Author Topic: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate  (Read 5085 times)

Matt Hummel

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2751
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #30 on: August 26, 2015, 03:21:49 PM »
The "birth control pill" is always covered for medical use. Women with endometriosis, ovarian cysts, and other reproductive problems that are resolved/managed by the BCP do have access to it for that purpose even under plans that don't cover contraception. When it is used/requested for contraceptive purposes or without medical necessity, then it is not covered.

Are you sure?  My wife has all the above (endometriosis, ovarian cysts, and other reproductive problems), resulting in surgery and the removal of an ovary; her doctor has prescribed birth control pills for her for almost our whole marriage.  But I do not believe our insurance (Concordia Health Plans, Blue Cross/Blue Shield) has ever paid for it.  Maybe we need to do some checking...

I believe it's criminal if you're not getting that coverage for the above issues.  But I do honestly think it's worth checking out the link Prolife Professional posted.  If it helps, it's worth posting on this forum. 

http://www.creightonmodel.com/education.htm



Well- like almost any technology, it depends upon the ends towards which it is used. But- unlike the chemical contraceptives that are de facto abortifacients (read the documentation about "inhibiting nidation ") NFP is not an abortifacient.  And the idea is that you use the information regarding fertility cycles to abstain at those points when you do not wish to conceive. There is a difference in kind between abstention and contraception.

I agree there's a difference between abstention and contraception, as well as a difference between contraception and abortifacients, and killing and murder, and some other things.  So I'm with you there.  Functionally, I do think using the the technology is basically contraception.  Are condoms allowed?  Serious question.

Someone-

No worries. In short, no. The use of a condom interposes a barrier to the marital act that disconnects the procreative from the unitive nature of the act.

Some will undoubtedly snark at this, but ask yourself this- 50+ years on into the Contraceptive culture, just how are we doing with that disconnect sociatality?
Matt Hummel


“The chief purpose of life, for any of us, is to increase according to our capacity our knowledge of God by all means we have, and to be moved by it to praise and thanks.”

― J.R.R. Tolkien

scott8

  • Guest
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #31 on: August 26, 2015, 03:36:26 PM »
The "birth control pill" is always covered for medical use. Women with endometriosis, ovarian cysts, and other reproductive problems that are resolved/managed by the BCP do have access to it for that purpose even under plans that don't cover contraception. When it is used/requested for contraceptive purposes or without medical necessity, then it is not covered.

Are you sure?  My wife has all the above (endometriosis, ovarian cysts, and other reproductive problems), resulting in surgery and the removal of an ovary; her doctor has prescribed birth control pills for her for almost our whole marriage.  But I do not believe our insurance (Concordia Health Plans, Blue Cross/Blue Shield) has ever paid for it.  Maybe we need to do some checking...

I believe it's criminal if you're not getting that coverage for the above issues.  But I do honestly think it's worth checking out the link Prolife Professional posted.  If it helps, it's worth posting on this forum. 

http://www.creightonmodel.com/education.htm



Well- like almost any technology, it depends upon the ends towards which it is used. But- unlike the chemical contraceptives that are de facto abortifacients (read the documentation about "inhibiting nidation ") NFP is not an abortifacient.  And the idea is that you use the information regarding fertility cycles to abstain at those points when you do not wish to conceive. There is a difference in kind between abstention and contraception.

I agree there's a difference between abstention and contraception, as well as a difference between contraception and abortifacients, and killing and murder, and some other things.  So I'm with you there.  Functionally, I do think using the the technology is basically contraception.  Are condoms allowed?  Serious question.

Someone-

No worries. In short, no. The use of a condom interposes a barrier to the marital act that disconnects the procreative from the unitive nature of the act.

Some will undoubtedly snark at this, but ask yourself this- 50+ years on into the Contraceptive culture, just how are we doing with that disconnect sociatality?

I seem to remember either B16 or JPII saying that condoms were OK in some cases given the extent of the AIDS crisis in Africa.  Am I misremembering?

Matt Hummel

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2751
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #32 on: August 26, 2015, 04:44:16 PM »
The "birth control pill" is always covered for medical use. Women with endometriosis, ovarian cysts, and other reproductive problems that are resolved/managed by the BCP do have access to it for that purpose even under plans that don't cover contraception. When it is used/requested for contraceptive purposes or without medical necessity, then it is not covered.

Are you sure?  My wife has all the above (endometriosis, ovarian cysts, and other reproductive problems), resulting in surgery and the removal of an ovary; her doctor has prescribed birth control pills for her for almost our whole marriage.  But I do not believe our insurance (Concordia Health Plans, Blue Cross/Blue Shield) has ever paid for it.  Maybe we need to do some checking...

I believe it's criminal if you're not getting that coverage for the above issues.  But I do honestly think it's worth checking out the link Prolife Professional posted.  If it helps, it's worth posting on this forum. 

http://www.creightonmodel.com/education.htm



Well- like almost any technology, it depends upon the ends towards which it is used. But- unlike the chemical contraceptives that are de facto abortifacients (read the documentation about "inhibiting nidation ") NFP is not an abortifacient.  And the idea is that you use the information regarding fertility cycles to abstain at those points when you do not wish to conceive. There is a difference in kind between abstention and contraception.

I agree there's a difference between abstention and contraception, as well as a difference between contraception and abortifacients, and killing and murder, and some other things.  So I'm with you there.  Functionally, I do think using the the technology is basically contraception.  Are condoms allowed?  Serious question.

Someone-

No worries. In short, no. The use of a condom interposes a barrier to the marital act that disconnects the procreative from the unitive nature of the act.

Some will undoubtedly snark at this, but ask yourself this- 50+ years on into the Contraceptive culture, just how are we doing with that disconnect sociatality?

I seem to remember either B16 or JPII saying that condoms were OK in some cases given the extent of the AIDS crisis in Africa.  Am I misremembering?

Far be it for me a lowly Master of Arts to criticize a Doctor of Philosophy, especially when earned at The University, but....

Yeah, kind of. He was talking about how it could be seen as an ( imperfect) sign of care and concern for the other.
Matt Hummel


“The chief purpose of life, for any of us, is to increase according to our capacity our knowledge of God by all means we have, and to be moved by it to praise and thanks.”

― J.R.R. Tolkien

scott8

  • Guest
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #33 on: August 26, 2015, 04:49:47 PM »
The "birth control pill" is always covered for medical use. Women with endometriosis, ovarian cysts, and other reproductive problems that are resolved/managed by the BCP do have access to it for that purpose even under plans that don't cover contraception. When it is used/requested for contraceptive purposes or without medical necessity, then it is not covered.

Are you sure?  My wife has all the above (endometriosis, ovarian cysts, and other reproductive problems), resulting in surgery and the removal of an ovary; her doctor has prescribed birth control pills for her for almost our whole marriage.  But I do not believe our insurance (Concordia Health Plans, Blue Cross/Blue Shield) has ever paid for it.  Maybe we need to do some checking...

I believe it's criminal if you're not getting that coverage for the above issues.  But I do honestly think it's worth checking out the link Prolife Professional posted.  If it helps, it's worth posting on this forum. 

http://www.creightonmodel.com/education.htm



Well- like almost any technology, it depends upon the ends towards which it is used. But- unlike the chemical contraceptives that are de facto abortifacients (read the documentation about "inhibiting nidation ") NFP is not an abortifacient.  And the idea is that you use the information regarding fertility cycles to abstain at those points when you do not wish to conceive. There is a difference in kind between abstention and contraception.

I agree there's a difference between abstention and contraception, as well as a difference between contraception and abortifacients, and killing and murder, and some other things.  So I'm with you there.  Functionally, I do think using the the technology is basically contraception.  Are condoms allowed?  Serious question.

Someone-

No worries. In short, no. The use of a condom interposes a barrier to the marital act that disconnects the procreative from the unitive nature of the act.

Some will undoubtedly snark at this, but ask yourself this- 50+ years on into the Contraceptive culture, just how are we doing with that disconnect sociatality?

I seem to remember either B16 or JPII saying that condoms were OK in some cases given the extent of the AIDS crisis in Africa.  Am I misremembering?

Far be it for me a lowly Master of Arts to criticize a Doctor of Philosophy, especially when earned at The University, but....

Yeah, kind of. He was talking about how it could be seen as an ( imperfect) sign of care and concern for the other.

Thanks.  I only remember hearing it second-hand, so that is a helpful clarification.

And FWIW, I always took Aerosmith's advice to heart: "Live and learn, from fools and from sages."  ;D

Daniel L. Gard

  • Guest
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #34 on: August 26, 2015, 04:57:34 PM »


Far be it for me a lowly Master of Arts to criticize a Doctor of Philosophy, especially when earned at The University, but....

Yeah, kind of. He was talking about how it could be seen as an ( imperfect) sign of care and concern for the other.

Thanks.  I only remember hearing it second-hand, so that is a helpful clarification.

And FWIW, I always took Aerosmith's advice to heart: "Live and learn, from fools and from sages."  ;D

A more ancient saying, "He who goes to school too long dies by degrees".

Michael Slusser

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 5524
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #35 on: August 26, 2015, 05:50:26 PM »
I seem to remember either B16 or JPII saying that condoms were OK in some cases given the extent of the AIDS crisis in Africa.  Am I misremembering?
You're probably remembering this news item:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/20/pope-condoms-can-be-justi_n_786414.html

Peace,
Michael
Fr. Michael Slusser
Retired Roman Catholic priest and theologian

Matt Hummel

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2751
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #36 on: August 26, 2015, 06:13:16 PM »
I seem to remember either B16 or JPII saying that condoms were OK in some cases given the extent of the AIDS crisis in Africa.  Am I misremembering?
You're probably remembering this news item:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/20/pope-condoms-can-be-justi_n_786414.html

Peace,
Michael

That would be the one. Thank you Father.
Matt Hummel


“The chief purpose of life, for any of us, is to increase according to our capacity our knowledge of God by all means we have, and to be moved by it to praise and thanks.”

