I have a hard time believing many non-wingers care about the Catholic church contraceptive thing. I’m not saying there’s none, but most people support access to birth control, and the “I support birth control but I oppose the church having to provide access to it in their health care programs” position is too complicated for mass consumption. It sure doesn’t fit on a bumper sticker. I’m not demeaning liberal Catholics who hold this position, just saying that I doubt there are many people in their boat and even fewer who are single issue voters on this one.
I think Steve M. is right about why the issue is getting so much attention.
It’s a firestorm, I think, because the American political elite teems with high-profile right-wing Catholics — among them converts such as Newt Gingrich, Robert Bork, Sam Brownback, Laura Ingraham, Lawrence Kudlow, and Ramesh Ponnuru. There’s been a concerted effort in recent years to win influential wingers over to the Catholic Church (Father John McCloskey, a prime mover in this effort, was described in a 2002 Slate article as “The Catholic Church’s K Street lobbyist”); the effort seems to be the political equivalent of Scientology’s focus on converting famous entertainers.
When you combine all these wingnut Catholic converts with birth Catholics who are prominent right-wingers (William Bennett, Scalia/Thomas/Roberts), you get a Catholic-winger noise machine that can convey the sense within the Beltway that Catholics believe a certain thing when, in fact, only prominent right-wing Catholic pols and pundits believe it in great numbers.
The priest profiled in that Slate article above is a member of Opus Dei, a cult that operates within the Catholic Church, and he converted Larry Kudlow, Sam Brownback, and Newt.
In particular, Opus Dei (in marked contrast to the Catholic church in general) preaches the gospel of success, as does Mormonism, as does Scientology.
Is it inevitable that our society will be taken over by “gospel of success” cults? I think the answer is probably “yes”.
Cassidy
CNN was nauseating tonight with their constant evn handed coverage which consisted of one women constantly wailing and gnashing her teeth about how the evil ni(clang) was making them violate their sacred vows before God. Coming from a group of people whose leadership has a pretty high penchant for breaking said vows to diddle children, I’ve got no sympathy.
Baud
IMHO, this is getting a lot of attention because it’s the best wedge issue that the establishment has against Democrats right now. Hating gays and muslims are going out of vogue. My God, they were trotting out welfare queens until the birth control issue came up.
Trentrunner
The Catholic Church can dictate what the rest of us do when they stop fucking children.
Until then, they can have a big vessel of STFU and join the goddamn 21st century.
Childfuckers.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
Considering all of the preachers we see on TV that are part of this, I’m not surprised.
How many times did Jesus go after the Jewish leaders who acted this way?
aimai
I completely agree with SteveM. And there has been the difference, not only between the hierarchy and the laity but between the men in the church and women for centuries. A (Boston) Nun said to my mother, once “Oh, all the Priests are Republicans and all the Nuns are Democrats.” There’s a reason why all those high profile converts in the story Steve Links to are all men–the Catholic Church has (often) followed the goal of converting important people first. In fact, in South India (Ramesh Ponnoru anyone?) the deliberate choice was made to convert Brahmins and not untouchables in order to better influence important people. This is one reason why the horrible class consciousness and colonialist attitudes of the Indian Catholics never surprise me, they are basically “Twice Born” Born again and that gives you a special kind of arrogance.
aimai
Mary G
It’s men making most of the fuss, and a few women over reproductive age. Anyone who currently needs birth control and doesn’t have a trust fund will support the president. One way to get the younger voters back out.
MikeJ
I wonder what the reporters at the Christian Science Monitor think about required coverage.
Warren Terra
Note also the military’s head Catholic chaplain all but calling on the troops to mutiny:
(Sorry about the link, but I couldn’t readily find a non-winger, non-theocratic link for this story)
Cassidy
@Warren Terra: Yeah. That turd was made to take that last line out.
master c
Im a Catholic-sorta. The church I grew up with isnt there so much. I know nuns get a bad rap, but they were a fantastic influence. They taught me to question everything. They taught me about social justice. They taught me not to take the Bible literally. We dont have many nuns anymore. We have only men who have very little real life experience. I am so saddened about many things that have happened in the church [duh] but I think when they threw their lot in with Evangelicals-they lost their identity, and sense of purpose
Walizonia
The BC issue is a large part of why I left the church. The church has a very unnatural and unhealthy attitude towards sex in general. The majority of Catholics that routinely use BC really should stand up to leadership on this issue and stop acting like bystander sheep.
Benjamin Franklin
Irish Catholic Chris Matthews was predictably dour in his discussion.
Do they all fear ex-comunication by the Papist in the Vatican?
geg6
When they come clean on their child fucking cartel and their unwed mother slave scheme, they MIGHT, maybe, have some moral basis for lecturing anyone else. Until then, they can fuck off and die. In fact, as a victim of their baby selling Racket, they can just shut the hell up, fuck off, and die. In that order.
The Catholic Church is a criminal cartel that has ruined more lives than all of the drug cartels that ever existed. They are dying here in the US, much like the white male supremacists who make up most of their ranks. I hope this shit just speeds up the process and I will get one of my fondest bucket list wishes: to piss on the ruins of the Roman Catholic Church.
Roger Moore
What is this “will be taken over” thing? The question is whether we have been taken over by gospel of success cults already, or if they’re just well on their way.
Villago Delenda Est
The “gospel of success” types were the ones Jesus took a nine iron to in the temple.
Warren Terra
@MikeJ:
I was wondering the very same thing this morning. Although sadly the Christian Science Monitor has too proud a tradition of being really quite rational (especially given the beliefs of the underlying religion), so I doubt they’d ever try to impost medical-care-by-hooey on their employees. But surely there must be some other religious organization with significant commercial enterprises and less shame or sense of propriety? Does the Scientology Church run any businesses, and do they comply with the requirement they cover mental health care, which the Scientologists claim is inherently evil? What are the medical beliefs of the Unification Church, owners of The Washington Times?
Egg Berry
Will be? Where you been the last 40 years?
