Bishops pledge to defy Obama administration on contraception mandate

posted at 10:25 am on January 31, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Earlier this month, HHS issued a finding that reaffirmed its position that all employers had to comply with a new mandate to provide contraception support in health-care plans — even religious organizations whose doctrines oppose pre- and post-conception intervention.  Needless to say, the decision — which gives churches and other explicitly religious organizations only a one-year waiver to comply — are outraged over the intrusion on their consciences.  Three Catholic bishops announced yesterday that they will defy the Obama administration and fight the rule, and more will surely follow:

At least three Catholic bishops have said they will not comply with the mandate the Obama administration put in place recently in Obamacare that will force religious employers to pay for birth control, contraception and drugs that may cause abortions in their health care plans.

The Obama Administration issued a statement re-iterating the “contraceptive mandate” requiring all insurance providers cover the full range of FDA-approved drugs and devices would remain intact. This mandate, originally proposed in August, includes drugs that work after conception to destroy life rather than prevent it. The statement included a postponement of one year for religious groups that do not already carry contraceptives and additionally would not be exempted under last year’s narrow definition of “religious employer.”

The mandate not only violates such existing conscience protections on abortion such as the Hyde/Weldon Amendment (in so far as Plan B and Ella are covered), but also violates the principles of the Church Amendments which protects conscience rights for those who object to contraceptives and other services on moral or religious grounds.

Responding to it, Bishop Thomas Olmstead of Phoenix announced that his diocese will not comply with the mandate and Archbishop Dennis Schnurr of Cincinnati and Bishop David Ricken of Green Bay, agreed to refuse to comply.

It’s early yet, but the entire USCCB should be acting in unison along these lines.  The Catholic Church, as well as other religious organizations, should not have to fund procedures and devices that violate their tenets on the sanctity of life through employer-based insurance plans.  As Life News says, this is a violation of the First Amendment on its face — having the federal government intrude on religious practices, especially in areas that break no other laws for public peace and safety.

Beyond the religious exemption, however, is a larger question.  Why has HHS arrogated to itself the authority to mandate coverage for contraceptive and abortive devices (ie, the IUD)?  Why do health insurance plans need to cover what is clearly an elective process?  They don’t cover nose jobs or breast enhancements, or for that matter, LASIK in most cases.  Lasik at least treats a chronic medical condition (which is easily and less expensively treated with eyeglasses or contacts).  For all other entirely elective medical treatments, patients cover the costs themselves.  If insurance plans and/or employers want to cover contraception because of market demand and competition, I’d have no problem with it, but that’s obviously not the case if Kathleen Sebelius and Barack Obama feel the need to impose mandates on industry to add to their costs in covering entirely elective products and services.

Hopefully, this will go to court sooner rather than later and get torn down quickly by the courts.  The larger question remains, however.  We need to get government out of the market, and this example of heavy-handed social engineering conducted by the elites is a great example of what happens when the federal government gets the kind of power they do in ObamaCare.

Update: The Anchoress tries to find the silver lining:

To be sure, this situation is cause for concern, but there are some bright spots in all of this. Although the mainstream press has reported very little about this event—a close examination might prove uncomfortable for their own worldviews—the unified public expression of righteous defiance by the U.S. bishops is a powerful development.

Just as importantly, the laity—divided for decades on issues ranging from felt-banners to dress to dogma—has found a line in the sand upon which they can come together; “conservative” Catholics are reassured to see their more “progressive” brethren defending the church’s right to be who and what she is; more “progressive” Catholics may be coming to realize that—as relentlessly single-minded as some of their opponents could be—had they not held the line all these years, much could be crumbling at this moment.

I hope she’s right and that this becomes a hinge in history when many people awaken to the ability of government to abuse power, and not just the few affected.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Glad to see it.

Red Cloud on January 31, 2012 at 10:26 AM

The IRS and DOJ will be contacting them shortly.
(I was getting excited when I saw the headline…I thought they were talking about our Bishop!)

KOOLAID2 on January 31, 2012 at 10:28 AM

I’ve been defying the PBHO administration on pretty much everything.

Bishop on January 31, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Bishop on January 31, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Wow. Your own thread. Congrats!

