Comments on: Why is Coakley Playing Chicken With the Catholic Church? http://www.sundriesshack.com/2010/01/15/why-is-coakley-playing-chicken-with-the-catholic-church/ Delivering the Best of the New Media Since 2004. Fri, 25 May 2012 21:47:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Bob Belvederehttp://www.sundriesshack.com/2010/01/15/why-is-coakley-playing-chicken-with-the-catholic-church/comment-page-1/#comment-688510 Bob Belvedere Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:42:19 +0000 http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=11508#comment-688510 Linked to at: <b> <a href="http://thecampofthesaints.wordpress.com/2010/01/16/stacy-mccain-in-bosstown-v" rel="nofollow">Stacy McCain In Bosstown V</a></b> Linked to at:

Stacy McCain In Bosstown V

]]> By: Jimmiehttp://www.sundriesshack.com/2010/01/15/why-is-coakley-playing-chicken-with-the-catholic-church/comment-page-1/#comment-688498 Jimmie Sat, 16 Jan 2010 14:19:02 +0000 http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=11508#comment-688498 Ann, the alternative is for the Church to close these hospitals entirely, thus depriving people of real, lifesaving medical treatment. If you wan them to close because they, essentially, won't perform abortions (which really is the argument in Massachusetts), then you have to accept that you will b severely limiting the availability of health care to the residents of that state. That's the choice. Ann, the alternative is for the Church to close these hospitals entirely, thus depriving people of real, lifesaving medical treatment. If you wan them to close because they, essentially, won't perform abortions (which really is the argument in Massachusetts), then you have to accept that you will b severely limiting the availability of health care to the residents of that state. That's the choice.

]]> By: Ann Neumannhttp://www.sundriesshack.com/2010/01/15/why-is-coakley-playing-chicken-with-the-catholic-church/comment-page-1/#comment-688496 Ann Neumann Sat, 16 Jan 2010 13:04:10 +0000 http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=11508#comment-688496 Coakley's more than half right. The Catholic Church is the second largest provider of health care in the US. All 624 Catholic hospitals, hundreds of long-term, hospice and elder care facilities, and 60 health care networks place doctrinal delivery of health care above patients' rights. These hospitals receive non profit status from the government, collect 50% of their funding from federal Medicare and Medicaid payments and serve diverse communities - 1/5th of all US patients - but are not required to abide by standard medical procedures when treating women, gays or elders. Services denied include: tubal ligations, fertility treatment for unmarried and lesbian women, STD or HIV counseling, condom or other birth control counseling, sterilization, abortion, or compliance with a patient's advance directives (living wills). Catholic institutions are required by the Catholic Church to not only deny these services but also to not inform patients of their existence or to refer patients to other facilities for them. Protecting employees rights is incredibly important, but the Catholic health care behemoth does so according to it's "mission" of Catholic medicine. Providers like doctors or nurses that don't agree with the "institutional conscience" of the Catholic hierarchy must too abide by it's directives, tailoring their delivery of medical advice accordingly. Standing up for the Catholic Church in this case defies not only logic (they are touting, "no federal dollars for abortion" even as they deny fertilization services to women, with US funding!) but also meaningful religious liberty. Allow one faith to dominate social services and other faiths' liberties are also denied. We're a pluralistic society. Our health care should accord each patient's conscience, not that of one church's hierarchy. Coakley's more than half right. The Catholic Church is the second largest provider of health care in the US. All 624 Catholic hospitals, hundreds of long-term, hospice and elder care facilities, and 60 health care networks place doctrinal delivery of health care above patients' rights.

These hospitals receive non profit status from the government, collect 50% of their funding from federal Medicare and Medicaid payments and serve diverse communities – 1/5th of all US patients – but are not required to abide by standard medical procedures when treating women, gays or elders.

Services denied include: tubal ligations, fertility treatment for unmarried and lesbian women, STD or HIV counseling, condom or other birth control counseling, sterilization, abortion, or compliance with a patient's advance directives (living wills). Catholic institutions are required by the Catholic Church to not only deny these services but also to not inform patients of their existence or to refer patients to other facilities for them.

Protecting employees rights is incredibly important, but the Catholic health care behemoth does so according to it's "mission" of Catholic medicine. Providers like doctors or nurses that don't agree with the "institutional conscience" of the Catholic hierarchy must too abide by it's directives, tailoring their delivery of medical advice accordingly.

Standing up for the Catholic Church in this case defies not only logic (they are touting, "no federal dollars for abortion" even as they deny fertilization services to women, with US funding!) but also meaningful religious liberty. Allow one faith to dominate social services and other faiths' liberties are also denied. We're a pluralistic society. Our health care should accord each patient's conscience, not that of one church's hierarchy.

]]>