There is a bipartisan amendment sponsored by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) that would require private and public health plans to cover all "spiritual care" - whether or not the individual has religious objections to medical care. This proposed funding undermines our Constitution and will open up your tax dollars to scam artists.

This amendment will make an existing problem worse. Religious people who object to medical care already have some "spiritual care" covered by Medicare and Medicaid. This "spiritual care" includes reimbursements for payments that Christian Scientists make to members of the Church who pray for them when they are ill. Numerous children have died while receiving this "spiritual care" when modern science would easily have saved their lives.

Under the new amendment, all health plans would be obligated to cover such expenses. The Hatch-Kerry bill amendment doesn't stop there, expanding this practice to all Americans, regardless of whether or not they object to medical care. Tax payers would help foot the bill for this religion-based care, care offering no scientific evidence of effectiveness. "Care" which, in fact, endangers lives by placing government approval on non-scientific practices.

Another amendment, proposed by Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming), would ensure that doctors can deny patients any care or information that violates the doctor's religious beliefs. This violation of medical ethics is labeled with the Orwellian term "Conscience Clause" - i.e. denying or delaying proper care for a person in need. This amendment cruelly places the religious beliefs of practitioners (such as pharmacists) above the medical needs of patients. This amendment threatens your access to contraception, end-of-life care, HIV care, and any other care to which a health provider employee objects.

Third, Senator Hatch has submitted an amendment requesting that funding for Title V abstinence-only-until-marriage programs be restored. Congress has wasted $ 1.5 billion on such programs since 1996. Numerous studies, including a 10-year government-funded evaluation of the Title V abstinence-only program, have found that these programs do not delay sexual initiation and have no beneficial impact on young people's health or sexual behavior. In addition to being ineffective and leaving out information on safe sex, many such programs contain false and misleading "medical" statements and teach religious propaganda and theologically-driven gender stereotypes to our children.

I thought Bristol Palin was going around trying to get everybody on board the “Abstinence Only” bus?

While I fully agree that science has proven itself a more consistent & reliable healer than spiritual care alone, I also recognize that some religions do not believe in doctors and the practice of medicine.

I think to solve this dilemma; the amendment must be worded such that the government will pay for certified and licensed spiritual care or appropriate medical care, but not both!

Yes, yes, of course that’s not going to prevent you from having a member of the clergy visit you in the hospital.

And perhaps there can be some nominal amount that can overlap, say $1,000 or so. But the government should not, must not, be on the hook for many thousands of dollars for both spiritual healing and medical care. Care must also be taken that taxpayer funds don’t go out to “snake-oil” salesmen, charlatans & con-artists, which is why I think anyone who receives government funding must have a valid license.

quote:

Originally posted by DaleU:
I thought Bristol Palin was going around trying to get everybody on board the “Abstinence Only” bus?

While I fully agree that science has proven itself a more consistent & reliable healer than spiritual care alone, I also recognize that some religions do not believe in doctors and the practice of medicine.

I think to solve this dilemma; the amendment must be worded such that the government will pay for certified and licensed spiritual care or appropriate medical care, but not both!

Yes, yes, of course that’s not going to prevent you from having a member of the clergy visit you in the hospital.

And perhaps there can be some nominal amount that can overlap, say $1,000 or so. But the government should not, must not, be on the hook for many thousands of dollars for both spiritual healing and medical care. Care must also be taken that taxpayer funds don’t go out to “snake-oil” salesmen, charlatans & con-artists, which is why I think anyone who receives government funding must have a valid license.

Hello DaleU,

Your service period and your thoughts on how to solve certain problems fit my way of thinking.

Not sure if they will listen to our line of thoughts, but here's to those of us who would really find answer that is logical and fair.

(That is an Arnold Palmer, not beer)

LJ

quote:

Originally posted by DaleU:
I think to solve this dilemma; the amendment must be worded such that the government will pay for certified and licensed spiritual care or appropriate medical care, but not both!

That sounds like a great idea, not only because those alternative treatments are much cheaper than actual effective ones, but because it would provide "evolution in action," letting the weaker minds die off.

