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)
  • IMO.... Christians, Catholics, whatever religion you feel like naming... will SAY oh no, this is not what I believe, this is not what the church teaches, but then DO the exact opposite but do not tell anyone. Does that make sense?

    Example, my SIL is just now getting confirmed through the Catholic church... they just went over the importance of NOT using BC and all that, she had her tubes tied 4 years ago, she says, well "I wouldn't have done it any other way, it may be a sin but I couldn't handle another child", there you have it.

    Answer by amazinggrace83 at 12:50 PM on Nov. 27, 2012

  • I think the Church needs to pick its battles, and this is one that doesn't need to be fought. Idk why they are wasting so much time and energy on it, except out of a deep-seeded hatred for Obama (hey, I don't like the guy either, but I'll spend my energy on more effective means of changing the damage he has done/will do).

    However, the Church is trying to change those numbers you posted. There was a huge push for NFP education in the parish I attended back home. I even decided to give it a try just because the pill really did a number on me when I was younger, and I don't believe in taking medication unless it is absolutely needed to save my life. But anyway, it's definitely not something that can be changed over night or even within a few years (my NFP education was more than 15 yrs ago), but I do think that their energy should be focused on that rather than the whole Obamacare thing.

    Answer by anime_mom619 at 2:19 PM on Nov. 26, 2012

  • The choice is to opt out of insurance all together. Companies are already doing this and not for religious reasons. It's just too expensive.

    Answer by RyansMom001 at 11:23 PM on Nov. 25, 2012

  • Sounds great, but there's no way we can afford this.

    We can't, but that's no excuse to give a free pass to some groups just because they practice the "right" religion, and then make everyone else pay even more than they would have to start with to pick up their slack. This is a crystal clear case of 2 wrongs not making a right.

    Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 11:18 PM on Nov. 25, 2012

  • Sounds great, but there's no way we can afford this. I think it's okay for something's to be paid for out of pocket.

    Answer by RyansMom001 at 11:16 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Beams and motes?

    Answer by lga1965 at 7:10 PM 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

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