News-Record.com

From the article:
"They are talking about a recent bill requiring all Connecticut hospitals to offer emergency contraception to rape victims."

Because a key Catholic value is to support a rapist's efforts to force a woman to help him reproduce? Have they lost their minds?

I have to admit, that I don't like the church stepping in blocking a measure that doesn't kill innocent babies but still prevents unwanted children. I've never seen much biblical support for calling the use of contraceptives a sin.

The issue I think in these cases and the "morning after" pill is whether its truly a contraceptive or a termination of the pregnancy. I've heard good evidence both ways. In the end, I draw my line at the morning after pill and go no further. In this case, its not required to be administered (which I would object to) but merely required to be offered. I cannot disagree with this bill inasmuch as what I've read about it here.

Abortion is not the central issue here; it is whether the state has the right to FORCE Catholic hospitals to do something THEY consider wrong. The abortion question could be debated extensively, but the real issue would be missed.

Like Paradigm, I’m a little confused as to exactly what is involved: is it the termination of a rape impregnation, or an effort to prevent a pregnancy because semen has been deposited? Perhaps it would be impossible to tell, so the chemical agent just makes sure that impregnation either could take place - or won't take place.

The real issue, however, is whether a religious institution has the right to non-interference by the state, citing the separation clause. Since liberals in particular are so adamant and strict about keeping the Church out of the state's business, they can hardly argue honestly that the state has the Constitutional right to cross the line into Church prerogatives. Either the line is there, or it isn't.

However, the actual meaning of the "separation clause" needs to be more clearly defined before all of these "separation" issues can be resolved. In my opinion, there is certainly a principle which necessitates the functional separation of Church and state; but biblically there is mutuality as well, wherein the Church prophetically guides and informs the state (although no one denomination – general not institutional influences) as to moral and spiritual principles of good government and justice, and the state guards and protects the Church, as well as holding Her to Her legal responsibilities.

I actually agree that if a religiously-run hospital declines to administer scientifically valid but for them debatably ethical procedures or drugs, it is within their rights. As long as patients choosing to go there are made aware of these restrictions beforehand. Of course, in an emergency situation such as a rape, few women may have the option or presence of mind to choose another facility immediately. That effectively leaves the woman to decide whether to have an abortion or not after full impregnation occurs. So, it may be the Catholic hospitals are setting up more abortions.