I'm afraid that in the real world, though, there'd be no way hospitals would actually deny care to the believers once they finally gave up and went to the emergency room. In fact, there's already laws on the books most places to require such treatment for anyone.

On the bright side - part of the Obama's health care promises include tracking treatment efficacy and using industrial "best practices" techniques to increase funding for those that work and decrease it for those that don't. If that were fully put into place (which won't happen, of course), then not only faith healing, but other woo such as acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, and the others would find themselves being marginalized and underfunded.

quote:

Originally posted by billbright:
Another amendment, proposed by Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming), would ensure that doctors can deny patients any care or information that violates the doctor's religious beliefs. This violation of medical ethics is labeled with the Orwellian term "Conscience Clause" - i.e. denying or delaying proper care for a person in need.

This one actually bothers me more. Not only am I opposed to the intended effects - denying abortion and contraception, extending life against the patient's wishes, and so forth - I am afraid that such a "Conscience Clause" could be perverted to even worse use. It could justify a health-care provider refusing to treat people of a different religion, race, or whatever. Imagine a doctor morally opposed to miscegenation, refusing to treat a mixed-race child because of its "unnatural, immoral" parentage.

Hi, Mark. Good to 'see' you again.

I agree that this one is maybe the most onerous of the three, but all three create a very slippery slope.

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:

quote:

Originally posted by DaleU:
I think to solve this dilemma; the amendment must be worded such that the government will pay for certified and licensed spiritual care or appropriate medical care, but not both!

That sounds like a great idea, not only because those alternative treatments are much cheaper than actual effective ones, but because it would provide "evolution in action," letting the weaker minds die off.

I'm afraid that in the real world, though, there'd be no way hospitals would actually deny care to the believers once they finally gave up and went to the emergency room. In fact, there's already laws on the books most places to require such treatment for anyone.

On the bright side - part of the Obama's health care promises include tracking treatment efficacy and using industrial "best practices" techniques to increase funding for those that work and decrease it for those that don't. If that were fully put into place (which won't happen, of course), then not only faith healing, but other woo such as acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, and the others would find themselves being marginalized and underfunded.

Hello BobApril,

Excellent addition to the post by DaleU,

Now if we who disagree can stop fighting about our beliefs long enough to actually mutually support something like this, we might actually have a chance for success.

Sadly, we have a habit of dropping back into our old beliefs and thinking that the 'other side' has no redeeming values at all and everything they say is 'bad'.

Just $0.02, it would be outstanding if I was proven wrong in this one case. Not sure how many times I have wanted to be proven wrong.

LJ

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:

quote:

Originally posted by DaleU:
I think to solve this dilemma; the amendment must be worded such that the government will pay for certified and licensed spiritual care or appropriate medical care, but not both!

That sounds like a great idea, not only because those alternative treatments are much cheaper than actual effective ones, but because it would provide "evolution in action," letting the weaker minds die off.

I'm afraid that in the real world, though, there'd be no way hospitals would actually deny care to the believers once they finally gave up and went to the emergency room. In fact, there's already laws on the books most places to require such treatment for anyone.

On the bright side - part of the Obama's health care promises include tracking treatment efficacy and using industrial "best practices" techniques to increase funding for those that work and decrease it for those that don't. If that were fully put into place (which won't happen, of course), then not only faith healing, but other woo such as acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, and the others would find themselves being marginalized and underfunded.

Hello BobApril,

Excellent addition to the post by DaleU,

Now if we who disagree can stop fighting about our beliefs long enough to actually mutually support something like this, we might actually have a chance for success.

Sadly, we have a habit of dropping back into our old beliefs and thinking that the 'other side' has no redeeming values at all and everything they say is 'bad'.

Just $0.02, it would be outstanding if I was proven wrong in this one case. Not sure how many times I have wanted to be proven wrong.

LJ

I don't understand. Why would even you want to support this foolishness?

W.T.H.!!??

For over seventeen years I have visited hospitals nursing homes and the homes of shut-ins all over the place!!

Never once did I ask for, or receive, a DIME!!

I do know that some hospice Chaplains receive a stipend for their services and am dead set against it!

Without exception the most common complaint I hear, from the people I visit is when an old person can no longer easily attend church services and friends finnaly play out and don't give them rides anymore, the church of which they have been a member of all their lives forgets they exist!!

The Pastors don't visit, they don't call, and the lame excuse they ALL give, is that they will call or visit if the parishoner calls for a visit or a call!!

BUT THE PLEDGE CARDS KEEP SHOWING UP IN THE DAMNED MAIL!!!

And if you don't send in your pledge THEN THEY CALL TO SEE WHERE IT IS!!!

For those of you who may be nonplussed out there over this, it is called AN OBSCENITY!!

This goes for EVERY church it is NOT endemic to one denomination or another they ALL do it unless the Pastor is an active advocate of visitation by parishoners and clergy and lay clergy!!

Now as far as the government PAYING for spiritual care?????

SCREW DAT!!

Clear enough?? I flippin' hope so!!!

T

quote:

For over seventeen years I have visited hospitals nursing homes and the homes of shut-ins all over the place!!

Well, Bruce, that's the most biblical thing I've heard you say! Visit any one in prision lately. That's my favorite place to "obley" the bible.

Man talk about selective perception!!

Once you read something, do you remember it?

What I do in ministry is all over these boards.

quote:

Originally posted by reducetension:

quote:

For over seventeen years I have visited hospitals nursing homes and the homes of shut-ins all over the place!!

Well, Bruce, that's the most biblical thing I've heard you say! Visit any one in prision lately. That's my favorite place to "obley" the bible.

I can see you are not at all familiar with prison outreach programs. The prisoners have to request the program and be approved for it. They are not quite the captive audience you seem to be envisioning.

quote:

Originally posted by thorin001:

quote:

Originally posted by reducetension:

quote:

For over seventeen years I have visited hospitals nursing homes and the homes of shut-ins all over the place!!

Well, Bruce, that's the most biblical thing I've heard you say! Visit any one in prision lately. That's my favorite place to "obley" the bible.

I can see you are not at all familiar with prison outreach programs. The prisoners have to request the program and be approved for it. They are not quite the captive audience you seem to be envisioning.

True. But I have worked in prisons, including military prisons, for several decades. All kinds of volunteers function in them (it saves the prison money, sort of.) It varies more from prison to prison than by any one set rule.

quote:

Originally posted by billbright:

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:

quote:

Originally posted by DaleU:
I think to solve this dilemma; the amendment must be worded such that the government will pay for certified and licensed spiritual care or appropriate medical care, but not both!

That sounds like a great idea, not only because those alternative treatments are much cheaper than actual effective ones, but because it would provide "evolution in action," letting the weaker minds die off.

I'm afraid that in the real world, though, there'd be no way hospitals would actually deny care to the believers once they finally gave up and went to the emergency room. In fact, there's already laws on the books most places to require such treatment for anyone.

On the bright side - part of the Obama's health care promises include tracking treatment efficacy and using industrial "best practices" techniques to increase funding for those that work and decrease it for those that don't. If that were fully put into place (which won't happen, of course), then not only faith healing, but other woo such as acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, and the others would find themselves being marginalized and underfunded.

Hello BobApril,

Excellent addition to the post by DaleU,

Now if we who disagree can stop fighting about our beliefs long enough to actually mutually support something like this, we might actually have a chance for success.

Sadly, we have a habit of dropping back into our old beliefs and thinking that the 'other side' has no redeeming values at all and everything they say is 'bad'.

Just $0.02, it would be outstanding if I was proven wrong in this one case. Not sure how many times I have wanted to be proven wrong.

LJ

I don't understand. Why would even you want to support this foolishness?

Hi Billbright,

There are a few reasons that come to mind (not inclusive by no means).