Fallon on January 31, 2012 at 10:30 AM

“We have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it”

This quote will go down in history as the greatest lesson in US politics.

katy on January 31, 2012 at 10:30 AM

That’s one scary looking IUD on the front page.

CorporatePiggy on January 31, 2012 at 10:30 AM

These Bishops have courage. We need to stand with them.

Kataklysmic on January 31, 2012 at 10:30 AM

It’s time to stand firm and not yield to Obama and his distractive policies.

rplat on January 31, 2012 at 10:30 AM

I stand with them.

Weight of Glory on January 31, 2012 at 10:31 AM

This is absolutely what they should do in every diocese.

What annoys me most about this whole issue is the notion that contraceptives should be “free.” Why? They are optional drugs that nobody HAS to take, they are not treatments for any disease. They have niothing at all to do with “health,” no matter how much the feminists try to propagandize this. There is a perfectly natural alternative to chemical contraception that works every time. And anyone who works for a Catholic organization knows this!

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:32 AM

That’s one scary looking IUD on the front page.

CorporatePiggy on January 31, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Doh! I thought that was some kind of new ‘kinder, gentler’ fishing hook.

Dexter_Alarius on January 31, 2012 at 10:33 AM

I guess Bishop was first again…
*snap fingers*

Electrongod on January 31, 2012 at 10:33 AM

What the hell is that picture of for this thread? Please do not let it be what I fear it is.

mechkiller_k on January 31, 2012 at 10:33 AM

That, that picture you used. Symbolism we much, or Fruedian we slip? In any case you didn’t “Resist we much”.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Amen Katy

cmsinaz on January 31, 2012 at 10:35 AM

Doh! I thought that was some kind of new ‘kinder, gentler’ fishing hook.

Dexter_Alarius on January 31, 2012 at 10:33 AM

It may be what “The Shining” was all about.

Oldnuke on January 31, 2012 at 10:36 AM

These are the same bishops that DEFENDED Obama in 2008, right?

No offense, but their credibility is suspect. Everyone with a brain could have predicted that Obama and ACA and his other policies would have led to this.

Maybe the Bishops learned their lesson. We will see.

neoavatara on January 31, 2012 at 10:37 AM

KOOLAIDS
Me to, I had to reread. Congrads Bishop you deserve it!

angrymike on January 31, 2012 at 10:37 AM

“What annoys me most about this whole issue is the notion that contraceptives should be “free.” Why?”

Because in libworld consequence free recreational sex is a right which must be subsidized by the American taxpayers.

tommyboy on January 31, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Oh. Those bishops. Now I understand

FLconservative on January 31, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Oh come now. When has the rule of law meant anything to this administration?

The law appears to just an annoying obstruction that is overuled by the whims of Obama’s imperial czars.

I’m happy that the Catholic Church is standing up for what they believe is right. Maybe the eyes of some of their flock will be opened to the runaway despotism that is this administration.

Alferd Packer on January 31, 2012 at 10:38 AM

They made a mistake giving us a year. There is time to lawyer up, educate Catholics (and others) etc. There is a lot of anger out there already — wait till a few months from now.

This is not about contraception. This is about the government’s ability to dictate to religious organizations about violating their own beliefs. Obama and Pelosi (the latter being as fake a Catholic as I ever saw) believe the government is effectively God.

I think they have seriously overplayed their hand and I pray to God that Catholics and others teach them a serious lesson, and more importantly, demand our rights lest we lose them.

inviolet on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

But devout Catholic Bill O’Reilly tells me that following the RCC on contraception is optional?

/

Sarcasm aside, how may American Catholics understand (or even believe) that their church teaches that the use of contraception is a grave (mortal) sin (which means eternal, fiery torment if not absolved)?

How many understand that voting for a pro-Choice candidate when there is a viable pro-Life candidate (barring special circumstance) is a grave (mortal sin?

How many understand or believe that masturbation is a grave (mortal) sin?

