Skip to main content

I Choose No Contraception, so Why am I Paying For It? This is Really a Mandate Against Life Comments

Caring for a pregnant woman is expensive.  Caring for children is even more expensive.  Preventing their existence is cheap.  Destroying them in the womb is a money-saving act in the long run. This kind of thinking is what this mandate is really all about. This kind of thinking will kill us. Continue Reading

1 - 10 of 54 Comments

  1. Vance
    2 years ago

    Rob, You are right. Medicare becomes the primary coverage and the private policy becomes the secondary coverage. The problem with this is that the government dictates how much the doctor or hospital will receive in payment. The government agrees to pay 35% of the medical claim. THEN the government ONLY PAYS 80% of the 35%. The secondary picks up the remaining 20% of the 35% sum. The doctors and or hospital gets stiffed for 65% of their costs. What the Ryan plan does is open the medical insurance up across state lines where we can have competitive Health Insurance the same as we have competitive car insurance. We all see auto insurance ads on TV but we do not see Health Insurance ads. The Marxist Democrats are acutely aware of this and this is why they have blocked competitive health Insurance. The Ryan plan also gives everyone the Freedom they don't have which is to opt out or have Medicare be the secondary to a Private Primary Policy. I have a friend who is not yet 65. He is a serious physical basket case and pays a hefty health premium BUT this guy is getting a grade A health service and lucky for him because he needs it in his case. He would be 'Out-of-Luck' if he was in Medicare. ANOTHER BIG PROBLEM- the government has "Mandated" that every medical clinic and hospital ER accept every ILLEGAL ALIEN who walks in the door. The government is not reimbursing the med clinics and hospital ER's so they are getting stiffed for the cost. Our Health System problems are GOVERNMENT not the doctors or hospitals.

  2. JeanCatherine
    2 years ago

    Excellent Emma.

  3. Bulbajer
    2 years ago

    Vance, Peace may have been referring to the Iraq War, which had nothing to do with Islamism.

  4. MaryA
    2 years ago

    Hmong people slaughtering pigs on a balcony is problematic. Obviously the LAPD didn't want to push the issue but you should atleast be zoned for a church. And, you should have to comply with health ordinances. You are pushing the envelop. The government wants to define what "Catholic" (as in hospitals, homeless shelters, colleges) means. Also, consider that while it is expensive to treat a pregnant mother, down the road a woman who aborts suffers a higher rate of breast cancer (not cheap to treat) or a woman on birth control may also suffer stroke, thrombosis, and higher rates of heart disease--also expensive to treat not to mention dibilitating. As a Catholic I applaude the Church for not wanting to conscience things which down the road might prove to be harmful to the health of women. There are enough studies out there that show the contraindications. Recently I read that airlines, for instance, are recommending elastic hose for people on long flights who among a list of things are on--get this--birth control. Who is going to argue with an airline that may be over the ocean when a woman, and a very young one at that, has an embolism or stroke. They obviously have heard something that the rest of us are not privy to.

  5. renton
    2 years ago

    I choose not to have war in afganistan why do I have to pay for it.

  6. Jerome
    2 years ago

    As Catholics, we may have our own points of view, but we must follow the Church's teaching. We can not choose to defend what we like and not defend what "everybody does anyway". That's why it's not about contraception, it's about freedom of religion. For this reason, even though I may be supporting the wars in the Middle East, it is our duty to strongly demand, and have priests demand in church, that all our federal taxes do not go to the Dept of Defense, as the Church has not declared those wars to be just. It's not about defense, it's about freedom of religion. Not doing so would be cherry picking our issues and we would be Catholics-in name-only.
    Also, it is our duty and the duty of the parishes to demand strongly that our state taxes do not go to states that have a death penalty. Even if we may be in favor of the death penalty, the Church is not, and we can not cherry pick our issues. It's not about justice, it's about freedom of religion. Not doing so would make us Catholic-in-name-only.
    Priests in all parishes must, during Mass if needed, insist and even demand that all of us refuse to support any policy, state or federal, that restrict access of services to immigrants, legal or not. It is not about immigration laws, it is about religious freedom. Not doing so would be cherry-picking our issues and we would be Catholics-in-name-0nly.