1. Mainly getting rid of stupid items once and for all.
2. Holding people accountable for what they do to others.
3. Actually making groups have to do research and document what they want to do and then stick to it, once it is written.
4. Prove what works and what does not work.
5. Document that you have been given a chance an, failed and will not be given the same support for your ideas again, once they have been proven wrong.
6. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, actually trying to DO SOMETHING that can be supported through laws to eliminate stupid ideas as opposed to just stating opinions, of which we all have those.


Can you elaborate what YOU think is foolish about my suggestion?

LJ

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:

quote:

Originally posted by billbright:

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:

quote:

Originally posted by DaleU:
I think to solve this dilemma; the amendment must be worded such that the government will pay for certified and licensed spiritual care or appropriate medical care, but not both!

That sounds like a great idea, not only because those alternative treatments are much cheaper than actual effective ones, but because it would provide "evolution in action," letting the weaker minds die off.

I'm afraid that in the real world, though, there'd be no way hospitals would actually deny care to the believers once they finally gave up and went to the emergency room. In fact, there's already laws on the books most places to require such treatment for anyone.

On the bright side - part of the Obama's health care promises include tracking treatment efficacy and using industrial "best practices" techniques to increase funding for those that work and decrease it for those that don't. If that were fully put into place (which won't happen, of course), then not only faith healing, but other woo such as acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, and the others would find themselves being marginalized and underfunded.

Hello BobApril,

Excellent addition to the post by DaleU,

Now if we who disagree can stop fighting about our beliefs long enough to actually mutually support something like this, we might actually have a chance for success.

Sadly, we have a habit of dropping back into our old beliefs and thinking that the 'other side' has no redeeming values at all and everything they say is 'bad'.

Just $0.02, it would be outstanding if I was proven wrong in this one case. Not sure how many times I have wanted to be proven wrong.

LJ

I don't understand. Why would even you want to support this foolishness?

Hi Billbright,

There are a few reasons that come to mind (not inclusive by no means).

1. Mainly getting rid of stupid items once and for all.
2. Holding people accountable for what they do to others.
3. Actually making groups have to do research and document what they want to do and then stick to it, once it is written.
4. Prove what works and what does not work.
5. Document that you have been given a chance an, failed and will not be given the same support for your ideas again, once they have been proven wrong.
6. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, actually trying to DO SOMETHING that can be supported through laws to eliminate stupid ideas as opposed to just stating opinions, of which we all have those.


Can you elaborate what YOU think is foolish about my suggestion?

LJ

LJ, like the guy says in Oh Brother, Where Art Thou, that don' make no damn sense. I mean, absolutely none of it does. Are you sure you're in the right thread?

quote:

Originally posted by billbright:

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:
...tracking treatment efficacy and using industrial "best practices" techniques to increase funding for those that work and decrease it for those that don't. If that were fully put into place...then not only faith healing, but other woo such as acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, and the others would find themselves being marginalized and underfunded.

1. Mainly getting rid of stupid items once and for all.
2. Holding people accountable for what they do to others.
3. Actually making groups have to do research and document what they want to do and then stick to it, once it is written.
4. Prove what works and what does not work.
5. Document that you have been given a chance an, failed and will not be given the same support for your ideas again, once they have been proven wrong.
6. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, actually trying to DO SOMETHING that can be supported through laws to eliminate stupid ideas as opposed to just stating opinions, of which we all have those.

LJ, like the guy says in Oh Brother, Where Art Thou, that don' make no damn sense. I mean, absolutely none of it does. Are you sure you're in the right thread?

I believe that you may have misunderstood our friend all4truth, Bill - I think he was agreeing with my idea of making the woo-treatments show effectiveness in scientific tests. He's not supporting the original article, paying for healing prayer.

quote:

1. Mainly getting rid of stupid items once and for all.
2. Holding people accountable for what they do to others.
3. Actually making groups have to do research and document what they want to do and then stick to it, once it is written.
4. Prove what works and what does not work.
5. Document that you have been given a chance an, failed and will not be given the same support for your ideas again, once they have been proven wrong.
6. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, actually trying to DO SOMETHING that can be supported through laws to eliminate stupid ideas as opposed to just stating opinions, of which we all have those.

