51 Comments

• eiriamach | Mar 13, 2012, 10:33 AM EDT

  Correction, BishopSean, I meant Luke 11, 46-52. These are verses which echo the Book of Job, I think, in warning us not simply to rehearse inherited judgments about good and evil, but to keep our minds open to new ways of understanding the past and to receiving anew the Gospel itself. The texts sow many seeds, many meanings, more than a single truth, according to the questions with which we approach them, and while truth is unchanging, our questions change with the times.

• eiriamach | Mar 13, 2012, 10:12 AM EDT

  Hi BishopSean. Per the US Constitution, "tolerance" is enough. Christians sometimes object that we should regard those who are different with neighborly love, not just tolerance. But I value tolerance because we simply do not KNOW enough about what sin is, whereas we must agree on basic values, especially freedom of individual choice. Without free will, there is neither sin nor virtue but only coercion. IF the churches adopted tolerance, they would embrace gays and feminists and draw them in to worship and spiritual journeys within their communities. Christian love stops short of moral judgment about individual souls. Whenever we privilege moral judgment, we exclude some from the graces of community and we narrow our vision to the "like-minded." I think Christians yearn for some new revelation to adjust inherited antipathy to equal participation of women and gays. That revelation may emerge from the witness of Christian communities that include gays and women even as ministers or priests. So, I suggest, we do not yet know that "tolerance becomes the last virtue for a totally corrupt society." If and when sure knowledge comes, it must find us all standing together and listening, ready to help whoever needs help. The signs of the times tell me that much: full inclusion first and only then full understanding. I think Luke 11:41 has it right on tolerance.

• pilib04 | Mar 12, 2012, 11:10 AM EDT

  The bishops have been after President Obama since he was nominated. Their disgraceful behavior over the commencement at Notre Dame was reported world wide. This is all politics and their pronouncements carry no moral weight whatsoever. Why don't they just go back to protecting child rapists!

• BishopSean | Mar 12, 2012, 11:06 AM EDT

  Hi, Eiriamach. I'm grateful for your contributions to dialogue. I note you wrote about “the sign of the times.” In Vatican II, it meant that the Church should work with and learn from modern world. Jesus used the phrase “sign of the times” in Mt. 16:3, 24:1, etc. However, another sense of “sign of the times” that doesn’t refer to Messiah’s arrival and Kingdom. The sign (spirit) of our time (Age) is not that of the Spirit of God. It involves: tolerance, meaning not accepting differences but rather to not be judgmental. Thus tolerance becomes last virtue for a totally corrupt society. But Romans 12:2 says "be not conformed to this world." It means Pragmatism, meaning the “mass mind” rules and that Christians have no right to go out into all the world, except to tell the world it is perfectly OK. It involves LAWLESSNESS, meaning distain for legitimate authority—even spiritual authority (Acts 23:1-5). And it means Self-Centeredness. Humanism touts individual self-expression and self-fulfillment as life's supreme goal. “But when Christ calls a person, He calls him to come and die.” (Bonhoeffer). Regards.

• eiriamach | Mar 11, 2012, 11:03 PM EDT

  Gearoid writes, "Now this has set an unhealthy precedent which has set all the major religions in the US on a combat footing and coalitions are being formed to oppose it." I've read through the lists of signers of Cardinal Dolan's letters to the Obama administration. It seemed to me that in addition to RCC bishops and priests, a few orthodox rabbis, the signatures were those of evangelical clergy. I did note that no Episcopalian signed Dolan's letters, although one breakaway North American Anglican bishop did sign. It is far from true that clergy are rushing to support the USCCB's anti-contraceptive-insurance for workers and anti-marriage equality for gays initiatives. The impact of Cardinal Dolan's political activities has been to clarify the conservative-reformist splits among the Christian denominations in the USA. In other words, greater polarization within the Body of Christ--moving further apart is not an edifying ecumenical outcome for Christians.

