I really hate that ND is going this route. I just don't understand how offering medical coverage to someone who MAY OR MAY NOT take advantage of it. Is somehow infringing on ND's right to religious freedom?
It sounds much more like ND is trying to impose THEIR religious views on the people who work for the university.
Terrible message and an awful precedent to set.
There are so many issues with the logic of this post and your subsequent posts.... sigh....
1. You hate that ND is going this route, which is fine because you're entitled to your opinion. But you're saying this is a "terrible message" when the
majority of America supports the stance ND is taking and has previously taken a similar stance. 28 states total have sued, countless groups both religious and non-religious have sued, and a large majority of the population in polling dislikes the bill for whatever reason. So, by definition of the word "precedent," ND is not setting any kind of precedent at all. If anything, they are
following precedent set by others.
2. The concept of imposing religious views on employees of the University is ludicrous. It's a private University, not a publicly traded company or government office or public school. So it can make whatever rules it wants and if you don't like them go work/enroll somewhere else. When you sign up to work at Notre Dame you know exactly what health benefits you are getting in your terms of employment. Don't like it? Cool, it's your choice as a free American to go work somewhere else.
3. The idea that ND should be mandated to endorse something that, as a private Catholic university, they do not religiously approve us is insane. At it's logical conclusion, that's no different than saying Jehovah's witnesses should be forced to take blood transfusions because it will save lives. Or, as a more mild example, it's no different than saying Orthodox Jews running a food bank should have to accept donations of pork products. The 1st amendment fundamentally protects this right.
4. Don't even get me started on how many issues there are with the "IBM doesn't believe in cancer" crap. For starters, IBM isn't religious; is publicly traded; is a corporation; and cancer is a life-threatening disease NOT a completely optional medicine. You can't "not support the use of cancer" like you can "not support the use of birth control." Also, you should know that Notre Dame does support the use of contraceptive for medical reasons (polycystic ovarian syndrome, etc.). There is literally nothing truly "medical" about birth control when it is used just to have sex without creating a baby... which is a whole 'nother can of worms I'd rather not open.
