The Secular Coalition for America takes no position on the Baucus Health Care Bill itself, but we are working to defeat three proposed amendments that would alter public policy to privilege religious people.
Amendment 1- First is the bipartisan amendment sponsored by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and John Kerry (D-Mass.). Under current law, religious people who object to medical care may have some "spiritual care" covered by Medicare and Medicaid, including reimbursement 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 could easily have saved their lives. The Hatch-Kerry Amendment would make a bad situation even worse. It would expand such practices and require all private and public health plans to cover "spiritual care," whether or not the individual has religious objections to medical care. Not only does such funding undermine our Constitution, it more easily puts your tax dollars into the waiting hands of scam artists. Taxpayers would pay for this religion-based care, for which there is no scientific evidence of effectiveness. Even worse, placing the government stamp of approval on non-scientific practices such as "spiritual care" would place many more lives at risk.
Amendment 2- We also oppose an amendment by Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming), which would allow doctors to 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." This amendment cruelly places the religious beliefs of practitioners such as pharmacists above the medical needs of patients. It threatens access to contraception, end-of-life care, HIV care, and any other care to which a health provider objects. It would also allow health care providers to withhold information from patients about their health care status and their treatment options, in violation of informed consent and ethical standards. Medical professionals (whether doctors, pharmacists, or emergency technicians) are employed in the field of medicine, not spirituality. They have the right to consider their religious beliefs in determining medical decisions for their own care, but their personal religion should never infringe on the right of a patient to seek products or procedures that they have a legal right to obtain.
Amendment 3- Lastly, we object to an amendment by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), requesting that funding for Title V abstinence-only-until-marriage programs be restored. Congress has already wasted $1.5 billion on such programs since 1996, despite the fact that there is no evidence that abstinence-only programs have been effective in stopping or even delaying teen sex. Numerous studies, including a 10-year government-funded evaluation of the Title V abstinence-only program, found that these programs do not delay sexual initiation and have no beneficial impact on young people's sexual behavior. In addition to being ineffective, many such programs replace information about safe sex with false and misleading "medical" statements based more on ancient religious beliefs than on the best available scientific evidence.
The First Amendment protects religious freedom, but no American taxpayer should be forced to subsidize a fellow citizen's religious beliefs and practices. The Hatch, Kerry and Enzi amendments, in a misguided attempt to accommodate religion, encourage waste, poor outcomes, and anti-scientific thinking. They have no place in a bill whose goal is to make quality medical care more accessible to all.
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/herb_silverman/2009/09/health_funding_for_evidence_not_faith.htmlGah! I didn't even know that they were going to propose payment for "spiritual care." Why is Kerry supporting this?
I will check to find out the fate of these amenments and who voted for them.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