• eiriamach | Mar 11, 2012, 10:43 PM EDT

  @Gearoid4, on contraception and abortion statistics, no. Some unplanned pregnancies result in abortions, but women who cannot afford birth control cannot afford abortion. A significant number are criminal rapes and unreported rapes and incest, and some are because of non-viable fetuses. It is important to note that one reason the bishops' anti-contraceptive campaign has much opposition is that it makes their anti-abortion campaign look hypocritical. Nicholas Kristof in Nov 3 NY Times: "Contraception already prevents 112 million abortions a year, by U.N. estimates. The United Nations Population Fund is a bête noire for conservatives, but its promotion of contraception means that it may have reduced abortions more than any organization in the world. Republicans are seeking to cut more money from global family planning—which, in poor countries, would mean more abortions and more women dying in childbirth. Conservatives have also sought to slash Title X Family Planning programs within the United States. The Guttmacher Institute estimates that in a year these domestic programs avert 973,000 unintended pregnancies, of which 406,000 would end in abortions. Guttmacher calculates that these family-planning centers in the United States actually save taxpayers roughly $3.4 billion annually that would otherwise be spent on pregnancies and babies."

• eiriamach | Mar 11, 2012, 10:19 PM EDT

  Ethos and rules must be relevant to the occupation: medical ethics, privacy of client records, etc., and government rules for employment: safety standards, non-discriminatory treatment, etc. Insofar as a hospital is Catholic-owned, I'd expect its ethos to derive from the beatitudes and love of neighbor--heal the sick and injured and comfort the dying, for instance. Willing parishioners fund hospitals and schools? No, these institutions are dependent on client fees, government HHS grants, and private insurance, Medicare and Medicaid. Some make huge profits, all tax exempt. If the bishops order the hospitals and schools to disobey the HHS rules, they will lose govt money, and, I'd expect, a huge taxpayer outcry might result in their losing tax-exempt status. I suspect that the hospitals and schools are already working out their strategies for becoming independent from the Church; dis-affiliating would be the only way to save themselves if the bishops order non-compliance with HHS rules. Independence might be the best outcome: patient care would be decided entirely by medical personnel, academic curricula by academicians, etc., and burdens off taxpayers. No federal court would take your position that the HHS rule is an unwarranted intrusion of gov't into religious life. Employees' sex lives are private and must remain within the purview of their consciences, not bishops' teaching.

• Gearoid4 | Mar 11, 2012, 04:49 PM EDT

  But when an employee works within a Catholic or other religious Institution, don't they have to respect the ethos and rules which govern those places of employment? Catholic hospitals and schools etc were funded by the pennies of willing parishioners and they constitute an integral part of the Catholic Church across the world. They have in effect been protected by the legal restraints in the First Amendment which prevents government or religions from injudiciously stepping on each-other's toes. This latest Healthcare act was done in bad faith by the Obama regime and is an unwarranted intrusion which now threatens to overturn this Constitutional guarantee of long standing. When you say that 50% of pregnancies are "unplanned", do you mean that the contraceptive precautions taken orally or inserted internally have not worked? As this would tally with the statistics that US clinics give for the failure of contraceptives as one of the prime causes for women to abort the growing lives inside them

• eiriamach | Mar 11, 2012, 03:56 PM EDT

  Gearoid4, the "territory occupied by Faith groups" is *not* the consciences of employees of Catholic hospitals, schools, and agencies. The bishops are intruding on choices which belong to a woman and her physician, or her partner, and her God/conscience. Nothing in the First Amendment reserves to any church the right to limit employment benefits for workers in accordance with religious doctrine--except that tradition has allowed it for church employees. As Pat123 said, that intrusion of religion into employment law and health policy would constitute tyranny and "establishment" of church teaching. No element of the HHS Rule violates the freedom of religion or conscience of any Catholic employer. The employers will not be paying for contraceptive insurance or writing policies or sponsoring benefits; in fact, they will be paying (or their employees will be paying) less and having no involvement in claims. Fifty percent of American pregnancies are unplanned, with serious consequences for the nation, for employers, and for families. And while pregnancy and birth are natural processes (required medical skills in pre-natal, delivery, neo-natal and post-natal care), regulation of a hormonal system is a medical task requiring expensive exams, prescriptions and monitoring. Houses of worship are exempt from the HHS rule, but church-affiliated hospitals, schools, and agencies are not, and these employ millions of workers. It would be dangerous precedent indeed for the administration or the courts to allow employers to control employment benefits according to the employers' religious doctrines. It will not happen, and it would be wrong to deprive women of their moral choices in such way.

• Gearoid4 | Mar 11, 2012, 01:58 PM EDT

  I don't think so, Pat123. You see the First Amendment is clear on the illegality of federal government entering into the territory occupied by Faith groups and conversely the interference of religions in the affairs of government. Now on that basis, religious groups are rightly up in arms about the implications of this latest Healthcare mandate which stipulates that all bodies/institutions, regardless of whether they are religious or not will have to pay for insurance policies which cover such "reproductive" practices as contraceptive bills and sterilization. The exemption clause is so narrow as to be deemed useless. Now this has set an unhealthy precedent which has set all the major religions in the US on a combat footing and coalitions are being formed to oppose it. So you see, there is a very widespread perception that the Obama regime have overstepped the legal boundaries of government in relation to the internal affairs of how religion should regulate their own beliefs and practices.

• Pat123 | Mar 11, 2012, 01:45 PM EDT

  Hi Gearoid4, I think you have it backwards. The US Constitution does promise religious freedom, but that would be to everyone, not just Catholic employers. The Bishops' stance is that only their religious rights matter, not those of their employees, and that the Church's rights are more important than the health needs of their employees. All people in the US have rights, not just the Catholic leadership. Allowing such an exemption would amount to a partial establishment of a state religion, which would be unconstitutional. It is entirely proper for religious leaders to admonish their parishioners to follow what they believe to be the true path, but imposing that path on others is not only tyranny, but also unchristian and, probably, unconstitutional.

• Gearoid4 | Mar 11, 2012, 01:29 PM EDT

  It became "political", Eiriamach, when the secular government in the guise of the Obama regime decided to interfere with the internal affairs of religious bodies by imposing legislation on them which contravenes their consciences and their rights under the First Amendment. Naturally the Church realized what was at stake and accordingly has issued a robust defense against this invidious mandate. This situation was forced on the Church and the die has been cast, so to speak. You use the "Sensum Fidelium" in a distorted way. The teaching against the use of artificial contraception to frustrate the reproductive cycle of a woman in terms of the procreative nature of the sexual act has been a constant since the Church was founded. It is based on sound biblical principles which celebrates the beauty of fertility and procreation as being in the Natural order of things. One cannot overthrow this belief by reliance on opinion polls as this is a totally unreliable and unsound way to base one's religious tenets. Vatican 11 re-iterated the Church's age-old pro-life message in relation to the rejection of practices which prevented or halted the development of life in the womb. Christ promised that the Holy Spirit would be with His Church from the time of His absence until the period that He would return. There is little doubt that this promise has been fulfilled and this is evident in the prophetic encyclical Humanae Vitae(1968) which distills the clear traditional teaching on the immorality of contraceptive practices.

• Pat123 | Mar 11, 2012, 12:10 PM EDT

  I agree that this has more to do with politics than any spiritual truth, but setting that aside for now, Access to free or low-cost birth-control medications has not only been shown to be a medical necessity, but also an economic choice in health care. That is, if the Church thinks they will get a discount for denying this basic need to its employees, they are sadly mistaken. Rates are set by actuaries who know that a health plan without access to these medicines is more costly than one with. So, will parishioners be happy knowing that their leadership is spending more to get less? Is it a Christian act to deny basic medical needs to one's employees? Many churches have been closed for economic reasons in the US. How many more will be closed, because of higher health care costs? And, of course, with higher costs, how will the Church pay for all those lawsuits? Clearly, this is far from a simple or settled question.

• eiriamach | Mar 11, 2012, 07:54 AM EDT

  @Gearoid4, every time you miss my point or misconstrue it, you sharpen the contrast between what "church" is and what hierarchs like Cardinal Dolan erroneously think it is. The Christian Church is about living one's life in the Spirit, and it is about carrying out Christ's mission-- not the bishops' political agenda-- in this world. Opinion polls tell us the minds of the people, and religion surveys tell us the direction of the people's understanding of Christ's missions for them. I have said on IC at least a half-dozen times that I am not a relativist. I do not decide what is right on the basis of votes or poll numbers in favor or against. But every Christian must assess the signs of the times. Second Vatican Council decisively associated the inerrancy of church teaching with the sensum fidelium, and any claim to papal infallibility as well rests upon the beliefs of Christians across the centuries and across the denominations. Unless the bishops and people are of one mind on it, no teaching can claim to encompass "eternal" and uncompromising "truth." Bishops ignore the sensus fidelium at the peril of their standing within the community of faith. Doplan and crew are well out on a very shaky limb. Listen and you'll hear it cracking.

• JohnE67 | Mar 11, 2012, 05:57 AM EDT

  Its all about the Churchs power to control people because of their hope in an eternal life. Do what the guy with hte funny hat says, and he will put in a good word with teh man upstairs. What a farce...please. The greatest gift Jesus gave us was free will, and teh greatest commandement is "Love thy neighbor as yourself" Why cant the Catholics accept these truths? It is not about freedom to worship as the Vatican sees fit, its about freedom to worship as teh individual sees fit...

• Collette2 | Mar 11, 2012, 03:00 AM EDT

  We weren't compelled to accept apparitions stigmata's and whatever other money making rackets around the traps either, but everything is acknowledged under the guise of spirituality.

• Gearoid4 | Mar 10, 2012, 08:59 PM EST

  Limbo was never a core doctrine of the Church and none of the faithful had to subscribe to it. It was a speculative piece of theology that never was officially endorsed by the Church and was quietly dropped because of lack of biblical foundations for it. This contrasts with the situation when the Church promulgates doctrines that are immutable and based on biblical foundations.

• hollabackgurl | Mar 10, 2012, 08:35 PM EST

  Oh spare me the "Truth for the Church is Eternal" hooey. One word: Limbo. Remember Limbo? Limbo for unbaptised babies who die in infancy? These used to pray for those lost children in Ireland right up till the 1990's when - whoops - it vanished. They stopped mentioning it in church. No more Limbo. So much for Eternal Truths.

• Gearoid4 | Mar 10, 2012, 07:19 PM EST

  The basic point seems to be missed here by those who are lambasting the bishop for his unambiguous and forthright stance in proclaiming the right of religious bodies not to have their core beliefs interfered with by government diktats. The current Obama Healthcare mandate is in clear contravention of the First Amendment of the US constitution which prevents the federal authorities stepping into religious territory and vice-versa. This insidious piece of legislation by the Obama regime sets an unhealthy precedent which in effect means other sectors and not necessarily religious, can be targeted in similar fashion in the present or future. @Eiriamach, the Catholic Church thankfully does not decide doctrine or core beliefs on the basis of opinion polls which are often arbitrary and whimsical in terms of their results. This appeal to the "Sensum Fidelium" is another vain attempt to try to encourage the Church to operate like a political party which changes it's manifesto according to the latest popular fad or fashion. Truth for the Church is eternal and cannot be compromised by current social winds which clearly contradict it.

• eiriamach | Mar 10, 2012, 06:30 PM EST

  Listen, Cardinal Dolan, this is what "religious freedom" means: "Americans are searching for churches -- and temples, synagogues, and mosques -- that are not caught up in political intrigue, rigid rules and prohibitions, institutional maintenance, unresponsive authorities, and inflexible dogma but instead offer pathways of life-giving spiritual experience, connection, meaning, vocation, and doing justice in the world. Americans are not rejecting faith -- they are, however, rejecting self-serving religious institutions."-- Diana Butler Bass, writing for the Huffington Post, 2/18/12.

• buffaloirishman | Mar 10, 2012, 04:21 PM EST

  The Cardinal is a hypocrite. This was not an issue for many years. Why now? Now it is a partisan issue. The US Bishops have been loyal partners with the Republican party for many years. As the country again gets turned around by a Democrat (just like it did when Bill Clinton cleaned up after Regan/Bush) the Republicans call on the rich, the US Bishops and Rush Limbaugh in an attempt to distract us from fairness. equality and progress. People are seeing the patterns of hypocrisy. These are the same people who oversaw the sex abuse scandal. Why are they still in charge?

