Skip to main content

Family Planning and the Bishops

     I realize that the matter of Obama and the Catholic Bishops has been overworked lately, but I can't help weighing in with some thoughts on the subject.
     In the first place, I can see both sides of the argument: freedom of religion vs. insurance-paid family planning.
     But some columnists have been throwing around assumptions that appear to me to be a misuse of the English language. Recently I have read several columns in which the government, President Obama in particular, was accused of requiring the church to go against its “conscience.”
     I do not believe that the Catholic Church or a corporation or a high school class or any other organized set of people can have a conscience, Organizations are groups of human beings; each member of the group has a unique conscience. There may be an average of individual consciences of the members, but such an average is as different from a true conscience as an average bird is from an ostrich. Calling an organization's teachings, rules, bylaws, etc. a conscience is like calling the rules of grammar creative writing.
     A fundamental principle of Catholic morality is that you must follow your conscience, however, a well-formed conscience will never contradict the objective(?) moral law, as taught by Christ and his Church. In other words, if one's conscience does not agree with the rules of the Church, it is not a “well-formed” conscience. It reminds me of the Sunday School teacher who stated, “Today we are going to have an open, honest discussion of the world's religions, and discover that Christianity is the best.”
     Recent polls suggest that a majority of Catholic women do not have a “well-formed” conscience with regard to birth control, and I believe that is what has always had the hierarchy so gravely concerned. If an individual has to depend upon an organization's oversight to see that his or her conscience is being followed, then that conscience is useless. Shades of 1984; the church is doing Big Brother's work.
     If each individual in the flock believed in following the rules, the Bishops should have no hesitation in allowing their employees to choose for themselves whether or not they want their health insurance to cover family planning. Possibly allowing each employee to opt in or out of the requirement would be a reasonable compromise, reasonable, that is, for everyone but the Bishops.
     Much has also been made of the requirement that uninsured individuals must purchase health insurance or face a fine. There is nothing new about this; for example, drivers are required to purchase liability insurance or else provide proof of financial responsibility. In order to protect innocent accident victims from liability, the insurance must contain certain minimum provisions as specified by law.
     The healthcare insurance requirement does not sound much different from the accident insurance requirement. Substitute “the public” for “innocent accident victims,” and there is no difference.
     But in the real world, I fully expect the Supreme Court to declare the insurance requirement of the Healthcare Act to be unconstitutional.
******
     My books, “There Are Only Seven Jokes” and “The Spirit Runs Through It” are available in paperback, or at the Kindle Store.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

There Are Only Seven Jokes - Introduction

      The statement “There are only seven jokes – all the rest are variations,” has been around for a long time, but no one ever seems to know what the original seven are. I think I have found the solution to the mystery.       The answer is to be found in an article published in the New York Times on May 2, 1909. Entitled “New Jokes? There Are No New Jokes, There Is Only One Joke,” it goes on to say that all jokes are a distortion, and lists seven categories of distortion. Supposedly every joke will fit into one of the categories. I believe that repetition changed the seven categories into the seven jokes.       Each of my next seven blogs will be devoted to exploring one of the categories. In addition, I shall attempt to give an example or two of jokes which I think fit the category.       You must realize that this article appeared over one hundred years ago, so most of the jokes appearing therein are so out-of-date that modern readers wouldn’t even understand them. For example,

By Today’s Standards Many of my Teachers Would be in Jail

I started school in a two-room building: grades 1 to 4 in one room; grades 5 to 8 in the other. One teacher in each room taught all four grades. I don’t remember first grade very well – the teacher left at the end of the year. I am pretty sure it was not my fault. Now keep in mind that reading the Bible every morning was the standard for all grades at that time. But my teacher in grades two to four went a little above and beyond the normal practice. As a member of a “plain” sect, she considered it her duty to lead the little heathens to Christianity. She offered a free Bible to all students who managed to memorize 20 verses. I memorized my verses – “Jesus saves” was my favorite because it was the shortest – and got my Bible with my twenty underlined in red. That would be illegal today (not the underlining), and rightly so. Teachers may not teach religion, although contrary to what many folks seem to think, students may bring their Bibles to school, read them, and pray their
The National Anthem I have a somewhat minor pet peeve. I say minor because in the grand scheme of things neither I nor society will do anything substantive about it, so my best bet is probably to suck it up and move on. Perhaps after writing about it I can lay it to rest. It came up recently while I was working out at our Wellness Center. A program on television was playing America The Beautiful , and I remarked to a lady I have known for 40 years that I thought that should be the National Anthem instead of The Star Spangled Banner. She replied, rather huffily, I thought, “Some people think God Bless America should be the national anthem.” At that point I decided, wisely, I think, to back off before an argument sprang up. Now I realize that The Star Spangled Banner is a very nice, patriotic song, but an anthem it is not. According to Wikipedia, “ An anthem is a  musical composition  of celebration, usually used as a symbol for a distinct group, particularly the  nationa