Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Culture Wars and Lady Parts
The current confounding ruckus about whether (possibly Catholic) employers should offer insurance plans that cover contraception raises some basic questions, as in: Why are we debating contraception - which most Americans, including Catholics, use and approve of, in 2012? Why is the right-wing suddenly taking up the old Culture Wars cry when it's largely based on the medieval belief system of a small group of elderly celibate men who wouldn't know a lady part if they met one and thus have no moral, legal or medical reason to dictate what women do or don't do with aforementioned parts? Why is the media not calling out these guys when they say hooey things like the access to contraception is "but a thinly disguised way of silencing the moral witness of Catholics in protecting the sanctity and dignity of every human life" and "an attempt to put a bushel basket over the light of our Catholic faith." And how much does all this have to do with the news that the economy is doing way better, thanks, so it looks like Republicans will have to gin up some other bogus story to get attention? One of these pieces quotes a Catholic bishop who argues, without irony, that believers shouldn't have to be second-class citizens; it seems women are another matter.
The jobless rate from today's Labor Department numbers
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
25 Comments so far
Show AllThe law simply requires emplyer provided insurance to cover birth control. So what? If the Catholic rank and file can trust the priesthood to not be sexually molesting their little boys, whay can't the priesthood trust those same good Catholics to not take advantage of the insurance provided birth control? No one is forcing them at gunpoint to use condoms or birth control pills. If the Catholic Church wants to get involve in politics that affect all citizens, not just Catholics, then perhaps their tax exempt status of one of the wealthiest organizations in the world should be reexamined.
Well put! But, that should include all religions that are attempting to influence the election process. Abortion, contraception, gay marriage, etc. etc. etc. are the emotional social issues monopolizing the political discourse and has nothing to do with the actual issues that this country is facing. To take part in the political process forfit your tax exempt staus.
Wholeheartedly agree!
The Catholic Church has shielded pedophiles for decades, but claims it has the moral authority to oppose providing birth control in an insurance plan. The King of the Pedophiles in Rome has no business telling women what the can do with their bodies.
I'd say that King of Pedophiles is only steps away from adding the USA to his list of governed bodies. He does after all have the control of the highest court in the land, and others of his followers (there's a better name for them, but I can't recall it at the moment) are making laws that will affect mostly women. I listened to one of them on C-Span this morning, using the argument that this birth control thing Obama is pushing "Is taking away the first amendment freedom of religion rights."
All these people have to do is stop this birth control plan, then take over hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, and so on. And then "exercise their freedom of religion," not to provide womens' reproductive health care, and women will be right back where we were sixty years ago - and having lived with laws against women then, I pity those who pay no attention now, and what they'll find themselves up against one day if these people have their way.
Just look at the picture, what a bunch of obsolete narrow minded old farts.
BINGO!
In dresses yet! Oh, the irony.
Sadly, yet another example of how the US healthuncare system causes problems that just don't exist in the civilised world.
A small group of elderly celibate men who wouldn't know a lady part if they met one have no moral, legal or medical reason to dictate what women do or don't do with aforementioned parts.
There is a short and simple answer to the entire laundry list of questions Abby poses:
Election year.
And you think Willard Mitt and the Koch brothers will do better?
Just the Catholic Church doing its part in destroying the lives of poor and working class women. It's been going on in the Catholic Church for centuries.
Hoa binh
Yet another very good reason (as if we needed more) for all aspects of acces to healthcare to be taken out of the hands of employers, ie universal healthcare, single payer. Contraception must be available at low or no cost but not mandatory! Even as a mere male I know that there are reasons why 'the pill' can be prescribed for reasons other than to prevent conception. What are those women supposed to do?
This will be a lot more fun if we add male circumcision to the discussion. E.g., Can I sue the parents, doctor & hospital that broke my toy without my consent?
"Arrogance of power" referred to by Lord Acton! Just an idea!
Is the question to Abby's answer or the answer to Abby's question a matter of Lord Acton's "arrogance of power" by some? Just asking.
It appears I have repeat on the Dog. Abby and all others forgive me.
They're saying "if I can't get laid, you can't either"...and "you took away my little boys, so there..."
The Reverend Al Sharpton claims that this is strictly a "labor law issue". Nonsense. The reason why the public at large does not see that this is also a constitutional issue is the fact that "separation of church and state", read "separation of church and public funding" no longer exists if it ever has. Hence the public at large which accepts this non-existent "separation of church and public funding" as "normal" does not grasp that any organization that accepts public funding cannot be an "establishment of religion" protected by the first amendment. If it is not an "establishment of religion" then there cannot be any exceptions from labor laws and that is the correct sequence of arguments. The issue is not a "culture war" but a fundamental constitutional one about the "separation of church and public funding". Regrettably, that egregious nonsense cannot be made undone easily because sucking at the tits of government is soooo delicious and rewarding.
Why do these guys wear robes? Remember high school graduation? I had a pint of booze under mine. I could swear the one in the picture that is leaning forward has his hands on his, well I thought I saw his robe bouncing, he was probably thinking about the alter boy, in the name of GOD. The robe will probably burn pretty good in hell.
It's incredible how a bunch of sexually repressed old men wearing dresses and tiarras can attempt to control the sex lives of others-in the name of some God. It was acceptable for women not to vote-until they no longer accepted it. It was acceptable for Blacks to ride in the back of the bus-until they no longer accepted it. It will soon be acceptable for women to choose, and the world will move on.
This issue is about health-which is- a matter of life and death, and not about fairy tales some people believe actually happened in a book known as the bible.
The article begins with the question as to why we are debating contraception all of a sudden?
I have the answer. All of this fuss about contraception has come shortly after the most recent economic data was released showing unemployment dropping.
The bottom line is that the economy is improving and that is bad news for a GOP win in November. Therefore, all they have left is to try to "energize" their base by digging up these old social issues. They do it because they know it gets social conservatives foaming at the mouth with anger.
Look for more of this to come as the general election gets into full swing.
I have a feeling that this is going to be the most divisive and nasty Presidential campaign in a long time.
I think your right on. What I wonder is why the Dems and Progressives fall into the trap of answering them...it is such bogus...we aren't in the middle ages or in Salem...This is modern day version of witch burning by the descendants of the male clergy...all this attack against women, brown and black people...just scare tactics for the uninformed..enough already..call them on fact-less nonsense.
Exactly. It's a total distraction and it doesn't deserve the attention it's getting.
Also, this claim that this provision is violating religious freedom is complete BS.
The bill of rights does not apply to organizations, groups or companies (although the SC says they are a person, go figure). The bill of rights was intended for the individual. In no way is the individual right of religious freedom being trampled on with this requirement.
It's ironic, but Lawrence O' Donnell hit the nail on the head when he recently said that none of this would be an issue if we just passed Single Payer. I concur. The private health insurance model just doesn't work. It's time to come to terms with that and scrap it.