I'm pretty tired of catholics; I used to be one

Let's decouple insurance from employment once and for all. Increase salaries, don't offer insurance to anyone. Give a public option to those who want one and let the marketplace fight over the rest.

As to the Catholic Church being forced to follow existing law for non-church employees? Sounds like a good idea to me!

1 Reply

@roger,

Me either, talk about a subject I skip past.

My mother, I remember, wanted catholic schools to be government supported, good taft republican that she was. When I was ten or a teen, I didn't get the nuances. But even in the late fifties/early sixties, that good hospital was a business run by business savvy nuns. I'm not knocking that hospital, that's where I went decades later for a useful biopsy; far as I know it is very well regarded to date.

0 Replies

@roger,

I'm trying to think of a "for profit" example of church endeavor. I can't think of anything off hand. I imagine their hospitals, shelters, universities, etc., are all not-for-profit.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

You're correct that employers don't have the right to determine what healthcare their employees may avail themselves of, but they do have a right to determine what healthcare they are willing to pay for...at least they should.

If I won't contribute to a health plan that pays for x-rays, my employees still have plenty of choices to support their own rights: They can quit and find a job with an employer who doesn't have a problem with x-rays. They can opt out of the company provided health insurance plan. They can pay for the x-rays themselves.

Employers aren't preventing people from obtaining health insurance through other means.

2 Replies

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

I hate seeing Obama climb down on this recent matter.
But past him, why are so many catholic women so nod-a-long?

Because hypocrisy is more convenient than taking a stand on principle and risking that people think you're a (gasp) feminist.

1 Reply

@JPB,

I have to think about that. My first instinct is 'rigg'.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

I'm inclined to say yes to that, but I think it is more complicated than hypocrisy.
Not that I know, I haven't been catholic since the early sixties when I went from fervent to what is this nonsense.
What if I stayed? There was a group of nuns in my city who put up a fight, see Immaculate Heart Nuns, or some link like that.

I left the church when I worked my way out of believing, which turned out not to be a matter of argument but a kind of popped balloon. But many others in the u.s. stayed, still believing and, I take, trying to represent themselves in conversation with or antagonism to the vatican.

I take it, but don't know personally, that there are many catholics with basic belief who aren't engaged with the vatican. And that women who use contraceptive pills and so on, are part of that.

I think there is a wacko disjuncture with bishops and the congregation.

1 Reply

I don't know that it's so much hypocracy or feminism.

Just a long stance of "who cares" about some issues for most catholics, i.e. birth control.

I mean, everyone knows no one pays any attention to it, so, whatever.

2 Replies

@chai2,

re who cares, I wonder about voting blocks. Those could be interesting.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Quote:

You're correct that employers don't have the right to determine what healthcare their employees may avail themselves of, but they do have a right to determine what healthcare they are willing to pay for...at least they should.

If I won't contribute to a health plan that pays for x-rays, my employees still have plenty of choices to support their own rights: They can quit and find a job with an employer who doesn't have a problem with x-rays. They can opt out of the company provided health insurance plan. They can pay for the x-rays themselves.

Employers aren't preventing people from obtaining health insurance through other means.

Is there any difference between what you are saying, and saying that employers shouldn't be forced to provide health insurance period?

I have already said I would prefer a single payer health care system which would avoid this whole problem. But the fact is that we have an employer based system where the majority of working Americans get insurance through their employer.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

But the fact is that we have an employer based system where the majority of working Americans get insurance through their employer.

the fact of the matter is that we have a healthcare delivery system which is humongously expensive and delivers a crappy product. So do we care how it is currently set up? This is not something that can be fixed with tinkering, we tried that with HMO's and one of Obama's top five blunders was thinking that he could do something useful by tinkering with health care from Washington. Healthcare does not get fixed until the American people wake up and realize that it is not possible to be successful as a nation unless we fix this son of a bitch, and then riot in the streets to make it happen.

0 Replies

@chai2,

chai2 wrote:

I don't know that it's so much hypocracy or feminism.

Just a long stance of "who cares" about some issues for most catholics, i.e. birth control.

I mean, everyone knows no one pays any attention to it, so, whatever.

In that case, I would argue that those people act hypocritically by staying in the Catholic church. Why belong to an organization whose goals they don't share, and whose values they don't care about or even pay attention to?

