The Hartfordite sits down with Archbishop Henry Mansell. Watch the interview on Sunday on Face the State. He says President Obama has declared “a war on religion” that
shows a terrible lack of feeling and a real knowledge of the issues … I think it will have an effect, and enormous effect because this is fundamental in our lives our lives as citizens of the United States and as members of the Catholic church and other churches.
This war on contraception also gave us this memorable image from yesterday, when a House of Representives committee chaired by U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-CA, heard testimony on the matter. It was a from a panel of men, of course:
If you enjoyed this article, please consider sharing it!
16 Responses to A War on Catholics, Religion Or Contraception?
- -- ADVERTISEMENT --
- -- ADVERTISEMENT --
The Committee tried to restrict the conversation to constitutional issues and Obama supporteres were trying to spin it as a women’s health issue. I agree with the committee. Stick to the agenda.
I agree with Mansell. Obama is tone deaf. Had Obama stuck with condoms as a health issue and presented the compromise directive first and limited the inclusion of pills to the traditional pre-coitus birth control pills it would be a done deal with some minor squawking from the Catholic Church that would have little political leverage. It was somewhat expected and self-insurance would remain an option.
The minute Obama pushed abortion-inducing drugs into the religious organizations, the first proposal, it was over.
This is now a war over free chemical abortions. Not birth control or women’s health.
Let’s spin it another way. Would the supporters of FREE abortion-inducing drugs put free birth control and women’s health at risk over that one issue? Apparently the answer is yes!
And those Planned Parenthood polls? Ask Catholic women if they support (in turn) condoms, the pill, Plan B, chemical abortions or old-fashioned abortions. The “52% of Catholics support birth control” numbers fall over the cliff as the answers move to post-coitus solutions.
As polite adults no one’s mentioning that Obama’s Christian denomination is in full support of the pre-compromise directive and supports free chemical abortions offered through the churches. Yes it is another UCC v Roman Catholic war couched as a separation issue and women’s health and secularism. Obama is acting on matters of his religious faith.
There will be blowback on this issue. Rick Warren’s turned his back on Obama as has the Catholic hierarchy.
In the past 10 presidential elections the Catholic vote has favored the winner of the popular vote each time (including Gore).
In 2008, 54% of Catholics voted for Barack Obama.
In 2010, 54% of Catholics supported Republicans and Obama is now polling worse than 2010. more ominious given the recent economic upturn and general rise in the polls for Obama.
My favorite press release from the UCC this year: it wins an award for the best misue of the word mainstream too
http://www.ucc.org/news/ucc-20-other-mainstream.html
And the hypocrisy of the women’s groups?
Pushing for responsible sex and the male condom mandate in the age of AIDS is now being undermined by easy and free after-the-fact chemical abortion as a solution. High school and College kids kids aren’t worried so much about AIDS as pregnancy.
Note that these women’s health groups don’t refer to polls suggesting easy access to abortion undermines the AIDs/condom health agenda and are counter productive to public health.
Once again this is a war over chemical abortion not birth control or public health.
Bill Clinton wouldn’t have a problem with this issue after 1994. As in DADT Clinton would have gone for the low-hanging fruit, the easy compromise, the possible not the perfect, and move on to something else.
The chemical abortion thing is Ned Lamont territory for the tone deaf progressives. They’d rather lose the 2012 election than concede an inch. Mitt Lieberman will capture the mdoerates.
It was only 15 years ago that Clinton was signing off on abstinence-only sex ed programs. Is Uganda with its abstinence before condoms (ABC) sex education ahead of the US in both its moral and public health teachings? The US is now encouraging high-risk sexual practices that can be cured through free and readily available chemical abortion on demand?
To me, this is a bunch of theocrats pouncing in response to a clumsy move by the administration. Men like Mansell are far more dangerous to the country and the constitution than Obama could ever be.
The overwhelming majority of Catholics do not pay any attention to the Catholic Hierarchy’s position on contraception. Find a young Cartholic couple with more than 4 kids and those are the only ones possibly listening to the Cardinals and Bishops. The moral authority of the US Catholic hierarchy totally disappeared with the Preist/Pedophile scandal. It had been on the wane since the “Pill” was available. The failure of the Catholic Hierarchy to fail to condemn two wars (Vietnam and Iraq) that blatantly violated their precepts on a “Just War” was another blow. Likewise, their minimalist opposition to the Death Penalty while being so adamant on Abortion is another hypocrisy by the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church. We Catholics, I am Catholic educated from grade school through college, retain our Catholic Faith in spite of our Hierarchy.
War on religion? Don’t make me laugh. The Republicans and Tea-publicans need a big distraction from the sorry set of presidential candidates that they have fielded. And the churches need a big distraction from all those costly court settlements – a way to rally their dispirited troops, in a a fake “war on religion”. One of the legitimate functions of government is to promote equality and fairness for all, by having everyone play by the same rules. Absolutely NO ONE is coming into our Churches and trying to tell parishioners what to believe…or forcing them to use contraception. BUT If the Bishops (and other denominations) want to start businesses that employ millions of people of varying faiths -or no “faith” at all- THEN they must play by the rules that other workers live by. ..ESPECIALLY if the churches use our tax dollars in the process. Just because a religious group in America claims to believe something, we cannot excuse them from obeying the law in the PUBLIC arena, based on that belief. They can legally attempt to change the law, not to deny it outright. And if they want to plunge overtly into politics from the pulpit, then they should give up their tax-exempt status. Are they churches, or are they super-pacs? They need to decide- or have the IRS decide for them. Did I miss something, or when it comes to the “sanctity of life”, is every single righteous Catholic still a card carrying conscientious objector, still refusing to take up arms, still totally against the death penalty, and still against contraception and birth-control in all its forms? Oh well, hypocrisy is often at the heart of politics, and politics masquerading as religion even more so. This country is an invigorating mixture of all the diversity that life has to offer, drawing its strength FROM that diversity. But TRUE religious freedom gives everyone the right to make personal decisions, including whether to use birth control, based on our own beliefs and according to what is best for our health and our families. It fiercely protects the rights of all of us to practice our faith. It does not, however, give anyone, including the bishops, the right to impose their beliefs on others and discriminate in the name of religious liberty. People of faith should not let themselves be used as pawns in a fake war “against religion”’. The ONLY war going on here is a war against women and families who want to control their own futures. THAT’S what I call liberty! It’s a war …a war between the lies about religious liberty, and the truth. Don’t believe the hype -think for yourself! Postcript: An interesting point to consider is this: Mitt Romney tried to score some points by telling us that his dad was born in Mexico. HOWEVER, the REASON for that was that his Mormon Grand-dad LEFT the US in the 1880’s because laws against polygamy were passed in the US (and being a Mormon, his Grand-dad wanted to keep his multiple wives). SO… if we follow the “logic” of the people crying crocodile tears about a non-existent “war on religion”, then the US should have allowed polygamy (and who knows what else) just because a particular religion claimed it as their belief. GIVE ME A BREAK!
The spin on this come Summer will be “Obama offering free abortion on demand”.
The Gallup poll on abortion is due in May. The poll is remarkably consistent over 30 years. The American consensus is for legal first term abortion for the big 3 exceptions: health of the mother, fetal impairments and rape or incest.
There’s a consensus on parental notification requirements as well.
Second term, third term, on demand, and partial birth are minority positions. Very much so FWIW.
The GOP and religious poll more conservative on the issue than Democrats yet even Democrats support the majority view.
Pretending that 56% of Catholic women (or 98%) support free ObamaCare chemical abortion on-demand is far enough from the truth that Progressives should fear their own mounting BS.
http://tinyurl.com/86cw4wu
Of course the Catholic Church is under attack! Has been so since humans discovered that science is more dependable for dealing with the physical world than Vatican theological declarations. Issa’s all male panel seems so Inquisitional: exclude all dialogue since we don’t do reason well. The argument is about women’s health and not religious freedom. The Catholic Church and the fundamentalists are free to preach any “truth” they want but they should not be allowed to legalize that truth if it hurts others. Finally, I doubt that the Republican Party really wants women’s health as their a wedge issue.
The Republicans and Fundamentalists are as ignorant of modern science as the Vatican was of Gallileo. The Vatican of the Gallileo’s time set back science by a generationm. The Republicans and Fundamentalists want to disniss discussion of science and women’s health, ban the teaching of evolution, reject all the science concerning global warming, eliminate all the science behind environmental laws and ignore the potential of stem cell research. The Republicans and Fundamentalists fear science because it threatens their cherished belief systems – Republican Greed and Fundmentalists’ “Bible Creation Fable1″
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting an inexperienced man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of Idiots such as those who made him their president.”
Democracy is a failure Rick. Bring back the Divine Right of Kings and a return to an orderly rule of law.
Thanks for the gibberish, Ricky Boy. We get that you are factually compromised. Just keep winging that Fox News drivel, I’m sure like-minded zombies will keep sucking it up.
Oh, and you might want to see if the Joint Chiefs or bin Laden agree with you.
This has nothing to do with religious groups. A hospital provides medical services, nothing else and no matter who owns the hospital it is NOT a religious organization. A University that does NOT require religious based education as part of its curriculum is NOT a religious organization no matter who operates it. Churches, Temples and Mosques were exempt and I am tired of these religions trying to force their beliefs on everybody else.
Edward, try telling that to Parish schools and soup kitcheds, thrift stores, Catholic High Schools, Seminaries, etc.
Whle St Francis is the other extreme, a large corporate Catholic hospital, there are many many Catholic agencies that are smaller and parish or diocese based.
In 1912 not this was a problem. No income tax. This is a problem of the last 30 years which the Roberts supreme court is starting to unwind by allowing taxpayer paid school vouchers to go to parochial schools, etc.
This whole new age mantra “we taxed it so you have to conform to our laws even if they violate your religious precepts” is going nowhere in the Roberts Court.
Don’t like the rules at St Francis? Go to Hartford Hospital. That will be the new mantra after Romney appoints two conservatives to the Supremes.
This bizarre discriminatory notion that Obama can impose his “open and affirming” religious values at the expense of traditional Christian religious values?
I can’t wait until that makes it way to the Roberts court. The Roberts Court will likely rule that “open and affirming” secularism as practiced by the United Church of Christ is just another form of religious value with no greater right to constitutional protection than traditional religious values. Taxpayer funding doesn’t allow the government to impose “open and affirming” religious values on religious recipients with “traditional” values.
And now we have Obama and Santorum taking shots at each other. Religious war: who gets to impose their religion on the other. Santorums old-fashioned Evangelism or Obama’a “open and affirming” ‘phony’ religion?
…..Santorum said on Saturday that Obama’s agenda is tied to “some phony theology” not based on the Bible……
How can you not love politics?