• Collette2 | Mar 10, 2012, 03:57 PM EST

  Pat123, it's time they kept out of the bedromm full stop. Holding other mens wives to ransom over contraception, especially when they can't control what their own clergy are doing in and out of OfFICE times, usually when the husbands are at work.

• etighe1130 | Mar 10, 2012, 12:57 PM EST

  I applaud the Archbishop's efforts. Those who support this gov't intrusion into our private lives will eventually find themselves on the wrong side of another issue and then it will be too late.

• Pat123 | Mar 10, 2012, 12:55 PM EST

  I find it interesting that the religious sensibilities of employers is given a higher priority than those of their employees. If the employees are Catholics who agree with the Bishop on this, they would not take advantage of this benefit. Whatever happened to the role of a priest as a spiritual guide intent on helping people's souls become strong? If there is no temptation to resist, the soul cannot grow strong. Besides that, even among Catholics, birth control is viewed as a responsible way to manage family size and for any woman, there are serious medical conditions that are managed by "the pill." It is time for the Bishops to remember what it means to be a Catholic.

• eiriamach | Mar 10, 2012, 12:07 PM EST

  "Roughly 6 in 10 Catholics (58%) believe that employers should be required to provide their employees with health care plans that cover contraception" (Public Religion Research Institute 2.7.2012). The same research group finds that 71 percent of Catholics support civil marriage equality for same-sex couples: “Catholics are more supportive of legal recognitions of same-sex relationships than members of any other Christian tradition and Americans overall” Cardinal Dolan appears to speak for a small group of his confreres and the Curia, not for American Catholics.

• peterson | Mar 10, 2012, 11:47 AM EST

  Obama should keep his nose out of Church business !! He has indicated his dislike for Christians in general.

• eiriamach | Mar 10, 2012, 11:14 AM EST

  Cardinal Dolan is like Verbal Viagra: he tries with his verbosity to re-erect the flaccid moral "authority" of the bishops' contraceptive teachings. The 98% of Catholic women and their partners who conscientiously disobey humane vitae, the majority of young Catholics who approve of equality for LGBTs and reject the subordination of women implicit in the bishops' current political agenda are fast dissolving the separate identity of "Catholic" within global Christianity. With that separateness goes USCCB "authority." No amount of catechesis can restore that separate identity or close the now-well-publicized breach between the sensus fidelium and the failed moral "authority" of churchmen like Dolan. Truth compels our consciences, as Pope Paul VI said, only by its own power as truth, and the Cardinal seems to have little if any of that power.

• CMMcShane | Mar 10, 2012, 10:12 AM EST

  Re Kilgara comments, she or he, is entitled to their opinion. I am 78 and those Catholics, who think for themselves and follow their conscience are probably better educated and more intelligent than the Vatican and Heirarchy that has been dummied down by all those conservative appointments by Pope John Paul II. He has a lot to answer.

• Gearoid4 | Mar 10, 2012, 09:40 AM EST

  Archbishop Dolan has truly found his voice in relation to articulating the Church's implacable defense against unconstitutional Federal intrusion into the internal workings of Religious bodies. This mandate may not stand legally as challenges mount from Church and Faith organizations to overturn it through the courts.

• BishopSean | Mar 10, 2012, 06:49 AM EST

  This issue goes beyond birth control. But the Obama Administration has been giving up to some US$ 500 M per year for institutional and other support to birth control provider Planned Parenthood (PP), also the US’s largest provider of abortions. PP is now charged in federal court for knowingly seeking improper reimbursements from Texas Women’s Health Program from 2007-2009. Accusation is that PP of Houston and SE Texas filed at least 87,075 fraudulent claims, thus receiving some US$5.7 million from Medicaid for services PP does not cover or were never performed. Also, 10 state audits of Planned Parenthood clinics nationwide showed pattern of improper billing practices resulting in nearly $8 million of overpayments from Medicaid. The lawsuit filed by ADF found 38 federal audits of state family planning programs showing between $88 million and $99 million in overbilling, most of which went to Planned Parenthood. PP portrays image of being ethical provider of health care and birth control to low-income women. Bears close watching.

• eiriamach | Mar 10, 2012, 05:21 AM EST

  What has this cardinal done to the consciences of Catholics, for which he bears some responsibility? Where is the life of the spirit or service to God and the people of God in all his political noise-making? And what's left of the public image of Catholicism in the US except a power play for control over federal rule-making? It will be difficult enough for the GOP to recover the trust of voters after their war against women's health care; I suspect that it will be impossible for the USCCB and Dolan to recover their integrity.

• kilgara | Mar 09, 2012, 09:05 PM EST

  These know-nothing comments applauding contraception are no doubt from Catholics under 50 who were never fully instructed in our faith. For the last 40 years even people who attended Catholic institutions for 8, 12 or even 16 years are woefully deficient in knowledge of their faith.The causes were lack of nuns, media brainwashing, turmoil in the Church etc.The result is the "cafeteria Catholic" who thinks they themselves are as qualified as the Pope and the Bishops to decide which laws of the Church they should obey and which ones they should not obey.Their arrogance knows no bounds. This is extremely sad for in the end they will pay dearly for their arrogance with the loss of their eternal soul.

• hollabackgurl | Mar 09, 2012, 05:20 PM EST

  Churches that play politics should pay taxes.

• seanomelb | Mar 09, 2012, 05:05 PM EST

  If Dolan wishes to politicize Catholicism and take sides in the political debate the US should claim federal income tax from them. Dolan is clouding issues to maintain his dictatorial power over womens rights.

• Collette2 | Mar 09, 2012, 02:59 PM EST

  Where does this prince of the church get his gaul from. With all the crap going down in Philadelpha at the moment and his focus is on Obama.

• Portia777 | Mar 09, 2012, 01:49 PM EST

  This is all about Hierarchial patriarchal control over fe-male fertility.Control over Eve ill wombmen who cannot possibly make decisions for themselves. lol

• freebie28 | Mar 09, 2012, 01:29 PM EST

  Coincidence or by design; Obama never (and Irish Central writers for that matter) seem to intercede on behalf of women wearing an Islam or Muslim label.

• Portia777 | Mar 09, 2012, 01:23 PM EST

  Who in their right mind is going to pay any heed to a man in a dress, holding a staff and wearing a fish hat?he is a man- or at least we asume so, so what business is of his what wombmen do with their sovereign selves?Give him a few sheep to herd and a few fish to play with and he will be all right. Bless Father Ted for his true portrayal of the fish men of god.

• Nicomax | Mar 09, 2012, 01:06 PM EST

  Most of this article was without surprise until I came upon a certain Rev. FAITH Whitmore in Sacramento, CA whose support for abortion and same sex marriage resulted in the Catholic Church closing down her homeless shelter. The real question is how did a female get that position to begin with? And with the name of FAITH, no less.

• CMMcShane | Mar 09, 2012, 12:32 PM EST

  Dolan sounds like a right wing REpublican nut! He confirms Father Andy Greeley's qualifications to be a Bishop. Must be obedient and dumb.

• PhlutiePhan | Mar 09, 2012, 12:23 PM EST

  Bill Clinton said it best. It all depends on what the meaning of "is" is. "Wild Bill" turned to Wall Street to help the Middle class and downtrodden. After all, he was the "first black president". He was from a small town and the poor gravitated toward him. In some cases, he took the gravitation to be a sexual mandate. However, Obama is an altogether different story. Obama wants to destroy Wall Street and the proletariat will take over the means of production. According to Salon.com, his coalition is "women, non-whites, and non-heterosexuals". He has stated that he no longer needs the working class. His wife according to Jodi Kantor resents, read hates, the Irish Catholic politician. He is out and about to destroy the Catholic Church as a vestige of ancient white male patriarchal rule. He forgets that Maewyn Succat was a slave for over six years. His Latin name was Patricus and his father was a high ranking military officer. Sounds like John McCain. All slaves were not black. All of the wronged throughout history were not black or women. Obama has an ax to grind and he wants to do a "horror on Elm Street" on the Catholic Church and Dolan is standing in the road before Obama's radical feminist tank column.

• Jimandjudyp | Mar 09, 2012, 12:18 PM EST

  I see an issue of religious freedom for the employee. The Catholic employer has no right to control employees use of birth control during their personal lives. If Catholics engage in sexual activity during working hours the employer should be able to forbid birth control. Non-Catholic employees engaging in sex while working should be allowed to practice birth control.

• patrickesq | Mar 09, 2012, 12:03 PM EST

  The hierarchy of the Church wants to foist their absolutist theological views on everyone, including the non Catholic employees of their institutions that provide non religious services, i.e., health care, education, etc., and on Catholics who do not accept their views on birth control. That in itself is a violation of religious freedom. A truly Christian principle would allow birth control, which would prevent unwanted pregnancies, that produce abortions at worst, or unloved and inadequately cared for children.

• mikehoulihan | Mar 09, 2012, 12:02 PM EST

  Niall, thanks for more Catholic bashing in Irish Central.

• rugbyplayer | Mar 09, 2012, 11:59 AM EST

  Dolan whose ego is as big as his belly should be run out of New York.

• NYCsheridan | Mar 09, 2012, 11:51 AM EST

  colkelly, what the hell does this have to do with separation of church and state? Are you mad? Do you see any other religions involved in this disaster? Well? All I see is a hopelessly lost bunch of CATHOLIC bishops running around bemoaning the FACT that American women have the audacity to prevent unwanted pregnancy by taking a pill to prevent ovulation. Something that was approved by the FDA in 1961! 1961!!!! Perhaps the bishops are worried that a new promising crop of young boys and girls will not be available?

• NYCsheridan | Mar 09, 2012, 11:46 AM EST

  Religious Freedom my ass. Keep my employer out of my private life. Catholic hierarchy is so out of touch with the flock, it is surreal.

• rpbrown | Mar 09, 2012, 11:10 AM EST

  And besides, if more women have contraception available, less babies will be made. And that is a FAR cheaper option for all.

• rpbrown | Mar 09, 2012, 11:09 AM EST

  This is completely asinine. Firstly, we need as much birth control as possible in the world today....OUR PLANET CANNOT HANDLE ALL THESE PEOPLE. Environmentally, politically, resource-wise and so on there are just too many of us. Grow the f@#$ up and realize we need to do EVERYTHING possible to reduce population. Yes, it'd be grate if people just kept their private's in their pants, but that doesn't seem to be working. Secondly, Viagra and Cialis is covered by insurance. And contraception isn't? Hmm. If you're trying to pass moral judgement, consider that people need healthcare for the results of their risky life choices all the time--think of the choices of those who are obese, who smoke, drink, take drugs etc. We pay for the consequences of these actions. And birth control is really that big of deal? Lastly, the views of a bunch of egotistical men walking around in dresses is keeping this country with many people in third-world states of mind. I mean really. Celebrate your faith, absolutely. But this is not an infringement on that. The majority of Catholics use contraception, it's like employers will be forcing contraception upon it's employees for god's sake. If you're Catholic and against contraception, DON'T USE IT! It's that simple. But stop telling the rest of us we shouldn't have it (when our world needs it so badly) because you don't like it.

• pilib04 | Mar 09, 2012, 11:00 AM EST

  I'll be damned if I will allow the bishops to dictate to me who I will vote for in 2012. This crowd of pedophile protectors lost any cred in the past decade for moral teaching. AND point of fact it has ALWAYS been about contraception. The bishops have ALWAYS taught that the woman should be a baby machine!! Anyone who denies this is simply not listening or focused on what the bishops say. Read their pastoral letters from the past 100 years. Do the research. If they could have their way the Comstock laws would still be enforced!

• colkelley | Mar 09, 2012, 10:42 AM EST

  The issue is not contraception, it is direct government failure to respect the separation of Church. Even though I am a longtime atheist I can see the point clearly that the mandate violates the separation of Church and state and I stand in support of the religious organizations which are choosing to fight Obama's attempt to further expand Federal powers. This is just one more stone on the path to Obama's intention to establish a totalitarian state with himself as the "President For LIfe."