  7. j
    2 years ago

    Observation: It seems to me that we would not be in this dire predicament if we had had some congressmen and women voting against the health care bill in 2010. Standing in the breach was what we called for when this bill was being pushed on us then. As we all remember, most Americans were against passage of the bill. Our calls and petitions to congress were all but ignored. The so-called pro-life democrats led by the congressman from Michigan were prepared to kill the bill unless they would get assurances from the administration re. abortion. As we all remember, they thought they had those assurances, so they relented in their opposition. I thought then, and still think so today that they caved to the pressure. Now this is where we are. Would it be too much to ask for some of these people to step forward and justify their votes? Would they vote differently today than then? This, it seems to me,is vitally important in light of the arrogance this administration has shown with the HHS ruling. The question we should all be asking is 'what's next?' I think we need a conversation amongst ourselves, the liberal Catholics and the conservatives. I am not talking about the Pelosis, Bidens, or Sebelliuses. Their position is quite clear. Rather, I am referring to the rank and file membership of congress, retired or still active. Their speaking up would be one good place to start the conversation.

  8. Emma
    2 years ago

    All of the debate over religious freedom brought back to my mind something from my not too distant childhood. I lived for a time in a low income housing "community" in LA County. In that complex there were a few Hmong Families. One day when a bunch of us were outside in the playground, we heard this horrible screaming, something not human. Of course, being children, we ran to see what was going on, and lo and behold, there on one of the apartment balconies was a group of Hmong people. They were holding a little piglet up in the air and it was squealing and kicking. Just as a few of us said, "Oh, how cute! They slit its throat!" It was the first time many of us had ever seen anything killed. So heartbreaking. Some adult having witnessed this, called the police. At first, they were going to arrest them, but then, when it was discovered that this was some part of their religious ceremonies, the police left. The complex managers attempted to file a restraining order to stop them from repeating this. It was denied. Several families in the complex also sought some sort of injunction. It was denied. Animal Rights groups also attempted to put a stop to it. Unsuccessful. Why???? Because their right to slaughter animals on the balcony of their apartment was protected by their Constitutional right to the free exercise of their religion. Of course, the Hmongs are a minority. I'm not even aware of what their religion is. I only know that it involves the slaughter of little piglets and that whether you like it or not, they are free to do so in front of you and your children. They are protected under the Constitution. Apparently, the Constitution only protects your right to freely live by your faith, if it involves killing. Then again, with rights come responsibilities. It is every American's responsibility to protect the free practice of faith for all religions. Even if it's Christians. Even if it's Catholic. Even if it's Hmong.

  9. Linda
    2 years ago

    What a great article. Brava, Jennifer, brava!!

  10. Rob
    2 years ago

    Here we go again with "dear leader." What you fail to acknowledge vance is that right now insurance companies entire rate structure is set on the premise that when you become medicare eligible that becomes your primary insurance. I think you seem to be under some impression that the insurance companies are lined up to bear the brunt of the costs that gets shifted to you under the Ryan plan. You think your rates are high now? Wait until insurance companies are having to pick up the slack the government is not. Whether you want to admit it or not, those of us with private insurance have been subsidized to the extent that the government picks up the poor, sick and elderly. As far as doctor's going broke, this has more to do with bad practice management than it does medicare reimbursements. Not to mention that we have one of the most inefficient health care systems in the world. It's a convulted network of small businesses, the inefficiencies of which, drive up costs. We used to own a company that turned bad practices around and 90% of the time the culprit was a poorly run business or a doctor who thought he could do it all. But I will believe that our country is serious when I hear baby boomers demanding that their benefits be cut because they don't want to be a part of the evil socialism anymore......

Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment

Newsletter Sign Up

Daily Readings

Reading 1, Jonah 3:1-5, 10
The word of Yahweh was addressed to Jonah a second time. 'Up!' ... Read More

Psalm, Psalms 25:4-5, 6-7, 8-9
DIRECT me in your ways, Yahweh, and teach me your paths. ... Read More

Gospel, Mark 1:14-20
After John had been arrested, Jesus went into Galilee. There he ... Read More

Reading 2, First Corinthians 7:29-31
What I mean, brothers, is that the time has become limited, and ... Read More

Saint of the Day

January 25 Saint of the Day

St. Peter Thomas
January 25: Carmelite Latinpatriarch and papal legate. Peter was born ... Read More