2 Replies

@JPB,

JPB wrote:

Let's decouple insurance from employment once and for all. Increase salaries, don't offer insurance to anyone. Give a public option to those who want one and let the marketplace fight over the rest.

As to the Catholic Church being forced to follow existing law for non-church employees? Sounds like a good idea to me!

While I'm for that, this is the short-road to Single Payer HC, as the Public Option would quickly put private insurance out of business.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

You're correct that employers don't have the right to determine what healthcare their employees may avail themselves of, but they do have a right to determine what healthcare they are willing to pay for...at least they should.

Why? It's none of their business, any more than it being their business what I choose to do with the salary they pay me. Health Insurance is just compensation at the end of the day. This silly idea that the employer should be able to control not only the level of compensation, but the way it's used, is an idiotic proposition.

Quote:

If I won't contribute to a health plan that pays for x-rays, my employees still have plenty of choices to support their own rights: They can quit and find a job with an employer who doesn't have a problem with x-rays. They can opt out of the company provided health insurance plan. They can pay for the x-rays themselves.

Employers aren't preventing people from obtaining health insurance through other means.

Good luck selling that line with the public Laughing

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Not the public option I envision/support. Basic preventative and acute care with a strong focus on hospice. If you want more extensive coverage than that, buy it.

1 Reply

@JPB,

JPB wrote:

Not the public option I envision/support. Basic preventative and acute care with a strong focus on hospice. If you want more extensive coverage than that, buy it.

The bottom line problem is not insurance, it is that the system is too expensive and inefficient. Rationing care will not solve the problem, and rationing care by ability to pay the kings ransom required to get good care will not be tolerated.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Well, I see your point from where I stand. But I also figure that a lot of parishioners belong to a kind of religious community - themselves as a group that may or may not go along with the church hierarchy, and that their disagreements aren't enough to make them say 'bye'. Also, and I'm more vague on this at this point, maybe there are a lot of catholics out there who don't go to services often but still self identify as catholics.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

chai2 wrote:
I don't know that it's so much hypocracy or feminism.

Just a long stance of "who cares" about some issues for most catholics, i.e. birth control.

I mean, everyone knows no one pays any attention to it, so, whatever.

In that case, I would argue that those people act hypocritically by staying in the Catholic church. Why belong to an organization whose goals they don't share, and whose values they don't care about or even pay attention to?

Probably more about apathy.

I was born a cat'lick, I'll die a cat'lick sort of thing.

Just easier if someone asks your religion to say catholic.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

I hate seeing Obama climb down on this recent matter.

You might want to prepare yourself for climb-down #2 if what's posted on the Bishops' website is any indication of their satisfaction with his recent compromise:

In part:

Quote:

These changes require careful moral analysis, and moreover, appear subject to some measure of change. But we note at the outset that the lack of clear protection for key stakeholders—for self-insured religious employers; for religious and secular for-profit employers; for secular non-profit employers; for religious insurers; and for individuals—is unacceptable and must be corrected. And in the case where the employee and insurer agree to add the objectionable coverage, that coverage is still provided as a part of the objecting employer's plan, financed in the same way as the rest of the coverage offered by the objecting employer. This, too, raises serious moral concerns.

Further information on their website makes it clear they'll continue to counsel their faithful (more letters read during Mass) to press for legislative change or, probably preferable in their opinion, complete rescission of the mandate.

They do point out that perhaps the changes announced by the president on Friday don't represent the whole picture, as some of the information they received was in writing and some was verbal. Maybe the administration will come back and say they never intended the mandate apply to religious employers that are self-insured, though (which could be sizeable considering the vast network of Catholic charities).

1 Reply

@Irishk,

I stopped breath holding a while ago. Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.

I'm not in touch with catholic friends and relatives* on all this, other stuff going on re our lives, but I wonder about at least an U.S. backlash to Bishop behavior on this and other subjects. Among the things I don't know, is there a relatively radical catholic paper these days? Or relatively rad catholic type blog?

* re relatives, we've reached detente re politics and religion, for now. If we ever live near each other again, there'll be some knuckle dragging on both sides before the family dinner.

1 Reply

I'm pretty tired of catholics; I used to be one

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know