Rosa Salter Rodriguez has an article in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette about an ad featuring the tenets of the United Methodist Church with respect to health care which is causing some controversy because of the political implications of those tenets.
My main problem with the article is that it spends a lot of time talking about the reaction to the ad before getting around to telling you what the ad actually said. And, even then, you still have to kind of piece it together. Apparently the ad says “The United Methodist Church advocates lifting up those now relegated to second-class citizenship by providing adequate health care for ALL living in our great society” and also includes a quote from Senator Kennedy saying “The fundamental test of our society is how it treats the least powerful among us.”
The ad was put out by Al Kuelling, a retired physicist and member of a Fort Wayne Methodist Church. Before putting out the ad, he cleared it with a board of the national church. This has the local church riled up, apparently because they feel like it associates them with Democrats.
Maybe I’m just not as sensitized to it – or maybe the national media has different standards for its coverage – but I haven’t heard as much about the religious positions on health care as I have about various religious groups holding forth on a candidates abortion voting record. In the past, religious organizations have very much been involved in social justice issues – slavery, civil rights, etc. Health care seems to be along those lines.
I think that is why they have been so quiet. Churches don’t want to be on the same side as the abortionists, but I think they do agree with making health care fair.
I doubt many churches are fans of single payer, as it gives more power to the government.
I don’t think the health care issue is as susceptible to a right/wrong dichotomy as are issues like slavery, civil rights, and abortion. It’s one thing to say that a society should provide basic health care to all, but translating that moral notion into a position on single payer versus public option versus co-ops versus deregulation is probably more complicated that doing so on the other issues you mention.
Can we tax the UMC now, Doug?
Fine with me.
The Catholic church has been taking up the health care cause (though not as loudly as the abortion cause). Every week, the Archidocese of Indianapolis newspaper The Criterion has at least one article about health care for all. The main difference: Catholics are allowed to publicly question that stance via letters to the editor while arguments for abortion rights are excommunicated out of the publication.
To further the Catholic angle, I will provide a Pastoral statement written by the Kentucky Bishops. It was actually written by a theology professor & priest I had.
http://www.ccky.org/Resources/Public%20Witness/Health%20Care%20Is%20a%20Moral%20Right.pdf
It does not get the attention that abortion gets, but the position of the Catholic Church, from the local (Arch)Diocese to Encyclicals from the Holy See is consistent: that health care is a right. The right stems from the right to live a dignified life, and that the right should be prioritized for the poor.
I am not a practicing Catholic. I disagree with many of the Church’s antiquated positions. But on this, I happen to be on the same page.
To put it in a Constitutional or Lockean framework, if the right to be secure in one’s life is absolute, does this imply a right to access those societal constructs that aid in the preservation of that right?
I wish we spent more time talking about the various philosophies on health care as an imperative and a lot less on Death Panels (TM).
marc
Most catholics seem to be able to separate the secular world of law vs the spiritual world of faith.I can’t speak for other catholics,and Im not necessarily a typical catholic,but that has never been my goal.I do know Im not the only anti-abortion-pro-choice catholic. We’ve had lots of pro-choice catholics elected to public office,but it was never clear how they stood on issues for themselves,only how they would legislate them.. But one thing they have in common is that they believe in the Constitution and in secular government and don’t see that as a threat to church teachings.For me, the conservative Protestant politcians have become scary since they are unwilling or incapable of separating secular from religious domains. Secretary Sebelius and the Kennedy tradition of public service, VP Biden are immediate examples of those who can.
..The church postion is very clear and is strictly anti-abortion on all levels,and life is sacred til death,so many catholics logically believe that if government intervenes on one level for pro-life,why not on all stages for life issues?
If healthcare is seen as a natural right( as I think the church does and I do) so why shouldn’t government have a hand and in providing it? That’s still the applied(pragmatic) morality of most catholic lawmakers,and that’s why many of us still feel comfortable in the pews.
I personally think that the catholic teaching of ‘freedom of conscience’ ,which encourages catholics to weigh church teachings as an integral set of belief, frees catholic lawmakers to vote their conscience,and evaluate consequences of their actions. In Protestant churches either one accepts Scripture as nuanced in their church, or find another chruch.Again my personal understanding.
My perception is that Protestants can’t easily sit next to each other in the pews with differently ordered moral values,and in Protestantism the minister makes a real difference how Scripture is ordered and presented in importance.. The mass is the basis of community worship,and is always the same.That’s not to say a priest doesn’t give homilies on abortion,etc,but I see it as the church’s view ,separate from the mass,where my conscience is fed.
Even a language difference is no real issue..Ive been to mass in French,Dutch,German,Polish and latin and it’s all the same. What historically has been the biggest issue for parishoners,in my view, is ethnicity,and in Chicago anyway, masses can be celebrated with mostly Irish,or Polish, or different Hispanic groupings in attendance.Some churches have Polish and English and Spanish masses.
These are just my own personal views,but catholics still take a beating sometimes.I think the institution of teh church has been diminished due to the molestation scandals,and understandably so..
.
So on one level the church is little more than a corrupt organization that didnt patrol itself(like so many powerful, monied secular organizations in today’s news),but mass is still what you want it to be.
I am giving only my own personal views,and I don’t mean to demean anyone’s way of thinking.But I think that religion should be part of our politcial debate,but put more into a larger spectrum.