Manhattan Diary


Why the Catholic church is wrong, yet again, with contraception lawsuit

Posted on Wednesday, May 23, 2012 at 10:18 AM

RSS


Recent Posts

Archives

submit to reddit

 

President Obama


On Monday 40 Catholic organizations, including the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. and the University of Notre Dame, filed suit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services over its contraception coverage mandate. The announcement was made early to catch, and presumably shape, the week's news cycle.

It's important to stress that this has never happened before. America's bishops have chosen a key moment in an election year to sue the president over one of his policies.

No sitting president has ever been sued en masse by Catholic religious organizations and Catholic bishops.

Never before has a sitting president been so pointedly told by America's Catholic leaders what he can and cannot do.

The lawsuits launched against the administration argue that Obama’s healthcare law (Affordable Health Care Act) requiring insurance plans to cover birth control for women without a co-pay violates the religious freedom of Catholic institutions.

But the reason for the Obama administrations plan is to reduce health care costs by preventing unwanted pregnancies, many of which end in abortions. The plan provides health care and family planning to all women, not just those who can afford to pay for it.

Incidentally, birth control pills are used to treat a host of other women’s health problems quite unrelated to sex and reproduction.

Health care professionals will candidly tell you, contraception is less expensive than abortion or pregnancy, which in turn prevents the nation’s health care premiums from rising so quickly.

No woman is under the obligation to use contraception, but under the new rule, if they choose to their health insurance must provide it. The law doesn't force Catholic women to use contraception.
So this is hardly shattering stuff. Studies have shown that 98% of Catholic women use birth control at some point in their life. Catholics are not practicing what their church is preaching, in other words.

It's a remarkable development, this lawsuit, for what it tells us about the widening gulf between America’s church leadership and the flock they claim to represent.

Again, it also sets an appalling precedent, since the church is effectively telling the president of United States what he can and cannot do.

It certainly hasn't helped that right wing elements in the church have deliberately promoted the false claim that the Obama administration would require Catholic employers to provide abortion-inducing medication. This is simply not happening.

But by allowing politics to set the agenda, it becomes harder to ascribe your motivations purely to the religious faith you claim to be defending.

It seems that America’s Catholic bishops not only wish to deny women access to abortion under any circumstance, but clearly they appear to want to criminalize all forms of birth control as well.

Note the irony of that -- people who despise abortion fighting to prevent women from gaining access to contraception. America’s Catholic bishops seem to want to bring us back the world our grandmothers lived in (and were thankful to escape).

For right wing Catholics like Rick Santorum and the authors of this wrongheaded lawsuit, sex is only ever had for the purposes of reproduction. If you don’t conceive the union is potentially sinful.

That’s the kind of perspective that used to be called extreme. Now it’s the line in the sand that’s being fought over by the bishops, Notre Dame and the host of counter signers to these lawsuits.

It would probably help if voters didn't like most of the provisions of what many now call Obamacare. But a recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that a majority of the public now opposes repealing the law.

So the church is sailing against the tide of public opinion (and history) and gunning for the president in an election year. This seems like an overreach to me, and a potentially damaging one at that.

It also hasn't helped Americas Catholic Bishop Conference's profile that in recent weeks they have attacked the country’s hardworking and dedicated nuns for focusing on socialist stuff like helping the poor and the sick find access to health care, instead of bashing gays and preaching against abortion and contraception.

Critics have replied they would have been more impressed if the bishops had attacked the rampant problem of sexual predator priests with as much vigor and resources.

The president has weighed the issue from all sides and come to a rational decision, and the most realistic one based on how America’s Catholics actually live, and not how they are supposed to. He deserves our praise, not our condemnation.

 



