« Misshapen faith | Main | Focus on West Bottoms »

February 15, 2012

Church wrong on contraceptives

I disapprove of the American Council of Bishops for misrepresenting the requirement for insurance companies used by Catholic hospitals and universities to provide contraception without co-pays or deductibles. No physician is required to prescribe contraception and no woman is required to take contraception.

Because according to the Centers for Disease Control, 96 percent of sexually active Catholic women above the age of 18 have used a modern method of birth control, I think we can assume that some Catholic nurse in a Catholic hospital or some Catholic student at a Catholic university might want access to contraception without the added expense of a co-pay or a deductible.

Once again, this kind of restriction hits poor women the hardest because affluent women will simply pay the deductible or co-pay. American Catholics currently using modern birth control methods should not permit the bishops to influence their votes in the 2012 election.

Marcia Brox



The Mombasa Marxist regime put the original highly-objectionable contraceptive/abortifacient/sterilization mandate of August, 2011 in place in federal regulations on February 10, late Friday (the traditional time to sneak political actions past the media), without any compromise or revision, despite a massive debate over the revisions Obama announced earlier in the day. The announced “compromise” which still forced the mandate on insurance premium payers and pleased no one on the right, remains only a promise not being implemented or coded into law.
Any compromise or revision will now have to go through the formal regulatory process all over again. Catholics, religious, and pro-life organizations are now, with a one-year delay, officially being forced to either provide free contraceptives, abortifacients, and sterilizations, or to stop providing medical insurance to employees entirely. Any compromise or revision to the mandate adopted Friday from the 2011 regulation remains merely a far-off post-election promise buried in the Marxist medical takeover.
Catholics, pro-lifers, and conservatives now remain united in focusing on non-compliance, non-cooperation, non-participation, non-funding, obstruction, and repeal of the Marxist medical takeover.


Americans United for Life joined forces with other pro-life legal organizations to file the leading pro-life amicus brief before the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act violates the Constitution by forcing Americans to pay for abortion. The Marxist medical takeover includes an ‘abortion premium mandate’ forced on every participant that blatantly violates the conscience rights and First Amendment religious rights of millions of Americans.
Meanwhile, Catholics and pro-lifers and conservatives will remain united in focusing on non-compliance, non-participation, non-cooperation, non-funding, obstruction, and repeal of the Marist medical takeover.

Smarter Than You

"adolescent" and "sane outcome" used by the poster crying about "uncivil and impolite behavior."

Steve, meet Steve.

The issue is Obama has cherry picked contraceptives knowing that his base would misrepresent it as a women vs. Republicans issue. Look at the posts from the left and see that Obama is playing to his congregation. Sorry if the comparative of a false idol religion with a real one is uncomfortable for some of our Obama apologists. The shoe fits.


So Ms. Bronx, if you think the church is wrong then DON'T JOIN THAT CHURCH! Geeze, how difficult is this?


Republican governors who have signed contraception mandates into law with no or few religious exemptions:
Mitt Romney
Mike Huckabee
Jane Hull
George Pataki

President W. Bush could've challenged the birth control mandate put forth by the EEOC - Ashcroft said he would defend it.

Now who again is playing politics with women's health?

steven klein

Re copay and birth control. I thought the problem was that certain religious institutions did not want to provide coverage of any kind for such medications. Thus copay would not even be an issue. Thus patients would need to pay full out of pocket unless some alternative provision was made. But since I'm not an expert on the topic, I may be in error.

And why the adolescent references to Lord Obama and genuflection?? If one really wants to note to what extent contemporary political ideology has become a religion to many, monitor recitations of the conservative narrative by its strongest adherents. Terms such as apostasy, heresy, heretic, immersement in doctrine, excommunication, purity, etc are used frequently - and that's by other conservatives. That is one of the reasons why compromise has become almost impossible for so many conservatives. As the subject of the current discussion makes clear, one does not compromise on issues of faith or revelation. But it can be very hard to govern a representative democracy full of checks and balances with that type of thinking. By contrast, current Liberal thought is almost the opposite with no coherent philosophy or guiding doctrine at all and certainly no clergy or priesthood (a la Norquist) to enforce it.


