What makes a hospital Catholic? Jewish? Etc?

This is well done - a good idea. Let Catholic run health care institutions be designated by another name - "Catholic Health Services", for example. Same for any other religious group that wants to limit medical practice to less than that which generally available based on science.

This may also solve the problem of "conscience", when a doctor or other health care provider is required to perform a medical service that is against their beliefs. Let them work at health services that conform to their beliefs. But, if they work at a public hospital, they need to perform all the services that science and the law allow.

But, they should not get federal or state money. No Medicare/Medicaid, no federal money to build, supply, or run. That would be tax dollars going to support a faith.

This is a good idea.

No so-called religious institution should have any business functions or any other operations not explicitly religious such as hospitals, nursing homes, food providers, housing shelters, clothing outlets, bingo parlors, parking facilities, schools, non religious consoling, day care not for parents attending religious services or instruction, etc. I for one refuse to allow any religious superstition or dogma to have any influence directly on any governmental or business law, service, or action! Religions only have a right to advise their members on actions by their members for their members; they may argue for society to change its behavior, but no government or business should be allowed to impose any actions based solely on religious grounds. To do so, makes us no better than other theologies such as Israel, the Vatican or Saudi Arabia!

If the religious communities, if you will, like to follow certain precepts they are free to do so. I don't feel neither government nor anyone else can interfere with that. That being said the religious institutions such as RCC, Baptists, and whatever shade they may be should not encroach into secular domain unless they are willing to live by the secular rules. Otherwise they can go away like the Amish and remove themselves from the secular world all together.

Given that RCC and all these bigoted religious institutions have a strangle hold, whenever there are these extra secular fiats at the hospitals their funding from the benefactors and the patients should stop patronizing these institutions run by theses bigoted people and institutions. I passionately believe that we secularists should dig and start doing that. Next time when we are going for an elective procedures we should ask this of the hospital and make sure that the specialist we engage has privileges at more secular hospitals too and request that we be treated in those secular hospitals. Cut the bastards off their life line, $$$$$$$.

BRAD HIRSCHFIELD:

Your post in response to the questions about practices in Catholic hospitals IS EXCELLENT. Maybe as good as any post I have read on ON FAITH.

A hospital (health center, whatever) can make any rules it chooses, provided such are not illegal. The people who work in such hospitals MUST obey the rules or suffer whatever consequence the hospital authorities decide to pass out. This can pose a terrible delima for certain employes, and if they follow their conscience instead of the rule, they suffer.

I think the rules and actions cited in the questions for discussion ARE DEAD WRONG, but a non-public funded church has the right to make such rules, and the staff must do what it must do.

I just hope none of my tax dollars are going to the hospitals cited herein.

Call them whatever you want.
No one is forcing you to go to a Catholic hospital.
But it certainly seems as though you people would force them to become the type of hospital that you find acceptable.
And all because they have a policy against infanticide.
You people are truly evil

Well said, Mr. Hirschfield. I don't see how a facility that won't provide basic services such as a tubal ligation can be called a hospital.

I understand the position many Catholic people (and others) have on abortion, though I don't share their beliefs. But rejecting voluntary sterilizations? How is that any business of a bishop? Of anyone but the person making the decision to limit their fertility?

If you want to make your case to your parishioners, fine, but personally, I'm not Catholic, not religious in general, and I don't want kids. That's my decision, not any bishops. I don't want to risk a pregnancy when neither my husband or myself wants to have children, and when carrying to term could be dangerous for my health. So I got myself 'fixed.' I personally consider that responsible behavior. Why does a priest's, a bishop's or a health care provider's beliefs trump my own?

I have to feel if a health care provider feels that strongly regarding a reasonable procedure, they might need to consider another line of work. I feel the same way regarding people who follow the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses' and their aversion to blood transfusions, or people who believe in Christian Science and believe that medicine in general should be forsworn. They can believe whatever they please, but they should have no power to control what anyone else does. And they don't. I have to wonder, why to Catholic bishops?

Also, a query, do Catholic institutions (I agree with Mr. Hirschfield, if they are guided by religious rather than medical principles, they aren't really hospitals) have the same problems with vasectomies?

And if hospitals that are impaired by their religious teachings forfeit the right to be called hospitals because they refuse to meet professional standards, they need to forfeit the right to collect all insurance, private or government.

Many Catholic or other religious hospitals have been funded by donations from the general community. Some donors may be happy to see the bishops behave irresponsibly, but I doubt most do. American bishops need to clean up their own house and stay out of areas that they clearly do not understand.