98 comments

Next Previous Page 3 of 7 pages
Hey, Ciara! If my mother reads what you are saying about the Catholic church, she will make me end it with you. Then, the only way we could continue is for both of us to become Muslims. You would have to wear the burqa and you'd have to walk behind me when we are out, when I allow you out, that is. I don't think YOU (of all people) would like that! Éamo.
You see, Ciara, You are not the judge of others. That particular privilege is the prerogative of God. Human beings are human beings - we can be extremely remorseful one day, but we might go and do the very next whatever it was that made us remorseful. That it not necessarily hypocrisy - as I say, God is the judge. Anyway, what time did we say for tonight? Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
About the current "morning after pill" (ella): "Emergency contraception prevents ovulation. It has no impact on pregnancies that are already underway" (Van Look & Stewart, 1998 [a clinical study]). Since we know for fact that ella delays ovulation, it renders fertilization impossible, and with no fertilized ovum, there can be no abortion! Ella's 30mg dose, as Dr. Glasier points out, is "unlikely to be strong enough to prevent implantation of an already fertilized egg" (2010 Lancet 365: “Ulipristal acetate versus levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a randomised noninferiority trial and meta-analysis). The ella pill is "chemically similar" to the earlier (considered abortifacient) "morning after" pill RU 486, but its active chemical is far less than in RU486; hence it has no abortifacient action. Doctors do not administer Ella to pregnant women. They use it to suppress ovulation in rape victims and to treat fibroid tumors and other medical conditions.
clvlsls believes the lies told by the bishops about the Obama administration foisting abortion services on workers through the Affordable Care Act. USCCB know they look like fanatics when they object to making contraceptives generally available, so they "up the ante" and call birth control "abortion." But they lack any shred of support in clinical studies of the contraceptives included under the mandate. I'll repeat my earlier: The Affordable Care Act (ACA) met strenuous opposition from the Catholic bishops. It did not pass into law until Obama gave them a guarantee that it would not interfere with their rights of conscience regarding abortion. See Executive Order 13.535 (Mar 24, 2010), which specifically applies the Hyde Amendment to the ACA and forbids any federal funding of abortion services or abortifacients. The ACA also contains the Stupak–Pitts Amendment, which prohibits federal money "to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion" (Nov 7, 2009). Get the facts straight, clvlsls; don't repeat lies.
You all are overlooking the abortion aspects of this including the morning after pill! And "hollabackgurl" -- I have travelled and done business extensively through Europe,Canada, Asia and have no desire to live anywhere but here. My Irish/Italian ancestors knew a good thing. FYI --Obama is the one who wants us to emulate you all (who are SO "worldly & sophisticated) -- who's yer daddy paying the bills and the dole! Get a job -- get a life -- accept responsibility and shrug off the nanny states. I'd also love a penny for every Canadian coming here for surgery to avoid the wait there!
You catholics cant be that good at it if you do things everyday that are considered ''immoral'' but sure you can always sit in a box for 15 minutes and have a man in a dress absolve you from your sins and you can go right back out there and do it all over again! Ah the hypocrisy!
Eamo, on the issue of abortion, its up to me what grows in my womb, no one else gets a say.
Well said Hollaback. Paddy, plenty of irish people are anti the catholic church. Its an organised paedophile ring plus what it preaches is utter nonsense too. Its just another cult. The sooner its treated like it deserves in ireland, the better.
But, you see, "Hallabackgurl", the problem is that not everyone is as morally upstanding as yourself. Human nature enters into it. Comprendez? Or perhaps I should try a UFO type language? Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
Although opposed to Obamacare, I agree with Cahir, regarding the birth control issue. 98% is a convincing statistic that Catholic women wholeheartedly support birth control. The antiquated notion that sex without procreation, or outside of marriage is a "serious sin" would be laughable in the modern world, if it wasn't so pathetic! Also, consider that birth control PREVENTS abortions from taking place! Finally, the fact that women will not be required to have this birth control coverage makes the opposition to the Church's stance a "no-brainer"!
The suit is not about abortion, contraception or any other form of birth control. The suit is about the redefining the term "religious organization." The Administration chose to redefine a religious organization as one that "serves only members of its own faith." As you can see that excludes all church-associated organizations as colleges and universities, hospitals, social welfare entities such as Catholic Charities. So, if only churches are able to exempt themselves, that leaves all the other organizations to exclude persons who are not of their faith if they wish to follow the dictates of their conscience. READ the text of the suit, not the newspapers!
I just has a thought; Cahir and Hollabackgurl are one and the same. Both gay activists, both anti-Catholic, both opposed to other people's views.
Don't bother replying to Hollabackgurl, she is a violent anti-catholic and an equally violent gay activist. The restt of us who do not agree with her are all homophobes. GHod help her.
clvlsls writes: 'The requirement to enforce organizations to engage in commerce is unprecedented and yet to be tested uhder law...' So we can assume he's never been to Canada or Europe, or witnessed their universal health care systems, which supply contraception, without a word from the bishops. It amazes me how little traveled some American conservatives are.
"Portia777" - Aren't you ignoring some thing here? Such as the baby who is denied the right to its life? As for your attempts to gratuitously insult clergy and those others who believe in God, why do some people always have to resort to insults? It does nothing to strengthen your argument, it simply demeans your good self - and ONLY your good self. Best Wishes, Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
Next Previous Page 3 of 7 pages




Log into IrishCentral with your Facebook account


or sign-in directly

E-Mail:
Password:
 Remember me Forgot my password
Not a member? Register Now!
print this article Print
email this articleE-mail