― J.R.R. Tolkien

SomeoneWrites

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2596
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #37 on: August 27, 2015, 11:42:53 AM »

Yeah, kind of. He was talking about how it could be seen as an ( imperfect) sign of care and concern for the other.

Oddly enough, this is the read I have from ELCA concerning abortion.  An imperfect sign of care and concern for women. 

LCMS raised
LCMS theology major
LCMS sem grad
Atheist

Matt Hummel

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2751
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #38 on: August 27, 2015, 01:33:27 PM »

Yeah, kind of. He was talking about how it could be seen as an ( imperfect) sign of care and concern for the other.

Oddly enough, this is the read I have from ELCA concerning abortion.  An imperfect sign of care and concern for women.

Yeah, murder often is an imperfect way to show love.
Matt Hummel


“The chief purpose of life, for any of us, is to increase according to our capacity our knowledge of God by all means we have, and to be moved by it to praise and thanks.”

― J.R.R. Tolkien

Steverem

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1581
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #39 on: August 27, 2015, 01:51:23 PM »

Yeah, kind of. He was talking about how it could be seen as an ( imperfect) sign of care and concern for the other.

Oddly enough, this is the read I have from ELCA concerning abortion.  An imperfect sign of care and concern for women.

Yeah, murder often is an imperfect way to show love.

I just now received an email from ELCA Advocacy with the subject line, "Advocate for federal programs that work to support all children of God!"  Held out hope that they might say something about those children in the womb, but alas, their "all" is significantly less encompassing than one might think.


SomeoneWrites

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2596
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #40 on: August 27, 2015, 02:00:13 PM »

Yeah, kind of. He was talking about how it could be seen as an ( imperfect) sign of care and concern for the other.

Oddly enough, this is the read I have from ELCA concerning abortion.  An imperfect sign of care and concern for women.

Yeah, murder often is an imperfect way to show love.

As there is a difference between abortificients, abstention, and contraception - so too is there a difference between killing and murder. 
LCMS raised
LCMS theology major
LCMS sem grad
Atheist

Matt Hummel

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2751
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #41 on: August 27, 2015, 02:17:17 PM »

Yeah, kind of. He was talking about how it could be seen as an ( imperfect) sign of care and concern for the other.

Oddly enough, this is the read I have from ELCA concerning abortion.  An imperfect sign of care and concern for women.

Yeah, murder often is an imperfect way to show love.

As there is a difference between abortificients, abstention, and contraception - so too is there a difference between killing and murder.

Indeed-

Killing is when you put a 5.56 mm round through the brain pan of some bad actor from ISIS intent on spreading the Caliphate through rape, torture, and terror.

Murder is when you take a pair of scissors and cut through the face of a fetus to harvest its brain while the heart is still beating.

Snuffing the life of human child because it is inconvenient (however that is rationalized) is murder.
Matt Hummel


“The chief purpose of life, for any of us, is to increase according to our capacity our knowledge of God by all means we have, and to be moved by it to praise and thanks.”

― J.R.R. Tolkien

SomeoneWrites

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2596
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #42 on: August 27, 2015, 02:25:18 PM »

Indeed-

Killing is when you put a 5.56 mm round through the brain pan of some bad actor from ISIS intent on spreading the Caliphate through rape, torture, and terror.

And I think the Israelite conquest of Canaan was murder and genocidal. 


Murder is when you take a pair of scissors and cut through the face of a fetus to harvest its brain while the heart is still beating.

I do think there's limits on abortion.  Partial birth abortion is murder.  Some abortions I don't think count for murder. 

Snuffing the life of human child because it is inconvenient (however that is rationalized) is murder.

Good thing I'm not making this argument. 
LCMS raised
LCMS theology major
LCMS sem grad
Atheist

George Erdner

  • Guest
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #43 on: August 27, 2015, 02:54:48 PM »
I just now received an email from ELCA Advocacy with the subject line, "Advocate for federal programs that work to support all children of God!"  Held out hope that they might say something about those children in the womb, but alas, their "all" is significantly less encompassing than one might think.

Can anyone tell me where it says in Scripture that Jesus said that his followers should pray to Caesar (ie. the secular government) to help those in need instead of doing it directly themselves or praying to God for help?

Matt Hummel

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2751
    • View Profile
Re: Little Sisters of the Poor and the contraception mandate
« Reply #44 on: August 27, 2015, 03:47:50 PM »
I think it is in the 3rd Chapter of St. Paul's Letter to the Progressives.

Or was it in the Gospel According to Saul?
Matt Hummel


“The chief purpose of life, for any of us, is to increase according to our capacity our knowledge of God by all means we have, and to be moved by it to praise and thanks.”

― J.R.R. Tolkien