Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Found in Yonkers

(100 posts)
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 01:37 PM Jan 2012

Marco Rubio jumps into birth control dispute

Amid growing rancor between the Catholic hierarchy and the White House, Republican rising star Sen. Marco Rubio is pushing a bill that takes a swipe at the Obama administration’s stance on expanding access to birth control.

The Florida senator, widely considered on the short list for the GOP vice presidential pick, introduced legislation Tuesday that would vastly expand the ability of religious or faith-based employers to opt out of a health reform law requirement that health plans cover all FDA-approved contraceptives without any co-pay.

The administration had offered a narrow exemption to religious organizations, which the U.S.Conference of Catholic Bishops said was unacceptable. They were not mollified when the administration gave other religious group, such as a religiously affiliated hospitals or charities, an extra year — until August 2013 — to comply with the requirement.

Rubio’s bill would allow individuals to take a conscience exemption and not offer the benefit to workers. The administration has defined access to birth control as a basic preventive health service that should be available.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/72209.html#ixzz1l3gMoyS5

40 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Marco Rubio jumps into birth control dispute (Original Post) Found in Yonkers Jan 2012 OP
here is a way out of this... WCGreen Jan 2012 #1
Bingo!! proud2BlibKansan Jan 2012 #11
The argument is that as employers, they don't want to pay for employee benefits pnwmom Jan 2012 #17
They don't get to discriminate based on religious beliefs. That's the law. ehrnst Jan 2012 #28
The law isn't so clear when there's a conflict between pnwmom Jan 2012 #32
It seems like most people in this thread feel that if employers don't provide Yupster Feb 2012 #37
I don't think people are misunderstanding at all leftynyc Feb 2012 #40
Your point is exactly right. CottonBear Jan 2012 #21
Nice to show the base but...... Swede Atlanta Jan 2012 #2
The Catholic bishops may oppose Obama on this, hedgehog Jan 2012 #3
While that's good. atreides1 Jan 2012 #6
and Catholic men HockeyMom Jan 2012 #13
There is something about xxqqqzme Jan 2012 #4
Rubio, like all Republicans titaniumsalute Jan 2012 #5
Employer shouldn't impose religious beliefs on employee. julian09 Jan 2012 #9
solution redonhead Jan 2012 #7
Welcome to DU . libinnyandia Jan 2012 #14
Welcome to DU, redonhead! CaliforniaPeggy Jan 2012 #15
redonhead deserves a Star! Found in Yonkers Feb 2012 #34
I argued that once with a Priest 50 years ago HockeyMom Jan 2012 #19
The administration should not be pandering to the Bishops - TBF Jan 2012 #8
I guess they want more abortions then. Quantess Jan 2012 #10
Yes - they want the threat of unplanned pregnancy to keep women ehrnst Jan 2012 #30
Men...I swear one of these days women are going to just lose that last nerve nolabear Jan 2012 #12
My Congressman Steve King says allowing birth control will lead to the end of civilization. libinnyandia Jan 2012 #16
He meant "white civilization". nt Guy Whitey Corngood Jan 2012 #18
LOL - women have been practicing birth control in one way or another ehrnst Jan 2012 #29
The Jehovah's Witnesses want to deny transfusions to their employees perdita9 Jan 2012 #20
Is the Catholic church still relevant ? russspeakeasy Jan 2012 #22
Down here in Texas it's growing tremendously Yupster Feb 2012 #36
This is why religion needs to be completely cut out of politics. ChadwickHenryWard Jan 2012 #23
As long as the WOMEN Iliyah Jan 2012 #24
When will the men of America stop insisting upon... MarkCharles Jan 2012 #25
Religion adds legitimacy to the subversion of women. Quantess Feb 2012 #33
typical conservative psycho babble lark Jan 2012 #26
Again with corporations and businesses being = "individual" human beings... ehrnst Jan 2012 #27
It's absolutely clear that the Free Exercise Clause protects corporations as well as individuals. Jim Lane Feb 2012 #35
The church's religious beliefs need to coincide with the law in most instances ehrnst Feb 2012 #38
Yes, in *most* instances Jim Lane Feb 2012 #39
Itis part of the Catholic Church's female abuse campaign that began in the early church. olegramps Jan 2012 #31

WCGreen

(45,558 posts)
1. here is a way out of this...
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 01:46 PM
Jan 2012

Don't use Birth Control....

Easy Solution. If you are against Birth control then don't take advantage of the benifit.

What part of a free society don't these people understand.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
17. The argument is that as employers, they don't want to pay for employee benefits
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 03:19 PM
Jan 2012

that their religion proscribes.

