This should surprise no one:
Gallup is set to post the analysis on its Web site later today, and Gallup editor in chief Frank Newport gave me a preview of the forthcoming findings.
“Our analysis basically shows that Catholics’ opinions of Obama are little changed through Sunday,” Newport told me. “Our article will show that we can detect little change in Catholic approval so far.”
With the controversy continuing in the wake of Obama’s newly-announced accommodation — which has actually won approval from some Catholic groups — the new data casts doubt on the political efficacy of the continuing GOP and conservative attack on the White House stance. Mitch McConnell has vowed to keep up the crusade, though senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins have edged towards supporting Obama’s compromise.
Catholics were already ignoring the Bishops in regards to birth control, so I have no idea why anyone would think Obama would lose ground with Catholics for agreeing with them. If anything, I’m surprised more Catholics don’t support him for standing up to Bishops attempting to impose Sharia law on the country, because that is basically what they are trying to do. They can’t convince their flock that contraceptives are immoral, so they’ve taken to writing blustery op-eds and demanding the Opus Dei cult in DC make it law.
I actually didn’t make the connection until a couple of days ago, but EJ Dionne may be a distant cousin of mine. I’m rather ashamed at this fact now.
Don’t give E J Dionne a sad.
The threat of excommunication and brimstone keeps the low-info Catholic
in a state of fear. It’s too bad the Vatican can’t prohibit it’s charges from learning to read, as they did in the middle ages. They are better informed now.
This does not fit in with what I believe to be true so I will ignore it. I can haz NPR opinionating job now? kthxbai!
And now almost every ad on the page is for catholic charities.
Does it bother you even a little that you rely on outright lies in order to make your point? Not forcing a religious organization to pay for contraception is not the same as removing a woman’s ability to control her reproductive health.
We were shocked last night when we skyped with a rabid Obama supporter/liberal Dem who’s also a Catholic. She is totally on the side of the bishops and is warning that all Catholic hospitals will be shut down for this forcing of sin on believers. (In her mind, the sin is not “birth control” per se, but contraceptives that inhibit implantation. Since in her mind a fertilized egg is human, she thinks these methods are essentially abortions.)
She won’t not vote for Obama because of it, but she is deeply offended by this and considers it unconstitutional and an offense against her deeply held beliefs.
We were gobsmacked.
This was never aimed at Catholics.
It’s to stir up the Snake Handlers and Book Only Evangelicals who were gonna vote GOP anyway.
Yeah. Wazzup with the Catholic ads? Does anyone know the extent of the Vatican’s wealth?
Are you familiar with Roy Blount’s bill?
I saw a youtube of Peggy Noonan arguing vehemently against Obama’s birth control position by asserting it violated freedom of religion as established in the constitution.
Peggy Noon is Roman Catholic, with one son, married for just five years and divorced in 1990. Divorce is not recognized by the church, sex outside of marriage is a mortal sin, and so is the use of contraceptives.
So, Ms. Noonan is a woman who did not really get divorced, was a virgin until she had intercourse enough times to have one son, and has never had sex since, including the twenty years since her divorce.
Or she is a hypocrite.
pseudonymous in nc
It’s almost as if the bulk of American Catholics have nothing in common with a) the Red Beanie Brigade; b) the Papist Pundit Brigade.
DUH, because EJ Dionne got askeert and Ross Douchetat had to think about all those gross ladyparts having the sexytimes without making a baby and suchlike. Obviously this is a severe blow to the president’s chances of reelection.
And now patrick II has made me think of gin-soaked clown Peggy Nooner having the sexytimes and so I must go snort bleach. Be right back.
Yep, that’s the key for a lot of them. To them, contraception is murder as well as abortion, on accounts that it prevents the fertilized egg from implanting and therefore kills it. Heard it before.
When the employer’s choice costs a woman anywhere from $700-$1200 additional, I would say that provides some control. And since ED drugs are covered, this is specifically aimed at women.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@pseudonymous in nc: A few years back on BookTV, they were showing a half hour or so video of Maureen Dowd’s book party, at her house. I remember Chris Matthews asking MoDo, with that same skipping record intensity he has on his show, if Monsignor O’Whatsits was was coming. Makes me wonder how much of the pundit-class reaction to this is purely social. Former altar boys like Matthews and Dionne being stroked by the hierarchy, given shiny medals and fancy silk ribbons and plaques with their names in pretty letters in grand halls in the episcopal palace
When the Viagra coverage is only for married men, I’ll take them seriously.
