Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

5 Bumps

Beams and motes

A bit of an offshoot from the separation question.  Here are some basic facts:

83% of sexually active Catholic women who are not actively trying to get pregnant use artificial birth control (condoms, iud, tubal ligation, hormone-based pills, etc)

57% of Catholic voters support the bc mandate in Obamacare

The Catholic process of excommunication is not a lifetime ban from the church, but rather, a ban on taking holy communion until repenting and giving up the behavior leading to excommunication.  The church recently forbid an entire family from taking communion based on something a teenager in the family posted on facebook.


The data I linked is pretty common knowledge.  It was reported in every major news source in the country.  The Vatican has a public relations and media department to rival any other country or major corporation, so it is impossible for it to not be aware of that data.

So now the question - if the church feels so strongly about the inherent sin of birth control, why is it focusing all its energy on attending the mote in their neighbor's eye (by denying their non-Catholic employees access to birth control) instead of attending the beam in their own (by calling out all the Catholic women who use birth control, asking them the question point blank, and then denying communion to any who refuse to stop using it)?

Not that I feel Catholic women should be spiritually extorted, but, it is the faith they choose to practice with no guns to their heads.  How can the church possibly be considered credible in its FISCAL stance against BC when it makes no move whatsoever to address the SPIRITUAL transgression in its own congregations?


Answer Question

Asked by NotPanicking at 8:15 PM on Nov. 24, 2012 in Religious Debate

Level 51 (421,174 Credits)
Answers (15)
  • The Catholic church cannot afford to lose that many members. To call them out, to excommunicate all of those members who use birth control and their family members, too. No way they'd do that.

    Answer by Ludvik_Smith at 9:14 PM on Nov. 24, 2012

  • Convenience. Plain and simple.

    Answer by sahmamax2 at 9:18 PM on Nov. 24, 2012

  • That Beam is being examined. Has been examined, and is being taken care of. There has been many years where the faith wasn't taught. On so many levels in the American Church. There have been Bishops that have admitted this. We are hearing about it from the pulpit. There are many that have signed up and are taking NFP classes. There are many that are getting sterilization reversed. That are going to confession and being absolved. That is part of the story you're not hearing. But that's just the ones who still practise their faith. Large percetage of People who claim to be Catholic really don't go every Sunday, They're the Christmas and Easter Catholics. They Identify themselves as such but really aren't.


    Answer by daps at 6:39 AM on Nov. 25, 2012

  • Here's something else that if you're not in the Church and wouldn't notice. Many of the Bishops that have taken Vatican II and twisted it's teachings, are getting to retirement age. The Pope is replacing them with Men who have shown they are strong in the faith. Not afraid to speak out. The same is true with those who teach in the seminaries. I just love how People take that phrase plank and splinter to mean that the one correcting can't have any sin. What it means is examine that sin, know that sin, work on that sin before you speak. As for excommunication. There is a long process. It starts with you really excommunicating yourself. Your Priest will talk to you privately. When it's time then the Bishop. In most cases it's a mutual decision. But the Door is not closed you can come back. What is asked in these cases where people have been taught wrong, is that you refrain from communion until you have resolved your problem.

    Answer by daps at 6:58 AM on Nov. 25, 2012

  • This is all kept private unless the one that is teaching or blatantly speaking out against the teaching, has made it public. Then reluctantly the Church has to let it be known that this person has been in conference with their Bishop and should not be taking communion. For the most part excommunication is a private matter. As it should be.

    Answer by daps at 7:04 AM on Nov. 25, 2012

  • Large percetage of People who claim to be Catholic really don't go every Sunday, They're the Christmas and Easter Catholics. They Identify themselves as such but really aren't.

    Do they need to be reconfirmed before they are allowed back in? Are they denied the sacrament of the sick if they haven't been in a while? Because here's the rub. The flippant defense of the anti-bc insurance movement is if people don't like it, they can work somewhere else. Knowing that 85% of Catholic women use BC, do you think there are enough qualified Catholics to fill every job position at every Catholic owned business, who also do not violate that rule in practice? You want to discount those who don't follow every rule, but if you do, you've landed in the position of minority religion.

    When you insist those people aren't "real" Catholics, you must then also admit that the majority of them aren't getting "reeducated".

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 2:28 PM on Nov. 25, 2012

  • Beams and motes?

    Answer by lga1965 at 7:10 PM on Nov. 25, 2012

  • Convenience. Plain and simple.

    This I agree with!!! Catholics say one thing and do another thing that is convenient for them, I would say a large % do things that the church opposes to....

    Answer by older at 7:56 PM on Nov. 25, 2012

  • I don't care if women take birth control or not I just dont understand why this medication needs special presidential insistence that it be covered when so many important  medications aren't.  Prescriptions are expensive, BC is relatively affordable when compared to cancer and high blood pressure meds.  Just because a drug is covered doesn't mean it's paid for 100%.  Drugs that are routinely covered by insurance often have a higher mark up.  I just don't think BC needs a special presidential seal.  It sould be treated like other meds, they are ignored by congress.   I rather have cancer meds with a cap on mark up, or that they be covered at 100%.   Be a beam help dying patients afford their meds.


    Answer by RyansMom001 at 11:03 PM on Nov. 25, 2012

  • I just dont understand why this medication needs special presidential insistence that it be covered when so many important medications aren't

    That's kind of the point - this law is making ALL of those medications covered, not just bc. Some employers don't want to pay for any of them, so they think if they can object on religious grounds on the BC, it by default gives them a free pass to not pay for insurance that covers all the seizure, cancer, diabetes, MS, MD, and mental health meds, either.

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 11:05 PM on Nov. 25, 2012

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.