Cassidy
@efgoldman: Wish she had kept it in and then started some investigations into her colleagues with subpoenas and polygraphs and experts and everything.
scav
It’s a Catholic Governor (Gregoire) that’s promised to sign WA’s Gay Marriage bill and I read she’s one of several Catholic governors who support marriage equality. Is it because these couples won’t be needed birth control or is it maybe . . . oh dear, stereotype failure again. People just aren’t behaving how the political elite (and Catholic hierarchy) insist they should.
Gin & Tonic
There is no zealot like the convert.
Baud
@Benjamin Franklin:
They fear no longer being invited to their favorite beltway cocktail party.
Scotty
In terms of constitutionality, the inclusion of this provision would be allowed because it falls under the ‘promoting the general welfare’ concept. Those arguing that it is unconstitutional because it infringes on religion are actually to people who are promoting an unconstitutional act by the government, having religious doctrine dictate what laws can or can not be applied to the public. Am I wrong? And why hasn’t this been part of the discussion?
Warren Terra
@master c:
I grew up an Atheist Jew in Seattle in the 80s, and had tremendous respect for the Catholic Church. I lived within a half-dozen blocks of two Catholic schools, a nunnery, and the nuns’ business offices, and the nuns just couldn’t have been nicer people.
At the time, at least to an interested outsider, Catholicism in America still meant the martyred JFK, tied in memory at least to the civil rights struggle and the martyred MLK. Catholicism was Cesar Chavez, Liberation Theology, Archbishop Romero, and the Sanctuary Movement. It was a gay-friendly Seattle Archbishop. The Church was a grand liberal institution. Heck, even John Paul II, whose true face later emerged (including the banishment of that Seattle Archbishop to spend the last quarter-century in a Montana monastery), was known mostly for his support of the Solidary strikers in Poland, people defying the Soviet Empire in the name of their political freedom, within a labor-friendly movement.
I’ve never had anything but loathing for the Pat Robertsons of this world; I never expected any better. The true tragedy of the Catholic Church isn’t where it is – it’s how far it’s fallen, and how quickly.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
DK has a post talking about a number or religious leaders that came out in favor of the contraception ruling.
beltane
@Trentrunner: No, they cannot tell us what to do no matter what. Sorry to break it to the wingnuts but this country was founded as a reaction to the theocratic regimes that slaughtered anyone who dared exercise their personal conscience. The type of church/state partnership the Opus Dei followers are seeking is what leads to inquisitions and terror. Unless we want to see the establishment of a Franco style dictatorship we have to fight these people tooth and nail.
jl
As I mentioned in previous thread on this, TPM has some posts on moderate GOP interests groups asking the GOP fanatics, which I guess includes all of GOP House, to back off the issue because moderate GOP voters will react badly.
Can’t find the original story now. What I see now is reports of split in GOP Congress and something from a GOP director of Republicans for Choice (or something similar) and she has a position to advocate.
But I have not seen anything that indicates going to the mat on an anti contraception crusade will be a winner in a general election.
Might be some nice juice for the GOP primaries though, as if they were not crazy enough already.
So, I hope Obama administration talk about compromise is baiting their opponents into acting like the cynical opportunists and die hard fanatics that compose the GOP political class. But cannot count on that.
redshirt
We’re in the middle of madness, and it swells and bubbles up in all sorts of places. To think! We are still in thrall to Fairy Gods when we have technology any God would envy. It’s insanity.
andy
That’s the ticket! Borgias for the 21st century!
Raven
@Warren Terra: The JFK that was fucking a 19 year old intern in the tub with rubber duckies and sinking our ass deeper into Vietnam, that JFK?
Villago Delenda Est
@Baud:
DING DING DING DING DING
Got forbid they can no longer sit at the cool kids table.
Gian
the bosses are picking a hill to die on. 98% of their female flock when of fertile years have used contraception.
a church that’s gonna kick out 98% of the female population really might want to consider becoming gay marriage friendly
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@redshirt: Remember though, there’s an
appstory for that: Babylon. Just because they may be causing the destruction of our country doesn’t mean that can’t find a way to say it’s God’s will.trollhattan
@Warren Terra:
True that. It wasn’t wiccan priestesses the proceeds from Iran-Contra were killing in Central America. Those were real people doing actual good deeds. And how they were rewarded?
master c
@Warren Terra: @Warren Terra: @Warren Terra:
Yep, that’s my old church. I used to be so proud to be a freaky Catholic. Everybody says check out other churches…but Im soured on religion as a whole.
jl
@Scotty: Any lawyer types with knowledge of Constitutional highways and byways on this? Seems to me a large religious organization serving, and employing, people from general public are probably taking federal funds, and definitely providing some kind of public accommodation or common carrier service (or whatever, I get the lingo confused).
beltane
@geg6: I agree with you 100%. While there is much I admire about Catholicism, the Catholic Church hierarchy is a fundamentally evil institution that never met a right-wing regime it didn’t coddle and embrace and it never met a left-wing regime it didn’t seek to undermine and destroy.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@jl: You mean, as compared to when he it did it for the debt limit deal, the payroll tax cut extension, and … I can’t remember the third one?
Benjamin Franklin
@Raven:
First I was told about RFK and McCarthy. Then it was JFK/RFK rfking Marilyn Monroe.
Just don’t tell me anything about Abe Lincoln.
Raven
@Benjamin Franklin: I’m clean, honest!
Baud
One problem the Catholic Church has is that their whole social structure is anachronistic. A more flexible church would simply reform itself. But the Catholic hierarchy has gone all-in with view that their social structure is dictated by God, so they can’t reform themselves without the hierarchy losing legitimacy. Their only choice at this point is to escalate the “culture war.”
beltane
@andy: The Borgias at least were patrons of the arts and allegedly threw fabulous parties. The current crop of sh*theads we’re stuck with have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
Lev
I think John Boehner just ended the fun by turning it into a partisan crusade instead of just a quasi-nonpartisan one:
http://www.librarygrape.com/2012/02/overplaying-your-hand-or-why-john-boehner-is-a-really-sucky-house-speaker.html
I guess we’ll see, though.
scav
@beltane: Well, they do serve to make Dan Brown’s baddies ever so slightly plausible.
