Religion and the State

 “The measure, proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) would amend the Affordable Care Act to allow any employer to exclude any health service coverage, no matter how critical or basic, by claiming that it violates their religious or moral convictions.”-- Huffington Post

The right is nuts. How quickly they went from be outraged on first amendment grounds to Obama’s contraception plan to a full frontal attack on employer requirements to carry health insurance for their workers. Working from the playbook we are offered a glimpse into how and why things work the way they do. Here we see proposed legislation, on the surface claiming to speak to religious freedom, which would allow employers to opt out of any insurance regulation that runs counter to their religious beliefs. These “religious” or “moral” beliefs would be defined by the employer.

Conservatives believe the government has no role in requiring health insurance. Ultimately this would be something that some misguided businesses might want, but Blunt humps it for the masses in a blanket of religious freedom. Thoughtful business owners would do well to remember how foolish and costly it would be to add more people to the roles of the uninsured.

Of course the Catholic hierarchy, exposed as hopelessly corrupt over the past decade and so searching for righteous legitimacy, would endorse this hogwash. Ironically, at the same time the airwaves were filled with the self-righteous bloviating on separation of church and state, and first amendment infringement, the institution which they ostensibly stand to protect, the Vatican, was making other news. Reuter’s reported on Feb-04 that Vatican intrigues have led to charges of corruption, “nepotism and cronyism”, and the transfer of the Vatican Secretary of State. In this climate, it would be worth noting that Pope Benedict has called access to affordable healthcare a “human right”, except for the fact that Benedict and the Church leadership in general have ceded any claim to morality with the  handling of the pedophilia crisis. As many have noted the fact is the church has been surpassed by her children. 98% of Catholic women use contraceptives and 2/3 of Catholic employers already provide access to contraceptives to their (in many cases) non-Catholic employees via health plans as a result of state-level regulations.

Of course, Blunt’s legislation extends far beyond Catholics. As Jon Stewart pointed out last night, Scientologists due to their religious beliefs have the right to refuse medical attention and tragically as we have seen from time to time for their children. This legislation would make it possible for them to deny insurance to their employees. Blunt’s legislation as Stewart pointed out is a prescription for chaos. How would Mr. Blunt assume people would get coverage if any religious nut, for any reason, can deny care or coverage?

For a country forever talking about the separation of church and state, we are a people strangely corrupted and constrained by our obsession with religion. Santorum talks about freedom and religion as if his religious dogma is a devotion to freedom itself. Santorum defines freedom in almost every sense as a devotion to a god-centered religion that he believes and sounds much like a man who honors neither freedom nor humanity. Santorum extends this quasi-religious quasi-statist belief system well beyond hot-button issues of abortion and homosexuality and extends it to his cramped view of the roles of women in society as well as anti-scientific anti-intellectual views on global warming and stem cell research.  These positions, held and propagated by Santorum and the religious right in general, overlap almost everywhere in our complex and changing country.  If this is One-God spiritualism I can only say I must be a pagan.

But Santorum of course parts ways, especially with much of the Catholic Church hierarchy and other progressive Christians, as they all do when it comes to his heavy handed approach to American exceptionalism and militarism, and of course the death penalty. Santorum and all the conservatives see no role in government to aid the poor, or care for the sick. No reason for those most blessed among us to share the blessings of their bounty with the least among us. In addition to the inevitable tax cuts which have led to historical separation between the haves and have nots in America conservatives like Santorum argue for a single three word solution to everything: The Free Market. Jesus enters this market as his peril.  

Every problem can be solved if we just get out of the way and let the free market operate. Not a word spoken about the deep immorality that free markets have evidenced over these past few years, or the deep societal problems they have unleashed. The cure for all the country’s hurt is more of the same selfish, me for me, you for you, winner-take-all exceptionalism. Homeless? Hungry? Scared and alone and in need of help? The free market will be there soon, and if that doesn’t work we can still build more jails.

We criticize our politicians for the harshness of their views, but the reality is that the Republican field has been pandering to what they perceive as the views and demands of their electorate. There is a deep stain of bitterness to the poor in America that stains our body politic. Our politicians, often with the tax-protected assistance of the nation’s religious leaders, cast blame on the weakest among us, the poor, minorities, immigrants, for the hurt of the middle class. The rich in contrast are always benevolent, always ready to allow the slop-over of their wealth to trickle down to the wretched refuse, the huddled masses.  

Watch Romney as he pushes further and further, now calling himself a “severe” conservative. What the f*** does that mean? More severe like the proud Governor of Texas with 200+ death penalty executions, or the heartless and Isolationist Ron Paul, who sees no role for America domestically or internationally to solve any human problem. He feels bad and all that, but Dr. Paul and his ideologue son would not left a finger to help the most in need among us. The Civil Rights act of 1965 and the Voting Rights Act of 1964 were misguided pieces of legislation to this family.

This, then, is the corruption at the core of the American Heart of Darkness. This is the caldron to which Blunt would release any employer to avoid offering health insurance to his employees. Religion is deeply entwined in that story, and it is not just the religious right. I acknowledge that Catholic Church and its charitable arm, Catholic Charities,  serve millions of people in need, but some parts of these entities are very similar to  for profit enterprises with employees and payrolls and tax deductible funding. So excuse me if I want to throw a shoe at my TV when yet another politician expounds on the separation of church and state, and freedom of religion. Seldom mentioned in the battle over the contraceptive policy was the basic law of it: The US funds Catholic Charities to a great extent. These charities cannot survive without that funding, but they employ millions of non-Catholics. The Government was saying if you want the federal funds you must follow the law. I would have been fine with that, but also understand the compromise. But the result in plane terms is the government subsidizing societally beneficial religious endeavors.  The issue is not whether or not the church would have the right to pursue its core beliefs; it is to say that if it wanted to feed at the federal trough it would have to do so under certain guidelines.

This is a country whose political life is absolutely corrupted by the forceful role of religious advocates.  The US government subsidizes with tax laws hundreds of millions of charitable contributions which go to political activity. What looms is not a battle between morality and immorality; it is an argument between a democratic republic with separation between church and state and neo-fascism. At the moment the secular society and the religious institutions with massive property holdings and business before the state live in an uneasy truce. But the goal of some on the right is to substantially tip the balance.

I really don't think America, even at this late date, understands how truly radical the American right is. We do well to remember that they control without encumbrances such as the filibuster one half of the legislative branch of government.  The right is f***ing nuts.