How many continue to refer to Newt’s “ex-wives” or his former “marriages” when their church has declared that Newt has never really been married before and that Calista is his only wife?

mankai on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

They made a mistake giving us a year to “comply.” Time to do lots of things other than complying.

inviolet on January 31, 2012 at 10:40 AM

HUAH – you go, Catholics! Of course, you know what this means! Obama will call for ‘Jihad’ against the Catholic Church for daring to defy his edict!

easyt65 on January 31, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Time to lose their TE status!

ElenaKagan on January 31, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Oh, so this is what the Apostle John was referring to in the Book of Revelation when he wrote about the apocalypse.

Good for the Catholic Church. Now, fasten your seat belts. It’s going to be a bumpy ride.

rogaineguy on January 31, 2012 at 10:42 AM

This is absolutely what they should do in every diocese.

rockmom on January 31, 2012 at 10:32 AM

I think you’re going to see it across the board from every diocese. Archbishop Dolan in New York is very involved in leading and guiding this and has sent notice to Obama. After mass last Saturday evening our priest discussed this in no forcefully, calling it an attack on religious freedom, and that’s in the diocese of Wilmington, DE

Trafalgar on January 31, 2012 at 10:42 AM

I’ve been defying the PBHO administration on pretty much everything.

Bishop on January 31, 2012 at 10:29 AM

You and me both brother…and so should everyone else…wonder what life is like at Guantanamo??

PatriotRider on January 31, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Every Bishop in the country should put their name on a pledge to defy this order. But I fear that far too many would not…including our own Obama-licking bishop. When it comes to decisive action, he is all talk.

swinia sutki on January 31, 2012 at 10:44 AM

wtf is that thing?????

ted c on January 31, 2012 at 10:45 AM

“What annoys me most about this whole issue is the notion that contraceptives should be “free.” Why?”

Because in libworld consequence free recreational sex is a right which must be subsidized by the American taxpayers.

tommyboy on January 31, 2012 at 10:37 AM

A deeper analysis is that the entire progressive game plan is to severely reduce world population in order to bring on UTOPIA.
Death panels for the elderly and diseased. Free abortion and contraceptives. It’s a win win for the “hate human life” crowd.

Obamacare is rife with life ending legislation. It’s the foundational principle.

Ask Planned Parenthood…

katy on January 31, 2012 at 10:45 AM

mankai on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

I’d just like to add, I don’t like the fact that the RCC instructs its faithful on how to vote… by throwing in some threat of eternal damnation for the wrong vote. That’s a thoroughly un-American and potentially dangerous concept.

mankai on January 31, 2012 at 10:46 AM

We see a state – Oklahoma – that doesn’t want religious doctrine imposed on the state laws. The Democrats pounced on this screaming Islamophobia. Now, they tell us that the Catholic Church needs to abide by these new laws, regardless of religious beliefs. Does this tell you what this Administration thinks of religious freedom? It says certain religions are superior to other religions. (Just like the green industry and existing energy sources.)
I can’t wait until the Democrats get their way about sharia law and then the courts will be defenseless against any other religious doctrine that might go against the laws of this country. Please remember the man (Dale Neumann) in Wisconsin who went to jail for praying for his daughter instead of bringing her to the hospital in 2003. Or the incident in Philadelphia against Herbert Schaible? These individuals should prepare their defenses to get out of jail.

djaymick on January 31, 2012 at 10:46 AM

“What annoys me most about this whole issue is the notion that contraceptives should be “free.” Why?”

1) I tell Liberals I do not want abortions. I am thentold by Liberals that I have no right to force my beliefs on them.

2) The Liberal tells me that abortions should be allowed…and then forces THEIR beliefs on me by mandating that MY tax dollars have to go to fund THEIR beliefs / practices, making abortions and contraceptives ‘free’.

Wow – hypocrisy, double-standard anyone?!

The main way to spread one’s practices is to volunteer to pay for them. Tax dollars are then seized to pay for one side’s agenda/philosophy at the expense and against the will of the other.

easyt65 on January 31, 2012 at 10:47 AM

I think they have seriously overplayed their hand and I pray to God that Catholics and others teach them a serious lesson, and more importantly, demand our rights lest we lose them.

inviolet on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

A disgustingly high number of Catholics voted for Obama in 08. Will they now?

swinia sutki on January 31, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Dear Liar’s regime has just handed the GOP a campaign issue. Even if Evangelicals etc. are unenthusiastic about Romney, a pledge to overturn this (as part of overturning Obamacare) will go a long way. Even independents who believe they are fair minded will think this is a bit too far (“sure I think contraception should be legal & I like an insurance plan that covers it, but if you object on religious grounds you should be able to opt out.”)

