Government Abortion Funding Bill Debated by Senate: Bishops Support Bill

KatherineS

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2010
4,076
162
Washington, DC
✟5,152.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
This question is easily solved: If the bishops are against the bill, they are right. If the bishops support the bill, they are wrong and acting against tradition and the teachings of the Catholic Church. If they support the bill, they are modernists and could get excommunicated.:priest:

You are saying the bishops should be deposed because they supported the Jobs bill?
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,036
13,060
✟1,077,055.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Just curious. Since insurance is essentially a "risk pool," would you choose not to participate in your company's insurance plan if it covered abortions or gay partners? After all, all the premiums are going into one pot and are used to pay for covered expenses.

Do you even know whether these things are covered by your employer's policy?

I know my hubby's company started covering unmarried partners last year (I think that included heterosexual unmarried partners, too.)

I don't know whether it covers abortion or not. It does cover birth control.

But I don't look at our participation in this "risk pool" as subsidizing the abortions or gay partner medical expenses of other employees.
 
Upvote 0

Imperiuz

Liberty will prevail
May 22, 2007
3,100
311
30
Stockholm
✟21,093.00
Country
Sweden
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Independence-Party
You are saying the bishops should be deposed because they supported the Jobs bill?
Any Catholic who obstinately denies that abortion is always gravely immoral, commits the sin of heresy and incurs an automatic sentence of excommunication. So says the catechism.

But I don't look at our participation in this "risk pool" as subsidizing the abortions or gay partner medical expenses of other employees./QUOTE] It's a sin to force people to pay for something they do not want with the money that they have been blessed with by God, especialy when it's for others. It is the sin called stealing.

Socialism and catholicism are not compatible.
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,036
13,060
✟1,077,055.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Employee health insurance has always been voluntary, and certainly, employee dependent health insurance (which most employees have been paying a greater and greater share of) is voluntary.

They choose it because it protects them from the possibility of catastrophic medical expenses that would wipe them out financially (and perhaps literally) if they were incurred.

But I don't see the jobs bill extension as supporting abortion. If the government gives individuals a subsidy to purchase COBRA insurance, and the individuals send that money in with their monthly COBRA check, the government is not supporting the "risk pool" that may or may not cover abortions or gay partners. The purchasers are.

And I don't worry about our contributions to our health care policy because I have a sexagenarian spouse with pre-existing conditions, so we have gotten back more than we've put in, personally, for a number of years.
 
Upvote 0

KatherineS

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2010
4,076
162
Washington, DC
✟5,152.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Any Catholic who obstinately denies that abortion is always gravely immoral, commits the sin of heresy and incurs an automatic sentence of excommunication. So says the catechism.


Are you saying that because the bishops supported the Jobs bill they are now excommunicate and we are released from our obligations to them?
 
Upvote 0

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Are you saying that because the bishops supported the Jobs bill they are now excommunicate and we are released from our obligations to them?


You are aware his understanding of canon law in this case is imperfect at best. Automatic excommunication under canon 1398 without applying canon 1323 or 1321. He is also not taking into account the factors of formal, informal and remote material cooperation.
 
Upvote 0

KatherineS

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2010
4,076
162
Washington, DC
✟5,152.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
You are aware his understanding of canon law in this case is imperfect at best. Automatic excommunication under canon 1398 without applying canon 1323 or 1321. He is also not taking into account the factors of formal, informal and remote material cooperation.

Yes, I appreciate that, David. I was trying to understand his thinking. I had concluded his thinking was in error.
 
Upvote 0

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Yes, I appreciate that, David. I was trying to understand his thinking. I had concluded his thinking was in error.

Figured you had, I wanted a factual post up for the lurkers who don't post but read and go away thinking something is right. The entire discussion of can someone be in remote material cooperation with evil and what that entails is fascinating in moral theology, but pretty thick. People love to pull out canon 1398 as if they are canon lawyers or quote a canon lawyer who uses it. But when a canon lawyer uses it they know about the mitigating canons so they do not cite them, they know that apply.

An example. A priest who uses the confessional to solicit sex, usually, with the promise to absolve the companion (as happened in the abuse crisis many times) is automatically excommunicated under canon 1378 because it cites violations of canon 977 (that forbids the above) as grounds for latae sententiae excommunication. Just like canon 1398 counts it for those who procure or assist in procuring a successful abortion. But both canons are subject to the mitigating factors of canons 1321-1324. Those canons cite things like mental disorders, lack of use of reason, grave fear, coercion and a bunch of other things. That usually means that it is very hard to get automatically excommunicated. In fact in aboriton I would argue 99.9% of the time the woman meets some aspect of canons 1321-1324 that mitigates the canonical issue immediately (usually grave fear, lack of full reason due to such or outside coercion or manipulation). In those cases, it is almost always the abortionist who would incur latae sententiae because far from being covered by 1321-24, they are exploiting the conditions described.

Sorry for rambling but uncharitable misunderstandings of canon 1398 can hurt many people.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,036
13,060
✟1,077,055.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Figured you had, I wanted a factual post up for the lurkers who don't post but read and go away thinking something is right. The entire discussion of can someone be in remote material cooperation with evil and what that entails is fascinating in moral theology, but pretty thick.

But David, do you believe that if the federal government gives, in addition to extended unemployment benefits, a cash stipend representing 65% of a COBRA payment, that that is materially cooperating in abortion?

Even remotely?

You could give your niece a $25 check for Christmas and she could put it towards an abortion if she were pregnant...does that mean you materially cooperated?

People could take tax refunds, or earned income tax credits, or Social Security survivors' benefits....and use the money to procure an abortion.

When that money leaves the government's hands, the responsibility for how it is used is vested with the person who receives it, not the government.
 
Upvote 0

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
But David, do you believe that if the federal government gives, in addition to extended unemployment benefits, a cash stipend representing 65% of a COBRA payment, that that is materially cooperating in abortion?

Even remotely?

No because remote material cooperation has several factors, very much like mediate material that are not met here. This is different from the health care bill where members of congress said: "We want this to cover abortion" like waxman (who had a huge hand in writing it) said directly to stupak. So in one case a primary writer said the intention was to further abortion where it would would not be available otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

KatherineS

Well-Known Member
Jan 31, 2010
4,076
162
Washington, DC
✟5,152.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
This is different from the health care bill where members of congress said: "We want this to cover abortion" like waxman (who had a huge hand in writing it) said directly to stupak. So in one case a primary writer said the intention was to further abortion where it would would not be available otherwise.

Chairman Waxman also said he wanted single payer and a public option. That is hardly proof those things are law now.
 
Upvote 0

Davidnic

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 3, 2006
33,112
11,337
✟788,337.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Chairman Waxman also said he wanted single payer and a public option. That is hardly proof those things are law now.


My point was the difference in intention as far as determining levels of cooperation because of intention to cooperate in sin. Not an argument for whether or not the HC law provides for abortions. Honestly the two sides on that will not settle until either the first covered abortions happen and there is billing proof or they do not.
 
Upvote 0