Pres. Obama felt forced to compromise and personally address the furor surrounding his contraceptive mandate for all women, because religious conservatives wanted a fight about religious freedom where none existed and election year politics made it possible. He made a serious faith-based effort to solve an issue, without making women pay the price for religious conservatives, led by men across the political spectrum. A wider religious exclusion, going beyond Catholic institutions, is part of the compromise. However, Pres. Obama protected non-Catholic and non-religious women’s 1st Amendment right by maintaining the mandate and making sure free contraception is available to all women, regardless of where they work.
You can argue this compromise should have been in the rule to begin with, though the real problem was the White House, yet again, didn’t prepare for selling of the important policy now being implemented. They didn’t have political game on health care and this situation is no exception.
You can also argue that Pres. Obama would have been on the right side of the majority if he’d dug his heels in. Through that prism people will come to the conclusion that he “caved.”
As a person of deep spirituality and a long religious history, I understand the feelings many have that a compromise was necessary to offer. When the misogynistic male Catholic Church hierarchy starts squealing, it will reveal religious conservatives as rigid and unyielding to modern women’s reality, because nothing will appease the men in charge. This disrespect of modern women is one reason why the Catholic Church is hemorrhaging women, though ignoring and protecting pedophile priests didn’t help either.
There is much to be watch in the details of implementing this complicated and convoluted insurance mandate and alternative contraceptive policy option. It’s a part of Pres. Obama’s policy that will require diligence to make certain the law is followed and that religious and Catholic institutions do not discriminate against women and abridge their 1st Amendment rights.
Women+1
You got that right, Sandman. You got that right.
Capt. Caveman comes through again. Not a surprise. Did not follow what we in the military call the 6 P’s. Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance. It’s always the same on every big issue. For once, just once I wish he would stick to his guns. This was a no brainer if done right. These same Bishops have been protecting pedo’s for decades if not longer. The issue could have been are vasectomies allowed under the plan for men, if so, is that not another form of birth control. Oops that’s for men. I am so tired of old, white men dicitating things to minorities and women when they haven’t the slightest clue. If these Bishop’s wanted a fight then use surrogates, I’m sorry but there is so much corruption in religion these days that it would not be that hard to win this arguement, but once again no preparation. Personally I believe Churches and the like shouldn’t have any exemptions, then if they want to pontificate so be it. This country is at a dangerous point to where religion incrementally being brought into all aspects of our lives and at some point down the road there will be a backlash. Was a compromise needed? Possibly, but it could have been on their terms.
Oh, too priceless…
Capt. Caveman comes through again. Not a surprise. Did not follow what we in the military call the 6 P’s. Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance.
http://bit.ly/WTFO_RC_Limits
Warning: Put on your Nomex suites readers, there is some serious flame spraying in the piece. The last sentence of the last paragraph has a temperature generally seen in molten lava.
From near the beginning of the piece: “The Church’s insistence on following a deeply flawed teaching on birth control has once again brought in conflict with secular society. The church fathers are attempting to nullify the secular government’s prerogatives, and to carve out an illegitimate exception to the notion of the commons for themselves. This is ridiculous.”
Sidebar: As a religious non-conformist, and as a person who genuinely believes that the wall between church and state should not only be high, but topped with razor wire, the move by the U.S. Catholic Bishops has me seeing red.
The Limits Of Faith, Roman Catholic Edition
It should have everyone seeing red.
Reminds of a saying from the late Christopher Hitchens. “Mr. President, build up that wall”.
The European’s are way ahead of us on this; they learned a long time ago the consequences of religious extremism. That the United States, considering itself a modern nation, would allow itself to be pushed around by a minority church dating to before medieval times is simply astounding. Why did we waste so many lives fighting two wars against theocracy only to face the same enemy here at home. Make no mistake, there is no difference other than the religion; given the right circumstances, “ people of faith “ will always take whatever they can get. The religious zealots in this country are out of control and have been increasingly out of control since Reagan let them out of their cages. It’s time to put them back in.
“That’s how I dooz it Larry!!” – J.B. Smoove
What a save! What.A.Save!!! Now that’s what I’m talking about. This is a compromise everybody should be able to live with. Women get unfettered access to birth control, no copay, but the religious organizations don’t have to pay for it. I know that both extremes would dearly love to have this issue for November, but the rest of us just wanted it to go away. And now it has. I detect the workings of the good Mr. Biden in this. Well done, sir!! I doff my hat to you.
but the rest of us just wanted it to go away. And now it has.
I have no desire to spoil your celebratory festivities this weekend, but you are not the serious student of politics I gave you credit for yesterday if this is your belief.
There is already a bill being marked up in the House and I believe I read about 5 or 6 D-Senator likely defections.
Enjoy the bratwurst and beer this weekend, but there is nothing but your hopefulness that is making this go away.
This is a nickel’s worth of controversy that brings back the million dollar problem on the entire ACA mandate issue front and center just in time for SCOTUS arguments and campaign season.
You’re right. I’m probably overly optimistic that this issue will go away. BUT…. as a substantive matter, the narrow issue of whether religious organizations can be compelled to pay for services antithetical to their beliefs has been resolved. Women get the full panoply of coverage, and the religious organizations don’t have to underwrite it. That strikes me as a good outcome. While the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops is lukewarm, praising the move as a good first step, Catholic Charities and most other religious organizations appear to have agreed to declare victory and move on. As well they should.
I also agree that this does not settle the issue of the mandate itself. That is a subject for another day. My sense is that Kennedy will be the deciding vote AGAINST the mandate. I also believe that the Obama Administration will grant waivers to a number of states, as he has with No Child Left Behind. But we shall see.
“BUT…. as a substantive matter, the narrow issue of whether religious organizations can be compelled to pay for services antithetical to their beliefs has been resolved.”
Maybe because it NEVER WAS the issue.
That was the flat out LIE the wingnuts and superstitionists were trying real hard to MAKE the issue.
My comment from an earlier post:
While BHO enraged his base with the contraception controversy, it knocked the OWS’s 1% and income inequality story off the front page. Also, the $26 Billion bank settlement, that the administration arm-twisted every state AG on, was accepted. Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and the other banks got away once again under the Obama watch.
Mission Accomplished
Well played, sir.
Pretty cynical way of looking at things. Don’t think there’s a lot of truth to your statement.
I’m not the only one who believes this was a timed controversy – but with a political twist.
Indeed…lovely distractions abound everywhere.
The Catholic Church needs to focus on cleaning up crap like this instead of trying to prevent Womens Health. Women should make this an issue and put them on the defensive. Just saying.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/10/8000-new-instances-of-child-sexual-abuse-alleged-in-milwaukee-archdiocese/
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/08/catholic-cardinal-withdraws-apology-for-covering-up-sex-abuse/
Sorry Nightrain37,
But as long as the Papacy remains in the clutches of reactionary men like Benny the Rat-zinger, this will continue to be a theme. It’s a systemic problem stemming all the way back to the end of the 19th Century with Pius IX. It’s a long convoluted story which wonders trough Vatican Two by way of Humanae Vitae. Very long story short, the Roman Catholic Church has curled into a fetal ball on the subject human sexuality and has no intention of joining the mean cruel world anytime soon.
I dont see this one as a Obama cave. This keeps the polcy in place and it can work. Obama couldnt retreat on this bc he needs women in 2012. The bishops will fight it I guess and some Ags but like biden said today- why dont the bishops fight the 27 states who have this already?! and poor mitt-well more on that from me tommorrow
If we had had medicare for all in the health care plan, none of this fake hysteria would have happened.
As for the compromise, as long as women, whether Catholic or not who work for Catholic Universities and Hospitals receive the same coverage regarding co-pays, etc. I’m fine with this compromise even though this will be seen as a cave in towards those yelling and yapping about how their religious autonomy was being “attacked”. And, the compromise should not have happened because this wasn’t an attack on anyone’s religious liberty. Question remains, will the constipated Catholic Bishops agree to this compromise?
This whole thing and related events these past two weeks have put me in a really bad mood.
I’ve not posted my thoughts about any of this anywhere. Just re-tweeted some of the best and most informative tweets about what has gone on over the past couple of weeks. It’s taken me a day or two to regroup from my bad mood and write to paper all of my thoughts about these events. So, please excuse the length of this post. Next time, I’ll post as these things come up but my bad mood over all of it would have clouded any clear-headed comments on my part. Just pass it by if you don’t have the time.
If women don’t have control over our bodies (which we had to fight for for centuries) we have control over nothing. That goes for every woman on this planet including the nuns.
Taylor, your continued posts about this and the Susan G. Komen disgraceful move on Planned Parenthood have been so good. You’ve said it all just like it is out here. Thank you for keeping this bright light shinning on these crucial issues. I’m looking forward to more from you as things proceed.
Rachel Maddow, of whom I have not been a “fan”, has also done some great work on this. I have criticized her in the past but I have to hat tip her now for her intelligent reporting without resorting to clowning around or shilling for the WH as she oftentimes does. As has Al Sharpton. He’s been first rate on this. I loved how he took the Morning Joe crew to the woodshed earlier in the week. I even have to commend Andrea Mitchell who did that great interview with Nancy Brinker of Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Mitchell asked the tough, difficult questions and she didn’t back off one bit and she did it in a way that didn’t pounce but in a cool-headed, productive way.
It’s been one heck of a couple of weeks, where now even some conservative reactionary group calling themselves the so-called “one million moms” (who only have 40,000 members on their facebook page) is actively campaigning to get Ellen Degeneres fired (because she’s gay and for no other reason) from being the J C Penny spokesperson. As of this writing Penny has not caved. Yay!
All of these things (Susan G. Komen, the wailing by the Catholic Bishops and their appeasers over their phony charge of attacks on their religious freedoms and the J.C. Penny boycott) are all connected as the radical, rabid, mendacious right continues to bully it’s way to get their oppressive way over American culture and law. And, some of the altar boys on the left we now see are ready to help them get some of their way, perhaps.
I’ve been too furious to post anything on line because I don’t want to post whilst I’m in a furious mind-set. Now, I’m just deeply angry with this BS, disgusted and up to my eyeteeth with the made up hysteria of the Catholic Bishops and all of their appeasers on the radical right and the male baby boomer left which doesn’t surprise me in the least. Not one bit. I remember women of the generation before mine during the height of the Vietnam protests complaint: many of these men of the left were no different in their attitudes towards women than the men on the right or center. Made no damn difference. And, although some things have changed with regard to this, many men of that generation, Matthews, Dionne, Shields (he’s much older which means chances are he’s even worse), etc. continue to harbor these prejudices. They show more fealty to the men in the red bennies and cardboard collars than they do towards women which includes their wives, daughters and mothers. And, some men on the left from the generation behind mine who supported Obama leave a lot to be desired in their attitudes towards women as well as most of us know and have experienced first hand.
The guy with the real big problem on the “left’ is Chris Matthews. There is truly something wrong with him. I can’t bear to watch or listen to his dribbling inane commentary any longer No big news that this guy has a huge problem with women, it wasn’t only Hillary Clinton, she was just the stand-in and on the receiving end of his rants and hate for the rest of us. He’s just been unwatchable for a long time now and his latest commentary about all of this is cringe-inducing.
And, as you’ve said, Taylor except for Al Sharpton, Maddow, Chris Hayes (whom I truly like and admire): both of whom were born Catholics, btw, the most of the rest on MSNBC have been handling this very, very, very badly. I had to change the channel after listening to Matthews, Scarborough (who is milking this shamelessly non stop: disgusting display), Halpern, Shields, and even O’Donnell (who kind of righted himself with that Boies interview) but otherwise he’s also been with the other cockeyed altar boys of MSNBC.
Although there have been continued efforts by the radical right in this country to take the air out of health care for women starting with attacks to weaken the SETTLED LAW (last time I heard) of Roe v Wade, this has been one hell of a week regarding the assault on our hard won rights which are a matter of life and death rights for women. Whether via Susan G. Komen for the Cure’s attack on Planned Parenthood and all the hidden, under the radar crap they lobbied Congress for which actually harmed the very women , like me, whom they insisted they were advocates for, or via the shrill, hysteria on display by the Catholic Bishops and their baby boomer mostly male appeasers. And, the moronic “one million moms”.
How long do we have to fight for birth control? I truly didn’t see this coming now as this was pretty much settled law in New York which I discuss further along in my comments.
How many more hits will women have to take before we do what those in an earlier generation did to get abortion to be safe and legal in this country? If I recall correctly from my reading, in the 1970′s, a number of famous American women who had illegal abortions signed their name on a list which was willingly made public. They did this before Roe v Wade was passed in ’73. . Yes, they had the cover of publishing their names en mass and they were famous women so they were probably safe from being accused of a crime. But, who knows what could have happened. Or, the not famous women who took to the streets in droves to demand that abortion be legalized. These women were so damned brave. If it weren’t for them, my generation wouldn’t have been as free. Where are their equivalents today? Yes, we march in protests all over the place, whether for Occupy, against the wars, for gay rights, against racism which are all worthy to march for and against, but where are we women doing it for ourselves. Crickets.
I hope all of these things have woken us up finally so we start to become the activists that our mothers and grand mothers were to make our lives safer and free from unwanted pregnancies, or dying in childbirth or from a botched illegal abortion.
I was born and raised Roman Catholic. I attended parochial school through grad school (although attending a Catholic University was my choice not because of any religious beliefs on my part: by the time I was in college, I had pretty much left the church behind because I couldn’t abide their dogma and doctrine any longer) because of the fine education I knew I would receive there for the tuition I and my parents could afford. I was fortunate to receive a full scholarship to grad school so I naturally took advantage of it.
The University I attended (as with all Catholic Universities I know of), unlike grammar and high school, do not require students to attend church services, you’re just required to take a couple of theology classes as an undergrad over the four years which I actually enjoyed. And, unlike grammar and high school, there was absolutely no message the Catholic-raised students received from the clergy to convert Jews (which btw, if you succeeded in converting a Jew, some venal sins you committed would be washed away, poof, all gone). The University I attended had a healthy population of Jews, Protestants and even Buddhists,. So, there were Rabbi’s, Ministers and Buddhist priests on faculty to teach those students theology. I was also taught by the Jesuits, who had a built in teaching methodology which has served me well which was to question precepts, in other words they taught us to doubt.
In the Catholic doctrine, once upon a time, it was a sin to eat meat (red, pink, white) on Friday. I remember as a kid being scared to death to be anywhere near a piece of meat on Friday for fear of going to hell. And, then the church declared this doctrine moot and now practicing Catholics can munch on chicken, pork, beef on a Friday without fear of hell fire. As with the “don’t eat meat” doctrine, the contraceptive doctrine as with many other arbitrary doctrines of the church are man made, not handed down from on high. Jesus, if I recall correctly, never said a peep about these things. Same with priests and nuns having to take a vow of celibacy: man made not from Jesus’ teachings.
Obviously, over the centuries, they consolidated their man-made doctrines, so as to have control over their sheep, their parishioners and for no other reason.
Being from New York, I know that the diocese of New York and specifically Archbishop Dolan who holds court at St., Patrick’s has been in the forefront of this religious bullying about contraception (and abortion and homosexuality) since he gained power over the diocese. The Catholic Church has been in this forefront as long as I can remember and most parishioners ignore them and many priests have turned their attention elsewhere because they realized this was impossible to control. But, the Bishops continued to insist on this man-made doctrine being obeyed. So, even though they received public funds for their churches and universities, they brazenly continued to lead the charge against the government in this regard and they lost in the courts in New York, that is. Then they were silent for a long while until now. Opportunity knocked.
During the height of the Aids epidemic two Archbishops before Dolan, Cardinal O’Connor, another fierce opponent of birth control held the same edict re/contraception even with regard to gay men who had Aids as ridiculous as that sounds. O’Connor opposed condom distribution as an AIDS-prevention measure, viewing it as being contrary to the Church’s teaching that contraceptives is immoral and its use a sin. O’Connor rejected the argument that condoms distributed to gay men are not contraceptives. He twisted himself into a pretzel trying to explain his reasoning on that one. High hypocrisy, once again.
I remember being turned off of Pope John Paul for various reasons especially re/women in the church and his refusal to even consider having women ordained as priests (even as there was a huge shortage in the priesthood) but the one that really turned me off of him and the Church’s teachings over contraception was when he would visit third world countries and preach against the use of birth control (except for the Rhythm Method – which has a high rate of failure) for impoverished women in these countries who have been “brainwashed” into blind devotion to the Church and most particularly to the Pope. So, they believed and obeyed every word he said and didn’t practice birth control. How many children could that family not afford and how many of them because of his preaching died from malnutrition or were prostituted out by their families to make ends meet? Or those women who died in childbirth from so many pregnancies? Where is the moral responsibility for those consequences?
(The Catholic Church has never been “friendly” to women like most religions, except for the Episcopalians (the enlightened part of that church) which if I decided or the inclination came upon me to join any formal religion that would be the one. )
Same with the pedophiles in the priesthood and the shameful way in which this was handled over the years. I know plenty of people who left the church because of all of these reasons and more. Also, the current Archbishop of New York, Dolan, went after every homosexual priest he could find to purge them from their ranks, and if there just happened to be a pedophile among these vanquished gay men, even better. Instead of ridding the church of the ones who actually harmed boys and girls he blamed it all on priests who may have been gay but not child molesters. And, as most rational people know, the majority of gay priests are not pedophiles. The horrific manner in which this was handled by the Church over the years has been an abomination. I’ve thought more than once this week, that they made up this hollowbelu to take minds off of the continued problem of priests molesting boys and girls and the disgraceful way in which the Vatican and the Bishops, Cardinals and the Pope behaved to this day.
And, so it continues on into the present. That’s my much-more-than two cents for now on this artificial and made up attack on religious freedom which it ain’t and all rational, reasonable people who know the facts and history of contraception coverage by Catholic Hospitals and Universities for their employees know better . As most of us now know, this is not anything new what HHS and the POTUS have issued as policy on a National level as this policy has been in place for employees of Catholic Hospitals and Universities in 28 states including NY.
Which brings me to the court case of Catholic Charities vs. New York State. There was an article in one of the Albany, New York papers written by a member of Catholics for Choice (here is the link http://tinyurl.com/6mre92s). It’s a short editorial that fills in a lot of the blanks regarding something that I don’t think a lot of people know happened. Please pass this along to get all the facts out about this issue with the Catholic Bishops and their appeasers. There is actual settled case law in NY regarding this so-called “new and fresh attack on religious freedom” as falsely charged by the Catholic Bishops. As mentioned, the case was Catholic Charities vs The State of New York which was brought to the courts in 2002 by the Church against the State of NY on this very issue of contraceptive coverage.
Catholic Charities lost three times in the NY State Courts. It finally went all the way up to the Supremes and in 2007 they refused to take the case on appeal. Why this fact hasn’t gotten out there in TV-land, not that I have seen, is beyond me. Those on our side, need to be armed with these facts to properly argue why this is nothing new and the highest court in the land decided this so called attack on “religious freedom” didn’t pass the smell test and so refused to hear the case on appeal. There was nothing in the law that NY passed that was unconstitutional. As far as NY is concerned, this is settled law and can be used as legal precedent. .
Catholics for Choice is a grand organization who are truly on the front lines in these issues. Although I’m not a Catholic practicing the religion any longer, I support this organization as I support Planned Parenthood.
And, as Taylor posted in one of her tweets, I’m taking her advice and now following Catholics for Choice.
“Catholic Charities lost three times in the NY State Courts. It finally went all the way up to the Supremes and in 2007 they ruled against the Church’s argument that it’s religious freedoms were being violated by the State. ”
If I’m not mistaken the same thing happened in another state also. These are the last desperate thrashings of a wounded and very dangerous mob of UBERmisogynistic UBERChristofacists.
The repugnantklan/teabaggers, since taking over the House have devoted their time almost exclusively to erecting barriers to women being able to actually have accxess to their constitutional right to reproductive choice. That and actively working to block anything the administration or Dems have proposed that might help the economy.
It WAS and IS about a woman being able to make HER OWN reproductive choices.
Thanks, secular.
You’re absolutely right. These ARE the last desperate thrashings of a very dangerous mob of religious fanatics and authoritarians.
I stand in awe Newdealdem1,
That is one serious unpacking of the state of affairs. Great post, keep them coming!
You had to hear me when I was furious and ranting in my household. lol It wasn’t pretty.
Thanks for your kind comments, spincitysd. I’ve been reading your posts as well on this blog and I’ve appreciated your commentary, too. It’s a pleasure to post here on this blog with posters like yourself.
As I read through your comment, I just keep wondering how all these superstitious nitwits and opportunists can have so much power over the rest of us. And I include most of the so-called journalists you mention in that grouping.
Anyway, that’s an interesting commentary. Wish I could add more to it, but I stopped thinking of religious leaders as arbiters of morality at least forty years ago. I haven’t paid much attention to them since.
Catholic Charities lost three times in the NY State Courts. It finally went all the way up to the Supremes and in 2007 they ruled against the Church’s argument that it’s religious freedoms were being violated by the State.
I cannot accept inaccurate postings……SCOTUS did not “rule against”….the petition for certiorari was denied. About 8,000 petitions are filed each year…..SCOTUS currently accepts about 1%.
But, you shouldn’t have to wait much longer…..arguments are docketed for March.
“I cannot accept inaccurate postings…”
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! he/she/it did NOT actually post that did they?!!!!! Oh yes he/she/it Di-id!! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
I went back and re-read that paragraph again in that editorial. The writer says
” the U.S. Supreme Court rejected their appeal in 2007.”
I’m aware of the miniscule number of cases the Supremes accept.
I misinterpreted that phrase. I see that now. I also dislike inaccuracies in posts and whenever I get it wrong, I’ll be first to admit it.
However, it seems to me if they refused to accept the appeal, someone on the high court at the least read the summary by one of their clerks and made a decision that something didn’t meet the smell test here. It seems unreasonable to reject a case on appeal without even looking at the case in brief at the least. If you are an attorney, perhaps you can enlighten us here.
Nevertheless, Catholic Charities aka, the Archbishop of New York, Dolan, lost the case and on appeal in the New York Court System. Three times. And, as Boies says in that interview with O’Donnell, he doubts that the Supreme Court will hear the case now. Given this, the New York law was judged not unconstitutional and that doesn’t mean nothing. It counts in NY. At the least, there is legal precedent and the decision made in that case can thereafter be referred to in deciding similar cases.
Point is, for now the courts have decided there is no infringement on religious freedom here in NY. And, for now, that stands.
Frankly it is completely disingenuous try to parse this as any sort of attempt to subvert anyone’s “freedom of religion”
If the Catholic Hospitals were religion based and catered to ONLY Catholics and didn’t accept a penny in taxpayer monies or did not offer health insurance as part of the pay to employees there would be no problem. It is a commerce and equal treatment issue.