But I expect the stupid party to fumble this.

rbj on January 31, 2012 at 10:47 AM

IUDs creep me the f**k out.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Bishop Lennon in the Diocese of Cleveland has issued a letter saying he will not comply, as well. I think there are a lot more than three dioceses involved here (I know of three in Ohio alone).

jdp629 on January 31, 2012 at 10:49 AM

The ACA has some similaries to 666 in revelation. Just saying’

FLconservative on January 31, 2012 at 10:49 AM

After the recent pro religious freedom/seperation ruling of the Supremes it is time for the Catholic church to stand up and fight.

Fleuries on January 31, 2012 at 10:50 AM

Rubio has introduce the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 2012 which will repeal this horrible law. All we need to 12 Democrats who is up for reelection this year to allow it on the floor. I think we will have 12 democrats if not , then their challengers should run ads for the rest of the year reminding the voters of the state that their senators don’t care about people’s religious belief.

BroncosRock on January 31, 2012 at 10:50 AM

They need to start with Pelosi, Kerry and the Kennedy clan! This includes every Demorat who hides behind the Catholic Church. You can’t be Catholic and support abortion……………………

vietvet68 on January 31, 2012 at 10:50 AM

It is interesting how in the media it is being framed as a Catholic issue, when in reality it will effect all religious groups who object. On the other hand, it is good to see a principled stand being taken to defend religious liberty. I hope evangelical leaders would also be willing to go to jail in defense of liberty.

Imrahil on January 31, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Had a Catholic buddy call me about this yesterday. When (not if) all the Bishops come out in unison on this, the local parishioners will all be getting the same message on fighting this. Obama will, effectively, have at least 1/4 of the population railing against him.

It’s one thing to have the Pope or Bishops come out and ask you to support/fight something. But when your own priest is asking you, it’s a whole new ball-game. And it won’t be just the Catholics, because it’s not just about the contraception, it’s ALL about the First Amendment. If they’ll do it to Catholics, they’ll do it to Baptists, Jews, etc, etc.

I just CANNOT understand why PBHO would let this be used against him. I mean, I knew he was dumb, but never thought he was THIS dumb.

LtGenRob on January 31, 2012 at 10:51 AM

They got what they wanted. Now I guess it’s time to find out how hard it will be to unvote stupid.

Jeffster on January 31, 2012 at 10:52 AM

From a letter that Bishop Malooly in the Diocese of Wilmington sent out recently:

We cannot – we will not – comply with this unjust law.

I think you’re seeing an across the board approach, not just individual bishops.

Trafalgar on January 31, 2012 at 10:53 AM

The O admin knew damn well this would cause the second great US civil war.

They want it. They are itching for a breakdown. They’re going to get it.

Everything they have done over the last 3 years has been designed to provoke.

I guess all their infrastructure is in place. Man your battle stations people.

katy on January 31, 2012 at 10:54 AM

That thing looks like a fish scale.

Wade on January 31, 2012 at 10:54 AM

You can’t be Catholic and support abortion……………………

vietvet68 on January 31, 2012 at 10:50 AM

This!!

Trafalgar on January 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM

This is not about contraception. This is about the government’s ability to dictate to religious organizations…

inviolet on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Exactly. It is reprehensible that this administration shows blatant disregard for the separation of church and state. It’s as if they are looking for any fight they can to make the constitution a “living document” so they can turn this into a self-fulfilling prophecy over it being “antiquated”.

Parts of this country are willing to listen to Sharia Law, but have no use or respect for Canon Law… which bears no resemblance to criminal or civil disobedience.

VietVet_Dave on January 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM

There is an exemption for religious organizations when they are serving their own faithful. The RCC is looking for a broader exemption when they employ non-Catholics and serve the general public.

