HHS mandate on Catholic and other religious institutions

• Con_Alma

  A friend of mine is an OBGYN and he is Catholic. He has a private practice and he will not prescribe any birth control to his patients.
• sleeper

  

  Con_Alma;1077097 wrote:A friend of mine is an OBGYN and he is Catholic. He has a private practice and he will not prescribe any birth control to his patients.

  I don't necessarily blame him. The less BC he prescribes the more pregnant women he gets as patients. This is another case where someone is using religion to profit and the masses are hoodwinked into choosing religious beliefs over their own health.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1077080 wrote:You do realize that anyone who works for a religion is taxed on their earnings just like the rest of us, correct?
  
  Only "tax exempt" status is that the religion is not taxed on money that is donated to them. That money is donated from people who already paid taxes on their income. So, the money has already been taxed.
  
  It is no different than donations to any non-profit organization, they do not pay taxes on those donations either. Many non-profits provide free birth control and accept donations and they pay no tax on the donations either.
  
  FYI, in Ohio churches aren't even free from property taxes, I know this for a fact. So religious organizations really only get "away" with not paying taxes on the donations, just like every other non-profit out there.

  Interesting that this is how you defend churches being tax free entities. In this case, why should consumers have to pay sales tax? The money has already been taxed once, and then that money goes to a corporation which the profits are taxed, and then its distributed as capital gains which is also taxed. Using this logic, you are for the elimination of the sales tax, the corporate tax, and the capital gains tax. I hope you run for president, I would vote for you.
• Abe Vigoda

  

  majorspark;1076623 wrote:I can only imagine how tough it is for a man with Erectile Disfunction. At least your wife's employer covers your viagra.

  So you think prostate cancer is funny?
• Devils Advocate

  

  jmog;1077073 wrote: If the employees of a CATHOLIC institution don't believe in the CATHOLIC beliefs/practices then they are FREE to get a job anywhere else.

  And the institution is free to say no to federal funding.
  
  The Gubmint is not forcing or mandating that anyone use birth control. only that it is available.
  
  The Catholic Church should have no fear of this issue. If their followers do not wish to use birth conrol, no one is forcing themto submit to the dogma.
  
  I know several Catholic families that have 2 or fewer children. Do you think that they do not use birth control? or are they just really good at spray and pray?
• sleeper

  

  Devils Advocate;1077122 wrote:And the institution is free to say no to federal funding.
  
  The Gubmint is not forcing or mandating that anyone use birth control. only that it is available.
  
  The Catholic Church should have no fear of this issue. If their followers do not wish to use birth conrol, no one is forcing themto submit to the dogma.
  
  I know several Catholic families that have 2 or fewer children. Do you think that they do not use birth control? or are they just really good at spray and pray?

  I love the statement in bold. We all know most Catholics are CINOs. Reps. +1 A+
• Con_Alma

  sleeper;1077113 wrote:I don't necessarily blame him. The less BC he prescribes the more pregnant women he gets as patients. This is another case where someone is using religion to profit and the masses are hoodwinked into choosing religious beliefs over their own health.

  Not blaming him is to be understood and implied. What would there be to blame him for?
  
  He and his wife are truly practicing their faith. I have known them for many years now. They are quality people and I respect them both tremendously.
• sleeper

  

  Con_Alma;1077124 wrote:Not blaming him is to be understood and implied. What would there be to blame him for?
  
  He and his wife are truly practicing their faith. I have known them for many years now. They are quality people and I respect them both tremendously.

  /Con_Alma'd
• jmog

  sleeper;1076940 wrote: if you take government money(ie. have zero tax liability) you are subject to the rules and regulations of the government. You can choose not to follow these regulations, just like the government can choose to take away the funding. In this case, I hope they do because churches are profit money making machines that have business being given non-profit status.

  That is not even close to being accurate.
  
  Having to not pay federal taxes like a corporation is NOT the same as taking money from the federal government.
  
  One thing you are forgetting, churches are NOT 100% tax free, they are still required to pay property taxes.
  
  They are tax free on their donations, just like EVERY non-profit is.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1077178 wrote:That is not even close to being accurate.
  
  Having to not pay federal taxes like a corporation is NOT the same as taking money from the federal government.
  
  One thing you are forgetting, churches are NOT 100% tax free, they are still required to pay property taxes.
  
  They are tax free on their donations, just like EVERY non-profit is.

  They shouldn't be a non-profit. That is the point. They are corporations who parade as religious institutions to increase their wealth. Strip churches of their status, they don't deserve it.
• Con_Alma

  There are large universities that as government entities dont have similar tax liabilities as corporations and they are larger than many companies....and function like them.
  
  There are hospitals that do the same. I believe the Cleveland Clinic is non-profit.
• Devils Advocate

  

  The Federal Government has used it's funding to coerce for years. Anyone remember the Federal UniformDrinking Age Act?
  
  St. Ronnie blackmailed the states and said that they would not provide Federal Highway funds to any State that did not MANDATE that thier underage drinking law was not 21 years of age.
  
  The states did not have to adopt it, unless of course they wanted thier federal funding.
• jmog

  Devils Advocate;1077122 wrote:And the institution is free to say no to federal funding.
  
  The Gubmint is not forcing or mandating that anyone use birth control. only that it is available.
  
  The Catholic Church should have no fear of this issue. If their followers do not wish to use birth conrol, no one is forcing themto submit to the dogma.
  
  I know several Catholic families that have 2 or fewer children. Do you think that they do not use birth control? or are they just really good at spray and pray?

  1. The catholic church doesn't receive federal funding.
  2. The only common catholic entity that receives federal funding is chatolic hospitals. You do realize that it is about 5% of their total funding correct? Are you really saying that if someone takes a small percentage of their funds from the federal government then the federal government makes all the rules for them?
  
  You do realize that this could cause the catholic church to get out of the hospital business right? They did this when it came to adoption. The catholic church got out of the adoption business when the federal government mandated they accept adoption applications from homosexual couples. Whether you believe the catholic church is right or wrong on their stance on homosexuality, the federal government told them to go against their beliefs. So, they just got out of the adoption business.
  
  Some would think "well fine, let them get out of the hospital business" but as it stands right now 1 in 6 hospital patients in the US is served at a catholic hospital. The gubmint said Chrysler was "too big to fail" but Chrysler only held about 10% of the US market share of automobiles. Catholic hospitals make up about 17% of all hospitals in terms of number of patients seen.
• jmog

  sleeper;1077192 wrote:They shouldn't be a non-profit. That is the point. They are corporations who parade as religious institutions to increase their wealth. Strip churches of their status, they don't deserve it.

  1. That is your opinion, not a fact.
  2. Sounds like a pure communist plan.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1077202 wrote:1. That is your opinion, not a fact.
  2. Sounds like a pure communist plan.

  Yours is also an opinion not a fact.
  
  Communist plan to get the government out of religious instituions? They shouldn't be tax exempt.
• jmog

  sleeper;1077212 wrote:Yours is also an opinion not a fact.
  
  Communist plan to get the government out of religious instituions? They shouldn't be tax exempt.

  Give any facts as to why they "should not be tax exempt", not your opinion.
  
  I will give one fact, the law, end of discussion. The law states that any religious institution is exempt from taxes on donations just like all non-profit orgs.
  
  Your only reason is that you believe them to be profit bearing corporations, which they are not.
  
  I have actually sat on a financial board of a local church, and while there maybe some out there that are different, the finances are strictly watched to make sure no "profits" are made, that everything is spent for operations or improvements of the church.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1077241 wrote:Give any facts as to why they "should not be tax exempt", not your opinion.
  
  I will give one fact, the law, end of discussion. The law states that any religious institution is exempt from taxes on donations just like all non-profit orgs.
  
