![]() |
| 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
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.| May 29, 2012, 12:51 PM EDT
Jimgordo must be using Vatican issued glasses when he reads about this issue. The suit contends that the Government is forcing them to serve only their members. That's rubbish. It's the BISHOPS who are twisting this rule to say that. What the govt is saying to the bishops is this: Treat all your non-religious employees all the same and NOT act as if they are members of your faith. This suit is a diversion, to take away from their problems with the sexual abuse trial in Philladelphia, the corruption being exposed in the Vatican, the non-bashing, and the ridiculous attacks against the American Girl Scouts. Yes, that's right, the GIRL SCOUTS. Dan Brown couldn't make up this stuff.
BrianO | May 28, 2012, 10:44 PM EDT
you are still allowed to purchase your own health insurance so buy one that covers contraception.
hollabackgurl | May 28, 2012, 08:49 PM EDT
It's quite clear what the Bishops and their GOP bedfellows have in store for women in 2012: no contraception, no right to make their own choices, no abortion without prodding with the shaming wand first (and even then no guarantee).
BrianO | May 28, 2012, 09:47 AM EDT
2Samjacobs, With regards to the actual story, it is an ever repeating excuse for Cahir O'Doherty to support Obama and trash any dissenting opinion.
EamonnDublin | May 28, 2012, 03:55 AM EDT
Hey, Ciara! I didn't think you'd accept anything that Archbishop Diarmuid Martin said or did! Perhaps your "Certificate of Leaving the Catholic Church" is a forgery, done on his in-house printing machine? Anyway, with regard to the existence (or not) of God, either one of us - you or me - is in for one big shock when we die! Maybe you should believe - just a teenchy bit - just in case? Not being presumptious or anything, but I'd miss you up in Heaven! Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland. (Address, hopefully, to be changed to "Heaven" at some future unknown date).
kerry214 | May 28, 2012, 03:11 AM EDT
It is a documented fact that among the clergy in the USA, that the Nuns vote Democrat and Bishops vote Republican. Sister Simone who is the spokesperson for several orders of Religious Nuns, stated on Cable TV, that she felt the reason the Nuns voted Democrat was that they deal with real life, mainly the poor & the sick, while the hierarchy act on concepts, not reality. They (The Nuns ) are expected to issue a statement regarding the healthcare issue. They are not backing the Bishops. Go, Sisters go !!! Well, Cardinals Law & Levada that kind of tells you where you can go with your latest effort to "Crack down on the Nuns Liberalism" Cardinal Law should have been arrested before he was allowed to leave the Boston area. And Levada was not much better.
SamJacob | May 27, 2012, 09:41 PM EDT
Nothing sadder than the comments section of any article relating to American politics. Within seconds, the comments have nothing to do with the story and everything to do with the narrow-mindedness of the typically polarized American "political debate". With regard to the actual story, I see it as another example of the Catholic Church demonstrating a lack of understanding of what it's adherents actually want. I also find it ironic that the (erroneous) underlying theme of religious freedom being under threat is being fought using money donated (tax-free) by people who don't agree with the principal and who probably thought the money was being put to more pastoral use.
eiriamach | May 27, 2012, 09:37 PM EDT
I do my own research, clvlsls, with no "talking points provided" at all. In my comments, I gave citations to sources available on the Internet. Anyone who thinks I might have misrepresented the facts can track them down-- that's easy enough-- and point out any errors in my posts. I notice that you do not bother to say where you get your claims from. Sources are important only if the truth matters. How's OTTOYH (off the top of your head) working out for you? Now, how to interpret your "good riddance"-- are you leaving us? Dia duit, a chara!
clvlsls | May 27, 2012, 08:37 PM EDT
eiriamach -- the US GOVT funding provides everything (including the vacuum)which winds up placed in the womb -- u r entitled to your delusionianal hair-splitting interpretations but you're lack of common sense and real world knowledge in spouting talking points provided to u is beyond comprehension SO good riddance!
clevelander | May 27, 2012, 06:54 PM EDT
@bytheway you and I have no say in American matters. Stay out of American affairs as you tell them to stay out of ours. But I still maintain you live in the States. Up State New York. Go look for a husband instead of meddling in American affairs.
ciaradexy | May 27, 2012, 05:50 PM EDT
Eamo, I dont have a religion. I officially left the catholic church and I have a cert from Diarmuid Martin confirming it! I do voluntary work with many organisations because I believe its the right thing to do and not because an imaginary deity told me to!
ciaradexy | May 27, 2012, 05:47 PM EDT
Eamonn, as most Americans of irish descent assume we are ALL catholic here in ireland then catholicism is the one thats gonna get all the attention on this site.