Their argument rests on freedom of religion, which is part of our free society. The dispute is how it applies in this situation.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
28. They don't get to discriminate based on religious beliefs. That's the law.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 05:15 PM
Jan 2012

Women are people, businesses are not.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
32. The law isn't so clear when there's a conflict between
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 09:02 PM
Jan 2012

freedom of religion and other civil rights.

There are exceptions related to Christian Scientists and Amish people, for example. (Court decisions ruled that Amish parents don't have to send their children to public school after the 8th grade -- which clearly discriminates against those children based on their parents' beliefs.)

Yupster

(14,308 posts)
37. It seems like most people in this thread feel that if employers don't provide
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 12:15 PM
Feb 2012

birth controll for free in their inurance package, then people can't get birth controll.

That's an awfully big leap to make.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
40. I don't think people are misunderstanding at all
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 03:55 PM
Feb 2012

The point is that birth control will not be covered by insurance and shit like viagra will.

CottonBear

(21,596 posts)
21. Your point is exactly right.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 03:42 PM
Jan 2012

However, the wingnuts don't want anyone to be able to use birth control. They are not simply satisfied with with abstaining from sex or having sex without birth control themselves. On the other hand, the wingnuts want to punish women and children for being poor by denying them assistance for healthcare, food, shelter and education.

 

Swede Atlanta

(3,596 posts)
2. Nice to show the base but......
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 01:47 PM
Jan 2012

This bill will go no where. The Democrats in the Senate will not even take this up and Obama would likely veto it. Obama is trying to be flexible by extending some exemptions but at the end of the day access to birth control needs to be available to all employees, not just the ones that aren't working for one associated with Bennie.

hedgehog

(36,286 posts)
3. The Catholic bishops may oppose Obama on this,
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 01:53 PM
Jan 2012

but 98% of Catholic women are apt to support him wholeheartedly.

I wonder which group has the most votes?

atreides1

(16,046 posts)
6. While that's good.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 02:08 PM
Jan 2012

The Catholic bishops along with the Catholic church could give two shits what Catholic women want! Which has been a standard for several hundred years now...

Maybe if all those rules breaking Catholics would actually stand up to the hierarchy of the church, it might be impressive...but I don't see that happening!

 

HockeyMom

(14,337 posts)
13. and Catholic men
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 03:05 PM
Jan 2012

How many Catholic husbands want to have, and support, a qiverfull of children? Will vasectomy be covered under this bill? They should be. If the man can't "spread his seed", the woman won't get pregnant.

xxqqqzme

(14,887 posts)
4. There is something about
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 01:57 PM
Jan 2012

rubio that just creeps me out. He always looks like he is plotting his next scam. Do not trust him at all.

titaniumsalute

(4,742 posts)
5. Rubio, like all Republicans
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 02:01 PM
Jan 2012

Love the fetus and hate the child. Some Jesus Christer business owner decides his employees shouldn't receive birth control as a health benefit...fuck that.

 

julian09

(1,435 posts)
9. Employer shouldn't impose religious beliefs on employee.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 02:20 PM
Jan 2012

Rubio is denying workers the right to make own decision. I thought they didn't want govt in peoples' lives.
No one is forcing anyone to do anything, they shouldn't force anyone not to do someyhing.
Stay out of other peoples lives and bedroom.

redonhead

(8 posts)
7. solution
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 02:08 PM
Jan 2012

men who don't want birth control, wives who don't want more kids, easy solution, practice complete abstinence...see how them boys like that..
Long time listener, new responder, bigtime worker for Obama.

 

HockeyMom

(14,337 posts)
19. I argued that once with a Priest 50 years ago
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 03:26 PM
Jan 2012

in Catholic school. If you cannot afford more children, have a life threatening medical condition, or just plain don't want more children, you should practice abstinence in marriage until menopause? For 20 years? He GLARED at me and wouldn't answer me a teenage girl. The Nuns actually LAUGHED when I said that. If you cannot debate a teenager as a Priest, you will never be able to debate ANYBODY.

TBF

(31,921 posts)
8. The administration should not be pandering to the Bishops -
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 02:14 PM
Jan 2012

birth control should be free to all. And should be highly encouraged for republicans. JMHO ...

nolabear

(41,915 posts)
12. Men...I swear one of these days women are going to just lose that last nerve
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 02:57 PM
Jan 2012

and things are going to change, Babies, things are going to change.

I KNOW where most of the country's communion wafers are made, and I know what saltpeter is for.

libinnyandia

(1,374 posts)
16. My Congressman Steve King says allowing birth control will lead to the end of civilization.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 03:17 PM
Jan 2012

A society that has him in Congress isn't much of a civilization.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
29. LOL - women have been practicing birth control in one way or another
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 05:16 PM
Jan 2012

for centuries.

He has no idea what he's talking about.

perdita9

(1,142 posts)
20. The Jehovah's Witnesses want to deny transfusions to their employees
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 03:35 PM
Jan 2012

Think the Republicans will support THAT too?

ChadwickHenryWard

(862 posts)
23. This is why religion needs to be completely cut out of politics.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 04:04 PM
Jan 2012

Access to birth control is one of the most important hallmarks of an advanced society. The religious beliefs of a few should be allowed to bar this necessity from American society.

I know that it has become a cliche to say that the only purpose of religion is to control people, but can anybody doubt that here? This narrow cabal of old men with a hysterical attitude toward sex thinks they can bully the rest of us back into the Dark Ages. This impulse and effort to control the private lives of others is appalling. The men of the Enlightenment believed that the priest and the king would suffer simultaneous deaths. We are free of the tyranny of kings, but the blight of the priesthood remains. How much longer?

Iliyah

(25,111 posts)
24. As long as the WOMEN
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 04:11 PM
Jan 2012

give 10% of their salary, the Bishops in most part will look the other way, ummmmmmmmm, kinda sorta like when sexual molestation occurs with the priests and young boys. All this BS is for show.

You know what, I'm totally in favor of the religious institutions paying their fair taxes, seriously, because these people are ALL IN MY PRIVATE business and telling me who to vote for!

 

MarkCharles

(2,261 posts)
25. When will the men of America stop insisting upon...
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 04:41 PM
Jan 2012

controlling what goes on in a woman's uterus?

The absolutely tyrannical nature of men's desires to tell all the women of the nation what they can and cannot have access to, it just makes no sense in the 21st century.

It's as if these men still think women are slaves to a man's desire and design, either that or property to be controlled like a pet.


But these men still do it, over and over and over again.

Quantess

(27,630 posts)
33. Religion adds legitimacy to the subversion of women.
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 07:44 AM
Feb 2012

They act like god wants it this way. Convenient!

lark

(23,003 posts)
26. typical conservative psycho babble
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 04:43 PM
Jan 2012

Let's stop a woman's ability to control her procreation then demonize her and throw her in jail when she gets pregnant, can't afford a baby, doesn't want a baby, or has health problems that make having a baby dangerous. Basically, all they want is to turn us into baby making machines so we pump out tons of workers who get no education (they also want to destroy public education) and will work cheap for the masters.

Totally disgusting.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
35. It's absolutely clear that the Free Exercise Clause protects corporations as well as individuals.
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 10:27 AM
Feb 2012

As a general principle, the government can't compel a church to act against its religious beliefs.

Of course, there's also the Establishment Clause. As a general principle, the government can't give a church a special privilege (disobeying a particular law) that's not available to nonreligious employers.

Each of these general principles is valid and important. The problem here is that the two principles come into conflict.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
38. The church's religious beliefs need to coincide with the law in most instances
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 01:12 PM
Feb 2012

They have the option of civil disobedience when they believe a law is immoral.

Polygamy is illegal, age of consent for marriage is also a legal matter, and churches must comply with that.

I think that in the case of a Conscience Clause - those are intended for individuals to refuse action, not a business entity.

The difference is important in that case.

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
39. Yes, in *most* instances
Wed Feb 1, 2012, 03:53 PM
Feb 2012

Religious objectors to war can't refuse to pay taxes that support the war machine. On the other hand, they can refuse to take up arms themselves, even when we have conscription. To some extent, the tax law infringes on individuals' free exercise of religion, and the Selective Service System's treatment of conscientious objectors gave special privileges to some religious people. The point is that, as between these two aspects of the separation of church and state (the two religion clauses of the First Amendment), neither is given automatic priority over the other. (A common legal term is that there's no bright-line test.)

I don't see any logical reason to distinguish here between individuals and entities like churches. For the government to compel a church, even as an entity, to act against its religious principles is regrettable and should be avoided, other things being equal.

Of course, other things never are equal. There's always some other valid interest involved, like the government's decision that employees should be covered for contraception.

olegramps

(8,200 posts)
31. Itis part of the Catholic Church's female abuse campaign that began in the early church.
Tue Jan 31, 2012, 08:00 PM
Jan 2012

Theologians dating from Augustine to Thomas Aquinas regarded women as defective creatures and therefore more easily preyed up on by the Satan. Their campaign resulted the witch burnings that lasted over three centuries. How many women perish? Some estimates go as high as several hundred thousand to over a million as the Protestants join in the carnage. This subject is not talked about sense both Catholics and Protestants were eager participants. If you want to explore just how revolting the situation was read the "Witch's Hammer" which became the manual for the detection and punishment of helpless beings that even included children. The present day bishops are just as screwed up as their medieval predecessors.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Marco Rubio jumps into bi...