However, being pro-big business, they prefer the Freedom of Religion for Corporate Bodies (such as Catholic hospitals) over the Freedom of Religion for the Workers in those businesses - they who may not share the same religious convictions.
|Ilknes - Five Months and Counting...|
The entire "life begins at conception" concept is religiously-based. The US Council of Catholic Bishops, in arguing against being involved in the Affordable Care Act, merely demonstrate that they are upset that their employees will have access to measures that these males religiously object to: birth control and abortifacients. And maybe even abortions.
But that's a religious concern not necessarily shared by their employees. The bishops are basically arguing that they should have the right to impose their religious views upon their workers, who - even if they are Catholic - do not need to have the same religious views (if any) as their employers.
Is that okay in any other field? Who would argue that Muslims have a right to make their employees pray to Mecca during the workday (unpaid time at that)? Or that a capital acquisition firm under Mormon leadership has a right to baptize deceased employees or dead family members of employees? Or that all school children should be made to participate in Christian prayers, or pledge allegiance to a civil religious god?
You wanna get a Republican angry with you? Tell him that in supporting the Diocese, the GOP is supporting group-think over the rights of the individual. They'll be angry - because they're hypocritical.
But then, that's a fair thing to say about nearly every person that's politically motivated. Politics is about power. And power corrupts. Most of us want more than we have - or we want to maintain what power we do have.
Perhaps the only person that is not in danger of being labeled a hypocrite is she or he that purposefully gives away or denies his or her own privileges? Or, rather, that has few to begin with and is only fighting for her or his right for basic liberties (such as access to basic health care). For instance, the so-called "Party of the People" rarely supports workers' rights - rarely defends the poor anyway. Let it be known that some of its major actors oppose teachers in the name of privatizing education. Actually, they're quite fond of privatizing for profit just about any public good that can be unchained. Parks, schools, right-of-way, postal service...
Is that why they haven't brought up this objection?