Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Catholics for Choice says Obama is siding with the Bishops on birth control issue.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 01:53 PM
Original message
Catholics for Choice says Obama is siding with the Bishops on birth control issue.
This is not about religion. It is about power over women's choices.

Catholics for Choice has had a campaign going to get the president to reject the pressure from the bishops' group and their lobbyists. But they feel he is going to give in to their demands.

David Nolan, a spokesperson for Catholics for Choice, told me today, "Obama's definitely listening to the bishops. The bishops seem to have significant sway over the administration, which can be seen by the fact Archbishop Dolan met with (Obama) last week and came out alleging that he felt much more at ease with what was going on after the meeting. Which seems to suggest that Obama made lots of conciliatory noises to the archbishop." The archbishop, Nolan emphasized, does not represent American Catholics, but rather is "the leader of 271 active bishops, and that's who he represents."

Catholics for Choice has launched a campaign urging its supporters to call the White House and express that "Catholics overwhelmingly reject the bishops views on contraception" and that it "is discriminatory to deny these women and men access to this important provision simply because the institution where they work or the school they attend is religiously affiliated." The ACLU has launched a similar campaign, arguing that religious freedom "does not mean that we get to impose those beliefs on others."

Both Sides Expect Obama to Side with Bishops on Contraception Coverage


This is from an article by Sarah Posner, the author of Gods Profits: Faith, Fraud, and the Republican Crusade for Values Voters.

As usual Democrats for Life is pushing the anti-choice message. I would love to find a list of their members, but there is no list at their website.

Here is more from the article.

Democrats for Life, which lost most of the members of its caucus in the Blue Dog wipeout of the 2010 midterms, is out with a statement about the Obama Administration's impending decision on whether to expand the exemption from birth control coverage for employer-sponsored insurance plans. If the Administration does the Bishops' bidding, employers could choose to exclude from insurance coverage the free contraception, mandated by HHS guidelines issued under the Affordable Care Act, based on "religious conscience," even if the employer isn't a church.

DFL executive director Kristen Day issued a statement predicting that the administration would indeed decide to expand the exemption, so that even nominally religious employers could refuse to cover contraceptives. Note the confidence, from her statement: The Administration has no intention of forcing Catholic institutions to provide insurance coverage for services that are directly in opposition to their moral beliefs. It does not make any sense from a public policy perspective and it certainly is not smart politically to alienate Catholic voters.


This is a huge power play that goes beyond religion and into the very lives of women and their choices.

Do you remember the Stupak amendment in 2009? There was a vicious part of this power play showing back then. A website actually posted a Catholic Hall of Shame....and they listed the names of every Catholic who voted against Bart Stupak's amendment to permit no abortion to be paid for under the health care bill.

From page 2 of The 'Catholic Hall of Shame

Those words of the late Champion of Life, John Paul II, need no further elaboration. The Catholics who failed to support the Stupak/Pitts Amendment should be exposed. Such is the case with Congressman Patrick Kennedy, who was recently and rightly corrected by his Bishop and the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi who has faced a similar response from her own Bishop. The Catholics in the US House of Representatives who voted against the Stupak/ Pitts Amendment which tried to protect the lives of our first neighbors in the womb from being killed with tax dollars under the profane cover of the delivery of health care are a veritable unfaithful Catholic Hall of Shame. Here are their names:

Reps. Michael Arcuri (D-N.Y.); Xavier Becerra (D-Calif,); Tim Bishop (D-N.Y.); Robert Brady (D-Pa.); Michael Capuano (D-Mass); William Lacy Clay (D-Mo.); Gerry Connolly (D-Va.); Joe Courtney (Conn.); Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.); William Delahunt (D-Mass.); Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.); Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.); Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.); Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.); John D. Hall (N.Y.); Phil Hare (D-Ill.); Brian Higgins (D-N.Y.); Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.); Mary Jo Kilroy (D-Ohio); Ann D. Kirkpatrick (D-Ariz.); Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio); John Larson (D-Conn.); Manuel Lujn (D-N.M.); Edward Markey (D-Mass.); Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.); Betty McCollum (D-Minn.); James McGovern (D-Mass.); George Miller (D-Calif.); Harry Mitchell (D-Ariz.); James Moran (D-Va.); Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.); Grace Napolitano (D-Calif.); Frank Pallone (D-N.J.); Bill Pascrell (D-N.J); Ed Pastor (D-Ariz.); Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.); Linda T. Snchez (D-Calif.); Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.); Jose Serrano (D- N.Y.); Joe Sestak (D-Pa.); Jackie Speier (D- Calif.); Mike Thompson (D-Calif.); Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.); Nydia Velzquez (D-N.Y.); Peter Visclosky (D-Ind.) and Diane Watson (D-Calif.).

Some of my readers will find the action of listing them and calling them unfaithful to be harsh or even uncharitable. However, I list them to invite our readers to specifically pray for their conversion, their return to the truth.


Not only do I find it "harsh" and "uncharitable", I find it disgusting.

Sarah Posner closes her article by speaking of the very dangerous precedent it will set if Obama caves to the Bishops.

But if Obama does allow them to declare victory, it will set a dangerous precedent for the "religious liberty" claims of certain religious figures to stand in the way of people who do not share their religion, and in this case, even their co-religionists who challenge the leadership's orthodoxy. Like Catholic women over the age of 18 who are just as likely to have used contraception as the general population. All 98% of them.


I am hoping that our president listens to more sensible voices.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. Birth control is NOT a religious issue. It is an issue of human rights.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roguevalley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. If he does I can't wait for the apologists to defend this. If he does
this he is a bastard. PERIOD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. But human rights are a religious issue
Most of the religious don't think we should have any.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
2. That would bring the 3D chess game to an end
Bishop takes Queen, mate. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MattBaggins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 01:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. People scream and clutch their pearls over the idea of Sharia law
in America.

Sharia law will come to America because of incidents like this. Exemptions for this religious reason or that religious belief are the case law that will allow it to happen.

They want Sharia law... Their version of it anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
4. As disappointed as I've been in Obama the last couple of years, I find this flabbergasting.
How does any Democrat get a pass on this from any Democrat?

This is one of those deals that just playing along should get you rode out on a rail, even if it doesn't go down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. I still find it hard to believe the Stupak amdt passed with a Dem majority in the House.
If not for the senate it would have passed.

We have compromised so much we forget what happened two years ago when a church listed the names of those who stood their ground for the people.

We forget the other compromises so quickly now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. The Catholic Church should keep their religious beliefs inside
their church and religion and keep it out of the secular.

WWJD: Jesus would tell them to go into their rooms and pray.
He would tell them that they should live their lives as they see fit and let others live their lives as they see fit.


The Catholic Churches in America should lose their tax-exempt status and should be asked why they are allowed to send tax-exempt money to a foreign government. I thought this was against the law. The Holy See is a foreign government and hides pedophiles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Book Lover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. Is there nowhere I can run from these men?
I left the catholic church for many reasons, and thought civil society was my escape place. Was I wrong!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rusty fender Donating Member (442 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
9. The Obama Admin. won't dare allow an exemption
for the Catholic church in the healthcare bill. There is no way, politically, to justify a big, ol' slap to women's faces that an exemption would be.:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-23-11 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. True, there is no political way to justify it.
But in today's political world, anything is possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sulphurdunn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-25-11 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
12. With few exceptions, throughout
all of history, priests have been the enemies of individual liberty for the common people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-25-11 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
13. 98% of Catholic women use contraception
the hierarchy can carry on all it wants but Catholic women use contraception.

The hierarchy is sooo out of touch with the flock. As a Catholic woman, I would rather Obama stand his ground and tell the hierarchy to take a hike. Let the hierarchy have egg on its face if it wants to go against public opinion. See where all its hue and cry got it in New York state over gay marriage. The cardinal looked like a doofus. There would be a repeat on contraception. Obama is doing the hierarchy a favor by not provoking it during an election cycle; not the other way around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-25-11 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
14. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 21st 2024, 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC