The EpsilonBee is a bilingual site about current events, politics, history, gossip and whatever.
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Response
@Tom Quinn: Recently in a commencement address Father Jenkins in an indirect way addressed the tone of current political discussions and urged for civility, a message with which I agree. In the words of President Obama, "we can disagree, without being disagreeable".
Professor Duffy's letter has generated a debate, such as between the two of us. In particular, I noticed that you have tried to understand my objections, and I have tried my best to understand yours. And we did this without insulting each other. I would say this is a positive thing.
I will try to go one by one through the various issues you raised.
1. You are right that federal law does not mandate employers to provide health insurance to its employees, but once such benefits are offered, the law requires that the employer adhere to federal laws prohibiting discrimination in employment.. Market laws in a sense encourage employers to offer such benefits or else they would not be able to stay competitive. The University of Notre Dame could not be ranked as high as it is if it could not attract top faculty, which it could not if it did not offer insurance or guaranteed academic freedom. Moreover, the University of Notre Dame, unlike other private entities, benefits from the Federal Government generosity from research grants, student loans and grants. (For example, the research grants awarded to Notre Dame faculty added up to more than 100 million.) This helps the University but it adds a layer of responsibility towards people that do not have the same beliefs as you.
Currently, about 80% of Catholics and and a larger percentage of non-Catholics use contraceptives. That includes a majority of Notre Dame employees. Should the University stop paying salaries because it could be used for purchasing contraceptives? Should the health insurance stop paying for a visit to a doctor that results in a prescription for contraceptives, even though the cost of those contraceptive is covered by the employee, not the insurance? Arguably, one cannot get contraceptives legally without a prescription or without paying. Where does this prohibition stop?
2. I try to be more concrete on the issue of disconnect between the Church and its followers. All the Catholics that I know (they are many) are appalled at the sexual abuse scandals and are in favor of more transparency. They all believe that this scandal distracts from all the great service the Church provides to the less fortunate amongst us.
Apparently this message is not resonating with some of the higher-ups in the Church. Also there is an obvious disconnect between the Church's message on contraceptives and the 80% of American catholics that use them.
In Europe, the disconnect is even higher. Over the last decade applications for priesthood in Spain, arguably one of the most Catholic countries, dropped by 25%. This week there was a meeting in Dublin of the Association of Catholic Priests discussing precisely this disconnect.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17973830
There is a tremendous cultural change going on, and I can observe that in my students. They are embracing the cultural changes at a faster rate than the Church. And they are the future.
Friday, May 4, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)