You know, I could really give two flips whether or not Catholic hospitals and institutions are required to provide their employees with contraceptive health care. Personally, I think it's discriminatory to those employees who aren't Catholic yet work at these locations, but, hey, that can be settled in the courts, as it has before. Lord knows that the Catholic Church is familiar with that venue.No, what really torques me about this controversy are Republicans and certain Catholics using this debate in an attempt to advance their conservative ideology and demonize President Obama. This is not a new issue. Not at all.
Twenty-eight states already require organizations that offer prescription insurance to cover contraception and since 98 percent of Catholic women use birth control, many Catholic institutions offer the benefit to their employees.Catholic institutions have been providing their employees with health care that includes contraceptive measures for years, but now it's a huge deal because a Kenyan Muslim who hates America is making it part of his attempt to bring quality and comprehensive healthcare to Americans. It's an opportunity for the Republican Catholic opportunists and, man, are they making the most of it. While Democrats keep trying to improve our healthcare system, Republicans are doing everything in their power, including whipping out their religion and coupling it with over-the-top inflammatory rhetoric, to stop them.
Which brings me to my last point. Earlier this week, South Florida blog and Catholic conservative Searching for Signs decided to characterize this political kerfuffle as Obama’s Frontal Attack on Religious Freedom. An attack on religious freedom.
Until Catholics start getting thrown off planes for the clothes they wear. Until churches start being firebombed. Until a community angrily protests the construction of a chapel in their neighborhood. Until one or any of these things start happening in the United States, let me just suggest that Searching for Signs and the folks who want to characterize the Obama Administration's attempt to better health care in the USA as an "attack on religious freedom," are disingenuous and totally and utterly full of crap.
.
7 comments:
Hi Rick:
How exactly does contraception fall under "preventive care"? Care directed at preventing illnesses obviously falls under that category, but I wasn't aware that pregnancy can be compared to an illness that needs to be prevented.
Not all prescriptions are preventative. For instance, Viagra.
Where does the church stand, so to speak, on that?
The mandate specifically addresses "preventive care".
I don't need to explain the difference between Viagra and contraceptives, do I?
They go together like salt and petre.
That's a very narrow definition of "preventive". Wanting to avoid an pregnancy is very much prevention. You'd think pro-lifers would be in favor of preventing unwanted pregnancies.
As far as I'm concerned, I don't see why should the Catholic Church, an institution thoroughly discredited for all the damage that has done to humanity since its inception, of which the child abuse scandal is only the last episode, be given any consideration. They want to operate a hospital or a university, they should adhere to the same rules as everybody else. Catholics of true faith should repudiate a church that continues to consider women as second-class persons, amasses riches while professing to serve the poor and hides criminals within their highest ranks.
Yeah, yeah, Alex...Catholic Church bad. The reason they should be given consideration (as opposed to unfettered sway) is simple: THEY HAVE SEVERAL MILLION VOTES THAT MAY GET CAST. And in America, home of the perennial 51-49, you don't ignore a cleavable constituency, certainly not this early in the game.
Rick, I would propose you consider this issue in a different light. I am believing less and less that Obama is the innocent victim you'd like him to be on this. The statistics on contraceptive use among Catholics have been easily available to the administration. Clearly, these are statistics that "play against type". The only way to capitalize on that discrepancy, if at all, is to place that discrepancy in the balance and see which way it breaks. There is so much about the timing of the move that seems pointed at derailing or redirecting the discussion within the republican primaries. The dialogue has shifted from economic to social policy, almost goading the entrenched to come out of their Altamiran hiding place to play. At worst, Romney weakens by his inability to speak of anything but management principles. At best, moderate Catholics swing favorably and mobilize. Maybe not to repudiate the Church. But a simple vote in November will do.
Evil genius, indeed?
Nonee, the church doesn't have votes... the voters do, including many who are catholic and obviously do not agree with what the church says about contraception. It's exactly capitalizing on that discrepancy you mention. BTW, I agree with you it was a calculated move, especially since the compromise was clearly available from the beginning. Obama won the issue in more ways than just forcing Republicans to go to the social agenda playbook, it also showed why an only employer-provided insurance model is flawed.
And yes, Church bad. Very bad.
Post a Comment
Spam, vulgar language, trolling and off-topic comments are not tolerated at SFDB and your comment will be removed if it meets this criteria.