General Stuck
”
haven’t read the comments, so excuse if this is a repeat. But the answer is “yes” and the Mormons, and Opus Dei and scientology are all pikers in the scheme of religious things to capture capitalism as a kind of Baby Jeevus, Inc. The group that is way on down that road toward quietly making it a reality, are The Family. A consortium of various religious denominations that are Christian in nature. They are not an organized religion so much as organized political masters of the universe with a simple single belief. Jesus plus nothing, and Jesus as conquerer of economic worlds, our world. To ultimately run the whole fucking show.
demkat620
@Trentrunner: This
Until they get right with that shit, they don’t get to tell me what to do with my lady bits.
Cacti
Republicans want your boss to decide if you can use birth control.
Put that on a bumper sticker.
beltane
@Baud: They have been able to reform themselves in the past when their backs were against the wall. However, this pope has stated he’d prefer to see a “purer” church even if it means shedding members by the millions. At the rate Benedict is going, he’ll soon be left with a church that has 27% of its former membership, at least in the developed world.
jl
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
Yes, it is odd. I read a couple of stories of moderate GOPper leaders who deal with normal people telling the GOP House to lower their hands and back away from the issue slowly, RIGHT NOW.
And the GOP leadership charges ahead. And Obama talks about compromise, where I see no moral or legal or constitutional reason to do any compormise (though, IANAL).
So, I guess if the crazy and dangerous opposition wants to walk right up to a cliff and horse around, you just watch the show.
Maybe they figure they need to get more turnout for their sagging primary show, and then go moderate for the general. Not sure it will work, if that is their plan. Seems like the GOP is doing an optimal repetition and review routine for the general public to burn a pattern into their heads for the general, IMHO. I wish I could do that as well when I am in the classroom.
Suffern ACE
@Scotty: Why? Because it’s more fun to belive the church is being punished for pedophilia by being required to have insurance policies that address the needs of their workers.
Citizen_X
I don’t know, but it sure has become the State Religion of the 1%.
Can we refer to them as Randian Fundamentalists?
jl
@Lev: I don’t think the freedom of religion angle will fly, when it comes to big hospital serving a large area, and employing thousands of people of all religions.
Edit: except with fanatics, but the GOP has them already, so who else will bite? Maybe its desperation? Maybe the nuts forcing Boehner to dance, just for kicks, again?
Lev
Also, my guess is that stuff like this just hastens the decline of organized religion in this country. It’s happening very quickly now and will likely continue to do so. Reactionary, prosperity-gospel religion gives your average young person a creed with literally nothing to identify with, and that effectively creates an expiration date for the thing. I am actually a person of faith but this process doesn’t really bother me that much at this point. I don’t think there’s that much to lose.
pseudonymous in nc
Look at Santorum: the choice of Megachurches ‘R’ Us, but actually a Catholic whose Catholicism is alien to 98% of his practicing co-denominationalists.
There’s also a clear divide in the US between the hierarchy and the sixtysomething high-profile public Papists — basically, “white ethnic” Catholics like Tweety, the Catholic Supremos, O’Reilly, etc — and the future of Catholicism in America, which says “Y con tu espíritu” at Mass.
Cacti
The fact that the right is picking a fight over birth control shows that they’re desperate.
The economy is turning the corner, Osama’s dead, Iraq is over, the tide of public opinion is turning on same sex marriage.
They’ve got nothing.
Warren Terra
@Raven:
I don’t disagree with you that JFK was not the beautiful icon I was taught to think he was as a kid in the 80s – I was talking about the public image of the Catholic Church and the first Catholic President, not the actuality. Heck, you could make a great case that JFK was far less important for civil rights than LBJ (although of course LBJ bears greater responsibility for Vietnam than does JFK).
Still, I realize it’s lurid and entertaining and all, and its details might even be true, but surely we can distinguish between playing Up Periscope with an intern on the one hand and the Vietnam War on the other.
wasabi gasp
Shake it again.
Lev
@jl: Huh? I was arguing that Boehner ruined this issue for them by turning it into another partisan standoff.
pseudonymous in nc
@master c:
What’s that line from James Joyce? “I said that I had lost the faith, but not that I had lost self-respect.”
Suffern ACE
@Lev: Sooo. Boehner’s taken from “Exemptions for the Church on covering birth control” to “exemptions for anyone who wants it”.
patrick II
I used to think that the Catholic bishops actually believed what they teach. Not anymore. In this particular case, I think their sudden distress is more about harming a political enemy — Obama — then it is about any concern that anyone will use contraceptives.
The bishops are now aligned with rich powerful conservatives allies, regardless of their religion, to help those allies politically and be rewarded with continued money and power. The bishops want an enabled populace no more than the allegedly more secular portion of our oligarchy.
Scotty
@jl:
As in, the insurance carrier is providing the contraception and not the church. Ergo the church is not being forced to go against it’s tenets.
jl
@Lev: I read the story in the link as Boehner de facto turning it into a partisan issue, but trying to hide that under the bipartisan cover of ‘freedom of religion’.
But I not as hep to way GOP stunts work, so maybe I misinterpreted.
Cacti
There’s really no compromise to be had here.
On the one hand, you have a policy that is supported by a majority of the public, and a large majority of women.
On the other hand, you have a gang of anti-sex old geezers, whose church views women as a two-legged companion animal.
Jeffro
DougJ, is that post title a Godfathers (band) reference?
Because if it is, please keep that up. At least through the Unreal World of this election cycle…
jl
@Scotty: Yeah, that is what I was getting at with the ‘public accomodation’ and ‘common carrier’ lingo (which I, NAL, should probably not try to use).
But you make the point better in plain English.
Is there an exception for medical staff for religious reasons. That is, devout Catholic doc can refer cast to colleague? If that is the case, I cannot see any reason for compromise, unless a church gets upset that something they disapprove of might go inside their building (which seems silly to me, unless it is a sanctuary).
