If your Catholic Employer can deny you contraception insurance...

[McCamy Taylor]

Last edited Thu Feb 9, 2012, 10:59 PM - Edit history (1)

...then your Jehovah's Witness employer can demand that your health insurance exclude blood transfusions.

The employer who belongs to the Church of Scientology can strip your insurance of mental health coverage.

Your Jewish employer can deny porcine (pig) heart valve replacements.

Your Muslim employer can say "no" to treatment for alcohol abuse on the grounds that alcoholism is a sin and not a health problem.

And your Christian Scientists employer can use this as an excuse to deny you any health care coverage at all.


Further...

....since health insurance is something that we all pay for ourselves (i.e. it is deducted from our wages), if your Catholic Employer can tell that you can not spend your money to buy health insurance that covers birth control, he can also demand that you not spend any portion of your salary for condoms.

Your Jewish employer can insist that the wages he pays not go towards the purchase of bacon.

Ditto for your Muslim employer, and you can't buy any beer, either!

Your Christian Scientist employer can put a tag on you with an alarm that goes off if you get within 100 feet of a CVS Pharmacy.


And since it would be a violation of religious conscience to give money to someone who is going to tithe it to the wrong Church, Synagogue or Mosque, your employer can demand that you adopt his religion. If you refuse, he can fire you immediately, and he will not have to pay unemployment, since that would be giving money to a cause that is not in keeping with his faith.

If you can see what is wrong with the last ten scenarios, then you should be able to see what is wrong with the first.

[LynnTTT]

1. and

your Seventh day Adventist employer can deny coverage for lung cancer if he discovers you were a "secret smoker'

and maybe any "religious" employer will deny pregnancy coverage for an unmarried mother.

[Curmudgeoness]

2. You make a very good point.

This could snowball to the point that no one is covered for anything.

What I wonder though---can Catholics get a prescription for birth control for menstral problems? I remember that is what we all did back before birth control was covered by any health policies.

[Bigmack]

15. The insurance companies would love it... no coverage for anything. Heaven for them. nt

[pipi_k]

34. Birth control for menstrual problems...

Yep!

This is what happened to me back in the mid 70s after my third child was born.

I kept bleeding and bleeding...every day for four months straight.

It was hormonal problems...was put on birth control pills, which took care of the problem. I didn't take them for contraception...I took them to straighten out my hormonal problem.

Sometimes it's not even about contraception. After giving birth the third time, I was never able to have another child, even when I got off the pills after two years. That's a long time, from age 24 to menopause 30 years later.

[Curmudgeoness]

39. I also did the birth control for problems,

even though I didn't have any problems. Back in the 70's, there was no coverage for the pill as birth control, but it was covered if it was to remedy problems. All the ob/gyn doctors knew it, and they would just prescribe them for some minor issues that were "medically necessary". I bet that the Catholic institutions have lots of women with problems now---since it is not covered for them YET.

Where there is a will, there is a way.

[Kber]

52. After suffering for years, I found BC pills were the only thing to control my migraines

However, I was actually taking them to avoid getting knocked up. Being headache free was a nice bonus, tho!

[kag]

50. I think the church will look the other way if you claim...

that you're on the pill for "other problems," but the fact of the matter is that some huge percentage (I've heard the statistic before but don't have it under my fingertips right now) of Catholic women take birth control pills. My mom did, and as far as I remember (she died 25 yrs ago) she never made any bones about the fact that she used them FOR birth control. She had already had four kids and one still birth, and that was plenty.

[Curmudgeoness]

51. LOL, of course they take them.

And for birth control. If not, do you have any idea how huge the families would be today? And since they are not, there is only one reason for it......birth control. The patriarchs in the Catholic church keep their heads in the sand over this.

[WCGreen]

3. Absolutely.

[annabanana]

4. kicked, rec'd, tweeted, facepaged and emalied to Rachel!!

GOTS to get this info OUT there!!

[riderinthestorm]

5. Yes, yes, yes and yes. K&R. nt

[MountainLaurel]

6. I've been screaming this all week

I grew up in a church (Baptist) that believed mental illness really didn't exist, that it was a sign of secular society's selfishness. Not surprisingly, they also believed AIDS was sent from god to rid the world of gays.

Can I steal this -- you put it mo' better than I could.

[yankeepants]

7. Thank you. Nice work.

I will print this out and have it available for any water cooler debate that should arise.

