c. 2007 Religion News Service
Clergy, Democrats Vow Fight Over Insurance Veto
WASHINGTON (RNS) Praying for a presidential conversion but vowing a crusade if they don’t get one, Democrats joined religious leaders Tuesday (Oct. 2) to protest President Bush’s anticipated veto of a popular health insurance plan for low-income children.
It was the latest in a flurry of recent activity orchestrated by faith-based groups intent on pressuring Bush not to veto the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, approved by Congress last month. Knowing that a veto is likely, the group urged Congress to override it.
Describing it as an “11th-hour moment,” Democratic members of Congress and clergy alike appealed to the “very conscience of our nation” in urging Bush to sign the legislation.
“Followers of Jesus Christ do not oppose health care to children of low-income families,” said the Rev. Glenn Palmberg, president of the Evangelical Covenant Church.
No one thought they would change Bush’s mind, however. Doing so would take a “Saul to Paul conversion,” said Rep. James E. Clyburn, D-S.C., who has urged his party to frame issues like health care in moral terms.
SCHIP currently covers 6.6 million children whose families earn too much to qualify for Medicaid services for the poor, but who may not earn enough to buy private health insurance. The bill before Bush would expand coverage to an additional 4 million children, with an additional $35 billion in costs over the next five years.
Bush wants an increase of only $5 billion over the next five years. He argues that the SCHIP expansion would encourage families who have private insurance to switch to SCHIP.
The Rev. Jim Wallis, the head of the social justice group Sojourners/Call to Renewal, said it seemed Bush’s focus on “compassionate conservatism” has all but disappeared. If Bush vetoes the bill, Wallis said he’ll take further action to ensure that millions of children are covered.
“If the president vetoes the bill, overriding the veto will become our new faith-based initiative,” Wallis said.
_ Sarah McCann
McCain Under Fire for `Christian Nation’ Remarks
WASHINGTON (RNS) Presidential hopeful John McCain has come under fire for calling the United States “a Christian nation” that was “founded primarily on Christian principles.”
The Arizona Republican made his remarks in an interview with Dan Gilgoff, the political editor for Beliefnet.
The Rev. C. Welton Gaddy, president of the Washington-based Interfaith Alliance, called McCain’s remarks “appalling” and said “a Christian is a person who is a follower of Jesus. This whole nation is not a follower of Jesus.”
McCain did, however, draw some support from the Christian Coalition, which was founded by religious broadcaster Pat Robertson. During the 2000 campaign, McCain called Robertson and the late Jerry Falwell “agents of intolerance.”
“We believe this took a lot of courage,” said spokeswoman Michelle Combs, saying the group was “very proud” of the senator.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations, meanwhile, asked McCain to clarify what he meant.
“Senator McCain should know that our nation was founded on universal moral principles common to many religions and philosophies,” said Corey Saylor, the national legislative director for CAIR.
The National Jewish Democratic Council expressed similar feelings.
“Someone running for president ought to understand the Constitution a little better,” Ira N. Forman, executive director of the NJDC, said. “Nowhere does it say the United States is a `Christian’ nation.”
Dan Gilgoff, who conducted the interview with McCain, said the senator may have been unprepared to answer some of the questions touching on the religious right. “McCain has been insulated from some of that,” he said.
Gilgoff noted, however, that McCain is not alone _ according to a survey done by the First Amendment Center last month, 55 percent of Americans “believe that the Constitution establishes a Christian nation.”
_ Heather Donckels
Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Sex Toys Law
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (RNS) Within days, police and deputies in Alabama could begin to arrest merchants who sell sex toys.
On Monday (Oct. 1), the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the challenge of a state ban on sex toy sales, effectively ending a nine-year legal battle over the constitutionality of the law.
Sheri Williams, who brought the legal challenge as the owner of Pleasures boutiques in Huntsville and Decatur, said her shops will remain open.
“My stand has always been I’ll fight until there is no fight left in me, even if I have to fight it from my jail cell,” Williams said by phone Monday from a lingerie trade show in Las Vegas.
“I have decided to file another challenge,” said Williams, adding that this time she would challenge the state ban on First Amendment grounds rather than on issues of sexual privacy.
Meanwhile, the Alabama attorney general’s office will go to federal court to end an injunction that has delayed enforcement of the ban.
“Now it has been settled. Now the injunction has to be dissolved,” said Chris Bence, chief of staff for Attorney General Troy King. “That’s just a formality, but it must be done.”
Madison County District Attorney Tim Morgan said he did not plan to mount a campaign against sex toy retailers but would consider cases supplied by police.
“It’s a pretty low priority,” said Morgan. “We’ve got plenty of work to do. We don’t need to be going out drumming up business.”
The ban stems from a few lines of the 14-page Anti-Obscenity Enforcement Act, passed by the Legislature in 1998. The law includes a prohibition against the distribution or production of “any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs.”
Violators face up to a year in jail and a fine of not more than $10,000. Possession is not illegal. Georgia, Texas, Nebraska, Virginia, Mississippi and Louisiana have similar bans.
_ Challen Stephens
Indian Priest Claims Miracle Due to Mother Teresa
VATICAN CITY (RNS) In an event that could qualify Mother Teresa for sainthood, an Indian priest claims he was miraculously cured of a large kidney stone after praying to Teresa on the 10th anniversary of her death.
According to the Catholic Church’s UCA News agency, the Rev. V.M. Thomas of Guwahati, in northeastern India, was scheduled for surgery to remove a half-inch kidney stone on Sept. 6.
On Sept. 5, the 10th anniversary of Mother Teresa’s death, Thomas celebrated Mass at a home for abandoned children founded by the late nun.
The next day, X-rays and an ultrasound revealed that the kidney stone had disappeared. The surgeon in charge reportedly described the disappearance of the stone as “beyond medical explanation.”
In documents shown to UCA News by Archbishop Thomas Menamparampil of Guwahati, Thomas stated his belief that the stone miraculously disappeared while he celebrated Mass and prayed to Mother Teresa for his surgery to be successful.
Pope John Paul II beatified Mother Teresa, founder of the Missionaries of Charity, in 2003, bringing her one step short of sainthood. To qualify her for canonization, the Vatican must officially attribute a miracle occurring since that time to her intervention.
_ Francis X. Rocca
N.Y. Bishops Ponder Strategy on Contraceptives Law
SYRACUSE, N.Y. (RNS) New York’s Roman Catholic bishops could drop prescription drug benefits from employee health plans to circumvent a state law that mandates prescription coverage for contraceptives.
Dennis Poust, director of communications for the New York State Catholic Conference, discussed the possibility Monday (Oct. 1) after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to consider a challenge to the law from church groups.
“The state has put us in an untenable position,” Poust said. “We teach contraception is sinful, but we teach that everyone has a right to health care. It is a Catch-22.”
Dioceses could cancel prescription coverage and provide a stipend to pay for prescriptions, he said. Or dioceses could opt for self-insurance, which is not subject to state mandates.
“From a moral theology perspective, it’s one step removed from the sinful act,” Poust said.
Last October, the New York State Court of Appeals upheld an earlier ruling by the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court, rejecting religious groups’ arguments that the 2002 Women’s Health and Wellness Act violates religious freedom.
Ten religious organizations in New York sued the state in December 2002, claiming the law _ which requires health insurers to provide coverage for obstetric and gynecologic care _ should include a religious exemption for organizations that do not support birth control.
In 2004, the Supreme Court declined to review a similar case argued by the California Catholic Conference.
According to a spring LeMoyne College/Zogby International poll, 67 percent of American Catholics disagree with church teaching that artificial birth control is wrong.
If bishops decide to eliminate prescription coverage, they would again discriminate against women, said Betty DeFazio, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood in the Rochester/Syracuse region.
“For women, reproductive care is routine health care,” she said. “To deny that for women who are trying to be responsible just doesn’t make sense.”
New York’s law affects employees of the church’s ministries, such as Catholic Charities and schools. Employees of churches and the bishops’ staffs are exempt because they serve organizations of people with mainly the same faith and provide services that are primarily religious.
_ Renee K. Gadoua
Quote of the Day: Catholic Blogger Rocco Palmo
(RNS) “I respect the priesthood so much I chose not to mar it with myself.”
_ Rocco Palmo, Philadelphia-based blogger of Whispers in the Loggia and a writer for The Tablet, speaking at the annual meeting of the Religion Newswriters Association in San Antonio.
KRE/LF END RNS