So, any lawyers here can help out?
andy
@beltane: Maybe Newt should be running for Pope, too!
Carolinus
I really wish there was SGK-PP level activism on this issue. I’m just not seeing it and the male catholic conserva-dems + lieberman are folding:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/72650.html
Tim Kaine, Bob Casey, John Larson, Daniel Lipinski, Joe Manchin & Lieberman. There are a couple more who are advocating the Hawaii model, but that’s almost as bad as the USCCB has already outright rejected it:
http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/5664/
AFAIK the reason this is potentially a big problem is a simple majority in each house can overturn a new admin regulation with no veto (hopefully it can still be filibustered)? If the dems lose the senate numbers they need to hold the line the admin may as well capitulate. Massive pressure really needs to be mobilized to push back against the defectors, but I’m just not seeing it. I’ll make my phonecalls to my congress-critters tommorow.
Villago Delenda Est
@Cacti:
Fixed, no charge!
jl
@Cacti: Well, now, now. They do give grown up women some credit. They are the people a man can have real official (officially really sinful) sex with, as opposed to other men and little boys and girls, who don’t rate on that score. That’s what I gather from what I have read about their attitude towards the scandals.
Baud
@Cacti:
I wouldn’t be opposed to a compromise that allowed the church-run businesses to avoid paying for contraceptives as long as employees had equally good access to them through some other means. I don’t know if there is any such compromise possible under the sun, but maybe someone smarter than me can come up with one.
eemom
I heard some clowns on NPR this afternoon trying to gin up some ominous rumblings about this being a liability for Obama amongst Catholic swing voters and Latinos, which struck me as a particularly exemplary chapter in the neverending saga of stoopid that is 2012 NPR. I mean, isn’t it true that most rank and file Catholics ignore the bullshit and use BC anyway? And even if they don’t, some obscure issue about the church paying for employees’ birth control, unlike abortion or gay marriage, is not the kind of thing even the most devout dogma-believer is going to get worked up about.
beltane
@Baud: They can give the employees a pay raise to cover the cost of contraceptives.
Lev
@jl: Okay, fair enough. I’m not sure that would really work, though.
beltane
@jl: It is only females that are filthy vessels of sin. In their minds, a priest is more defiled by having intercourse with a woman than with a male child. I wish I was being sarcastic but I am not.
Scotty
@jl: Anyone can refuse to accept parts of their insurance and not seek those services. For instance, my group insurance through work provides for elective sterilization. Just because it is offered does not mean I have to utilize it. I would imagine it would be the same for this particular provision. Just because contraception is offered in the insurance, the provision does not force you to use it.
beltane
@eemom: 98% of Catholic women use birth control. The other 2% write for the National Review.
Hill Dweller
The administration should ride it out, while continuing to point out several Catholic hospitals and universities already included birth control in their insurance plans long before the health care legislation passed, yet no one said a word.
MikeJ
@beltane:
That in itself is birth control.
Villago Delenda Est
@Scotty:
They’re afraid that their flock will be unable to resist the temptation of unauthorized sexytime.
It’s a legitimate fear.
jl
@eemom: Everything I have read agrees with what you say, and then as I posted above, warnings from GOP operatives out in the field to back off.
That might be why the GOP is trying to play up the freedom of religion angle. Today, contraception, tomorrow, mandatory Satanist educational events at church or some nonsense. That kind of hysteria might sway some moderate voters in the general election who would otherwise be turned off by anti contraceptive jihad.
Spaghetti Lee
Makes me sad, more than anything. I was raised Catholic, most of my family still is, the local priest is a good guy and there’s lots of good people in my church. I’ve been drifting away from the church for years, not really on purpose, but I just can’t bring myself to call myself a member when people like Donohue and Bennett and Bishop Egan are calling the shots. And I don’t really feel liberated like some people say they do when they leave their religion behind-just sad and empty.
gocart mozart
Remember folks, if you are a fan of Ayn Rand, you make the baby Jesus cry. http://aynrandhatedjesus.blogspot.com/
jl
@Lev: The political gyrations are getting so bizarre, I find a lot of it hard to understand. That was just my relatively naive take on your link.
freelancer
Yes.
beltane
@Scotty: You touched upon the central point here. To use or not use contraception is a matter of personal conscience. What the Church is doing here is trying to use the government to eliminate a woman’s ability to exercise her freedom of conscience, which makes sense since they believe women are morally weak, inferior creatures who cannot be allowed to make decisions for themselves.
Darius
You know, this whole brouhaha reminds me a bit of the Terri Schiavo affair. The Republicans are so certain they’re on the right side of this, and the mainstream pundits have bought into that hook line, and sinker, despite all evidence to the contrary. But when the dust settles, I think it’ll become clear that the GOP overreached on this issue, badly.
beltane
@Hill Dweller: What should really happen is a “day without women” in these institutions. If women accept being treated as a lesser form of humanity we will be subjected to a never-ending worsening of our condition.
Cacti
@beltane:
Yep.
They’re trying to get the sanction of the State to enforce religious doctrine in your non-religious employment.
catpal
yeah I knew the Catholic Church was a cult when I was a child and realized that a famous Mafia family of Criminals and well-known Murderers, had donated to the church my family was attending, and the Church said “hey, thanks for the $$$ Millions, all your horrific murders are now forgiven.”
I agree that it is just a few Loud Catholics and Old people no-longer using BC, that are trying to make this a “controversy.”
I tell them to go go worry about you-Cult Catholics protecting Mafia Murderers, pedophiles, Adulterers, etc., and leave the rest of us normal people alone.
Loneoak
I think it is entirely reasonable that the pre-modern moral preferences of employers should dictate what women can and cannot do with their wombs. Entering an employment contract is a holy bond, even deeper and more demanding than traditionalist patriarchal marriage.
Cacti
@Darius:
And again, in this case, the echo chamber is believing its own bullshit. Everyone that elite conservative catholics know agree that this is an outrage.
Meanwhile, in the ordinary world…62% of women are just fine with the regulation as is.
