Catholic League v Obama re:mandatory payment for birth control

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
LMD
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: 02/24/2003 - 1:01am
Catholic League v Obama re:mandatory payment for birth control

Just a note...my purpose for this thread is not to foment debate on the tenets of the Catholic church and/or it's position on birth control. I'm not Catholic, but I have no problem seeing this move for what it is.

To me, this is another blatant example of our "g-o-d-vernment's" overt war on religion. The proverbial camel's nose was helped under the church tent long ago with the creation of tax exempt status. This 'quasi-godvernment' partnership was one step towards the ultimate control of such religious institutions, whether Catholic OR Protestant. But, I believe this intrusion would have happened regardless of said partnerships...

Below is just one article discussing the new law which would force Catholic-affliliated universities and hospitals offering health insurance plans to include free birth control and sterilization.

[url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2097523/Church-declare-war-Obama... to declare war on Obama over birth control as religious leaders threaten President with Catholic vote[/url]
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:52 PM on 7th February 2012

-Reform law demands free birth control to be provided at Catholic hospitals and universities
-Catholics make up quarter of U.S. population
-Some now rethinking vote come election time

"...Catholic League head Bill Donohue said: ‘Never before, unprecedented in American history, for the federal government to line up against the Roman Catholic Church,’ ...

...Archbishop Timothy Dolan recently spoke out about the issue. 'It’s not about contraception. It’s about the right of conscience,' he told reporters. 'The government doesn’t have the right to butt into the internal governance and teachings of the church,” he said..."

LMD
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: 02/24/2003 - 1:01am
I caught part of the PBS

I caught part of the PBS NewHour last night which covered this controversy. What struck me the most were the comments made during the episode by a 27-year-old graduate student attending Catholic University of America. She claims to be "a non-practicing Catholic" who is in favor of mandated free birth control. I've copied her comments below, from the transcript of the program.
[url=http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/religion/jan-june12/catholics_02-06.html]... Administration, Catholic Leaders Clash Over Contraception Mandate[/url]
Airdate Feb. 6, 2012
PBS Newshour - Video, Transcript

"Twenty-seven-year-old Erin McCarthy, a non-practicing Catholic, is studying for her master's in social work there. Right now, she says she can't afford to pay for birth control out of pocket.

ERIN MCCARTHY, graduate student, Catholic University of America: A generic would cost $30 a month, something like that, which, you know, it may not seem like a lot, but times 12, without a full-time job, it adds up -- $30 can buy groceries for a few weeks, so --"

~I find Ms. McCarthy's comments vaccuous. Is this the best PBS can do? Is this the best a "graduate student" can do? Can Ms. McCarthy truly not afford to pay for her own birth control out-of-pocket? Or is it that Ms. McCarthy doesn't WANT to pay for her own birth control?
Her comparison of montly birth control cost to one half of one month's grocery bill is suspicious. She leads us to believe she only spends approximately $2.14/day out-of-pocket for sustenance. Perhaps she is on a Raman noodle diet. Perhaps she, like us, buys grains and beans in bulk and can keep grocery costs as low as possible. However, I doubt this "graduate student", who "only" has a part-time job, is living on limited cuisine. Her coffee - or tea - per day probably costs her that much...

Aside from my fixating on the minutia in her comments, I'm left with asking why I should be concerned about a "non-practicing Catholic's" opinions on the mandated FREE birth control and sterilization to be provided by Catholic affiliated hospitals and universities. Further, why should our government be forcing this mandate on religious institutions?

So many points to ponder...

Al Amoling
Offline
Last seen: 15 hours 29 min ago
Joined: 07/07/2004 - 12:01am
"Further, why should our

"Further, why should our government be forcing this mandate on religious institutions?"

The answer to that Lois is "because" they can.

LMD
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: 02/24/2003 - 1:01am
Al - As always, I appreciate

Al -
As always, I appreciate your thoughts.

As you say, they do it because they can.

These government mandates are, for lack of a better word, revealing. I'd say we are witnessing that which was prophesied long ago. Government becoming the god of the people.

I believe we passed the tipping point long ago. Government will be demanding that denial. Was thinking we Christians must be ready to take a stand for Christ right now .

Naran
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 12 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2004 - 12:01am
President Obama has

President Obama has caved.

***********

Updated: 11:06 AM
Obama to change birth-control rule

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Rushing to end a political uproar, President ... Obama ... will announce that religious employers will not have to cover birth control for their employees... instead will demand that insurance companies... directly responsible for providing free contraception.

Obama's shift is aimed at containing the political firestorm that erupted after he announced... that religious-affiliated employers had to cover birth control... for women.

[url=http://www.pressherald.com/news/Obama-to-change-birth-control-rule.html]...

***********

Okay. First he rightly angered all the fundamental Christian/religious organizations and groups. Now, he's going to make the insurance companies angry.

This guy can't win (I hope).

IMHO
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/06/2001 - 12:01am
Bishops' latest statement

Bishops' latest statement rejecting Obama' "compromise" hits the nail on the head.
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/us-bishops-release-new-statement-...

What will Obama do now?
This should keep the issue going for much longer during this election year.
Obama has dug himself a hole which is getting deeper and deeper

LMD
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: 02/24/2003 - 1:01am
IMHO, thanks for posting the

IMHO, thanks for posting the link to the Bishop's latest statement. I'm glad to see he is calling it like it is, so to speak.
President Obama's announcement is nothing more than a planned 'bait-and-switch', one which I think he believes the majority of those concerned would fall for. I'm hoping he is wrong.

Albert Mohler wrote a good piece about Obama's latest contrived move:
[url=http://www.albertmohler.com/2012/02/10/what-compromise-this-policy-leave... Compromise? This Policy Leaves Religious LIberty In Peril and Planned Parenthood Smiling[/url]

You asked, "What will Obama do now?". Good question. I'm sure you'll agree that he'll probably do whatever it takes to keep his position of power...

God help us.

IMHO
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
Joined: 10/06/2001 - 12:01am
Orthodox Jewish groups have

Orthodox Jewish groups have also added their voices to protest Obama's mandate.

Naran
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 12 months ago
Joined: 10/06/2004 - 12:01am
Feb 25, 10:50 AM EST Maine AG

Feb 25, 10:50 AM EST

Maine AG stands behind opposition to fed mandate

AUGUSTA, Maine (AP) -- ... 32 Democratic women legislators...urging... Schneider to remove his name from a letter ...opposing a federal mandate that employers cover contraception in health insurance plans.

...snip
Schneider and 12 other Republican attorneys general signed...letter ...new mandate is unconstitutional ..."would compel religious organizations, hospitals, universities and social service entities to subsidize contraceptive products and services which clearly violate their religious beliefs." ....

[url=http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ME_ATTORNEY_GENERAL_CONTRACEPTION...

wv_republican
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: 11/23/2004 - 1:01am
(No subject)

LMD
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
Joined: 02/24/2003 - 1:01am
Free Sterilizations Must Be

[url=http://cnsnews.com/news/article/free-sterilizations-must-be-offered-all-... Sterilizations Must Be Offered to All College Women Says HHS[/url]
March 17, 2012

"(CNSNews.com) - All student health care plans covering female college students in the United States must include coverage for free voluntary sterilization surgery, the Department of Health and Human Services announced late Friday afternoon...."

All women of college age, whether covered under their parents' health insurance, or through their employer, or through some government-subsidized plan will also be offered free sterilization.

And, they don't stop there:
"...HHS adopted verbatim the recommendation of the IOM committee it hired to develop the recommendation.

The committee said women of “reproductive capacity” included those as young as 15 years of age..."

handheld
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 2 months ago
Joined: 09/27/2011 - 5:06am
Posted: March 23 Updated:

Posted: March 23
Updated: Today at 12:08 AM
A rally cry for religion
United in their opposition to mandated birth-control coverage, demonstrators in Portland add voices to a national protest.
By Kelley Bouchard kbouchard@mainetoday.com
Staff Writer

...Charlotte Warren, associate director Maine Women's Lobby, said...it is typical for a woman to spend about five years being pregnant or trying to get pregnant and about 30 years trying to prevent pregnancy.

Warren said.., "Employers shouldn't be able to cherry-pick health care benefits for their employees based on their own personal religious beliefs," Warren said. "If religiously affiliated hospitals or institutions want to be part of the public sphere, they have to follow the same rules as other businesses."

http://www.kjonline.com/news/Contraception-mandate-sparks-Maine-rally.html

Islander
Offline
Last seen: 16 hours 58 min ago
Joined: 02/13/2009 - 12:16pm
I would let the person who

I would let the person who wanted the coverage pay for it, a la carte. Like I do for cable TV. If you want birth control as part of your package buy it, you want Viagra pay for it. No reason why a single male should pay for pregnancy or birth control coverage and i am sure the reverse is true.

wv_republican
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: 11/23/2004 - 1:01am
Forty-three Catholic dioceses

Forty-three Catholic dioceses and organizations across the country have announced religious liberty lawsuits against the federal government to challenge the Obama administration’s contraception mandate....They warned that the regulation could force Catholic schools, hospitals and charitable agencies around the nation to close down. (42)

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/forty-three-catholic-organization...

After forcing several Roman Catholic adoption agencies to close down, I think the government hopes the rest will too....

mainemom
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 4 days ago
Joined: 03/09/2004 - 1:01am
I'm resurrecting this thread

I'm resurrecting this thread to comment on the brilliance of this part of the president's reelection strategy.

President Revenge did not need to pick a fight with the Catholic Church.
Contraception is readily available to all American women.
No candidate or party had an agenda to change that.
Contraception was not a topic Republican candidates wanted to raise.

But the president's re-election was going to depend on turning out women voters, particularly single women, to cancel out the votes of the men who were going to vote on strictly economic issues.

The president's handlers had to figure out how to play up the "women's issues" in a way that would distract from the fiscal issues.
The brilliant solution was to bring the country to the place where women's issues intersected with fiscal issues: use the Affordable Care Act to mandate that employers pay for contraception, religious views of the employer notwithstanding.

Enter the Catholic bishops.
In the months leading up to the administration's final decision on the mandate, the bishops in the person of Cardinal Dolan went to the president with entreaties to excuse Catholic institutions from any such requirement. The religious liberty argument was fully aired, and the president understood it. His own Chief of Staff Bill Daley cautioned against imposing the mandate on the Church.

Such entreaties were doomed to fail, though, because the president's objective was to thrust "women's issues" into the campaign narrative and thereby to grab the committed interest of young female voters, especially in swing states.

Promising employer-mandated contraceptive freebies wasn't sufficient for the President's purpose. He had to frame the issue in a way that would leave Republicans no choice but to push back forcefully, and then he would have his narrative: the Republicans want to take away your access to contraceptive services.

So he picked a fight with the Catholic Church. The bishops had objected on the grounds of religious liberty, and Obama knew the Republicans would have to push back on those same grounds, or swallow their constitutional principles. Suddenly the narrative began to write itself, with the Neanderthals in the GOP teaming up with the patriarchal Catholic Church to set back "women's rights" by decades if not centuries.

It was a brilliant tactic, rooted in a cynical understanding of the Church's objections, a confidence that principled Republicans would take the religious liberty bait, and a satisfaction that his allies in the popular press and women's organizations would drive the narrative to suit his purpose.

The result? Free pills and "four more years."

wv_republican
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: 11/23/2004 - 1:01am
(No subject)

Log in to post comments