[fascisthunter]

8. This was the First Thing I Thought Of

[dynasaw]

9. Have to Correct You About Seventh Day Adventists

Unlike other fun die denominations the SDAs are pro science and medicine. They have hospitals, medical schools (some very good ones) and are into research involving stem cells. They would not be the ones to stop you getting transfusions. Remember back when the SDA surgeons were the ones who did heart transplants including the one with the baboon heart.

[McCamy Taylor]

12. Corrected the journal to Jehovah's Witness. Thanks.

[provis99]

49. Seventh Day Adventists don't believe in mental illness.

Mental illness is a result of sin and character weakness. Straight from my Seventh Day Adventist uncle, who is a psychiatric doctor in a hospital; how would you like that lunatic telling you how to deal with bipolar disorder, the way he does with me?

They are also mostly opposed to medicine when they think nutrition and praying and reading the Bible will suffice. Yeah, good way to deal with congestive heart failure there...

[EFerrari]

10. Well done!

[unblock]

11. to pick a nit, jews have no real problem with pigs parts for medical purposes.

sure, there's every brand of bizzarro in all walks of life, but as a religion, judaism holds that health comes first, particularly when it comes to matters of life and death.

insulin from pigs is fine, as are heart valves from pigs.

rabbis prefer the synthetic alternatives only because they don't have to answer as many phone calls.

[unblock]

13. remember you're dealing with people who think slavery was just a "way of life".

they are recasting freedom as something that belongs to businesses and companies at the expense of workers and customers.

in their context, slavery is nothing but the logical extention of employer "freedom" -- freedom to hire the people they want, freedom to control their hours, freedom to control their private lives, freedom to "motivate" then however the please, etc.


it's not enough for us to win on the merits of birth control.
we need to win back the frame -- freedom is for employees, freedom is for customers, freedom is for the people.

"freedom" for corporations to control the lives of others is a bogus argument.

[MuseRider]

14. Excellent!

Thank you for laying out so well.

[ProSense]

16. Evidently,

only the Catholic Church and RW fundies can scream loud to interfere in other people's health care choices.

[PassingFair]

30. Surging Santorum is Catholic. He has used this "controversy" to his advantage.

http://www.catholicvote.org/discuss/index.php?p=20505

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-culture-war-20120209,0,7084828.story


He stole lil' Newty's thunder.

[mrmpa]

17. Please, Please send this post to your local newspaper's letters to the editor eom

[annabanana]

27. +1.. get this OUT there!

[spanone]

18. k&r...

[annabanana]

19. Morning kick This needs extra exposure. . . .n/t

[Shankapotomus]

20. You know what? I think you're on to something here

I think atheist and progressives who employ non atheists and progressives should maybe start exploring taking away money for procedures and activities they deem offensive from their employees.

They want to play it that way, huh? Okay, let's play it that way.

[malaise]

21. Excellent post

Get religion out of people's lives - I've had enough of these theocratic zealots!

[fasttense]

22. As an agnostic employer I would do the tag thing that would go off

if my slave, I mean employee, got within 100 feet of a church.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

23. i guess my concern is this...

my company doesn't have to provide health insurance AT ALL...no company does unless it is part of an agreement that it has with the employees. and, my company definitely chooses what coverages to provide by the insurance they carry. different drugs have different co-pays if they are paid for at all. only certain mental health coverage is provided (and is covered at such a limited amount that it might as well be uncovered).

what's to stop these orgs from saying, "Yes, we cover that, but we only pay after your deductible is met and the co-pay is $xx.xx (which they could legitimately make as much as the drug costs)."

annoying all around...

sP

[rgbecker]

24. I think those days are coming to an end.

As the afforable health care act comes into force, insurance policies will have to meet minimum requirements of coverage. In fact that is the issue now with the policies that need to include the contraception coverage. This business of employers colluding with insurers to give only minimal coverage is coming to a close thanks to Obama staying on the case and getting this health care through, even though the pundits complain he should have focused on jobs.

[riderinthestorm]

36. I believe most (all?) companies will stop offering insurance at all in 2014 and beyond

The penalty is $2000 per employee, it costs most employers anywhere from $8 - 10,000 to insure their employees. I believe we'll see virtually all companies evaluating that cost and deciding to drop it, especially since it will be mandatory for everyone to buy it if their company doesn't offer it (and insurance companies will be mandated to insure everyone). There won't be any compelling reason for them to continue to offer it. They'll even be able to eliminate those jobs in HR that only exist to administer that damn insurance coverage....

[kelly1mm]

40. That is what I am seeing. I am on the Board of Directors

of two not for profits with a total of about 300 employees. Our cost per employee for health insurance is over $7200 per year. Both boards have voted to end health care coverage as of 2014.

[SoCalDem]

47. Elimination of employer-sponsored health insurance is the ONLY way we'll ever get nat'l healthcare

Once the briefcase-brigade LOSES their healthcare, there will be sufficient uproar to finally go to what the rest of the civilized world already has..and HAS had for decades.

As long as the "middles & uppers" have EZ-Access to company-provided health coverage (and their incomes can stay ahead of the increases), we will always have a seriously fractured (and very unequal) non-system.

Boomers are the key group here.

Once we Boomers mostly move into Medicare, there will be an ever-shrinking "customer-base" for insurers, so the costs will rise even more dramatically, forcing more people to have to opt-out.

Watch what happens when the 60K income mid-level exec can no longer afford to cover his/her family.

[The Doctor.]

25. This wins:

"The employer who belongs to the Church of Scientology can strip your insurance of mental health coverage."

I think I've been under the wrong impression here. Are you saying that a private sector employer can restrict your coverage based on your faith?

I thought that it only applied to people directly employed by a church.

[annabanana]

26. Actually.. If you are, say, a secretary in the Scientology

offices, but not a Scientologist yourself, your insurance package won't have mental health coverage.

If you work there and ARE a Scientologist, it won't matter to you.

[muriel_volestrangler]

28. Rubio and Machin (D!) have introduced a bill to allow anyone to refuse contraception coverage

It says:

No (regulation, etc.) ... shall require any individual or entity to offer, provide, or purchase health insurance coverage for a contraceptive or sterilization service, or related education or counseling, to which that individual or entity is opposed on the basis of religious belief or moral conviction

http://www.manchin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/files/serve?File_id=03a979bc-ec70-4368-9b08-98b1331f7ba7

Yes, at first, the Catholic bishops were just objecting to having to provide coverage for their university and hospital employees. But now they've decided to go all in, and claim that any individual employer should be able to refuse coverage, and Rubio and Manchin are their men in Congress.

[The Doctor.]

29. Okay, so that hasn't happened yet.

Judging by the OP, I thought I totally missed something and the debate was about any employer refusing coverage for faith-based excuses. It's a slippery-slope argument, but a great OP nonetheless.

As far as I'm concerned, let the churches limit their coverage. But make them eat the costs when it comes to maternity leave and child care.

Maybe people will smarten up and work for non-religious organizations. Is it realistic? No, but it's an entertaining thought.

[TheKentuckian]

44. There is no way to make them eat maternity and child care.

[The Doctor.]

46. Yeah, that's what I meant when I said it wasn't realistic.

I see how it's separated though.

[MountainLaurel]

41. Manchin is an utter DINO

Grrrr.

[jeff47]

31. It's what the Catholics are asking for

Current law, no they can't.

Catholics want to change it to match the OP's scenario.

[PassingFair]

33. Not "directly employed by a church"... I believe that the almost 20,000 people...

employed by this ONE catholic hospital will be paying for birth control out of pocket:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._John_Providence_Health_System

[Vattel]

32. My employer pays for some of my health insurance.

My contribution is deducted from my wages, but the employer contribution isn't.

[lumberjack_jeff]

37. How much do they pay toward your insurance if you don't work?

Your insurance and every other benefit is compensation - no different than your wages.

If you work a week, your wages and all non-wage benefits for that week are your money, including insurance premiums and "their" half of the SS taxes. The fact that they're spending it for you is immaterial.

They pay $25.00 per hour for your time. If you don't work, they pay zero. The fact that you only see $17.00 of that in your paycheck doesn't change the fact that your labor was sold to them for $25.00.

[SnowCritter]

35. K & R

and linked to Facebook!

Good work!

[TwilightGardener]

38. I worked for a while in a Catholic hospital--I'm a contraceptive-using Catholic, and most of

my coworkers were non-Catholic. I doubt that any of us took the jobs we held with the understanding that we'd have to abide by aspects of the Catholic faith. Why should we not be able to benefit from the same law that covers all other American employees?

[barbtries]

42. i hope this is getting wider coverage

than DU. talk about a slippery slope.

[TBF]

43. Recommending. nt

[Demonaut]

45. so if this is a sin, then can you refuse to work on Sundays? are these hospitals even open?

[DefenseLawyer]

48. If more "exceptions" in coverage means less cost

I can imagine all kinds of limitations in coverage being demanded in the name of "conscience" in order to save a buck.

[Tripod]

53. That is one great post!

Opens my eyes. I hadn't even thought about those things...Thx :smile: