Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 12:01 PM
Wed Dec 2
70 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
| Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
| Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
| Twitter
Sadie Stein
| Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
| Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
| Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Lizzie Skurnick
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Weekends/Commenter Moderator:
Hortense
| Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/23/09
This is also why I say it is JUST FINE to discriminate based on "creed." Creed is what people think, & if people think, for instance, that magic faeries sprinkle souldust on a sperm & an egg & that masturbation is murder-- or if they think that special invisible guys make souls appear when the sperm & the egg touch & that women should be kept in cages as incubators....well then that is a great reason not to vote for them.
11/23/09
11/23/09
Cuomo got it right too. The Church is refusing to give Catholic pro-choice Dems Communion because they acknowledge that their voters may not comply with Church dogma (self-identified believers and non-believers alike.) Great! If they have a stake in politics, you're right, they should lose their tax exempt status.
I would also add--it pisses me off even more when I think that American bishops were so quick to campaign for Bush and other "family values" Republicans (Catholic or otherwise) who also are fiscally conservative or support the war. For the most part, beyond abortion (and occasionally, immigration), the Church backs off (whether their perspective is a reasonable one or not). Why doesn't a social service budget deserve the same scrutiny as abortion (especially considering that anti-choice politicians seem to love having their cake and eating it too...screw the social costs of forcing a woman who doesn't want to a child to bear it and screw the endless benefits of sexual health awareness and family planning would have for the average citizen.) The bishops know why--their voice would be unwelcome, THAT'S why! People resent religion butting in then, so why does it fly here?! (Not that I can't think of a few answers that make me nauseous and angry. If only men could get knocked up...I wonder if they'd be labeled "baby-eaters" for protesting.)
The Church is rewarded for supporting hypocrisy when we give them a special voice. The irony....if there's something in the Constitution or public law against lobbyists or PACS, is it as well-known as the principle of separation between church and state? Why, how the hell is it that they can can away with this? Because pollers tell us that Americans see this as a "Christian" nation, despite the fact that half of those who identify as such have no fucking idea what they're talking about?
Dogma and "faith"--easily distinguishable from empathy, stewardship, or a number of other moral values that exist apart from institutionalized religion-- deserve no place in policymaking, PERIOD. It infuriates me. What entitles lobbying bishops or religious policymakers to impose the fables a select minority have accepted on everyone else? Fuck that.
11/23/09
Then I guess the right answer is: stop taking communion. If that is the way they want to play it-- then fine, agree with them. Stop taking communion & paying tithes.
11/23/09
11/23/09
My local bishop does regularly get an earful from me when the USCCB gets riled up about abortion and remains silent on other life issues. Jesus had far more to say about social justice and equality for the poor than he ever did about the occupancy of my uterus.
#tips
11/23/09
[www.irs.gov]
This issue actually really burns me up from a PR perspective. The RCC does so much good work, in terms of advocating for and providing for the poor and running quality schools and hospitals. Interjecting themselves in the healthcare debate has really overshadowed all the good work they do. To the outside observer, it probably appears the Bishops do nothing but meddle with women's health, when in reality the Church does a tremendous amount of good.
PR geniuses, they're not.
#tips
11/23/09
11/23/09
When you become head cheese, just create a constitution that says religion can't influence policy. And put it in your constitution that when a policymaker allows religion to influence policy, he is to be F-I-R-E-D.
11/23/09
#tips
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
#tips
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
I was pretty into being Catholic for a long time because I loved that part of the faith was service. I went to a Catholic university and did service work all through college (I also sang in the liturgical choir) and due to my Catholic faith, I joined Americorps after I graduated.
I realized one day, though, that you can believe in serving others and social justice without the icky parts of the Church clinging to you. You can be pro-social justice and also pro-women's rights. You can be a moral person without the institution telling you that your body isn't really yours.
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
I don't really know who's technically correct, but this whole affair begs the question: when the government is responsible for more health spending, it will be responsible for budgeting. Maybe that will require hard choices. Maybe in order to pay for one thing that will save or better a large group of people, a minority of others might be shorted for treatment funds. Or maybe in order to save a diminishing margin of people for one disease you would need to spend money on an expensive screening process that could be used more efficiently to save a larger group of people for something else. Health care is utilitarian in that respect.
Under a private system, squawking over rationing won't due any good because you're nobody's boss. Public officials are (in thoery) our minions, though. The Democrats' jumpy reaction to the reports this week makes me worry that in the future lawmakers will quixotically pursue 100% treatment under the threat of interest groups. If we have to make Medicare cuts and reduce fee-for-service and the like in order for this thing to work on a cost basis, we're in deep shit.
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
What they don't seem to get is that *nobody* is really pro-abortion, but they're pro-abortion *RIGHTS*, which is a much different thing indeed. This story from the Boston Globe should be mandatory reading for anybody who wants to place a vote on curbing abortion rights.
[www.boston.com]
11/23/09
Exactly. The Catholic church is great at the holier-than-thou stuff, but all they ever end up doing is shooting themselves in the foot. They have a lot of nerve whining about abortion funding, while their church is having to fight off lawsuit after lawsuit because their celibate male priests can't keep their hands of young boys.
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
All the while the issues holding up healthcare all relate to women.
Separate of what now?
I have a feeling that if we lifted the tax exempt status from all religious institutions in this country we might very well be able to pay for this damn bill from the revenue.
11/23/09
Obviously, He would demand proof of citizenship, co-pay, and proof of insurance (or entire bill paid in cash) at time of all miracle workings.