Related: Jews Tell Catholics How to Read Bible
Not my bible!!!!
"In the Boston area, more than 80 percent of Catholics don’t even attend church regularly.
Oh, so they are the good kind; they don't bother with it.
Is that a surprise given the boom-boom the priest is up to in the rectory?
--more--"
Related: Grocer gives $20m for Catholic education
Not all Catholics are bad.
They don't put up much of a fight, though:
"Catholic opposition to health bill fades; Demands easing for abortion curbs" by Susan Milligan, Globe Staff | March 18, 2010
WASHINGTON — Roman Catholic opposition to the health care overhaul package is crumbling, with some church officials and lawmakers concluding that their long-sought goal of health care overhaul trumps the desire to adopt the severest restrictions on abortion funding.
It's called selling out for a s*** bill.
I know the liberals are all like, better pass it, it's better than nothing, and besides, Obama needs a win(?).
What a rationale, huh?
Yeah, we better eat this turd or go hungry.
Either way you are going to be sick, Americans.
And the health tax that made you ill is going to save you, huh?
A coalition of 59,000 nuns released a letter yesterday calling on Congress to approve the overhaul, defying the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, which opposes the measure. The Catholic Health Association, which represents 1,200 Catholic hospitals, has endorsed the package, as have Catholics United and Catholic groups promoting social justice.
I'm glad I rarely go to Mass.
That split mirrors a division among some antiabortion US representatives. In preparing to cast perhaps one of the most important votes on a domestic issue in their careers, they are wrestling with questions that strike at the core of their beliefs and that threaten to embolden voters in November....
Yes, energized voters are emboldened (like a terrorist?) and are a threat, readers, did you catch that subtle elitist bias the reporter has internalized?
The political fissure among prominent Catholics has buoyed the hopes of Democratic leaders that they will be able to enlist enough votes to approve a health care bill this weekend....
Yeah, they call threats and extortion "rounding up" votes.
Once again we get a distorted view of the world through the prism of the Zionist newspaper.
House leaders say they had little choice but to accept the Senate-approved language on abortion because of congressional budget rules.
Just as they will have LITTLE CHOICE to accept the ENTIRE BILL after the Seante STIFFS 'EM on the CHANGES we are promised!
Related: Obama's Final House Heave For Health Tax
Democrats are trying to pass the package through a procedure known as budget reconciliation. The House would have to first pass the Senate version of the bill, then both chambers would approve fixes to it, attached to a budget bill that cannot be filibustered. However, only budget-related items can be part of the reconciliation bill, so the Senate abortion language could not be changed, senior staffers explained....
And yet the spineless s***s are going to vote for it anyway.
And it is not the issue of abortion for me; it is STOPPING this UNCONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE to PURCHASE OVERPRICED CRAP CARE by ANY MEANS NECESSARY!
Related: States Seek to Scuttle ObamaCare
That's one way.
The conference of bishops have been less assertive recently in their lobbying effort on Capitol Hill, several lawmakers said, a dramatic change from late last year, when they were helping to write the abortion language in the House bill.
Yeah, the SPECIAL INTERESTS write all the legislation in AmeriKa, didn't you know that?
Why do you think we are getting this s*** "reform" bill?
Representative Bart Stupak, Democrat of Michigan, maintains that he has about a dozen antiabortion lawmakers ready to vote against the bill in its current form. He won’t identify the members.
He'll change his mind.
Related: Massachusetts Senate Vote Irrelevant
Yeah, Pelosi is putting on the pressure. They'll switch.
President Obama heard from two Roman Catholic health care representatives Tuesday at the White House, Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Health Association, and Robert Stanek, chief executive of Catholic Healthcare East. Their inclusion at a small meeting with hospital officials reflects the White House effort to reach out to Catholics in its health lobbying effort....
Yeah, now he reaches out to them.
Never reached out to the single-payer folks at all.
--more--"Related:
"Today’s Senate bill - supported by Obama - resembles a plan drafted by a moderate Republican"
Yeah, go vote for that, DemocraPs.
My confession, readers?
See: My Abortion Evolution
Yeah, I'm not happy about it, but....
It is a NON-ISSUE anyway -- which is why the paper is giving it so much print.
"Few employers choose abortion coverage in health insurance plans; Customers may not know if policy covers procedure" by Peter Slevin, Washington Post | March 15, 2010
CHICAGO — In North Dakota, where insurers can cover abortions if customers pay a separate premium, the state’s largest provider says it sells no abortion policies because no one has asked to buy one.
Amid a high-stakes debate over abortion that could determine the fate of President Obama’s health care initiative, North Dakota’s law offers a test because it is much like the language favored by antiabortion lawmakers on Capitol Hill, notably Representative Bart Stupak, Democrat of Michigan.
“There’s not a lot to tell. We have no member who elected to have abortion riders,’’ said Denise Kolpack, vice president of Blue Cross-Blue Shield of North Dakota, which covers about 80 percent of the North Dakota market. “We would be legally bound to provide an offering, but we have no groups that have requested it.’’
Similar policies are in place in Kentucky, Missouri, Idaho, and Oklahoma.
“It is rare that we hear in the market that an employer would request a rider for this coverage,’’ said
Then WHAT is all the hubbub about?
In congressional discussions about health care reform, the debate over how abortion would be treated has been fractious, particularly among Democrats. Stupak and others threaten to oppose a Senate bill that they say falls short of maintaining the three-decade-old ban on federal funding for abortion.
Stupak’s amendment to the House bill, which passed 240 to 194 in November with 64 Democrats voting yes, would prohibit insurers from including abortion coverage for anyone who receives a federal subsidy. Much like laws in North Dakota and the four other states, however, insurers could offer coverage if customers buy a separate rider.
In the Senate, language drafted by Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, would allow companies to offer abortion coverage, without a rider, in policies sold on new insurance exchanges. But customers would need to send a separate check for the portion that covers abortion, perhaps $1 a month. Individual states could also bar from their exchanges any policies covering abortion.
In the five states where abortion coverage is prohibited except with a rider, it is unclear how customers who purchase group insurance, typically for their employees, learn about the abortion coverage option.
“I’m not sure if an employer would know that or not,’’ Felts said of customers in Kentucky, when asked whether Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield advertises its policies. He said if a customer requested abortion coverage, the company would offer it “in compliance’’ with state law.
“There’s an information gap, clearly,’’ said Elizabeth Nash, a researcher at the Guttmacher Institute, which supports abortion rights. “A lot of people don’t know if their health plan covers abortion because nobody wants to be in that situation.’’
Since 1983, Missouri law has required an extra premium for coverage of any abortion that is not “spontaneous,’’ meaning a miscarriage, or is not necessary to prevent the woman’s death.
“We do not know how many of our clients take the rider,’’ Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield spokesman Deb Wiethop said. “It is rare, but clients do ask for it.’’
In Congress, antiabortion forces contend that the Senate approach contains loopholes and unclear language that would allow federal money to support abortion coverage. A vote for the Senate bill would be a “career-defining pro-abortion vote,’’ the National Right to Life Committee said this month.
The House language, by comparison, “keeps the federal government out of the abortion business,’’ said Richard Doerflinger, associate policy director at the US Conference of Catholic Bishops.You guys just caved.
--more--"
