Herb Silverman
President, Secular Coalition for America

Herb Silverman

Silverman is Distinguished Professor of Mathematics at the College of Charleston and Founder and President of the Secular Coalition for America.

 ALL POSTS

Health Funding for Science, Not Faith

The Secular Coalition for America takes no position on the Baucus Health Care Bill itself, but we are working to defeat three proposed amendments that would alter public policy to privilege religious people.

First is the bipartisan amendment sponsored by Senators Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and John Kerry (D-Mass.). Under current law, religious people who object to medical care may have some "spiritual care" covered by Medicare and Medicaid, including reimbursement for payments that Christian Scientists make to members of the Church who pray for them when they are ill. Numerous children have died while receiving this "spiritual care," when modern science could easily have saved their lives. The Hatch-Kerry Amendment would make a bad situation even worse. It would expand such practices and require all private and public health plans to cover "spiritual care," whether or not the individual has religious objections to medical care. Not only does such funding undermine our Constitution, it more easily puts your tax dollars into the waiting hands of scam artists. Taxpayers would pay for this religion-based care, for which there is no scientific evidence of effectiveness. Even worse, placing the government stamp of approval on non-scientific practices such as "spiritual care" would place many more lives at risk.

We also oppose an amendment by Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming), which would allow doctors to deny patients any care or information that violates the doctor's religious beliefs. This violation of medical ethics is labeled with the Orwellian term "Conscience Clause." This amendment cruelly places the religious beliefs of practitioners such as pharmacists above the medical needs of patients. It threatens access to contraception, end-of-life care, HIV care, and any other care to which a health provider objects. It would also allow health care providers to withhold information from patients about their health care status and their treatment options, in violation of informed consent and ethical standards. Medical professionals (whether doctors, pharmacists, or emergency technicians) are employed in the field of medicine, not spirituality. They have the right to consider their religious beliefs in determining medical decisions for their own care, but their personal religion should never infringe on the right of a patient to seek products or procedures that they have a legal right to obtain.

Lastly, we object to an amendment by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), requesting that funding for Title V abstinence-only-until-marriage programs be restored. Congress has already wasted $1.5 billion on such programs since 1996, despite the fact that there is no evidence that abstinence-only programs have been effective in stopping or even delaying teen sex. Numerous studies, including a 10-year government-funded evaluation of the Title V abstinence-only program, found that these programs do not delay sexual initiation and have no beneficial impact on young people's sexual behavior. In addition to being ineffective, many such programs replace information about safe sex with false and misleading "medical" statements based more on ancient religious beliefs than on the best available scientific evidence.

The First Amendment protects religious freedom, but no American taxpayer should be forced to subsidize a fellow citizen's religious beliefs and practices. The Hatch, Kerry and Enzi amendments, in a misguided attempt to accommodate religion, encourage waste, poor outcomes, and anti-scientific thinking. They have no place in a bill whose goal is to make quality medical care more accessible to all.

By Herb Silverman  |  September 29, 2009; 2:17 PM ET
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: God's Will and Nuclear Arms | Next: A Seamless Garment

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.



If the religious right spent as much time trying to actually solve some of America's problems as they do trying to slip their creepy ideas past the courts and the voters, then we might fix healthcare and a hundred other serious problems in this troubled country.

Thanks to Dr. Silverman for alerting us to this latest religious right sneak attack.

Posted by: pelicanwatchcb | October 1, 2009 11:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Wow.
It is truly an utter disappointment to read this article.
Why is it, sir, that people are trying to eradicate faith and the conscience?
I'd like to remind you that health care practitioners go into this field to "help people's live" not help end their lives or the lives of their unborn children.
If a doctor chooses not to help their patient make a decision that goes against their conscience, they are still free to recieve health care else where.
There is no sense in holding a healthcare practioner to violate their own beliefs for another's...

Posted by: RL07 | October 1, 2009 1:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Receiving quality, affordable, health care in the United States is getting to be a bigger and bigger challenge with every passing day. With the strain on our government resources, it is inconceivable that the foregoing proposed amendments to Medicare and Medicaid policies have any place in an educated, prosperous society. Let's stick with science in treating health issues and trusting that an informed patient is his own best chance of survival.

Posted by: LorettaHaskell | October 1, 2009 8:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment

opppps.

"Walking on Bible 'water'Story Boards; is not same as walking on our "H2O" molecular story; like wise the Bible 'Light' Story's is unlike OUR "PHOTON' substance real story's!