EamonnDublin | May 27, 2012, 02:30 PM EDT
I would take a bit more notice of the articles in "Irish Central" taking the Catholic church to task if they, even once in a while, also criticised other religions. May I ask "Irish Central" if its editorial executive considers all other religions to be perfect and beyond reproach, or is it that there is an agenda in play? Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
cogwheel | May 27, 2012, 01:10 PM EDT
Intercessor.....The Church should stay out of politics, as the Obama administration should stay out of the Church.
Intercessor | May 27, 2012, 12:57 PM EDT
By suing the Obama Administration, the US Council of Catholic Bishops is trying to high-jack the November Presidential Election for the Republican Party in the States. I believe that the Roman Catholic Church should stay OUT of our (American) politics and the politics elsewhere, IF they are to remain as tax exempt institutions! I think that the bishops have chosen the wrong battle here, and it just may end up "Biting Them in the Ass," as we say in the States! I look for legislation to pass, eventually, that will prohibit the RCC from getting involved in politics or end up losing their Tax Exemptions in the States.
Intercessor | May 27, 2012, 12:49 PM EDT
It is estimated that about 90% of Catholics of a child-bearing age, use some method of birth control other than celibacy or two aspirin held tightly between one's legs! Therefore, the bishops of the USCCB are making "A big ta-do about nothing!" But they are grabbing the stage and taking the public's notice off of the Priest Pedophilia Scandal and the trial up in Philladelphia of Monsignor Lynn, who has used Dr. Sean Brady's defense, "I was Just a Note-taker Defense!" To read about this international, new Vatican Strategy, Google: Jeannie Guzman "The I was just a Note-taker Defense"
hollabackgurl | May 27, 2012, 12:36 PM EDT
You know you might win more respect and sympathy for your support of the bishops multiple lawsuits if you didn't misrepresent the administration's position - or call everyone who disagrees with you 'stupid' or an 'idiot.' The Catholic Church is suing the Obama administration for mandating that insurance plans provide birth control to women without a co-pay. The American people overwhelmingly oppose the bishops position. No one is buying that they won't be able "to live out the imperatives of our faith to serve, teach, heal, feed, and care for others." Given that one federal court has already ruled against the bishops' absurd argument that their definition of religious liberty trumps all else, any future lawsuits are most likely destined for the same fate.
Bythebay | May 27, 2012, 12:15 PM EDT
ellisk21, no I think none of the writers do any research whatsoever. I doubt they even have journalism degrees. It certainly shows. I can't imagine anyone wasting money for their print media. Quite abysmal.
ellisk26 | May 27, 2012, 11:03 AM EDT
It is very clear that this writer has absolutely no idea what he is writing about. Aren't you supposed to do at least a "little" research before you write an article? This is a clear case of government violating the freedom of religion in this country.
cogwheel | May 27, 2012, 10:48 AM EDT
Writer, you're an idiot. Prevent pregnancies because they MAY lead to abortions ? There are places readily accessible to women that provide birth control. This a blatant attempt by the Obama administration at CONTROL. He wants to control more and more of what the citizens do. As far as the Church, " sailing against the tide of public opinion", since when should the Church change Church Law based on "public opinion " .
cogwheel | May 27, 2012, 09:35 AM EDT
What a disgraceful misrepresentation! Catholics and other religions must not be forced to abandon absolute tenets. One does not need to be Catholic to refuse to participate in abortion or euthanasia at the President's whim. Here in the USA the freedom to exercise one's religion is guaranteed by the Constitution. That the criminals in power think they also have the right and power to force our consciences means a huge overreach that must be stopped. Everything Hitler did was legal too, with the same tricks and same propaganda. Not everything he did was RIGHT, though, and this cannot stand.
hollabackgurl | May 27, 2012, 09:24 AM EDT
Uh, the left didn't sue the administration with over 40 suits. So the comments below me by the unnamed poster make no sense. In fact they're just bizarre.