What would REALLY be neat is if we could apply these rules to government and it's failed and failing edifices to the stupidity of mankind!!

1. Failed welfare ideas.
2. the subjugation into slavery of families in the current welfare systems.
3. once a system or beaurocracy is shown to be a failure, ELIMINATING it! Instead of creating a self continuing, self sustaing organism which is concerned only with self perpetuation, rather than the goals for which it was originally conceived.
4. See above item!
5. Once you have failed at an objectified goal eliminate funding physical plant and start again with a new concept rather than continue a proven failure!!
6. Needs no explanation or restatement it stands as stated!!

quote:

eliminate stupid ideas

I was under the assumption voting did that, but really it is the self interest candidates that run and we vote for that are a problem. Get better brighter people in there and limit their terms so they are less likely to buy into the campaign follies that absorb their major interests (i.e. getting money from special interest groups/corporations.)

Of course, a citizen’s counsel selected by random to perform line-item vetoes might help. Make the White House accountable to how it signs a bill and Congress to how they write it.

Cut off credit cards to most Americans or limit to no more than a few hundred dollars if they miss payments. Credit Cards are the invention of the satan. They must be an abomination to the Lord?
Welfare... "the poor you will always have with you..." Have them join churches and have the churches support them, just like Jesus wanted and the early Church did (read the first 6 chapter of Acts.) Of course the poor are not the problem. It’s the overly rich that have become a problem. Tax ‘em!
Tax churches with too much stuff and gross revenue if they don't supplement the income of their members to a standard that will equalize the congregation. Having more Christians in the nation is pointless if they are not doing Christian things "one unto another"... as the Bible teaches.

Add a couple of more parties to election mix that can get set in Congress... wild eyed conservatives on one end and flipping liberals on the other, and a couple of moderate one between... and maybe let the Republicans become extinct all together.

Why is it that all the plans you offer ALWAYS have somebody ELSE paying for them??

We have run out of money what part of that don't you understand?

The AVERAGE American is taxed right now to the tune of fifty three percent in hidden taxes never mind income tax that only 38% of the upper wage earners pay anyway!!

quote:

1. Failed welfare ideas.

I agree some programs have had negative side effects. Some people become dependent on the aid. Most, don't, however.

What would YOU do for families in distress?

The single biggest thing to do to restore people to wage earner status is to provide qualified government certified child care workrs for dependant families so that (one) those mothers can work(two this will free up others to work and keep their wages in large part with a sliding scale so that SOMETHING is paid by all in the system.

I laid this all out a year or so ago on the threads and you saw it then. This sets up a system that lets one woman or man with let's say two kids work for 10 an hour and pay fifty a week into the system he or she keeps their food stamps, works for a wage that will increase with experience to a darned good one. Do you have any idea what day care providers are paid??

One person can comfortably care for six kids two for twelve and so forth. This frees up to work, those parents who can now AFFORD day care and GOOD day care for their kids.

Let them keep rental assistance as well, as they work and increase earning potential they will gradually remove themselves from the roles of welfare, some thing any one normally wants to do. Other parents of course will enter the job market in different specialties of service or profession as they choose.

That's a good idea. But it's possible that will create a NEW dependency, and therefore a new failed program--as some will see it? Child care might become the new entitlement that people will make sure they don't earn enough money to do without. Going past that magic number would be the same as a five hundred dollar a month decrease in wages. Would you limit the length of time a person can receive this benefit? Or, would it be better to make it a universal benefit, and allow people to opt for private day care.

Now... how do you help those who can't find a job, can't work, etc?

How do you help those who can't afford health care?

Yeah that would work, as long as the program remains cost neutral.

The start up would be costly but once it was up and running balancing it to provide for everybody just means more people are working whether they are the day care providers or those using the services.

People making a good salary would pay full boat and those making less pay less, just keep it on a cost neutral basis no tax dollars other than start up funds to begin the whole thing.

quote:

Now... how do you help those who can't find a job, can't work, etc?

How do you help those who can't afford health care?