OptionsTrader on January 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Dear Liar’s regime has just handed the GOP a campaign issue. Even if Evangelicals etc. are unenthusiastic about Romney, a pledge to overturn this (as part of overturning Obamacare) will go a long way. Even independents who believe they are fair minded will think this is a bit too far (“sure I think contraception should be legal & I like an insurance plan that covers it, but if you object on religious grounds you should be able to opt out.”)

But I expect the stupid party to fumble this.

rbj on January 31, 2012 at 10:47 AM

If there is one group the Republican establishment loathes more than the Tea Party, it is the evangelical/moral/religious voting bloc. If the Republicans make a campaign issue of this, I will be stunned.

Doomberg on January 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Really want to see some fun? Let the Pope impose General Interdict — that‘ll cause some blow-back…

affenhauer on January 31, 2012 at 10:56 AM

The RCC is looking for a broader exemption when they employ non-Catholics and serve the general public.

OptionsTrader on January 31, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Yes, because the Church believes that ALL human life is sacred, not just Catholic lives.

Trafalgar on January 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

A disgustingly high number of Catholics voted for Obama in 08. Will they now?

swinia sutki on January 31, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Yes, a disgustingly high number of Catholics, even actively practicing ones (I won’t speak for the ones who just call themselves that and don’t follow Jesus or the teachings of the Church or attend Mass each Sunday). This batch of serious Catholics includes my whole family (I am the only one who voted McCain) even though virtually all of us with only 1-1/2 exceptions (don’t ask) are lifelong Republicans.

They couched it in other language (even to themselves) but they basically voted for him because McCain is kind of a squish, with a temper, and plus Obama is black and they thought it’d be neat to give someone who looked like a moderate an affirmative action vote.

Am sure they are not the only ones who went through this thinking. I told them that voting for racial reasons was another form of racism even if they didn’t mean it that way. I said it gently so we’re still speaking (:P). And now they feel like they have to “defend their purchase,” so to speak (raaaaccciist, I know :) ).

Haven’t heard much defense of him lately BTW. Easter’s going to be interesting when we all get together.

Am appalled that they didn’t even listen when I told them about his proabortion voting record (which he did a pretty good job of downplaying) the babies dying in closets and the voting present. He was and is not qualified but they wanted to vote for the black guy.

inviolet on January 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

I just CANNOT understand why PBHO would let this be used against him. I mean, I knew he was dumb, but never thought he was THIS dumb.

LtGenRob on January 31, 2012 at 10:51 AM

You don’t think he’s setting HHS up for a “Sistah Soljah” moment do you? Let her be the evil blue meanie, then ride in on his high horse and save the day thus ingratiating himself with Catholics nationwide? The way he’s sinking to the lowest level of his progressive base you wouldn’t think so…but I never underestimate his ability to coldly calculate.

swinia sutki on January 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Waiting for the attacks on the Bishops from the MSM. Can just hear Overdorck, Williams & Co. The game plan is moving the Marxist agenda forward just in case some votes cannot be duplicated multiple times.

democratsarefools on January 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

Sarcasm aside, how may American Catholics understand (or even believe) that their church teaches that the use of contraception is a grave (mortal) sin (which means eternal, fiery torment if not absolved)?

How many understand that voting for a pro-Choice candidate when there is a viable pro-Life candidate (barring special circumstance) is a grave (mortal sin?

How many understand or believe that masturbation is a grave (mortal) sin?

How many continue to refer to Newt’s “ex-wives” or his former “marriages” when their church has declared that Newt has never really been married before and that Calista is his only wife?

mankai on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

You bounce between simplistic and technical without consistency. You are correct in your first point. Your observation about Catholic voting is simply wrong. Your observation about masturbation is mostly correct, but a more informed (and short) explanation can be found here. Most people do know know whether any, some, or all of Newt’s marriages were performed within and/or blessed by the Catholic Church. In fact, I’d be surprised if most people knew of Gingrich’s religious affiliation at all.

Jazz on January 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

I think I meant “overestimate” but I’m often confused.

swinia sutki on January 31, 2012 at 11:00 AM

I’m happy they will defy him. But as I recall they were also trumpeting him as bordering on the second coming when he was running. So much for social justice, eh? Reality is a B*tch.

clippermiami on January 31, 2012 at 11:01 AM

All bishops should be sent to Guantanamo.

cozmo on January 31, 2012 at 11:01 AM

I will stand with the Bishops on this.

