Greetings--I'm the "George" of these "George Jones Debates". Thanks to my old pal for giving me the opportunity to once again correct his misguided thinking. I think I stand a pretty good chance, too. I converted "Jones" from a "Reagan-Fanatic" into a supporter of Bill Clinton in 1992. That being said...
"Jones" has asked me to defend the Obama Administration's recent determination that birth control be covered by Health Care Providers, employers, and (by extension) those who are employed by religious organizations. He suggests that it is immoral for people to be forced to "purchase" goods and services which violate their moral codes or their personal conscience. The simple fact is that government can and does require us to do certain things that we may not individually wish to do in order to promote the greater good of society as a whole.
Personally, I would love to have the opportunity to drive my car as fast as I wished through a "school zone". If I don't want to wear a seatbelt, it should be my right. Why does the government of my state mandate that I wear a motorcycle helment? Why am I required to pay for and maintain homeowner's insurance--or car insurance for that matter? Why should I pay income taxes? The answer is simple. It is in the best interest of the entire society if I obey traffic laws, maintain insurance, and pay my taxes.
Under the Affordable Care Act, birth control is viewed as "preventative medical care". This follows the same logic as why I'm required to carry car insurance. I am required to carry insurance for one simple reason. It's not to protect MY assets--it's to protect the assets of SOMEONE ELSE. If I cause an accident that "totals" an expensive luxury car, I will never be able to pay for the damages. However, since I carry insurance, those who have had their property damaged due to my negligence, are compensated for their loss. This decision by the Obama administration is similar. Women of all faiths have the right to be protected from "accidents".
If religious organizations had won their argument with the Obama Administration, as many as 2 million women (according to US Gov't) would have been denied equal access to birth control. That is simply not fair. The laws of this nation should apply equally to all of us. No one should be able to exempt themselves from governmental regulations. It's in the best interest of us all.
Related Post - George Jones Debate, Part 1 - Religious employers must cover birth control
16 comments:
George - Let's use our last names when addressing each other, especially in the comments. Otherwise this will get very confusing for other folks.
I have plenty to write in response to your thoughts, but first allow me to ask you a question. Did you read at least the Fournier article and listen to the entire Smith audio? I would ask that you do that before we proceed.
I have, and will continue to refer to you as "Jones"--I like that a lot. I read the article, but didn't have time to listen to the audio. I would prefer if we keep it simple--no need to do CX-Policy Debate-style case building...that's no fun. I want to keep it light and breezy. George.
1. My family were Reagan Democrats. You converted no one to the Clintons. I abandoned Clinton after he adopted Don't Ask, Don't Tell... Wasn't that his first day in office my friend?
2. Contraception is an immoral act, an evil act. The pill, and most contraceptives, are abortifacients. Murder, the direct and intentional killing of an innocent person, should never be permitted in society. Murder does not serve the common good.
3. Babies are not "accidents." They are totally defenseless human beings who deserve protection under the law. Divine and Natural Law demand it. Positive (Human) Law should be in unison with both Divine and Natural Law. If Positive (Human) Law contradict Divine and Natural Law it must be resisted and changed.
4. How about being "fair" and just to human persons in the womb?
5. An exemption for religious organizations and individuals is the right thing to do according to our Constitution. We are a Republic, not a tyranny.
6. At least the Clintons understood micro-politics. You must build a coalition of various groups (gender, racial, ethnic, ideological, etc.) to win elections. To alienate the single largest religious denomination in the country is just "stupid politics." It will doom his re-election to total and complete failure. To drive whatever Catholics left in the Democratic Party into the Republican Party will ensure the Democratic Party remains a minority party for decades. This is a big, big deal for Catholics.
http://ncronline.org/blogs/distinctly-catholic/jaccuse
It's a good thing that such views as outlined above (which are not only moronic, but evil) are posted on a blog entitled "la nouvelle theologie" and not on a website in which the unsuspecting might actually presume to contain faithful, Catholic beliefs.
Sebelius: ‘We are in a war’
President Obama Lost My Vote
Why the HHS Ruling Will Become a Litmus Test for Pro-Obama Catholics
About Those Conscience Protections
Obama’s unnecessary war
On the Square - A Time for Catholic Action and Catholic Voices by Archbishop José H. Gomez
ZENIT - Whose Conscience? Which Religion? The Enemy Is Partially Us ~ Ruling on Health Care Needs to Be Judged in Light of Truth
We Are All Abortionists Now
Free Birth Control vs. Freedom of Religion
NYT - Government and Its Rivals by ROSS DOUTHAT
Declaring (spiritual) war on the Obama administration
‘We Will Not Comply’: Catholic Leaders Distribute Letter Slamming Obama Admin Contraceptive Mandate
Catholic Church Rejects Surrender Terms from Obama
Politico - President Obama's birth-control gamble
Post a Comment