisions or why. The issue is.. NO.. business, church,institution or person should forced by law to buy anything.