The State has no business telling people what they must do with respect to moral convictions granted by revelation. A lot of people died to get this disentangled and once you get to body counts of 20% of the population it should be realized that doing the opposite that has held the peace on this topic is unwise and asking for death on a scale unknown in modern times.

And for that Great Peace of Westphalia and the Enlightenment thereafter, I also stand.

ajacksonian on January 31, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Didn’t the Catholic Church support Obamacare?

Mimzey on January 31, 2012 at 11:03 AM

I just CANNOT understand why PBHO would let this be used against him.

LtGenRob on January 31, 2012 at 10:51 AM

This is ideological, not political.

faraway on January 31, 2012 at 11:04 AM

@ mankai on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

The problem is that it only takes one for the government to be infringing on their religious beliefs. The issue at hand is the Administration’s, and apparently your, belief that people who “still” believe that contraception is wrong are backward and that our “progressive”, enlightened society should not protect their right. Similar to how our society does not protect the right of people to sacrifice others for religious practices or live in polygamist relationships.

It is pretty standard liberal elitism.

oconp88 on January 31, 2012 at 11:05 AM

This is not about contraception. This is about the government’s ability to dictate to religious organizations…

inviolet on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

True. What I’ve learned is that apparently my Catholic Church and religions more generally apparently exist at the sufferance of the federal government.

Thank you, thank you, dear Mr. President, for the year’s extension!!! And thank you, thank you, oh generous Sebelius, for the extra one year!! Oh, thank you so much!!

Tell me that Sebelius is going to be excommunicated and the State of Kansas placed under Interdict and I will feel a little better.

Herald of Woe on January 31, 2012 at 11:06 AM

For all the options available to deal with ObamaCare, civil disobedience has been the one least advocated and least explored by commentators, although it is a far more surefire way of getting rid of ObamaCare than relying on a squishy Congress or a potentially squishy Republican president, or the Supreme Court.

If even a few million Americans simply refused to sign up for health insurance in 2014 and refused to pay the “penalty,” it would rock the whole rotten edifice to its foundations. If five or ten million did so, Obamacare would stop in its tracks and die.

deepelemblues on January 31, 2012 at 11:08 AM

I just CANNOT understand why PBHO would let this be used against him.

LtGenRob on January 31, 2012 at 10:51 AM

This is ideological, not political.

faraway on January 31, 2012 at 11:04 AM

It is ideological, political and the return of the law of unintended consequences.

Churches campaigned for the right of healthcare. They got it and realize they don’t get to decide what healthcare is.

cozmo on January 31, 2012 at 11:09 AM

It’s all part of the plan. Force the Church to choose between its conscience or their services and public outreach. As we can see the Church will choose to shut down services, hospitals, etc. This administration is counting on a public backlash against the Church–”how could they abandon all the sick and needy?-someone save us!!!” The Feds will declare the closure of all these hospitals, schools, etc. a national crisis and will take them over by executive order.

It’s all one big power and property grab.

Niere on January 31, 2012 at 11:11 AM

IUDs creep me the f**k out.

MadisonConservative on January 31, 2012 at 10:47 AM

Seconded. What kind of woman looks at that and thinks, “yes, I want that inside me”?

Why do health insurance plans need to cover what is clearly an elective process?

You know why, Ed. They consider it preventative. Wouldn’t want to punish a woman with a baby after all, and the pill is cheaper than regular abortions. Stupid thing is, a large number of women who have abortions were actually on the pill when they got pregnant, so this isn’t even necessarily preventing abortions. Ultimately, it’s just a bribe to women voters, which is sad, cause contraception is not that expensive.

Esthier on January 31, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Yes, because the Church believes that ALL human life is sacred, not just Catholic lives.

Trafalgar on January 31, 2012 at 10:57 AM

They have a Constitutionally protected right to believe that and to teach that. They, and other employers, can’t choose which laws to comply with when operating a public business.

When the RCC operates a corporate entity where faith is a condition of employment and they serve members of their faith, they have an exemption.

OptionsTrader on January 31, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Obama is targeting the Church, because the Church provides a tremendous amount of service to those who cannot pay. If the Church is forced from providing health-care and charity, people will have no choice but to turn to the government.

Iblis on January 31, 2012 at 11:13 AM

Tell me that Sebelius is going to be excommunicated…

Herald of Woe on January 31, 2012 at 11:06 AM

While born and raised a Catholic, I doubt Sebelius is a currently practicing Catholic. And if she is, she doesn’t need to “be” excommunicated, she’s already excommunicated herself.

Trafalgar on January 31, 2012 at 11:13 AM

This proves that the end game for the Obama administration and the devils (literally) in the Democratic party is at the very least depopulation and at worst eugenics.

Progressives have been playing this game with human life for more than a hundred years now. These are sick, sick, evil people we’re dealing with here.

mapper on January 31, 2012 at 11:15 AM

They got it and realize they don’t get to decide what healthcare is.

cozmo on January 31, 2012 at 11:09 AM

OK, but neither does Obama.

Esthier on January 31, 2012 at 11:15 AM

That IUD hasn’t been available in 40 years. Google images “Mirena”, the one that is used today. Ooooooh, scary!

Marcus on January 31, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Tell me that Sebelius is going to be excommunicated…

Herald of Woe on January 31, 2012 at 11:06 AM

And Pelosi, and….

affenhauer on January 31, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Hey Ed Morrissey,

Please give us the details of what that thing is (thread picture) sir. I can not seem to let this go. It likes like a whale harpoon.

mechkiller_k on January 31, 2012 at 11:16 AM

I’d just like to add, I don’t like the fact that the RCC instructs its faithful on how to vote… by throwing in some threat of eternal damnation for the wrong vote. That’s a thoroughly un-American and potentially dangerous concept.

mankai on January 31, 2012 at 10:46 AM

I don’t know about you, but every pastor we’ve ever had never told us who to vote for or how to vote, just to exercise one’s right as an American citizen to do so. Maybe we’ve been exceptionally lucky.

That being said, over a decade ago, my hubby and I once attended a Mass at a Catholic college in another state from where we live, and the priest’s homily was about as rabidly pro-union Democrat as you could have gotten without it being a campaign speech. As I remember, there was no particular reason for it, i.e., it wasn’t an election year and I don’t remember that there were major political issues being talked about. But I do remember getting angrier and angrier as he spoke, as I failed to see his point in hijacking the Gospel readings for that day into a pro-union screed.

PatriotGal2257 on January 31, 2012 at 11:16 AM

What kind of woman looks at that and thinks, “yes, I want that inside me”?

Esthier on January 31, 2012 at 11:11 AM

Most women.

faraway on January 31, 2012 at 11:17 AM

mankai on January 31, 2012 at 10:39 AM

How many people believe that libs like mankai, or the federal government, should be able to question the religious beliefs of Americans with whom they disagree, and find those religious beliefs wanting and therefore not entitled to respect or the protections of the First Amendment?

AZCoyote on January 31, 2012 at 11:19 AM

I’ve read my pocket Constitution several times and I still can’t find within it the power for the federal government to mandate that insurance providers, or anyone, must provide services dictated by the federal government.

Obamacare is an abomination to the Constitution, to personal liberty, capitalism, and religious liberty.

I’ve said several times that the federal government’s mandate of a minimum coverage package was more offensive to me than the individual mandate. The mandate at least has the semi-worthy goal of making sure everyone has coverage (I DON’T SUPPORT IT) but the coverage mandate treats us as if we were both victims and children unable to understand our options and make informed decisions. It is the infantilization of the public.

Charlemagne on January 31, 2012 at 11:20 AM

I rally to the Cross to fight a Crusade to dig the enemy out of our Holy Land of Washington!

Anyway I despise Obama the Terrible so much I fantasize I could do so ….