I don’t see that number getting smaller as more of them find out that a bunch of celibate bishops want to tell them what to do with their lady bits.
catpal
@Baud: nope. We cannot compromise with these Ideological Irrational Whackjobs.
Chris
@master c:
I empathize. Except in my case, it’s not about age, it’s about changing context. I grew up in the French Catholic Church, where things more or less clicked with what you’re saying. The American Church – gah. Still loads better than the fundiegelicals, if only because they agree that basic facts like evolution shouldn’t be denied, but that’s setting the bar pretty low.
fasteddie9318
@Cacti:
You mean “celibate,” right?
priscianusjr
@Raven:
Cacti
@fasteddie9318:
I was giving them the benefit of the doubt. ;-)
Chris
@Spaghetti Lee:
Again – empathize with all of this, especially the last sentence. Oh well.
fasteddie9318
@Cacti:
This is the compromise. On the one hand, you have the Catholic Church, which wants all of society to bend to its outdated-by-a-millenium dogma on, well, everything, and on the other hand you have the rational policy option, which would involve lifting Mother Church’s tax exemption and prosecuting its top American clergy under RICO statutes for running an organized child sex ring. Frankly, they’re getting a good deal with the contraception requirement.
priscianusjr
@Benjamin Franklin:
scav
I’m thinking an economically bright thing to do is for faith healers to get into the act, own a lot of businesses and then insist they shouldn’t have to compromise their religion by paying for health insurance at all for any of their employees. That’d be a hell of an edge on the competition. Do 7th Day Adventists not have to pay for blood transfusions? Is this medical delicacy á la carte?
ETA: or am I thinking of the J. Witnesses? It’s hard to keep up.
JoyfulA
@aimai: And Robert Novak was one of those Opus Dei converts, too.
Mike in NC
@eemom:
It is, hence the term “Cafeteria Catholic”. Nobody cares what all the bishops in bed with the Republicans have to say.
fasteddie9318
@Mike in NC:
If all they were in bed with was Republicans, they wouldn’t be in the mess they’re in.
Felanius Kootea
I wish one of the news shows would bring on a doctor to explain some of the non-contraceptive uses of birth control pills, so the debate gets expanded some. Why should a Catholic Bishop decide whether a (possibly non-Catholic) female employee of a Catholic organization gets to use the pill to manage unpleasant consequences of fibroids, for instance? How is it any of his business? When all the uses of contraceptives, in addition to preventing pregnancy, are made clear, it is all the more annoying to see this presented as a religious issue.
DW
There’s a story about JFK that one time during the 1960 campaign he had a chance to meet with a group of nuns or a group of bishops, but not enough time for both. He said “The bishops are all Republicans, no votes for me there. I’ll go see the nuns, they’re good Democrats.”
The ugly little truth is that the only real authority the bishops have is moral authority. They have power over the laity to the extent that the laity believes they are holy. These days, that’s not much power. That’s why they flip out over nuns – it drives them crazy to see nuns get more respect than bishops, and to realize Pelosi and Sebellius were educated by nuns. The bishops have their little band of elite followers but little real clout. If they want real clout, they’ll have to become better men. They’re about to learn that all over again.
Cacti
@fasteddie9318:
Now, let’s be fair.
It only took them 350 years to forgive Galileo for being right.
beltane
@Mike in NC: The term “cafeteria Catholic” is meant to be derogatory but I see it in terms of a real cafeteria where you can choose the soup and salad and take a pass on the shit sandwich. The bishops are retaliating by trying to jam the shit sandwich down everyone’s throat regardless. The net result will be fewer and fewer people going to the cafeteria at all.
benintn
I think it’s pretty easy to figure out why. The GOP wants everyone to say, “We can’t all get along, so therefore we should just get rid of government entirely – except we should invest trillions of dollars on warrantless wiretap programs and new ways of bombing the hell out of countries like Syria and Iran.”
shortstop
Yeah, so this morning I was worrying that the bishops and
GOP were successfully framing this issue to the everlasting misunderstanding of the populace. Glad to say I was wrong about the second half of that. The Terri Schiavo comparison is a good one.
Per the polls, so very interesting that Catholics come out noticeably above Americans as a whole in supporting the administration on this. Who comes out as being by far the strongest in opposition? Evangelical Prots. Discuss!
Mike
I think you have a great point here with this article. It was clear from day one that this was a media created “controversy”, and the righties are now rolling with it (‘cos the media will back them up on it). Of course, the righties have changed the subject, so as to dogwhistle their evangelical base. The “backlash” is purely in the media and the right wing noise machine, not really on the street. As we’ve seen, most people support the president’s position. That may change as the media tries to forcefeed Americans on this, but this “outrage” has been going on for a couple of weeks already, so I would imagine that the recent polls would be reflective of any damage done so far. The media will keep pushing the story, though, so something has to be done to fight this.
Obama should probably go more on the offensive on this, but I agree with his desire to accomodate progressive liberal catholic groups on this issue first. That way, he can have some stature to back up a rule change.
beltane
@shortstop: White Evangelicals hate the President no matter what he does. If he made a speech condemning suicide as sinful we’d wake up the next morning and find that all the evangelicals were no longer with us.
jl
@beltane: Might work, but that would be an unethical campaign tactic. Our side needs to retain some standards.
fasteddie9318
@Cacti: That was under the last pope, noted squishy liberal John Paul II. Papst Benedikt put the kibosh on plans to erect (the Church? erect? the jokes write themselves!) a statue of Galileo in the Vatican.
David Koch
Liberals who approve of this policy need to send the White House emails in support.
They’re being swamped with wacko outrage drummed up by Hate-radio and repressed Bishops.
Liberals need to balance it out and let them know they’re not alone.
True liberals have a duty to speak up when they support a policy.
Lord knows if Obama had done the wrong thing, liberals would be freaking out (rightfully so) and inundating the White House. It is perverse to only contact the White House when they’re wrong, and not when they’re right.
shortstop
beltane: Such a simple thing, and yet the bastard won’t do it! Barack fails us again!
Karmakin
Worrying about the future “gospel of success”? It’s already HERE. It’s a neo-calvinist world, we just live in it.
Here’s my (admittedly atheistic) take on it. The rise of public atheism/secularism has resulted in a marked change in terms of religious belief, namely Christianity. Where the focus used to be on the works of Jesus, the focus has over time moved more and more to the concept of God in and of itself.
And not a vague, mysterious deity, but a deity that actively intervenes in our world and takes an interested role.
What does this mean?
Well, it means that people believe that the winners are winners for a reason, and likewise, the losers are losers for a reason. And as such, going against that is trying to go against “God’s Will”. It’s as simple as that. That’s the language that the Tea Party used. The TP was the “coming out” party for neo-calvinism.
So the question is…how to fight it? First of all, as we become a more secular culture, they’re going to retreat more and more into their shell. Nothing we can do about that. The question is how to best politically isolate these views.
Personally, I think it’ll come down to liberal/progressive religious groups taking an active stance in making crystal clear the nature of their belief, and as such rejecting..loudly and clearly..interventionistic theistic belief.
But that will involve changing the traditions, changing the words that they use, etc. And in a lot of cases tribal identity trumps making the world a better place.
So it goes.
BonnyAnne
@Warren Terra:
Christ Almighty, do I ever miss Archbishop Hunthausen. None of this bullshit arguing over being forced to fund birth control; he withheld his income taxes to protest the proliferation of nuclear weapons. That was a man with some actual morality. I hope he’s enjoying Montana.
beltane
Laura Ingraham’s wikipedia page indicates that she has lived a rather unchaste life and yet has not given birth to any children. Did the dark power of her malevolent personality act as a form of spermicide or is she just another right-wing hypocrite?
I realize it is intrusive but I feel that every anti-contraception wingnut needs to explain to us why they have failed to pop out a baby every year, and why they demand that other women endure something that they themselves have not experienced.
beltane
@David Koch: How’s this for a bumpersticker: “I like sex and I vote”.
Michael G
I know I’m way down in the thread, and everyone above me has already agreed that this is a losing issue for the GOP, but I don’t know.
My normally quite casual Catholic father was up in arms over the concept of “government interfering in church business”. I’m not even sure he’s aware of the specifics of what that “interference” really is. The issue was presented on Fox has enough “truthiness” that this thing might have legs.
Yes, I am aware that one anecdote is not data, but this has the feel of a seeming non-issue that is successfully turned into a strong wedge issue in short order.
master c
@Spaghetti Lee:
me too.
Judas Escargot, Your Postmodern Neighbor
@beltane:
Yet another failure to use the Bully Pulpit.
Carolinus
Ugg, Mark Shields on the PBS News Hour tonight totally threw the admin under the bus:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june12/shieldsbrooks_02-03.html
He basically said it was going to have a cataclysmic impact, that it was dissing Catholics, and he refused to even try and make their case, calling it incomprehensible. Brooks & Shields — yet another all catholic male pundit panel.
MikeJ
@Carolinus: I wonder how many Catholic men think their wives don’t use any birth control.
beltane
@Carolinus: How many children does Mark Shields have? Unless he bred his wife to death like a puppy mill b*tch I don’t care to hear what he has to say on the subject.
Emma
Well, I went to the White House site and left a message. I urge everyone to do so and to encourage friends to do so. They need to know there’s another side. It’s not the same seeing it in polls as getting something directly.
Chris
@Michael G:
My Catholic, pro-life Democrat roommate’s reacting like your dad and quite seriously considering not voting for Obama because of this stuff. Yeah, I agree it could definitely have legs.
Suffern ACE
@Mike: What he should do is make Congress vote to strip access to birth control for unmarried women. That is where this is heading.
dogwood
@Michael G:
If he’s getting his information from Fox, then it’s more than likely he’s already in the Anti-Obama camp. Fox can enrage the casual Catholic as easily as any other of the various demographic groups that watch the network. It’s what they do.
beltane
How ironic that on the day the Pentagon announced that women can serve in combat roles the religious right is arguing that a woman’s body is not worthy of medical care in the same way a man’s is.
Josh G.
America has been more or less under the thumb of “gospel of success” cults from the beginning. Calvinism, the sect of the Puritans, was probably the original gospel-of-success cult. And it’s never really abated. Google “Acres of Diamonds” to see an example of a preacher saying the same crap (to vast audiences) in 1890.
pseudonymous in nc
@Carolinus:
Is he part of the DC Wednesday morning Mass crowd that Barbara Bradley Conceptua Maria Perpetua O’Hanrahan Hagerty likes to pretend are the pulse of American Catholicism?
The idea that Hispanic Catholics, in particular, give a shit about the complaints of octogenarian Bishop O’buser-Mover is just braindead.
Amusing Alias
You should have heard Chris Mathews tonight trying to explain that the issue isn’t about birth control, it’s about the First Amendment Right to Copay. WTF?
tkogrumpy
@geg6: Hear,hear!
scav
Don’t confuse easy initial flash of media-inspired arm-waving with the single issue that necessarily takes down the presidency. Is this the same crowd where large numbers were insisting the whole Komen thing would be over in a week? Oh, and here’s the latest on that: Komen fundraiser calls for CEO Nancy Brinker to quit over funding row
Not in the bag but not over yet, on either subject.
Personally, I think they’re choosing an idiotic health issue to stick a flag on (anybody for a spot of religiously garbed Death Panel jokes?) but we are talking about appeals to the 27%ers.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Carolinus: I fell out of the habit of watching the NewsHour a while ago, but Mark Shields, whom I like on every issue not related to religion, has been predicting the demise of the Democratic Party over abortion and gay rights for as long as I can remember
Xenos
@MikeJ:
Since the CSM is based in Massachusetts, they already have it. Along with all the staff of Boston College, Holy Cross, Catholic Charities in MA, as well as 21 other states.
master c
Okay I just emailed the White House. I feel emboldened by the Komen blow back. Women love their birth control! Say loud and proud ladies!
Mike
@Chris:
Mouse Tolliver
I’m listening to Robert Preston sing “Ya Got Trouble” from The Music Man. It’s the perfect soundtrack for this topic. Libertine men and scarlet women!
Xenos
@Xenos: Correction- 27 other states, including, I think, DC (Georgetown and Catholic University, too). I can’t find a list of the states though (Sullivan links to Thinkprogress which links to http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/2011/08/womensprevention08012011a.html, but not a single f’ing journalist seems to care to establish basic facts and put them out into the discourse – big surprise).
Hill Dweller
@Mike: The whole thing is horseshit. Catholic universities and hospitals employ thousands of non-Catholics. Should they be penalized for doing so when it comes to healthcare?
pseudonymous in nc
@Amusing Alias:
If it’s a matter of conscience, then the hospitals and schools can pay the damn fine for having non-compliant group policies. There’s no first amendment right to tax breaks.
Mike
@Hill Dweller: You’re preaching to the choir. I think the whole issue is bullshit, but the media is creating a controversy, and the GOP is morphing it into something totally unrelated to try and get votes. The reason why Obama is probably being conciliatory is that there are Catholic groups that supported him that aren’t happy (rally around the Vatican effect or whatnot), even if they agree with the policy. So, he’s trying to appease them as a favor for supporting him in the past. If he can strike up a good deal with some of the Catholic folk (you won’t get the crazies), then he can end up being the hero when the GOP goes overboard and tries to ban all contraception coverage (as they most likely will).
I do agree that it was a rather stupid fight to have in an election year. They couldn’t have waited until late november to roll this one out? I agree that the controversy is ridiculous, but the media loves this shit, and the media is powerful.
Hill Dweller
@Mike: I suspect they did consult with Catholics beforehand. And considering the policy mirrors existing policy in most states, I’m sure they didn’t think it would be a problem.
Again, several Catholic hospitals and universities already provide contraception as part of healthcare. Where was the feigned outrage then?
KS in MA
@beltane: Great idea.
Bago
First track of the second side of the Nevermind album by Nirvana. After escaping from a Christian cult and enjoying secular reality, that album was an ironic godsend. That and some Tool, and nine inch nails. It was all I could sneak around. Tapes were big, heavy, and stupid.
Chris
@Mike:
It could, but only if the administration backs off at least some. What you said about the archbishop might be enough, I don’t know. He’s from a union family in the Midwest, and for that and various other reasons I know he’s not remotely enthusiastic about voting Republican.
Hill Dweller
@Chris: How can the administration back off? Even if they exclude all Catholic universities/hospitals, it still won’t change the fact that more than half of the states already have the exact same policy in place, and several Catholic universities already cover contraception in their health insurance plans.
JGabriel
I don’t suppose there’s any chance we can find a place with some decent red wines this time?
.
Mnemosyne
@Mike in NC:
I especially loved when someone who supported the death penalty and the Iraq War would accuse me of being a “cafeteria Catholic” since, you know, they followed all of the church’s teachings to the letter.
/eyeroll
maus
@Roger Moore:
It’s called “American exceptionalism”.
Anonne
Skipping most of the comments, I will just say this: the idea of religious freedom is not limited to the secularization of society. I can definitely see both sides.
Granted, I don’t agree that a nun who needs hormones to treat some ailment best administered through birth control pills or a Catholic woman who needs an abortion to save her life should be denied such treatments, but it not so cut-and-dried for those of us of faith to be conflicted over this.
I think that these items should be made available, but if no one uses it, it shouldn’t be a big deal. The problem is that they know people will use it.
Rita R.
Late to this thread…
@patrick II:
@beltane
Yes for both of these. The pope and other Catholic leaders have publicly said they’d rather have a smaller church than carry out reform in any way — the papist version of “America, love it or leave it.” In fact, not only are they not reforming, they’re going backward — witness the Latin Mass fetish as just one example.
They’ve also gone all in with the Republican Party, basically becoming a religious adjunct of the GOP along with the fundies, which means they want to hurt Obama just as much as the wingers do. Add both of those to them turning opposition to gays, abortion and birth control into their central mission, and I am so done with this church that I don’t even recognize anymore.
The Catholic Church of the 1970s that I grew up in was very different, actually focused on helping the poor and loving thy neighbor and all those things Jesus actually talked about, not hatred of women (slutty temptresses) and the gays (slutty, uh, temptors). The reformational spirit of Vatican II was still alive and believed in, and bolstering the political goals of the Republican Party wasn’t on the to-do list.
The whole religion was screwed by John Paul II, who hid his reactionary mindset behind a genial appearance and ruled for 25 years, one of the longest papal reigns ever, putting his conservative imprint on the entire church by appointing cardinals and bishops with the same outlook who in turn inculcated new priests with it. The damage will take decades to undo, if ever, so it’s a good thing the church doesn’t mind losing me, because I’m not waiting around for it.
As for this birth control issue, not only are they using the opportunity to help the GOP by going after Obama, they are making a show of wrapping themselves in oh-so-virtuous adherence to moral beliefs to try to make everybody forget their decades of enabling and covering up of child molestation and rape.
pseudonymous in nc
It’s definitely a power squeeze by the bishops, who in their umbrella group are increasingly resembling the evangelicals. It’s also, I think, the last hoorah of the old Catholic order in the US, as the old (white) order gives way to a new demographic base that represents a different tradition and relationship to state power and social justice.
patrick II
@Rita R.:
If I was a more eloquent writer, that is what I would have written in the first place. Nicely put.
Xenos
@Rita R.: It looks like there was a deliberate plan to remake the church as a reactionary and revanchist organization by pushing these changes in the US. As a resident of an explicitly Catholic monarchy in Europe I am happy to report we have subsidized birth control and insured first term abortion. IVF is fairly limited and euthanasia is absolutely verboten – these are the issues where the church has drawn the line, and won the political fight.
There are two families in my town with five children, a Mormon family and my own (Epsicopal/Greek Orthodox) – both being immigrants from North America. I don’t even know of one Catholic family with more than three children, and the average is certainly less than two. And you would not believe the child subsidies paid in cash to every family’s bank account – three kids will get you more than $1000, paid every month, tax free.
The Catholic Church appears to be cool with all of this socialism – if they made a fuss they would face serious trouble with their parishioners, who pay the taxes that pay the priests’ salaries.
Xenos
@Rita R.: It looks like there was a deliberate plan to remake the church as a reactionary and revanchist organization by pushing these changes in the US. As a resident of an explicitly Catholic monarchy in Europe I am happy to report we have subsidized birth control and insured first term abortion. IVF is fairly limited and euthanasia is absolutely verboten – these are the issues where the church has drawn the line, and won the political fight.
There are two families in my town with five children, a Mormon family and my own (Epsicopal/Greek Orthodox) – both being immigrants from North America. I don’t even know of one Catholic family with more than three children, and the average is certainly less than two. And you would not believe the child subsidies paid in cash to every family’s bank account – three kids will get you more than $1000, paid every month, tax free.
The Catholic Church appears to be cool with all of this sockialism – if they made a fuss they would face serious trouble with their parishioners, who pay the taxes that pay the priests’ salaries.
Rita R.
@patrick II:
Aw, thanks. And I thought you put it quite well. :)
Darnell From LA
Is it just me, or does “Contraception Battle 2012” seem an awful lot like the insanity of the Terri Schaivo affair? What I mean is both are examples of the Right-Wing choosing to go to the wall over an issue that they think will fire up their base, but in doing so alienate most everyone, save for the loopiest of the 27% ‘ers.
Another Halocene Human
The sick thing about Opus Dei is that the Church has known about them for years and has the means to shut them down–but has apparently decided that they are too useful (because of converts/monetary donations/fanaticism which they hope will bleed over) and so they’ve decided to play with fire a little longer.
(There’s a long history of this in the Church. It usually ends badly.)
Another Halocene Human
@Warren Terra: Hear,hear.
I have no pity, tho’–the bishops did it to themselves.
Pat In Massachusetts
Steve M is right. I didn’t know about the priest lobbyist, but I am not surprised.
I don’t know of any Catholic women who follow the dictates of their parish priest, never mind American bishops or the Vatican!
If someone would only bother to ask what practicing and non-practicing Catholic women think about these “issues”, then of course there would be no debate and nothing for Laura Ingraham to squawk about on right wing radio and cable TV all day.
But American Catholic women will not be asked (or if they are asked, then they will not be listened to!)and Laura Ingraham’s job will be safe for another day.
master c
@Jeffro:
Nirvana I think.
ET
Wasn’t that FBI spy Robert Hanssen Opus Dei? ‘Cause considering some of the high profile members mentioned in this post, that is not a recommendation of it or the Catholic Church.
Chris
@Hill Dweller:
Don’t ask me – all I know is that as things stand, there’s a very good chance he won’t vote Obama.
@Another Halocene Human:
Heck, they love the guys. I can’t remember where I read this, but I remember hearing that JP2 and the current Pope had supported the hell out of Opus Dei as an ideological enforcer and counterweight to some of the less rigid religious orders like the Jesuits.
Paul in KY
@beltane: Maybe the President should try that…
Paul in KY
@Rita R.: The Catholic church you grew up in was the church of Pope Paul VI. Much nicer man than JP II & Pope Palpatine.
vernon
Well I’m a Socialist who’s totally non-religious and I think it’s a subject worth talking about. I’ll buy, at least provisionally, that it’s a matter of religious freedom; such matters are important; they’re good indicators of the kind of society we’re living in. But it does seem that as the controversy unfolds, the smell of rat is coming increasingly to the fore: righties charging Obama with heavy-handedness from the get go when he’s clearly making the effort to be reasonable.
Here’s a question: How do the healthcare systems in heavily Catholic countries deal with the issue (no pun intended)? They must have crossed this bridge long ago in Italy, France etc. What’s their solution, how well is it working, what does the Vatican say about it? Has anyone looked into this?
Retief
Mormonism doesn’t preach the “gospel of success,” if that phrase means that righteousness is rewarded with earthly riches, with the corollary that riches are evidence of righteousness. Just the opposite. There is an unfortunate amount of hero worship among Mormons for successful Mormons. I’d put that down more to tribalism than anything else. Anyway, Mormon Jesus is pretty clear that there ain’t no rich folks in the celestial kingdom. And that if our prosperity comes at the expense of other people, we’re dooming ourselves.
Another Halocene Human
@Chris: Jesuits aren’t less rigid, they’re just better educated and not insane. Jesuits can be quite dogmatic (and pro-Church) but they also have the tools to think for themselves … and do.
Probably explains why they’ve been suppressed by Papal degree at least twice. Heh heh.
Another Halocene Human
@vernon: The heavily Catholic countries in Europe have universal health care and cover birth control.
Many of the heavily-Catholic states in the United States (such as MA and NY) require employers to cover oral contraceptives in health insurance plans… including Catholic hospitals and universities.
Even in South America where the bishops have put down draconian abortion bans (recall the excommunication last year for the doctors who saved the life of a pregnant 9-year old girl), birth control use is ubiquitous. I can’t tell you which countries in Latin America have universal healthcare and which don’t, though. (The bishops have always sided with the slave plantation owners, the priests and nuns with the people–for which they were censured, suppressed, or raped and murdered.)
The issue here is that Timothy Dolan and the Ad Hoc Committee are pushing for special rights for churches. They want federal funds to pay for failing Catholic schools (they succeeded in the District of Columbia, over the objections of District residents), they want the ministerial exemption to cover… oh… non-ministers, etc, etc. There is a simple remedy to their crisis of conscience which they never mention: they could just pay the tax. Yup. They can leave their conscience unsullied by paying a tax.
THIS IS ABOUT THE ALMIGHTY DOLLAR. NOTHING ELSE.
vernon
@Another Halocene Human: Good stuff; thanks.