The overall abortion rate has fallen over the past several decades, from 367 abortions per 1000 live births in 1980, to a rate of 243 abortions per 1000 live births in 2008, the most recent year for which the CDC has statistics. No doubt increased availability of birth control has contributed to the decline in the abortion rate in our country.
This decrease no doubt induces fear and loathing in the anti-abortion movement. If cantraception is readily available, the rate will fall furehter, and they may lose traction with their right wing supporters.
If, on the other hand, contraception becomes more difficult to obtain, the abortion rate will go back up, and the issue of abortion will become the magnificent tool of division that it has always been.
Less contraception->more abortions->more right wing power.
To be fair, let’s not rule out the possibility of a sustained alcoholic blackout.
@Svensker: I seriously don’t get how the logic works, though I’m not disputing it does for the faithful. The sin is that money that belongs to the Catholic church gets laundered into birth control that is itself tantamount to abortion? Like I’ve been saying on many of these threads, that’s a weird view of how money works and who it belongs to, and a view even the most hardcore Catholic doesn’t apply to any other area of human experience. If a Catholic church bought vestments from a company with a gay employee who had adopted a child, would that also be a flagrant and troubling misuse of Church money in contravention of Church doctrines? How about a diocese doing business with a print shop that had an employee whose husband made syringes used in lethal injections? If this idea of what Church money can support applies to abortion and contraception, why doesn’t it apply to any other case?
The pundits and the bishops were unable to correctly judge the reaction of lay Catholics using conventional wisdom that’s been out of date for decades?
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Bob Somerby has been on that angle for years: the “East Coast Catholic” claque that has been so prominent in the media, including Russert, Matthews, Brian Williams, and Dowd.
I thought this was going to be about Cole’s pets ignoring him.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Oh, and I think I get what Dionne is up to. He wants to be able to insist that the Catholic social justice tradition and the Catholic Church are all one thing, because if he loses that connection there’s no longer any credible defense of why a Catholic liberal needs to be Catholic as well as liberal.
@Waldo: That wouldn’t explain her barren womb. There are really only three possibilities when it comes to Dame Peggy:
1)She prefers sodomy over Christian sex.
2)Untreated gonorrhea acquired from her years of servicing Republican politicians caused her to become sterile.
3)She is either a lesbian or her husband is gay.
@Svensker: I’d guess that any liberal Dem with those beliefs has gotten accustomed to the feeling of running headfirst into a brick wall. Repeatedly. Can’t be fun.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@FlipYrWhig: I didn’t know about BW, but that explains a lot. Also, too, Cokie Roberts.
The Moar You Know
Makewi’s just another radical openly agitating for the destruction of the American way of life.
You’d think these people would be ashamed of what they’re doing and the anti-family rhetoric and policies they promote, but sadly, they are not.
I can’t decide which gives me greater sick pleasure, the vision of the red hatted ones eating their own brains out while trapped in a vast lake of ice or contemplating the NI crowd devolving into a fratricidal cage fight in the UK. And then there’s the GodObsessedPowermongers Tour 2012. It’s like kamikaze† incest porn and I’m feeling a little ashamed but it seems to be all that’s on suddenly.
† really, more seppuku with intent to injust as many others as possible
Yoikes, I nearly forgot the self-tied pink noose of Komen. What is it with the pink/red ones all of a sudden? The color’s gone neuraltoxic.
ETA: tripped a trigger but oh well and NOW I remember that it’s the Red Tops in the UK that are going squiffy. Shades of the 27%.
@Literalreddy: You’re looking at this all wrong. Not being able to afford birth control gives women the freedom from feeling obligated to have sex. Very liberating for some women–mostly Republican women, I’m guessing.
Also, it’s nice to see EJ Dionne and Peggy Noonan agreeing that the way to unite Catholics is through the oppression of women. The tie that binds…
To be fair, I grew up Catholic and still hang out with many, many, many Catholics. I have never once heard a single one them voice any such concerns. In fact, even the Republican Catholics that I know think this is a mistake for the both the Church and the Republicans.