Ahhhhh Haaaaaa Haaaaaa! Oye yuyuyuyuyuyuy...

Posted by: cyber-man | September 30, 2009 8:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment

R A D C S:

".. a "" SCIENTIST" ?????????????????

say what; A SCIENTIST??????????????

Wow! a [JUDEO-abe-CHRISTO] Scientist!

Hmmm? Ahhhhhh Haaaaaaa Haaaaaa!

god = JESUS; god = Father god, god = Mother god, god = the Holy-Ghost...

Religion Science is not SECULAR-SCIENCE!

PRE-APOCALYPTIC Scientists are "INFERIOR" compared to Us SECULAR SCIENTISTS! WE [i] art Ye Deliverors, so to speaketh TRUTH (opposite of MYTH)!!

O' JESUS is a Scientist; Jesus is our Intelligent Designer (Son of a Father &* mother god)... LaLala!


Suddenly the CHUMASH/BIBLE, the QURAN/KOPRAN, the GEETA/KANGYURS... are/is equated with [SECULAR] Science Facts!?????????


Oye Vay: O' HOLYi-NO-MAN/WOMB; Please do-NOT/NO Forgive these [Christian.... Religio's as if Scientists] These Jealous "SuperStupidStitiopus" folk!

Note: YE Biblical 'water' story is not (un-like) OUR 'H2O' Story! YE Biblical 'Light' Story's, not OUR's, is (un-like) OUR "PHOTONs" Story!

Hint: Maybe Ye Religio-Scientists (always Laughable) can walk'th on Ye, not OUR, bible 'water' story's; never OUR PHOTONS reality! And YE, not OUR, biblio 'water' story's is no Science when it comes to OUR "H2O"/HOH" Reality Story!

Ye Folk worship "JEALOUS-god(s)" & god(s) that FEAR! WE

EKLAHT-i-on's (not OFF's) Worship a FEARLESS & a UN-JEALOUS G-D! We are SINGULAR (UNITED); Never PLURAL (DIVIDED)!

Posted by: cyber-man | September 30, 2009 8:10 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I am a practicing Christian Scientist and my family has successfully relied on spiritual healing for five generations now. My intent in posting this comment is not to take a position on the Baucus Health Care Bill or to “pitch” my preferred system of healing to those who depend on other types of health care. I would like, however, to respectfully disagree with Professor Silerman’s rationale regarding the first of the proposed amendments described in his post. Whereas Professor Silverman believes that this amendment would “privilege religious people,” I believe it really is intended to address what would otherwise be an unfair aspect of the Bill. In particular, it seems fundamentally unfair for someone to be required to pay for insurance that does not cover the type of healthcare he or she utilizes. In a policy climate where mandated universal coverage is at least a possibility, it would only seem fair that anyone required to pay into a system would have coverage for the type of health care that they have found works best for them (without depriving anyone else of their choices).

While Christian Scientists normally choose a path other than conventional medicine, this choice is not based on blind faith. It instead reflects a systematic approach to prayer that has proven to be reliable and effective in the lives of those who practice it.

Christian Scientists don’t believe or teach that their religion somehow exempts them from the legal and moral obligations that every parent has to provide the best possible care for their children. Indeed, I believe that most Christian Scientists feel a heightened sense of this responsibility and consistently practice their faith within that context.

I appreciate this opportunity to provide a different perspective on this issue.

Posted by: RADCS | September 30, 2009 6:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I support the opposition to this amendment. It's bad enough that we permit these scurrilous individuals to "prey" on the weak, there is no justification for paying them to do so.

Posted by: mickle1 | September 30, 2009 3:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The conservatives keep screaming that the 'spiraling costs' of the health-care legislation will bankrupt the country, and then they saddle the bill with this kind of a-scientific, mystic tripe. May the sponsors of these medieval amendments encounter the consequences of their actions.

Posted by: greyhound1 | September 30, 2009 3:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Christian Science treatment is effective. If you are going to make me pay for healthcare, please let me pay for healthcare I trust.

Posted by: amanda9 | September 30, 2009 2:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Mr. Silverman, thank you for a succinct and logically compelling article.

Posted by: egb3 | September 30, 2009 1:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Hear Hear Mr. Silverman! I agree wholeheartedly and well said, sir!

Get your faith off my body!!