I don't believe that somebody can find NO work.. I do agree they might not find the job they want, but they should still work! When the job they want opens up, well then go for it!!

If like me they can't work, then present programs should be enough. I paid all of my life so I feel no shame in using it (social security) I produced the numbers sufficient to provide fifteen percent of my pay in taxes so it is like an insurance policy and others should be encouraged to see it that way as well.

I talked to a friend the other day that had been laid off work. He had been paid $22.00 per hour, Now with the economy the way it is there are no companys willing to pay that amount instead he would have to settle for from $9.00 per hour to $12.00 per hour. This cut in pay would not allow him to make payments,buy food, pay the $400. permonth health insurence for his family along with all the other insurence required by law, then there is the daycare for his 3 children which costs almost $500. per week. ow can people afford to go back to work and olny make 1/2 the salery they were making.
There is not one singel person to blame for what We as people have done to ourselves. Greed has run rampent over this country and idiots have reached a new high in being idiots. (mainly our elected officals in our government) cant all be blamed on any one group altho obama has spent more in 9 mos. then bush did in 8 years. and Nope it didnt work eather. there needs to be signes posted on all their offices "Idiots at work"
D.J.

quote:

I don't believe that somebody can find NO work.. I do agree they might not find the job they want, but they should still work! When the job they want opens up, well then go for it!!

Did somebody forget to tell this guy:
'http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?cl=16228041

quote:

Why is it that all the plans you offer ALWAYS have somebody ELSE paying for them??

We have run out of money what part of that don't you understand?

The AVERAGE American is taxed right now to the tune of fifty three percent in hidden taxes never mind income tax that only 38% of the upper wage earners pay anyway!!

Tax religious institutions, what's wrong with that idea? Make them take care of their members, as the Bible requires, or tax them.

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:

quote:

Originally posted by billbright:

quote:

Originally posted by all4truth:

quote:

Originally posted by BobApril:
...tracking treatment efficacy and using industrial "best practices" techniques to increase funding for those that work and decrease it for those that don't. If that were fully put into place...then not only faith healing, but other woo such as acupuncture, homeopathy, chiropractic, and the others would find themselves being marginalized and underfunded.

1. Mainly getting rid of stupid items once and for all.
2. Holding people accountable for what they do to others.
3. Actually making groups have to do research and document what they want to do and then stick to it, once it is written.
4. Prove what works and what does not work.
5. Document that you have been given a chance an, failed and will not be given the same support for your ideas again, once they have been proven wrong.
6. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, actually trying to DO SOMETHING that can be supported through laws to eliminate stupid ideas as opposed to just stating opinions, of which we all have those.

LJ, like the guy says in Oh Brother, Where Art Thou, that don' make no damn sense. I mean, absolutely none of it does. Are you sure you're in the right thread?

I believe that you may have misunderstood our friend all4truth, Bill - I think he was agreeing with my idea of making the woo-treatments show effectiveness in scientific tests. He's not supporting the original article, paying for healing prayer.

What BobApril said. I apologize Billbright for getting way to cute in my response and confusing my self AND YOU in the process.

I do believe this would work for many hair brain ideas that people come up with.

LJ

quote:

Originally posted by reducetension:

quote:

Why is it that all the plans you offer ALWAYS have somebody ELSE paying for them??

We have run out of money what part of that don't you understand?

The AVERAGE American is taxed right now to the tune of fifty three percent in hidden taxes never mind income tax that only 38% of the upper wage earners pay anyway!!

Tax religious institutions, what's wrong with that idea? Make them take care of their members, as the Bible requires, or tax them.

ReduceTension,

I disagree with your suggestion. A better suggestion would be to put the tax back on the contributions to the religious organizations.

Not that I think either of these ideas is the best idea.

Added much later - the best answer, IMHO.
Leave things alone and let people do what they want with their money. If you find an organization that violates the law, prosecute them. Seems straight forward to me.

LJ

This message has been edited. Last edited by: all4truth,

LJ What are the conditions that Jesus teaches for helping someone and for how does one help and who should pay for that?