Anecdotes are not data and all that, but I’d venture to guess that it is less than 10-20% of Catholics who might think this way based on the fact that absolutely none of the ones I know do and that I will concede that my anecdotes are not data.
As for the only Catholics who I’ve heard who are so concerned about hospitals providing birth control and how that lines up with Humanae Vitae, they are the Village Catholics and no others. And most of those fuckers are all Opus Dei, so the parallels with the Taliban and Sharia law are more apt than you imagine.
the fake fake al
Oye, there is so much wrong here:
Tax exempt status
The first Amendment
All part of the Damage the President campaign.
But again, its complete over reach by the GOP. Catholics are not evangelicals! Most are lapse in some way.
I just cannot believe this shit.
That is all.
Well, if you know any female swing voters under the age of 80, I suggest talking this over with them. I expect most of them wonder if they’re in some sort of reverse Rip Van Winkle production.
The Other Chuck
It’s like telling a fish that it’s wet. Hypocrisy is the very air they breathe. I just don’t think pointing it out has any effect any more.
Maybe because…they figure he should do like they do and just ignore the bishops, too?
@Wee Bey: I disagree. This issue will be dead by the general election, because the republicans know its a loser in the general. I think this is actually supposed to be a GOP wedge issue (i.e. pulling for Santorum over Romney).
Terry Schiavo, Part Deux. Pass the popcorn.
@Svensker: Did you explain to her that birth control prevents fertilization from occurring? Pretty much ends the problem right there.
Just remember, the territory over which the bishop exercises his authority is called, not for nothing, a bishopric.
@ruemara: Or maybe explain to her that she’s a crazy person who has some insanely fucked up priorities. That should also end the problem. But it won’t.
@ruemara: Not all birth control. IUDs work by making the uterus extremely unfriendly to fertilized eggs.I think the morning after pill also prevents implantation.
I was just going to say. There are numerous methods of birth control that prevent fertilization from occuring. I don’t hear the bishops making a distinction between methods that prevent fertilization and ones that prevent implantation.
Villago Delenda Est
They make no such distinction. Any interference in the reproductive process (to include pulling out) is considered sinful.
When you picture (if you dare) being married to someone like Rick Santorum it becomes completely understandable.
@Villago Delenda Est:
They do allow not fucking on certain days of the month, aka the rhythm method.
Villago Delenda Est
And what do you call couples who use the rhythm method?
I’ve heard the Archdiocese of Washington is threatening to end all insurance rather than comply. Not sure if this is gossip or true – has anyone heard anything about this? Sounds like an attempt to blackmail folks into calling their representatives.
@Benjamin Franklin: It’s Google’s ad algorithm — searches the blog and matches up ads with what words are currently in the blog contents.
I looked this up on the Planned Parenthood website. It seems that if The Pill should fail in its first defenses against conception (preventing the egg being released, changing the cervical mucus so the sperm can’t get through), the fertilized ovum will find the uterus inhospitable to implantation.
It is a very remote possiblity, but enough of a chance that the insanely anti-abortion nuts can call even the Pill an abortifacient.
@Luthe: The morning after pill does not prevent implantation, only fertilization. The copper IUD primarily works by killing sperm or otherwise rendering it incapable of fertilization, and the hormonal IUD primarily works by preventing ovulation. The copper IUD, in particular, might kill the embryo if one were conceived, but virtually no conceptions occur in copper IUD users in the first place.
Also, the idea that the Pill makes the uterus inhospitable is extremely widespread and has long been assumed to be true, but has never actually been proven. The problem with the theory is that while most measurements of women on the Pill have in fact shown non-hospitable uterine linings, most women on the Pill also do not ovulate. Since ovulation is the event that triggers the preparation of the uterine lining, women who ovulate while on the Pill can’t be assumed to have the same thin uterine linings that you find on average in Pill users. And no study has shown that they do.
Benjamin Franklin: It’s too bad the Vatican can’t prohibit its charges from learning to read, as they did in the middle ages. They are better informed now.
Indeed. Funny how the printing press and Martin Luther led to the religious wars, which led to the separation of church and state in the U.S. Constitution.
Maybe we should keep a big list of things that happened before so that we can check against it when considering a new action.
Villago Delenda Est
Well, Michelle Bachmann once said the Renaissance was “a mistake”.
These guys are beyond repealing the Enlightenment. They want to take us back to the 11th Century.
@pat: Until the egg successfully implants there is no pregnancy, according to medical definitions. Without the use of the pill roughly 30-40% of fertilized eggs fail to implant anyway. Thus, arguing life begins at conception means that life begins before pregnancy, and that G-d designed the human female body to be a regular, all-natural abortion machine.
Furthermore, and by extension, if the pill blocks most of the the eggs from being fertilized, and occasionally blocks the occasional fertilized egg from implanting, then the pill is reducing the net number of abortions.
Good luck getting a wingnut to wrap their head around that logic, though.
Villago Delenda Est
Now, you know darn well that verified facts, based upon scientific research and findings, have no bearing on a discussion of what the red beanie brigade dictates about women’s health.
Go away, you terrible secular learned person! You’re harshing our angel pin counting!
Thank you for that. I confess that I don’t know much about the process and that the most details I know I got from a Catholic when I asked him why contraception was as big a deal to the church as abortion, and that’s what he said (basically that it prevents implantation after fertilization). It’s sad, but not overly surprising, and good to know, that they’re feeding their followers a line of bullshit about that too.
Ha! I love Wally Shawn!
@Benjamin Franklin: I’m not getting any. I’m thinking my other surfing choices are canceling out anything that would make me a likely bet for those folk.
@patrick II: Hell, a “concerned liberal Catholic” posting here the other day about Obama’s grave assault on his freedom of religion is a divorced gay man. There’s no accounting for why some people choose to carry others’ water.
@FlipYrWhig: “what Church money”
that Catholic Church money mostly comes from Federal $$$ to the Hospitals and Universities.
so those Bishop Dictators are not using Church money to pay for anything.
I haven’t said much about the use of contraceptives for other than pregnancy prevention, because I think bringing that point up too much makes it sound like we’re defensive about what the pill is primarily for (and we absolutely should not be). However, I will point out here that the diseases for which BC pills are helpful tend to be expensive ones. I just had a $50,000 emergency surgery for a relatively common condition, fairly easily and effectively treated by oral contraceptives, that went awry.
I stopped taking them myself several years back after my dad had a stroke and I started edging into an age demographic that many gynos think is contraindicated for the pill. So the pill wasn’t really an option for me at this stage of the game. However, this incident did make me think about all the women who suffer with this disease who could be controlling it with the pill if they can afford to. Especially the younger ones, who may have years of internal carnage from not having the scratch to pay for oral contraceptives themselves…and then may end up having major surgery.
By the way, I’m now on an injectable drug that costs thousands per shot and is aimed at preventing a recurrence of the condition that required the surgery. Since this drug puts ovaries to sleep temporarily (although ovulation sometimes still occurs during the period it’s in effect), I assume that the bishops would not want to cover this, no how, no way. The same drug, interestingly, is used to treat prostate cancer. I wonder if a fellow could get an exemption for that from Rome? I’ll have to ask around.
Wait just a second here: you think GOP congress critters are pounding this drum to woo Catholics? Of course not — they’re leveraging as a way to dog-whistle the usual suspects. Polling Catholics is not going to reveal whether McConnells of the world are getting what they expect.
I was reporting what I read on the PP website, I looked it up after some nut wrote to our local paper about the Pill being an abortifacient. Too bad it’s there, and I would not be surprised if there had not been any studies supporting it.
My biology is fuzzy, but it used to be blastocyst, zygote, embryo, fetus, baby, or something like that. I also seem to recall that centuries ago there was hot debate in the Catholic Church as to when exactly “ensoulment” occurred.
Guess that conundrum has been resolved in favor of “when sperm meets egg.” They are all insane, misogynistic control freaks. And that goes for the protestant fundies as well.
Google: our slogan is “don’t be evil, but creepy is fine.”
Islamic sharia law bad.
Catholic, fundie, or talibangelical sharia law THAT’S TOTALLY DIFFERENT BECAUSE I SAID SO!
@jibeaux: my Aunt is over 80, church-going catholic, and still knows when to salute to the Hypocrisy of the Catholic Church.
“Catholics were already ignoring the Bishops in regards to birth control”
And that makes you think that they will ignore the combined wisdom of Joe Scarborough, David Gregory and David Brooks? *** Get serious! We’re talking divine inspiration here…
***And Peggy Noonan! I forgot Peggy-Fucking-NOONAN!
I think we agree more than we disagree…
They need the fundies constantly stirred up. Exact mileage may vary.
In fairness, almost everyone thinks this, not just the Catholic Church. It was a reasonable hypothesis at one time, and most people haven’t kept up on the research.
@TooManyJens: I think I want to split the difference and say some people just aren’t aware of the newer research and some have a vested (heh!) interest in pushing the old. Similarly, we heard during the Komen flap from a whole lot of people insisting the science shows a link between abortion and breast cancer. The no-choice groups are flogging that discredited research hard and they have a lot of takers.
I do wonder if it’s Roman Catholic bishops fondness for Santorum that is the real factor here. While the rest of us are disgusted by Santorum, it’s something familiar to them, and they’ve seen a way they can get Romney to pull out and Santorum to surge in his place. Thanks to them, Santorum’s no longer no. 2, and if they can get enough fundies to sign on for Santorum they get what they want – a chance to force all Americans to live under them, and deal with the Santorum they have produced.
“…forcing a religious organization to pay for contraception…”
One more time,
Money that my employer paid directly to me for working for him is not my employer’s money, it is mine
Money that my employer paid into my retirement plan for working for him is not my employer’s money, it is mine
Money that my employer deducted from my check to pay my union dues for working for him is not my employer’s money, it is mine
Money that my employer paid into my medical insurance for working for him is not my employer’s money, it is mine
Even if my employer is a State or Local government – it aint “the taxpayer’s money”, it is mine
Even if my employer is “Catholic affiliated” – it aint “the church’s money”, it is mine
It’s MINE, by the fact that I earned it
It’s not your money you asshole!
Not requiring the Catholic church to provide contraception for free to their employees = bishops imposing sharia. Intelligent, rational, honest discourse is alive and well here.
You should take some of that money and buy contraceptives then. Other than that, I’m not really sure what argument you are making.
@makewi: “You should take some of that money and buy contraceptives then”
I’ll use the “Money that my employer paid into my medical insurance for working for him is not my employer’s money, it is mine” part, thanks
“I’m not really sure what argument you are making”
to quote Joe Wilson “you lie!”
also to quote Dick Chaney, “fuck you”
Here’s another interesting perspective: The Constitution of the United States requires a separation of church and state. In fact, the first amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” This means that no law shall be made that neither helps nor hinders any one religion. To allow catholic businesses to be free from providing health insurance which covers birth control for women, thus saving them money, seems like a violation of the separation of church and state. A law allowing such avoidance, where all other businesses must allow access to such coverage, shows favoritism for the catholic religion in one of the most fundamental ways, through their pocket book. Sounds unconstitutional to me…
Of course, that is provided that the insurance costs for the different kinds of coverage actually differ.
“…provide contraception for free to their employees…”
not free, employees have to provide labor to the employer to get it
thats kind of why they call them employees
Hovercraft Full of Eels
@Wee Bey: The GOP senator from Missouri spells his last name “Blunt,” as in “blunt instrument.” He was in the House before running for Senate. (Also, his son Matt was governor of the state for one term, and decided not to try for a second. He’s now a lobbyist in DC. Both Blunts are wingnutty and corrupt in a crony-capitalist sort of way.)
It’s confusing because there *is* a famous Roy Blount, as well – a writer and humorist from Texas who is not a wingnut, and usually uses “Jr.” as part of his name. Roy Blount Jr, the writer, seems like an OK guy, and doesn’t deserve blame for Roy Blunt, wingnut senator.
I recall the story of the Latin American bishop (Brazil, I believe) who headed a program to help poor women obtain birth control being interviewed on the topic.
‘Don’t you recognize the Pope as the Supreme Authority of the Catholic Church?’ (More or less, the reporter was asking.)
‘Oh, yes, of course, the Pope is God’s representative to our Church.’
‘And yet the Church has clearly stated its opposition to the use of contraception, hasn’t it?’
‘That is true.’
‘Well, isn’t that a contradiction?’
‘We recognize that the Pope is the Holy Leader of our Church, but that does not mean we do everything he says.’
Good thing Reagan’s revolutionaries and their ‘Cold War’ enablers helped the Church hunt down and kill so many of those ‘liberation theology’ ideologues which Glenn Beck decades later found to be such a frightening force after it was largely assassinated en masse throughout the hemisphere.