Catholic Church: I want your money
62Title X for all
but not your rules...
It all began during the Richard Nixon years. You can argue that he was a corrupt and paranoid politician but he was also a Republican moderate. During his tenure he signed into law Title X. Title X insured that funding be provided for reproductive rights. This law is now under attack. That's right, nearly 50 years later a law that has been on the books and responsible for the care of women's reproductive health is now being called a bad law. The Republican Candidate for President, Mitt Romney, has already stated that he would repeal this law.
What does this law specifically do? It is part of the "Public Health Service Act" which mandates funding to pay for family planning and other preventative services. It provides these services to low income families and individuals at no cost, which means that more than 5-million individuals have been able to get health care in this country in 2011. More than $327 million dollars under the Obama administration have been provided this year for this coverage, an $11-million dollar increase over the previous year. These services include, breast cancer screenings, pelvic exams, cervical cancer education and exams, reproductive counseling including HIV, STD and pregnancy.
Regardless of whether you agree with certain counseling specifics, all of these services including contraception must be provided to low income families and individuals if they ask for them. The Catholic argument, and other religious administrators of their medical hospitals, say that providing reproductive counseling and the administrating of contraception is anti-thetical to their beliefs and thus they will not provide those services. Which is fine to many of us but then they should also not take government funding--that's right--turn down the Title X funding they currently take in.
Government serves all the people. Everyone is eligible to utilize government services, including health care, and anyone who takes in government funds to provide those services is responsible to provide those services to everyone. Regardless of doctrine or religious belief, if you take Title X funds--then those funds are to provide service to everyone in need of those services required by the law. Granted, religious organizations can ask for exemptions but then they must also be exempt from those funds. As the President has emphasized time and time again he is the President of all the people...the government serves all the people...religion and their entities have a right to discriminate if they want to--but then they have no right to tax payer money meant for all...everyone.
CommentsLoading...
Following that logic: Those who disagree with that government policy should stop paying taxes. If the government wants our money, do what we want.
Gusser:
There could be a tool in the arsenal of the "%99" (and an idea for another 'Hub')--Tax resistance.
Keep in mind Becky, that if the health services are provided out of the Church, there is an exemption. However, if the church runs a clinic, University hospital, Medical center or other facility and they take Medicaid funds...they must provide the full list of services paid for by Medicaid--which includes reproductive services. The church or medical facility cannot pick and choose--if they are a recipient of federal funds. This has nothing to do with preventing the church from speaking from the pulpit or spreading the news...or trying to save souls or preventing them from exercising freedom of religion or speech. However, this has everything to do with providing health services and taking federal dollars. BTW this same rule applies in Massachusetts under "Romney-care".
While this is desired, then that same person must also refuse all government services that those tax dollars pay for. Such as schools for their children, garbage pickup, use of streets and sidewalks, etc. etc. etc. Taxes we pay do not provide only one specific thing. They are used for a variety of services that we all take advantage of. The argument that we shrink our government and reduce taxes--then have a problem deciding how small our government should be...because they then realize the services that the government provides are many.
What about this...instead of Tax resistance...Tax necessity. I think the 99% movement is not about tax resistance, it was about using taxes to benefit the 1% at the expense of the 99%. It is about the haves using their power, thru their money, to squash freedom of speech for the 99%...increase their income and power by using their income and power to manipulate the power brokers in Washington to pay for their increase of power and money by taking shifting that power and money from the 99%. The Occupy movement is a very complicated one that is so powerful that it is now a part of the national conversation and conscience.
By your reasoning, or the lack thereof: These mythical 99% need to pay much more in tax. It is they who receive welfare, medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance etc. The "1%" doesn't get these payouts. Also the mythical 99% are made up of 38% Republicans ( They want no part of the"99%". 41% Democrats ( They love mooching). & 20% of "others". These "others" joined the Repubs in 2010 to soundly defeat the Dems. So your 99% is really only 41%. Truth hurts.
You assume too much. The 1% get more welfare from the government that the 99%. Welfare in the form of captial gain exemptions, subsidies for oil companies, exemptions for yacht purchases...etc etc etc. Regardless of the makeup of the 99%--their message is clear...the 1% are not innocent in the "welfare" argument--they just get it at a much higher level than the rest and the rest has to make up the difference they get.
Becky Katz Level 8 Commenter 3 months ago
I do not agree with you that they should not take the money. I received mammograms at a Catholic hospital and delivered my last child at one. I had my tubes tied at another one because they do not do that at Catholic hospitals.
This is another slam at religious freedoms. If your religion says 'no form of birth control', why should it be provided to anyone. That is a sin against you beliefs. They just need to continue providing for the care of your reproductive health. Proof that they are providing those benefits should be enough.