hollabackgurl | May 27, 2012, 09:21 AM EDT
Interesting comments, The left is weaving its web of bait and switch, divide and conquer, to those of American descent there is a clear message in these comment and it shows how the left operates. A biased media prints a provocative story to precipitate an argument, lets talk about reproduction rights, gay vs. straight, throw in religion and the various opinions of the church, instead of reviewing Obama's record in office. They will do anything to take our attention off the economy that this president has been in charge of. Old tactic, deflect the story, if you can't deflect the story then deflect the blame. Back when democrats had a backbone Harry Truman was famous for saying The buck stops here, well its time for the buck to stop where it belongs, don't be distracted.
eiriamach | May 27, 2012, 07:59 AM EDT
clvlsls, Have you been so completely duped by propaganda that you think what you've written is true?-- "SIMPLE FACT: one of the single (if not THE) largest US providers of Abortions -- Planned Parenthood -- LARGEST FUNDING SOURCE -- US GOVT!" But NOT for abortion! READ the laws; there is duplicate legislation, triplicate, at this point, ensuring that NO federal taxpayer dollars pay for abortions at Planned Parenthood or anywhere else! You falsify and vilify the work of a medical organization that is often the only source of preventive health care for women! This kind of paranoid ignorance has resulted in the loss of essential medical facilities for poor women in several states, and it fuels violence against health care providers and clients of these clinics. And you engage in distortions and lies!
EamonnDublin | May 27, 2012, 05:20 AM EDT
The post headed "SeanMor" of May 26th at 4.17pm is actually by me. This happens periodically - that is why I sign myself at the end. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
KatieMurphy | May 27, 2012, 12:31 AM EDT
teh whole birth control controversy is jusst another attempt by the chuch to both impose its will on others - the sign of a tyranny..............As well as further obfuscate the endless molestation of children. Dolan and much of the heirarchy belong in a prison where there is no way out except to the prisons own graveyard..........But what would we expect from a church that demonized Jews for a millenia, setting the foudation for the holocaust and the election of the madman hitler. ......Which if you check around you will find they have not yet EXcommunicated. No excuses here, the church's protect life campaign is nothing but BS to hide and deflect from their endless filthy crimes
paddyo1942 | May 26, 2012, 09:35 PM EDT
Ciara has no idea how her comments reveal her ignorance of the Catholic Church. "Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool; then to speak and remove all doubt.
clvlsls | May 26, 2012, 09:17 PM EDT
Yo eiriamach -- quote all of the obfuscting "facts"about bills/rules/amendments re: Obamacare and your ludicrous interpretation of the morning after pill. SIMPLE FACT: one of the single (if not THE) largest US providers of Abortions -- Planned Parenthood -- LARGEST FUNDING SOURCE -- US GOVT! Your are a cave dwelling dellusional fool -- HELP yourself -- start reading Plato or get some exercise!
hollabackgurl | May 26, 2012, 07:55 PM EDT
Cancer screening for women, treatment of painful periods and cramps and ovarian cysts with the contraceptive pill, not to mention contraception provided to victims of rape, diminish the revenue of the church's corporations. So they may be making a virtue of necessity, as many suspect.
Seanmor | May 26, 2012, 07:36 PM EDT
Whatever happened to the part of the Constitution that guarantees freedom of religion? What else will Obama try to impose on the R.C. Church, force Catholic hosptals to perform abortions and Catholic clergy to officiate at same-sex marriages?
Seanmor | May 26, 2012, 04:17 PM EDT
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.
EamonnDublin | May 26, 2012, 01:19 PM EDT
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.
eiriamach | May 26, 2012, 11:37 AM EDT
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.
eiriamach | May 26, 2012, 10:54 AM EDT
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.
clvlsls | May 26, 2012, 10:39 AM EDT
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!
ciaradexy | May 26, 2012, 05:49 AM EDT
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!
ciaradexy | May 26, 2012, 05:46 AM EDT
Eamo, on the issue of abortion, its up to me what grows in my womb, no one else gets a say.
ciaradexy | May 26, 2012, 05:44 AM EDT
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.
EamonnDublin | May 26, 2012, 05:42 AM EDT
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.
SingleDonald | May 25, 2012, 10:10 PM EDT
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"!
jimgordo1 | May 25, 2012, 07:23 PM EDT
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!
paddyo1942 | May 25, 2012, 06:52 PM EDT
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.
paddyo1942 | May 25, 2012, 06:38 PM EDT
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.
hollabackgurl | May 25, 2012, 04:23 PM EDT
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.
EamonnDublin | May 25, 2012, 03:48 PM EDT
"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.
eiriamach | May 25, 2012, 03:47 PM EDT
"Clear thinking US citizens realize that" health insurance policies that cover erectile dysfunction meds and testosterone replacement for men ought to cover hormonal meds for women. Both types of treatments require medical exams and payment for prescription purchases. That's called equal treatment under the law: see the Fourteenth Amendment, 1868. Requiring that insurance coverage be EQUAL does not touch the commerce clause of the constitution, and equal treatment takes precedence over any sect's religious insistence on unequal treatment, which they may practice in private but not impose on nonbelievers.
clvlsls | May 25, 2012, 03:10 PM EDT
The requirement to enforce organizations to engage in commerce is unprecedented and yet to be tested uhder law. The requirement to force religious organizations to violate deeply hed principals is unconstitutional. Clear thinking US citizens realize that birth control is readily (often freely but always cheaply) available.This is Obama's radical ideology running rampant! Sorry -- WE LEFT YOUROPE! It's America! How's the EU working for you?
eiriamach | May 25, 2012, 01:48 PM EDT
bogsidebunny inadvertently tells the truth when referring to the bishops' "*ideology*. They own the pitch so they get to make the rules." As Hollaback points out, no one owns the moral law! The bishops' position IS political, an "ideology," which they seek to impose through 43 law suits against HHS and related fed agencies. If they could win, they'd secure many millions of dollars in federal funding for Catholic hospitals, schools, and agencies. The only good purpose this lawsuit serves is that when they lose, Catholics will learn that the First Amendment protects everyone's freedom of conscience, not just the bishops' "ideology." And that's a good thing because the bishops twist the moral law of God into a misogynist and homophobic oppression that destroys consciences.
eiriamach | May 25, 2012, 01:25 PM EDT
freebie28, this topic elicits-- I will be candid-- not just many misstatements and errors of fact-- but an astonishing number of patently false statements, claims that show a wanton disregard for truth. Facts about the HHS mandate are readily available on the Internet, as is the Complaint filed with the court by Notre Dame, so there is no excuse for repeated false statements about this issue. Yours was one of the many. I corrected it in a restrained way: I did not call you a liar. I've no desire to hold a private conversation, but it's right on a public forum to hold people to accuracy and truth telling. Indeed, when people who are defending RELIGIOUS organizations show contempt for truth, they do harm to their cause and to their religion. When they verbally attack people who correct their statement, they reveal the crass political motives behind their statements.
Dublinborn | May 25, 2012, 01:18 PM EDT
Liberal Irish don't understand the US Constitution and the bill of rights period. If you cant vote here dún dó bhéil
hollabackgurl | May 25, 2012, 12:20 PM EDT
The Catholic Church is suing the president to ensure that they don't have to provide contraception to their employees (regardless of whether they are Catholic or not). If Catholics don't want to break their beliefs they should not request them. But instead they are protesting having to make them available to anyone. See the difference?
freebie28 | May 25, 2012, 12:13 PM EDT
eiriamach--that chip on your shoulder must be getting rather heavy to carry around. My original post here was a personal observation and directed at no other particular participant commenting here. You took it upon yourself to level an insult at me, questioning my ability to read. In the future, if you have any personal arrows to shoot in my direction, simply request my email address and I certainly welcome a private debate. I have no desire to continue public discussion solely for your amusement and apparant need for public acceptance by your like-minded peers at this site!
Portia777 | May 25, 2012, 12:11 PM EDT
EamonnDublin | May 25, 2012, 04:58 AM EDT "Hollabackgurl" - For the same reason that a nuclear scientist's opinion, or a medical consultant's opinion, trumps the opinion of others who are not experts in those fields. QED. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland. So how do you logically conclude that men in dresses have any experience of female fertility?Who gave them the right to control the fertility of females? i hope you are not falling for these men hearing voices from god on this?lol
EamonnDublin | May 25, 2012, 10:36 AM EDT
"Hollabackgurl" - With regard to the second sentence (question) of your posts, as to "why should the Bishop's religious opinions trump everyone else's opinions", I have already given an answer. However, in the interest of clarity, although it should really not be necessary to elaborate, the Catholic Bishop is talking about Catholics accepting or not accepting the contraception regulations under discussion. He is NOT talking about "everyone" else having to do as he says,he is simply saying that Catholics should not be required to break their beliefs. Seriously, "Hollabackgurl", I suggest you put a little more thought into your comments before lunging at your keyboard and gratuitously attempting to insult those who have a different point of view to your good self. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
EamonnDublin | May 25, 2012, 09:57 AM EDT
"Hollabackgurl" - Have you even read your own post of May 14th, 8.11pm? My point, as I clearly stated in my first sentence, is that just because 89% of American adults and 82% of Catholics agree with using contraception, this does not mean that they consider contraception to be moral. Can you not understand that? Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
hollabackgurl | May 25, 2012, 09:03 AM EDT
The Catholic Church do not OWN morality. Do you realize how foolish you sound? Why should the bishops religious opinions trump everyone elses religious opinions?
bogsidebunny | May 25, 2012, 07:19 AM EDT
Dear Mr O'Doherty, The Catholic Church is correct. You just don't happen to agree with their ideology. They own the pitch so they get to make the rules. Not liking the rules dosn't make 'em wrong, unless you happen to totally lack any common sense.
EamonnDublin | May 25, 2012, 05:04 AM EDT
Hey, "Hollabackgurl" - Just because "89% of Americans and 82% of Catholics" use contraception, does NOT mean that they consider contraception to be "moral". Lots of people do lots of things every day of the week that they consider to be immoral, but for whatever reason - it suits them, or they like it - they keep on doing it! Human nature. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
EamonnDublin | May 25, 2012, 04:58 AM EDT
"Hollabackgurl" - For the same reason that a nuclear scientist's opinion, or a medical consultant's opinion, trumps the opinion of others who are not experts in those fields. QED. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
hollabackgurl | May 25, 2012, 01:19 AM EDT
Why should the bishops religious opinions trump everyone elses religious opinions?
hollabackgurl | May 24, 2012, 11:53 PM EDT
You can't cure stupid. You can tell religious extremists that the Health Care Bill gives a guarantee it would not interfere with rights of conscience regarding abortion and would not federally fund abortifacients. But you can't convince religious extremists. In any case they want to talk about contraception but not what happened to kids once they were born and the church got their hands on them.
Yankee724 | May 24, 2012, 09:42 PM EDT
jflanagan has it right on. It is OBAMA who is telling the Catholic Church (and all Christian churches) what they can or can't say in the pulpit, not the other way around. He tells military chaplains what they are allowed to preach, as long as it is pro-Muslim and anti-Christian! Get the facts right, Mr. O'Doherty. The Church is RIGHT--again, and still.
jflanagan | May 24, 2012, 09:33 PM EDT
Hey, idiot, the President is telling the church what to do, completely ignoring the First Amendment. It is the Constitution stupid.
hollabackgurl | May 24, 2012, 08:11 PM EDT
89% of U.S. adults say birth control is moral - including 82% of Catholics. Gallup's Values and Beliefs survey of 1,024 U.S. adults, conducted May 3-6 found 90 percent of non-Catholics agree birth control is morally acceptable. "Catholic leaders are no doubt aware that many of their parishioners use birth control, but these data underscore the divide between official church teaching and Catholics' day-by-day behaviors," Gallup officials said.
hollabackgurl | May 24, 2012, 07:56 PM EDT
In a moment they'll be telling is that the Bible overrules the US Constitution. These kooks believe God's law surpasses man's. Just wait for the next poster. You know it's what they believe in their hearts.
irishpjk | May 24, 2012, 07:35 PM EDT
Come Election Day we will find out who is swimming against the tide of public opinion.
eiriamach | May 24, 2012, 07:33 PM EDT
Morally, the lawsuits are transparently wrong, and legally, they're based on a Mickey Mouse reading of the First Amendment, as well as contempt for medical science. Reading through the Complaint sent to federal court by Notre Dame has reassured me that they are sure to lose if the court does not dismiss the suit summarily (as is likely). @freebie28, if you have a specific reply to the correction I made to your statement, let's hear it. But name-calling calling is not an objection to an argument-- got it?
freebie28 | May 24, 2012, 07:09 PM EDT
eiriamach...certainly I can read (how rude). However,your endless pontificating and long-winded pseudo intellectual lectures will have been a moot point when the US Supreme Court strikes down this unjust and phony law as unconstitutional.
Gearoid4 | May 24, 2012, 06:46 PM EDT
Anyone for strong tea or weak liberal coffee?
pilib04 | May 24, 2012, 04:48 PM EDT
I see the teabaggers are busy writing again.
Gearoid4 | May 24, 2012, 04:24 PM EDT
It looks like Cahir is on the wrong side of the argument again. Recent polls in the US show clear majorities in the US population against the coercive and unconstitutional nature of the Obama healthcare act. The !st Amendment has bee violated and religious bodies are going to be forced to be co-payers for "reproductive" policies which undermine both their consciences and core beliefs. Contraception goes against the mutual love/procreative unity inherent in the act of sexual love-making. The Catholic Church is in the vanguard of a campaign, with widespread support from other Faith groups. Legally and morally they are standing on solid ground.
rainbowbrew | May 24, 2012, 03:45 PM EDT
Jeanne - sorry but I think you got that wrong. You have been listenning to too many far right extremeists probably from a church like the one in Florida whose preacher thinks we should put all gays in an electric fence and maybe drop food to them. He is not a dictator as that is impossible here in the states. As far as abortion he says make it a choice. If we do as you like deliver all babies are you going to take care of them, and what about the gays that you probably want to exclude. Sorry but you are wrong and your preachers are telling you becasue they want the guy who likes to fire people and run people's lives. It is just an anti-Obama plan for November. The words you use are so wrong and so out there.
JeanneTherese | May 24, 2012, 03:15 PM EDT
I believe your column is definitely WRONG! Our ??Pres?? is the worst president we ever had. He is the one putting his nose in our affairs like our bedrooms and even in our kitchens. LOL He is an egotistic, self loving , narcistic,on the verge DICTATOR who wants to RULE the World. Pray that he is not reelected for a second term as he will ruin our USA (more than he has already done) God help us! Abortion is KILLING~no matter how you look at it and it should be stopped and we SHOULD NOT haVE TO PAY FOR IT WITH our taxes.His fight againt DOMA is another of his evil agenda. I say no to OBAMA....no to 2012. God bless a!merica
knugent15 | May 24, 2012, 02:58 PM EDT
"Again, it also sets an appalling precedent, since the church is effectively telling the president of United States what he can and cannot do." The author of this piece obviously has no knowledge of the US Constituion and is just blatantly anti-Catholic. The President of the United States can not demand that any religious orgnaization do something that the religious organizatin feels is morally wrong. Our Constitution guarantees that, but Mr. O'Doherty does not understand that. Do a bit of research before you write your articles, because your article is filled with incorrect statements.
eiriamach | May 24, 2012, 02:33 PM EDT
How soon they forget! The Affordable Care Act (ACA) met strenuous opposition from the Catholic bishops. It did not become law until Obama gave a guarantee that it would not interfere with their rights of conscience regarding abortion. See Executive Order 13.535 (3/24/10), which specifically applies the Hyde Amendment to the ACA and forbids federal funding of abortion services and 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" (11/7/09). The fanaticism stirred up by this topic is as resistant to facts as a tsunami is to a sandpile. My private theory is that fanatical right-wing Catholicism generates delusions of persecution by government because RC has refused atonement and prosecution for the sexual abuse atrocities of its priests and bishops. It has avoided government prosecution for the most part, and now it claims government persecution!
hermitTalker | May 24, 2012, 02:05 PM EDT
More propaganda for the Left drippers. The suit has S fanny A to do with Birth Control or who uses it, It is about a Dictator deciding what a Church is and how it is to conduct its business. The POTUS should have joined the National Guard, or the Army, and learn not to shoot himself in the foot. Again and again.
Bythebay | May 24, 2012, 02:00 PM EDT
The Catholic Church also enjoys being tax free. Their Public Service agancies happily accept US tax dollars from all the divergent taxpayers of the US. Their Public Service agencies cannot discriminate by law.
patriciabruhn | May 24, 2012, 01:46 PM EDT
Please remember that the USA has enacted since we became a Country that there is separation of church & state. Everyone has a right to choose what they want for healthcare.
phinsman | May 24, 2012, 01:38 PM EDT
The Roman Catholic Church's rules are archaic and need to be modernized. Most women around the Earth want to have careers just like men do. How can parents afford to send 7 to 13 kids to college if both parents don't have full time jobs and an opportunity to save money to send their children to college? Ever since the 1980s college tuition/room/board/textbook costs have gone up over 500%. It is truly the parents' right to choose how many children they would like to have.
FastEddy | May 24, 2012, 01:18 PM EDT
"Why Irish Central is wrong, again ...". This is a serious constitutional issue: can US government force a mandate on a church, any church ... Not!
eiriamach | May 24, 2012, 01:02 PM EDT
freebie28, can you read? Or is it that truth means nothing to you? Catholic churches ARE exempted from the HHS mandate. But their public service agencies, such as hospitals and universities that serve non-Catholics, their charitable organizations, homeless shelters, adoption agencies, and such are NOT exempted because, as I indicated at 5/23, 12:01PM, these organizations employ hundreds of thousands of religiously diverse Americans, and they serve a diverse population while often reaping a tax-free profit. Federal law must respect equal rights under the Constitution. A Catholic employer can exercise freedom of conscience, but so must every employee, even when the employee's conscience speaks differently from his or her employer's conscience. That what 'freedom' means in the USA; the EQUAL right to liberties is constitutionally guaranteed. It does not discriminate against Catholics, nor does it ALLOW Catholics to discriminate against Methodists, Baptists, Muslims, Jews, Quakers, atheists, agnostics, Buddhists... When your 'freedom of conscience' wipes out my freedom of conscience, yours does not deserve the name "freedom." Notre Dame's lawsuit is unconscionable.
Nicoletta | May 24, 2012, 12:54 PM EDT
The previous comments say it all. Your rabid anti-Catholicism is showing, once again, Cahir, and one wonders why you have it in for the Catholic Church so badly. Think about your ancestors and what they suffered to hand the Catholic faith down through the generations to you, before you pen anything similar.
eiriamach | May 24, 2012, 12:42 PM EDT
Today's morning after pills are NOT abortifacients. They work by suppressing ovulation, and they are highly efficient. If ovulation cannot occur, fertilization of an ovum cannot occur, and there can be no pregnancy and thus NO abortion! The amount of mis-information put out here by Catholics is truly appalling. It amounts to wholesale lies when accurate information is readily available and people post the information frequently in response to the USCCB's continuous prevarications.
kilgara | May 24, 2012, 12:26 PM EDT
O'doherty,As usual if you had a clue about the subject you discuss you would know that the contraceptive "morning after pill" induces an abortion so in Obamas plan the Church would be subsidizing homicide.Educate yourself you eejit!
freebie28 | May 24, 2012, 12:15 PM EDT
Exemptions go to Muslims, Amish, Christian Scientist, Mennonites, American Indians, Union buddies (a given, of course), business entities (barely hanging on by skin of their teeth) such as McDonald's, and on and on and on. But Catholics--NO WAY.
Kathleen Wagner | May 24, 2012, 12:14 PM EDT
We have a thing we call the Constitution in the United States, and ever presidents (even those admired by the media) are obliged to comply with it. One of the rights specially enshrined in its First Amendment is the freedom of religion, by which more is meant that that the government may not put people in prison for attending a particular place of worship. The Bill of Rights protects the free exercise of religion, and that has generally been held by the courts to mean that the government cannot compel persons or organizations to act in violation of their religious principles. It's this protection the plaintiffs are claiming in their suit to the court, and if there's anything in precedent they ought by rights to succeed.
porkheaven | May 24, 2012, 11:23 AM EDT
The catholic church is correct. Obama is way out in left field.
hollabackgurl | May 24, 2012, 11:21 AM EDT
This isn't an assault on religious freedom you big drama queen. If you have a religious objection to the use of contraception don't use them, but don't try to prevent everyone else or force them to follow your point of view. Most Catholic women use contraception. If they need access to them they should not be prevented by celibate clergy who didn't show this kind of interest in sexuality when it involved the abuse of children.
snowkey | May 24, 2012, 11:10 AM EDT
What people fail to realize is that this suit has absolutely nothing to do with the use or non use of contraceptives. The administration picked this issue because they knew most people agreed with contraception, including most Catholics. But, It is really about the rights of any religion to practice what they preach. This is just a first assault on religious freedom. Next will be telling churches what they can and cannot say in their sermons. I'm proud of all of the Catholics and Non-Catholics (yes, there are some who have joined in this lawsuit) who are taking a stand for our constitutional rights to Freedom of Religion. Keep the government out of our pulpits.
hollabackgurl | May 24, 2012, 10:29 AM EDT
The Catholic Church have every right to control women's reproductive choices. Mr.O'Doherty would prefer if they could make their own choices about their own bodies, which neither the Pope nor his representative Cardinal Dolan can support. This is typical of the insiders in the VATICAN CONSERVATIVE ELITE, who don't wish to release their grip on other people's privates.
Dublinborn | May 24, 2012, 10:11 AM EDT
The Catholic Church have every right not to be forced to do anything that is contrary to their beliefs . Mr O Doherty needs remedial reading in the US Constitution and the Freedom of association clause in our first Amendment. This is typical of so many Irish and Irish American insiders who live within THE LIBERAL ELITE PALE and who never read the federalist papers or any of the founding documents.
hollabackgurl | May 24, 2012, 01:03 AM EDT
What sane adult would argue against the provision of contraception to a consenting adult? How can you be anti-abortion and yet insist that no one has the right to contraception either? Most Catholic women use contraception at some point in their lives, many for medical reasons - how dare a bunch of celibate elderly men tell them they no longer have the right to.
hollabackgurl | May 23, 2012, 03:58 PM EDT
Mr. O'Doherty's article is not so much a logical argument as an outright attack on the Catholic church as an entity. Why does he have to use the contraception insurance law as a crutch and a lead in to his article. He should simply tell us why he hates the Catholic church with a fury. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.
RedBranch | May 23, 2012, 03:46 PM EDT
'...it also sets an appalling precedent, since the church is effectively telling the president of United States what he can and cannot do.' I prefer to read it this way '... it also sets an appalling precedent, since a president is effectively telling a private entity, the Catholic Church, what it can and cannot do.'
eiriamach | May 23, 2012, 12:01 PM EDT
Notre Dame's health insurance covers 4,600 of its 5,200 eligible employees. Coverage actually extends to 11,000 because it covers employees' dependents. ND's health insurance for students covers 2,715, including dependents, although 11,902 students are eligible. Probably, the lower rate of students' coverage indicates that the plan provides for few gynecological services, so women students find other plans or carry no insurance. Notre Dame is just one RC institution taking federal money to provide education and employment to a religiously diverse population. Fines for non-compliance with the HHS mandate would cost such institutions serious money. The main argument of Notre Dame's complaint (available on the Internet) could apply to any employer: the HHS mandate burdens ND with gov't regulations that require it to "violate its conscience." By this argument, if I disapprove of any legitimate medical services my employees might use, I can refuse to provide insurance for them by claiming that such health services burden MY conscience. Oh yeah, sure! Dismissal of this silly electioneering lawsuit will follow shortly.
sailmaker | May 23, 2012, 10:48 AM EDT
Unfortunately your story is right on. The Bishops have blithely ignored three wars, poverty, sexual abuse, the collapsing priesthood, genocide, global hunger, but are content to become a cabal of the American Republican Party? Oh, Please! The pointy-hat crowd lost the contraception fight with American women more than 50 years ago and have made themselves merely irrelevant in that discussion, but they are frantically clawing back with half-truths and outright deception, all in an effort to regain control of the people, whom they are alienating left and right. The largest religious denomination in the US is Roman Catholic. Know what the second largest religious denomination is? Ex Roman Catholics. You'd think they would be concerned, but instead have melded the relationship with hell: religion and politics, and I'll bet the farm they won't like the outcome.
Shmrck5S | May 23, 2012, 10:20 AM EDT
In the world our grandmothers lived in (and which, from a moral standpoint, we would do well to return) families consisted of mothers and fathers and their children. Just because our president supports gay marriage, it doesn't mean he's right about everything (or anything, for that matter) else.
BrianO | May 23, 2012, 10:03 AM EDT
I get it Cahir, you support Obama. Wouldn't it just be better and constitutional if people bought the insurance from the private sector and kept the government out of it completely.