"... Oh my. There is a precious photograph of a house committee meeting ... the discussion panel is ALL MEN. Keep it up republicans, it looks great. ..."



WASHINGTON -- Three Democrats walked out of a House Oversight and Government Reform hearing on religious liberty and the birth control rule on Thursday to protest Chairman Darrell Issa's (R-Calif.) refusal to allow a progressive woman to testify in favor of the Obama administration's contraception rule. The morning panel at the hearing consisted exclusively of men from conservative religious organizations.



This is almost as "funny" as Mitt Romney traveling to Michigan to tell the voters how much he hates unions and that GM/Chrysler should have failed and then asking for their support in the primary.

Funny STUFF!!!

Smarter Than You

So what exactly is the driving need behind Lord Obama's commandment that contraception, morning after pills and other reproductive offerings be free? Is the co-pay on birth control more onerous than for a life saving cancer drug? Blood pressure medication?

Is $4/month the real reason some women don't use birth control?

This is just our President trying to give something else away that doesn't need to be free in order to agitate his base and their insane need to genuflect at the altar of Obama.

This type of provocation turned out so well for him at midterms I'm happy to see him revert to form.


Oh my. There is a precious photograph of a house committee meeting entitled: "Lines Crossed: Separation of Church and State. Has the Obama Administration Trampled on Freedom of Religion & Freedom of Conscience." Aside from the asinine and bogus title, the discussion panel is ALL MEN. Keep it up republicans, it looks great.

Pay no attention to that history behind the curtain where an all male senate committee questioning Anita Hill about sexual harassment lead to the "year of the woman" in elections. This lineup will lead to the "year of the democrats."


Whispering that clip was hilarious. I've never seen Andrea speechless.



"This contraceptive thing, my gosh, it's so inexpensive. Back in my days, they used Bayer aspirin for contraceptives. The gals put it between their knees, and it wasn't that costly."


Aspirin? Now why didn't I think of that.

steven klein

Based on the promulgations of the Catholic Church and the Council of Bishops it seems to me that the church is as opposed to birth control and other forms of reproductive health as it is to abortion and if it had the power, it would as readily ensure the unavailability of the former as the latter. If this is incorrect, let me know.

Conservative politicians have now embraced this view. Rubio has proposed legislation that would allow an employer to exclude contraceptive coverage from a health plan purely based on religious conscience regardless of the religious status of the employer's organization. Blunt is proposing legislation that would allow employers to omit any form of medical procedure from health plans based on the employer's religious views. Santorum has indicated that Griswold was wrongly decided and that states should have the right to interdict the availability of contraceptive pills and devices. The list goes on.

The views of the church and many conservative politicians are not really in doubt. What they lack is the power. Why deny this? Conservatives are now energized to defend the proposition that the Constitution will protect the exercise of religious conscience under a broad range of circumstances and the right to exercise that conscience, when in conflict, deserves greater respect than the health and physical well-being of innocent men, women and children impacted by that exercise. The courts will never interpret the protections of the First Amendment that radically. Conservatives are welcome to advocate openly these positions and take them to the general population. But bear in mind that most people ultimately and with minimal reflection are going to put the well-being of their families ahead of your special religious sensibilities - and they should.

Uncommon sense

Ok, let me get this straight...NV asks, "How is the Church's desire to not fund abortion and contraception...", then goes on to call other posters "sycophantic parrots..." in the next paragraph. NV's last sentence nails it. Too bad he doesnt take his own advice. I guess I missed the GOP talking points about how this is now about abortion funding. The irony here is too much. I think I've had enough laughs for the day.

BTW, the "Church" huh...with a capital C. Good times...


I thought that health reform was going to make insurance cheaper!!!! But, we keep adding more and more free things for the end user. Somebody has to pay for these free things. Get government out of healthcare, each mandate just keeps adding more dollars to the cost of healthcare.


"the religious proclivities of some individuals and some institutions can trump many people's access to healthcare"

How is the Church's desire to not fund abortion and contraception restricting a woman's access to them? Unlike the gov't the Church can't fine you if you disobey them so who is the real predator here?

Once again for all you sycophantic parrots of the White House/Media Matters/MSM meme-of-the-month club, no one is saying that contraception should be restricted or be made illegal. No one! Stop dancing whenever the DNC waves the bloody shirt of a made up threat to "reproductive rights" in front of your face.

steven klein

I suppose conservatives are well within their rights to try to argue that the religious proclivities of some individuals and some institutions can trump many people's access to healthcare and defensible and reasonable for a purely patriarchal institution like the Catholic church to create edicts on issues which impact women's health, but I don't think those arguments will carry you to electoral victory in the Fall. The current conservative narrative argues that the federal government is overreaching. The multiple samples of public opinion which have been taken recently actually show that the general public(including a very large percentage of Catholics) believes that conservative religious and political groups are overreaching and the government, as has often been the case historically, can actually be a line of defence against the predations of other societal power centers.

There are serious arguments to be made re tax reform, long term deficit reform and the size and role of government at all levels and some conservatives have been trying to make them. But fortunately for the President, liberals and moderates, the power of the extreme right within the Republican party is so signficant that its loud bellowing on a number of narrow pet issues along with a gradually improving economy may lead to a sane outcome in November after all.


"I guess your "catholic lites" include the 48% or so that are women who use modern contraception (their husbands get a pass, I guess). How condescending."


Since you seem to be one of those perpetually offended liberals who can't believe anyone would disagree with your enlightened world view allow me to explain what I mean by "Catholic Lite".

Catholics are bound to follow the Church's teachings. If the Pope says that conteception is a sin and shouldn't be used then Catholics shouldn't use them. If they do they aren't %100 Catholic. Same with abortion. You can call yourself Catholic all you like but part of the gig is following every rule that comes from Rome. If you don't you aren't truely Catholic, you are Catholic Lite.

See GG? Not one word about whether you are male of female. Funny how you just assumed that there would be.


"Groen, I think you're talking about Stephanoupolos asking Romney about Santorum's position on allowing states to ban contraception. Nothing else about contraception was discussed during that debate"


Nothing else about contraception was discussed because the original question to Romney came out of Left field (pun intented). No one had mentioned contraception before Stephanopolous led off the debate with it. It wasn't in the top 20 issues that Americans were concerned about so why did George spend five minutes trying to get Mitt to take a stand on it? In light of the Media Matters/White House/MSM connection uncovered by the Daily Caller last week one can logically assume it was the first phase of this Catholic question we are seeing now.

"This whole thing was a GOP ruse to take attention away from the healing economy and good jobs report"

How can it be a GOP ruse when it was Obama that mandated the change and the US Bishops, usually quite Liberal and staunchly Democrat, that raised the objection to it?

A healing economy? Projected economic growth of 2.7% best case for 2012 but most economists put it closer to 1.9%. Housing market still in the crapper and getting worse and just wait till $4/gallon gas kicks in this summer.

A good jobs report? I suppose erasing 2.5-3 million workers from the ranks of the unemployed will result in the unemployment rate coming down. Maybe if we stop counting everybody that is out of work we can reduce the unemployment rate to 0.0%? Our economy would be doing great then wouldn't it?

Uncommon sense

They must be giving liberal leave at Two Rivers.

NV, how does this book down to govt telling "us" what we can and cannot do? It is simply trying to make uniform what nearly 30 states already require.

BTW, your analogy would only work if this was trying to force the catholic church to force their clergy to put on condoms before they..well..we don't have to really paint that picture do we.

BTW, why aren't we hearing such a vocal outcry from other denominations? So, something that would require church affiliated organizations (but not churches themselves...let's not forget that) to provide contraceptive services through insurance providers brings out all the buzz from catholic bishops and clergy because somehow they must fight this immorality; yet the whole church was hush hush about sexually abusing children. I guess the catholic church just believes that one topic is more important than the other. How sad that I see all these cons coming hook, line and sinker to an issue the courts have already ruled on many times. WOW!!!!


I guess your "catholic lites" include the 48% or so that are women who use modern contraception (their husbands get a pass, I guess). How condescending.

This is more akin to a Muslim community center employee who is not Muslim, see, and all the employees, muslim and not, put together a pool of money for lunch. They go to Subway and the non-Muslim wants to order a turkey with bacon, but the muslim lunch boss holding the money won't let her. There's your analogy #whatever.

About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright