Government Subsidy?

[ab27]

With everything going on in our country now with the HHS Mandate, I was asked whether the Catholic institutions that are being forced in this law to provide contraceptives, sterilizations,and abortions whether they are receiving government subsidy. I know they are but what are they using the subsidy for and how can I correctly answer this person's question?

[SamH]

Originally Posted by ab27

With everything going on in our country now with the HHS Mandate, I was asked whether the Catholic institutions that are being forced in this law to provide contraceptives, sterilizations,and abortions whether they are receiving government subsidy. I know they are but what are they using the subsidy for and how can I correctly answer this person's question?

The question would be what does one have to do with the other?

They are not being paid a subsidy to provide this coverage. They are being paid to perform a service for the government - one that the government can't perform for itself. Does the fact that you are contractor make you slave to the government?

Does the government have the right to tell welfare recipients that they will be sterilized as a condition to receive welfare?

[TMC]

Originally Posted by ab27

With everything going on in our country now with the HHS Mandate, I was asked whether the Catholic institutions that are being forced in this law to provide contraceptives, sterilizations,and abortions whether they are receiving government subsidy. I know they are but what are they using the subsidy for and how can I correctly answer this person's question?

No Catholic institution is being forced to provide contraceptives, sterilizations or abortions. Under the first proposed regulation, some Catholic affiliated organizations (mainly hospitals and universities) would have been required to provide insurance for their employees that would cover contraception, but not abortion. Under the current proposed regulations, those organizations would be required to provide health insurance that did not include those services, but the insurers would be required to add contraception at no cost if the employee so chooses.

The regulations have nothing to do with any subsidy the organizations might receive, the regulations are part of the general employment regulations that apply to all employers.

[Ridgerunner]

Originally Posted by TMC

No Catholic institution is being forced to provide contraceptives, sterilizations or abortions. Under the first proposed regulation, some Catholic affiliated organizations (mainly hospitals and universities) would have been required to provide insurance for their employees that would cover contraception, but not abortion. Under the current proposed regulations, those organizations would be required to provide health insurance that did not include those services, but the insurers would be required to add contraception at no cost if the employee so chooses.

The regulations have nothing to do with any subsidy the organizations might receive, the regulations are part of the general employment regulations that apply to all employers.

The new regulations do require providing coverage for chemical abortion. Also sterilization. It's not just contraception. And requiring insurance companies to provide it "for free" is a fig leaf. Either the Catholic institutions will have the same rates as everyone else, in which case the whole "for free" thing is a lie, or they will have lower rates than everyone else due to providing less coverage, in which case everybody else will be subsidizing Catholic institutions.

Unless the government "compromise" is a lie, (and it surely is) the government would be obliging the general public to subsidize religious-based institutions, as clearly unconstitutional a mandate as could be imagined. But perhaps that's the point. Obama knows it would never stand court scrutiny to, in effect, subsidize Catholic institutions at everyone else's expense, and that's probably why he made that "compromise"; to be able to say he did when he knows it's a sham.

It's a sham like his "executive order" directing that Obamacare would not spend federal money on abortions. Well, no problem there, since he can just order insurance carriers to spend everybody else's money on it.

Lie after lie.