Who would force you to go to a Catholic hospital? You can go there, but they also have the right..or should have the right, to only supply you with everything that doesnt go against their beliefs. Maybe you might see it from a Jewish perspective...Does an Orthodox Jew, who sells only Kosher food in his deli, have to serve ham, because his employees demand it? Or can the govenment enforce by mandate no more circumsions because its against their new Healthcare law? If you fear the Church more than you fear your governments ability to violate your rights..than there is nothing more anyone can say...as an american all people are free to choose, no matter if their choices lack reason.  

Mar 12, 2012 -- 2:46PM, lulu2 wrote:

Who would force you to go to a Catholic hospital? You can go there, but they also have the right..or should have the right, to only supply you with everything that doesnt go against their beliefs. Maybe you might see it from a Jewish perspective...Does an Orthodox Jew, who sells only Kosher food in his deli, have to serve ham, because his employees demand it? Or can the govenment enforce by mandate no more circumsions because its against their new Healthcare law? If you fear the Church more than you fear your governments ability to violate your rights..than there is nothing more anyone can say...as an american all people are free to choose, no matter if their choices lack reason.  

In some places there are no other hospitals besides the Catholic hospital. Or an ambulance might take me there because it's closest. If you think you always get to choose what hospital you end up in, think again.

I do not agree that a hospital should be allowed to deny a person treatment because it goes against the religious views of the owners/management of the hospital. The first concern should be protecting the life of the patient. So I totally disagree that a Catholic hospital should be allowed to deny a woman a life-saving abortion. To me, that is the Catholic hospital imposing its religious view on a woman in a way that could kill her. It is denying her FREEDOM from the Catholic religion. The way I see it, a hospital must put saving a life at a higher priority than the religious beliefs of the hospital's owners or managers. In a hospital setting, decisions about what treatments are needed or are ethically and mediaclly appropriate should be based on the best medical practices and information and the wishes of the patient, first and foremost. In reality, cost is also often a factor. But where do the religious beliefs of hospital management lie on the list of priorities? I don't think they should be on it at all! 

Should the government be allowed to outlaw female circumcisions that are done on girls as they approach puberty? Must such a procedure be allowed if a person's relgious or cultural beliefs "require" it? Personally, I think circumcision of male infants should be left up to the parents. But if there is a significant concern regarding the procedure harming the patient, I do think the government has a regulatory role to play. But the government's decisions should be made based on best medical practice/knowledge, not religion. 

Lulu,

Dear gilg...when did I say I was Catholic? Or that I follow anyones words even Paul... as you seem to believe is where I get my info from?

LOL! You got me there, I made an assumption and if it was wrong, no offense intended.

 As for Charity.PLEASE READ ..community.beliefnet.com/lulu2/blog/2012/...

Lulu,

Interesting view, it merits discussion, start a thread on the subject and we can discuss it in more detail. Briefly, I am not sure what point you are making, obviously charity starts at home because of the proximity and family responsibilities. But you seem to be suggesting that charity is something we do when we have extra money that the family doesn't need. Charity is not only financial but I am sure you know that.

What I understand Christ to say is "we are all family" and our “brother's keeper”.  The Good Samaritan does not give aid only to the people next door or to his family, but the neighbor is anyone that we know needs help. I get the feeling from your article that you don't agree, let's discuss.

I agree with the principle of life, the problem here is that some people value life of the unborn and then devalue life of those already alive, I think this is hypocrisy. I firmly believe it is immoral for the any institution to spend so much effort fighting birth control or wanting their religious values imposed on others.

  As far as the role of government, well, philosophically, I am more aligned with Ron Paul, however, given what is, and not what is ideal, I don't have a problem with public education, tax dollars going to basic research or use for promoting the "general welfare" as the Constitution says. I do get disgusted with all the money going to prisons, what kind of idiots allocate money for prisons so that prisoners can have medical and dental care yet deny this same care for children?   

Most of all, I am disgusted with all these Pro-life candidates that are pushing for a war against Iran! How can you claim to be pro-life and push for aggression and war? Nuts.

Newsjunkie,

When the Blunt Amendment was being debated, I said to my husband, "Can you imagine going for a job interview if this passes? We'd have to ask, 'What is the owner's/manager's view on birth control? How about abortion? What about blood transfusions? Will refusing a feeding tube if I go into hospice care be a problem?'"

Yep, it would be good for lawyers but not for the rest of us. 

As far as hospice and feeding tubes, my understanding from our local chapter is “no feeding tubes” or care other than for pain management. Our local Catholic hospital hooked us up with Hospice and I've come to respect that organization, they worked with mom and one of my sisters, both died from breast cancer.