Also, it might be pointed out that there are other religions besides Christian. Would these same people supporting this proposal be interested in it if their own doctor was Wiccan? If the doctor sincerely worshiped the Flying Spagetti Monster and felt it his/her devote calling to make sure all pregancies were aborted? What if you doctor thought getting the Swine Flu was retribution from God for bad deeds and thought it best for you to die, as God intended? And the doctor wanted to help God along in his just path...

Clearly the hippocratic oath is a good idea. I would hope the 'religious' would be able to think this thing through better.

Posted by: briannholli | September 30, 2009 1:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I'm not surprised at all that Orrin Hatch or Mike Enzi would sponsor such tripe, seeing as they are both Republicans who would gladly hand over our government to the Christian Taliban, but Kerry?

Did he even read the admendment or is his support payback for some other sneaky little favor?

Just goes to show that our political system allows craven fools to be elected with alarming regularity, and permits them to stay in office even after they have proved themselves to be unworthy of all trust.

Posted by: Chagasman | September 30, 2009 1:10 PM
Report Offensive Comment

RE:
-------------------------------------------
I wonder if the people we send to Washington are really that bright.

Posted by: Guavafan | September 30, 2009 9:54 AM
------------------------------------------
Some sage has remarked that the Founding Framers were geniuses who devised a government that could be run by idiots. The electorate has provided the idiots!

Posted by: Ramblwrk68 | September 30, 2009 11:48 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I have a hard time keeping rational thoughts when I see the religion virus used as if it was no big deal. Can you imagine saddling already troubled health legislation with religion and mythical drivel? It is not enough that the multitude of debated issues, fiscal, public/private, politics, etc., threaten to derail the whole effort, the religionist have to further weaken the effort with make-believe. Such nonsense trivializes the whole process. I look forward to the day when the toxic effects of religions are treated by a secular society like any other disease.

Posted by: rach226042 | September 30, 2009 11:29 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Forgive me but I strongly agree with Professor Silverman

Posted by: Badwisky | September 30, 2009 10:18 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Ooooppps.

IMAGINE (A. Einstein said that its better than knowledge sometimes [pbuh et al];

i.e., A Hassidic Jew, critically injured/sick, Rushed to a Islamic Hospital. Will HE/SHe (not G-D) will reciev 100% professional Health Services or 50% Love treatment. Or should their EMERGENCY/iNTAKE doors read "JEWS NOT ALLOWED"??? Or imagine Such a Sign but only seen by THEM brother/Sister in da hoods???

VOTE: NO! NO to bauCUS! NO to KERRY (not Care-y)! NO to HATCH (go Hatch an Egg)!

No to "Religious-FAVORITISM" via Hijackers , in Business suits, of OUR Health care whom 'Channel' such "Secular-Tithes" to their 'Constituents' (Religious CORPORATIONS)!

Posted by: cyber-man | September 30, 2009 10:18 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I wonder if the people we send to Washington are really that bright.

Posted by: Guavafan | September 30, 2009 9:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment

PS:

As long as there is a "MOSQUE's IN EVERY STATE" then let the ISLAMIC-UMMA Of America (+/- 1.2 Million Strong, HERE) Build their own ISLAMic Hospital&Hospices , like the JEWISH HOSPITALs or Presbyterian, Lutheran hospitals/hospices et al Religio-Health-Care-Service-Providers in Broolkyn, N.Y. and elswhere.

POINT: Church/Religion based Hospital Systems, eventhough they get a 'bulk' of their income via FED/STATE/LOCAL Secular Hand-Outs for taking care of "The People" , re-godless of sex, Color, Origin etc.., THAT

STATE/CITY/COUNTY based System HEALTH/Care Providers Must 'NO/Not-Favor' Organized Religion Based Hospitals, desquised as 'Private' (but TAX Exempt & a big-WINDFALL as a result).

So those Idiot-Savants; Specifically Mr. Hatch, Kerry & Baucus et al & CO., Think They hath a MONOPOLY on/in (OUR, not Their) the (Secular's) SEANATE (not Religio/Church).!

Psychology speaking, It is because WE, "The People" allow these NEPOTISTIC Politician's , gots too comfortable, by letting them Bring their god(s) via PRAYER moment, not our-G-D, into (our) the Domain of OUR-Senate, not Theirs!!!!!

So, Their "Constituents", (As 'Christian' Majority of/in America) will vote them in or give polirtical-Tithes back to them when comes 'high Holy Time"????

VOTE: Seperate Church from State Government appropriated HEALTH-CARE-FUNDING! Public + Private Hospitals must be, as if 1-One ['Transparent' Health-Care Services] And the Religious must Funds Selves, or Allow to be BOUGHT-OUT, even under "emminent Domain" local/State /Fed Laws (Take over Property for "THE-PEOPLES-GOOD": Hence the words

For the good of the "... PUBLIC's HEALTH & WELFARE"! What's Best for The-Public, is good for Uncle/Aunt-SAM & CO.,!

NO to bauCUS! NO to HATCH! No to KERRY!

Note: They are ALL "PLUTO-CRATS" {GOVernment Run by the Wealthy not Oligarchs. Guess where their wealth came from?) So forget Democrats! Hmmmm.

Oye vay!

Posted by: cyber-man | September 30, 2009 9:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I am fed up with the religious communities being catered to and funded with my tax dollars. Medical care is based on science, not the Bible, the Torah, the Koran or any other religious book.

And to allow a pharmacist to decide whether or not to fill a legal prescription from a licensed physician is unconscionable. They were hired to do a job, not make moral judgments.

Posted by: Utahreb | September 30, 2009 9:42 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I have to agree with the author. I really don't mind if these fools want to try to pray away their illnesses and other degradations - hell, we can give them all a darwinaward for advancing the gene pool by removing themselves from it.

I just don't want to pay for it.

And Kerry? This is why I didn't vote for you, even though it probably helped that religious idiot Bush win. Spineless Kerry, only a dweeb like you could have lost to Bush.

Posted by: katavo | September 30, 2009 9:39 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I have no problem with these amendments other than the inevitable fringe-groups and wackos that will cash in. We need to develop a list of government-approved religions, and only members of these government-sponsored religions could partake in the tax-supported benefits benefits. Oh wait a minute, that would be counter to the Constitution. First, we will need to amend the Constitution to establish a set of government-sponsored religions. I will pray that my religion makes the list.

Posted by: Riograd | September 30, 2009 9:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Lord of Loo - fighting creeping Huckabee theocracy in America is harder every day. Why not just give up with old fossil Senators without term limits like these helping the cause. You could revert back to Lord Cheney's Jesuslandia, amend the Constitution to "God's standards" and let the poor and their children suffer and die without medical care as your loving Christ's wrathful punishment for their sloth.

Then you can outlaw and deport gays, "non-believers", Muslims, Latinos (illegal and legal), liberals, Democrats and environmentalists; pledge allegiance to Israel and figure out a way to nuke the Middle East without contaminating their oil.

Ward and June Cleaver can go back to living in their lily white suburbia and Blacks can once again be isolated to big city slums where they belong. Misogyny can rule again as God commands. June can wear here pearls while she scrubs the toilet and Wally can get syphilis and knock up Mary Lou while being taught abstinence instead of godless, commie, sex education. Beaver can learn the world is flat and evolution and global warming are "socialist" lies. White Christians can watch remakes of "Death Valley Days" and dream of their movie idol one day becoming President. All will be happy in the world of the Huckabees again.

I'm glad I'm living in Mexico where there's still religious freedom and tolerance. Don't parrot "love it or leave it" to me. I already did.

Posted by: coloradodog | September 30, 2009 9:20 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Like many others, I find it really disheartening that in the face of a mighty struggle to provide good, cost-effective health care to millions of our citizens, time and effort needs to be spent on keeping the religious nuts at bay. It's shocking to see John Kerry's name attached to this drivel. Anything for a vote I guess.

Posted by: sibonnesmom | September 30, 2009 9:18 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Mr. HER SiL:

When it comes to OUR GOVernment (not Theolgians of America & CO.) that where "Seperation of CHURCH & STATE" is critical, as in Survival, to OUR 'Republic' (quasi Democracy) operation; THAT

On the same token & Reality/Truth; that OUR 'HEALTH'/Care (at Hospitals, even Medical DR.'s Offices) SYSTEM Must also be Seperated, at all cost, from CHURCH/Sinogogue lalala care Systems!

iMPORTANT: As strange as this might sound , a friend of mine, whom I did not talk to for over 25 Years, and not a rich fella, had a 'Miracle' happen to him. He was stabbed 42 times with a 6 inch knive because he walked away from the Perp who demanded money. He was rushed to a "LUTHERAN" Hosp in Brooklyn.

The N.Y.P.D. Dicks , Irish looking Gang, told me that "He was bloodless & looked like a piece of meat all chopped up.. I don't know why he is alive.. someone powerfull was there for him.." Turns-out, the "PERP" was a Neighbor!? Note: I thanked the 3-Detectives for doing a great-Job! (From Investigating to Perp's capture: attempted murder).

i [WE] went to visit him this YOM KIPPUR, and i brought 2 Yamulka's & me Dad's [pbuh] small tenach. We put on the Yamulka's, he could barely sit & talk & doff on the coppa-lay, and briefly said, Shma Yisroel.... Adony Achad.." Hear O' WORLD, G-D is ONE.; i did it because it was Both Holy & Of Holyian Emergency. But, Another Miracle Happened: That Mr. M., got spiritedly" up! He was able to Walk.

Note: As an EKLAHT-iON i must admitt that "IT" or G-D is only 1/EK/UNO.... but i did the sharade out of respect via Jewish Symbols. (We're SABRA's), yes, we cried briefly. But it felt good. AND

Guess what?, He

i [WE] must admitt those Lutherans saved his 'LIFE' (aka gave him 'LOVE') or oss. WE believe had he gone to another hospital (City or Private) that He might of lost 1% of what it would've taken to Hold-ON. Foshtashe? Yes, they have a Christian Chapel in the main lobby. Yes they have cross's in some un-obvious places. Yes there are Nuns. And Yes there are 95% Christians.

But i also Saw how The Musloms was being treated (at 'steps' below I.C.U.) and the Heredi et al. And that place is a MAD-HOUSE; yet All [Staff] are so Nice/Pretty , Dedicated, Cool aka Beutifull Professional People.

Today He is having another Operation, where they'll insert a 'Green Mesh.Screen' in his gut to prevent a 'blood clot' reaching his lungs. Note: this guy a Chimney Smoker & a Daily Beer Drinker. He told me He "I will never Smoke again, but i'll drink once in a while.." So I told'm i'l sneak-in a brewski, aye?, He was like" eyes Widened saying "Ken" (Yes in Hebrew). Amazing. So, "LA CHIAM! SLONCHA! CHEERS! NA-ZDAROVIA.... Eeee Haaaaa!

Well, atleast one knows who their friends are when on death-bed or in the klinker.

HALLALUYA! Praise the HOLYi-NO-MAN/WOMB! Only "IT"!

Posted by: cyber-man | September 30, 2009 8:52 AM
Report Offensive Comment

If they get payments for people praying for them, I want to have regular massages for stress relief and have them covered, too. At least the latter has some scientific evidence to suggest it works.

Posted by: Catken1 | September 30, 2009 8:51 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Great article....100% agree. A good stand for sound science and maintaining the separation of church and state.

Posted by: jgpolitico | September 29, 2009 10:14 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I believe Herb is wrong in one aspect. This is not "a misguided attempt to accommodate religion" but an overt act of currying favor with religious fundamentalists, nutjobs, and wackos to secure votes. Herb is being too kind in his statement. The fact that religion is accommodated in this day and age is preposterous to say the least. If they want medical coverage for covering boogieman medicine, then Congress should take the complementary step of taking away all religious tax deductions (donations, property, etc.) so they can pay for it themselves. "What the lord giveth, the lord taketh away." Seems only appropriate.

Posted by: TomMelchiorre | September 29, 2009 5:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I heartily endorse the sentiments expressed by Professor Silverman in this essay. The fact that bills such as these are even seriously considered is a savage indictment of the political landscape in this country.

Posted by: jonesm2 | September 29, 2009 5:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

These amendments to the proposed Health Care program are, I assume, sponsored by the People's Republic of Psychoses, famous for its
Witch Doctor healers, obsession with genitalia, etc.?

Do we have the right to interfere in the affairs of the foreign nation in which we now reside?

Would it not be best to restore the US to sovereignty? That would be the nation that committed itself to separation of church and state, that continues, though fitfully, to work toward ending psychosis, rather than legislating it?

Posted by: Farnaz1Mansouri1 | September 29, 2009 5:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Maybe what we need is a law requiring some doctors to post a large sign on their doors stating "I practice SPIRITUAL medicine and reserve the right to withold treatment in any case which violates my religious faith". Then patients can choose whether to engage such a physician ir not. Any doctor who denies such treatment and does not have such a sign posted should have his/her license revoked.

Posted by: fhay26 | September 29, 2009 4:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Legally requiring coverage for non-medical, faith-based "treatment" is preposterous. I can't believe how much the religious community gets away with - it's absolutely outrageous.

Posted by: DAN46 | September 29, 2009 4:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Post a Comment


 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2009 The Washington Post Company