Church / State Issues

The current resurgence of those wanting to give the states the right to outlaw contraception and whatever else they deem “fit” for proper citizens is not so much alarming to me as it notes the growing pains of our little experimental plutocratic democracy and the evolution of Christianity.  It is also another reason why the United States should have universal healthcare for all citizens that is not “insurance” and profit based.  Universal health care could operate as a non-profit and continue to provide quality care for all the people that call the United States home or claim it as their citizenship no matter what their religious convictions might be.  And since I stumbled on this topic, let me say that if the state and federal government can mandate a minimum of auto insurance I must have to drive my car, then I would imagine that the same is true with a mandate for personal health insurance.  Don’t get me started on seat belt laws.  I do not know how the courts or even the Supremes are going to rationalize overturning what seems to have clear precedent, but where there are lobbyists, wealth, and fear this current crop of “conservative” judges have found a way.  Remember the Citizens United case.  Money equals free speech and corporations, multi-national, local or global, are sentient beings with concerns in our elections that need protecting.  If the new Health Care law, which so many are convinced is too much government intervention, socialism, or bad medicine is overturned will they then go back and litigate auto insurance as well?

Turing back to contraception, religion and the government.  Cynical as it may be, I think that some in the religious circles that want contraception to be outlawed, or at least too expensive for persons without means to obtain, is partly based in a fear that other religions are “out birthing” God fearing Christian caucasians.  I’ve heard former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and former Sen. Santorum both speak of the low birth rates in Europe as evidence of what they don’t want to happen here in America.  I can understand the thinking.  If there can be “more of us” than there are of “them” we can win the ballot box without overtly supporting a particular candidate and set the agenda for government based on our religious worldview.  It is thinking that is fifteen centuries old.  It is thinking that always keeps a labor force of poor and working poor fearful of each other and of what G*d might do.  When you strip away modernity and education there is not that much difference between this worldview and that of the Taliban or others that some politicians observe to be the enemy.  I heard former Sen. Santorum argue that the word “creator” in the Declaration of Independence means “God” moreover the “Christian” God, in the last Florida debate as evidence that the founders meant this to be a Christian nation.  Look one paragraph before to the phrase, “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”.  The founders were diests intentionally not privileging one religion’s G*d over another in their response to a government that considered itself “ordained” by G*d to rule the people.  Sen. Santorum’s interpretation of the word “creator” is misinformed.  It leads me to this final word.  Liberty University advertises on Sirius XM and local radio here in Tulsa.  The tagline at the end of their spots is, “Training champions for Christ.”  It makes me question what religious slant they bring to academics in the classroom.  Odd, you never hear it called a Christian madrasah.  Compare that to my alma mater, Texas Christian University, “To educate individuals to think and act as ethical leaders and responsible citizens in the global community.”  I think that includes making personal decisions about contraception and what is good for the whole of humanity rather than the few.  If religious liberty allows some to mandate that no federal dollars can be spent on women’s health at Planned Parenthood or that religiously affiliated hospitals do not have to the full range of women’s health services based on religious conviction then I purpose a new lobbyist group form because base on my religious convictions none of my tax dollars should be spent on creating weapons of mass destruction nor allowing the military industrial complex to sell weapons around the globe.  I don’t think this is a particularly Catholic Christian perspective.

Government, Religion and Contraception
— Martin E. Marty

“To hell with you!” is the message of the government to churches. So reasoned or charged Pittsburgh Catholic bishop David Zubik last week. He was reflecting on new federal rules that would force employers to include access to contraception (and sterilization) in health-insurance coverage for employees. “To hell with you!” is an ever more frequently uttered response to such governmental measures by a mix of citizens who resent having to deal with changes in health-care financing and insurance policies. In the bulls-eye that targets hell, Health and Human Services and its Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, are frequently issued one-way tickets to hell. Catholic Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted of Phoenix is most vocal and frontal among condemners of those Catholics who more or less side with Sebelius.

Michael Clancy in Saturday’s The Arizona Republic notes that “The Roman Catholic Church is the only significant denomination opposed to contraception.” We could find others, depending on how one defines “significant.” But in the press, it has become a Catholic issue, a designation that not all people in politics and government cherish. Some ponder: why is it a Catholic issue if, as we read in numerous polls, only two percent of Catholic women of child-bearing age oppose and do not use contraceptives?

Can we start over in the civil controversy over contraception? Before hell gets too crowded we might do well to get the hell out of here, meaning out of the current debates, the first inspired by Hosanna Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and now by the HHS ruling. One may rue Bishop Olmsted’s approach to these controversial issues and still agree with him that much is at stake in what he calls an “alarming and serious matter.” It “impacts the church in the United States and threatens the fundamental right to religious liberty.” Must it?

David Skeel in The Wall Street Journal was accurate in observing that after several decades in which church/state issues had dealt chiefly with religious symbols and practices in the public square, in the coming decade the fights and uncertainties will have to do with the ways in which federal and state regulations would inject government into religious affairs. Such issues are easily exploited by political factions and interests on all sides, but they cannot easily be wished away. Did the government in the current case act brutally, as its opponents claim? Or is the government simply seeking to help assure justice to citizens of all religious and non-religious sorts?

Citizens of all sorts? The Arizona Republic quotes Jan Olav Flaaten, the Lutheran pastor who directs the Arizona Ecumenical Council, who observes that “most religious groups are not concerned that the government overstretches in church-state relations” on this front.  He added that he could think of no other group than Catholics that had issues with contraception.” In most surveys that we have seen, about 98 percent of Catholic women of child-bearing age tell the poll-taker that they use contraceptive birth control devices and pills, whatever official church teaching and the bishops may say. The Catholic population is very little different from the rest of the population. Still, Catholic consciences and power have to be reckoned with. Can the controversy get off to a better start?

References
David Skeel, “On Religious Freedom, Years of Battles Ahead,” The Wall Street Journal, January 27, 2012.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204573704577184762102923798.html

Michael Clancy, “Phoenix Bishop Thomas Olmsted: Defy Feds on Birth Control,” The Arizona Republic, January 28, 2012.
http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/2012/01/27/20120127phoenix-bishop-defy-feds-birth-control.html#ixzz1kwyw7T5X