  Your only reason is that you believe them to be profit bearing corporations, which they are not.
  
  I have actually sat on a financial board of a local church, and while there maybe some out there that are different, the finances are strictly watched to make sure no "profits" are made, that everything is spent for operations or improvements of the church.

  The law is a derived from the opinions of people that we elect. This does not nullify my opinion that they should not be tax exempt. You lose.
  
  How does it feel to be wrong jmog?
• fish82

  

  sleeper;1077192 wrote:They shouldn't be a non-profit. That is the point. They are corporations who parade as religious institutions to increase their wealth. Strip churches of their status, they don't deserve it.

  You should generalize a little more. That would add some serious credibility to your position.
• sleeper

  

  fish82;1077249 wrote:You should generalize a little more. That would add some serious credibility to your position.

  You generalize as well. Otherwise, in order to make any statement, you would have to give every scenario known to man and beyond to not generalize. That is how the world works, we generalize, you generalize, your mom generalizes, etc.
  
  How does it feel to be wrong, fish82?
• fish82

  

  sleeper;1077253 wrote:You generalize as well. Otherwise, in order to make any statement, you would have to give every scenario known to man and beyond to not generalize. That is how the world works, we generalize, you generalize, your mom generalizes, etc.
  
  How does it feel to be wrong, fish82?

  I'll tell you if/when it happens. Until then, keep up the good fight, buckaroo. I find you entertaining.
• sleeper

  

  fish82;1077259 wrote:I'll tell you if/when it happens. Until then, keep up the good fight, buckaroo. I find you entertaining.

  It just happened. How does it feel?
  
  Do you or don't you generalize on everything you've ever commented on?
• fish82

  

  sleeper;1077260 wrote:It just happened. How does it feel?
  
  Do you or don't you generalize on everything you've ever commented on?

  Not really. No titty threads on SB today?
• sleeper

  

  fish82;1077265 wrote:Not really. No titty threads on SB today?

  I'm amazed then. You must be a human prodigy. It is literally IMPOSSIBLE for your brain to comprehend and analyze every single statement and every possibility before making a statement. Even saying "Obama will lose the general election' has many different scenarios that could make that untrue/ different. That is generalizing, you are taking the most likely scenario and painting it is fact/opinion. You've been ruined, how does it feel?
• jmog

  sleeper;1077248 wrote:The law is a derived from the opinions of people that we elect. This does not nullify my opinion that they should not be tax exempt. You lose.
  
  How does it feel to be wrong jmog?

  Oh I am wrong plenty of times, just not here.
  
  You have yet to still give a fact as to why they should NOT be non-profit.
• Bigdogg

  Catholic Health Partners is one of the largest health care systems in Ohio and Kentucky. It is safe to say that they would not survive without Medicaid and Medicare. You collect uncle Sams money, you dance to their song.
  
  

  Facts & Stats
  

  • Hospitals: 24
  • Long-Term Care Facilities: 15
  • Health Insurance Plan (PPO) Covered Lives: 117,962
  • Home Health Agencies: 8
  • Associates: 32,480
  • FTEs: 26,628
  • Affiliated Physicians: 5,593
  • Total Assets: $5.4 billion
  • Net Operating Revenues: $4.21 billion (2010)
  • Net Income: 220.5 million (2010)
  • Operating Income: $104 million (2010)
  • Total Annual Community Service Benefits: $365.1 million (2010)
  • Bond Ratings: Moody's: A1, S&P: AA-, Fitch: AA-

  Updated: Jan. 23, 2012
  

  Medicare and Medicaid Programs
  The Company renders services to patients under contractual arrangements with the Medicare and
  Medicaid programs. Net Medicare revenue was $1,413,814,000 and $1,325,369,000 for the years
  ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Net Medicaid revenue was $377,583,000 and
  $385,128,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009,

  http://www.health-partners.org/Reports/Recent Fiscal Year Reports/AFile_001_Audited_Financial_Statements.pdf