Sherman1864 on January 31, 2012 at 11:20 AM

About time! Mrs. Sebelius, along with many other “Catholics” in government should indeed be excommunicated – sometimes it seems to me that our bishops don’t have the nerve to really do that…. SAD… I am just glad that finally at least some of the Catholic Bishops have come out against this tyranny! Perhaps this is a new day dawning…

mkosin on January 31, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Yet the Catholic clergy continues to vote Dem election after election and in this case for Odumbo. When will they WAKE UP!!

rjoco1 on January 31, 2012 at 11:21 AM

When the RCC operates a corporate entity where faith is a condition of employment and they serve members of their faith, they have an exemption.
OptionsTrader on January 31, 2012 at 11:12 AM

Ahh, so in libworld separation of church and state only works in one direction.

tommyboy on January 31, 2012 at 11:21 AM

Why has HHS arrogated to itself the authority to mandate coverage for contraceptive and abortive devices (ie, the IUD)?

Seriously Ed, do you even have to ask this question!?!?

For the most arrogant, self-serving and intrusive administration in US history, this simply follows from their belief that government is source of all that is good and right in the world…and you stupid little ignorant rubes ought to be grateful that they are here to protect you from your own witlessness…

powerpickle on January 31, 2012 at 11:21 AM

OptionsTrader on January 31, 2012 at 11:12 AM

I think you’re looking at this from the wrong end. It’s not that the Catholic Church can’t choose which laws to comply with; it’s that the government has no right to impose laws which prevent the free exercise of freedom of religion in the first place. This law prohibits the Church from adhering to one of its key tenets which is that all life is sacred. Regardless of who they are providing insurance to, Catholic or non-Catholic, it is unconscionable for the Church to provide any services to anybody which disrespect the sanctity of life.

Trafalgar on January 31, 2012 at 11:22 AM

The O admin knew damn well this would cause the second great US civil war.

They want it. They are itching for a breakdown. They’re going to get it.

Everything they have done over the last 3 years has been designed to provoke.

I guess all their infrastructure is in place. Man your battle stations people.

The government will loose. Badly. The people won’t try to fight the military. They will sabotage the crap out of the support systems. There is no way to protect the infrastructure from angry citizens. Without the infrastructure the government can’t survive long.

We live in a nation where a beaver can take down a significant portion of the internet, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars to repair.

Given how vulnerable, fragile, and exposed the infrastructure that criss-crosses this nation it, the government would rue the day it started a civil war.

Good luck keeping the lights on, the sewers running, the water running if a second civil war starts. Angry American citizens will shut it down, and they will only need a shovel and a pick to do it.

Want to argue with me?

Ok. Let’s do a test.

Go start digging in your back yard. 15 random holes, 3 feet deep.

You won’t make 15 before you damage some kinda utility line.

The nation would come to a grinding halt, and I am pretty sure the government knows it. The system here cannot be maintained if there is a breakdown of the civil society.

We’d be Kabul inside 3 years.

SilverDeth on January 31, 2012 at 11:23 AM

For anyone still asking or wondering what’s in the photo (and who hasn’t read through the whole thread): It’s an IUD … though not Mirena or ParaGard, which are the two most commonly used ones these days.

Libraritarian on January 31, 2012 at 11:24 AM

abortive devices (ie, the IUD)? 

IUDs prevent fertilization. But why bother explaining.

Marcus on January 31, 2012 at 11:25 AM

Now might be a great time for NASA to start helping Catholics feel good about their contributions to science, you know, things like introducing Aristotelian reason, inventing the university, discovering genetics, perfecting beercraft, the big bang theory…

Greek Fire on January 31, 2012 at 11:26 AM

The people won’t try to fight the military.

If it comes to that, much if not most of the military will be on the side of the people and against the government. And they will bring their weapons with them.

tommyboy on January 31, 2012 at 11:27 AM

I don’t think Barry and the Queen of Health Care realize how big a bite they’ve taken – nor that they’re going to choke on it.

GarandFan on January 31, 2012 at 11:27 AM

‎”The Amish do not carry health insurance. The government respects their principles. Christian Scientists want to heal by prayer alone, and the new health-care reform law respects that. Quakers and others object to killing even in wartime, and the government respects that principle for conscientious objectors. By its decision, the Obama administration has failed to show the same respect for the consciences of Catholics and others who object to treating pregnancy as a disease.”

-Most Rev. Timothy Dolan, Cardinal-designate and Archbishop of New York

Libraritarian on January 31, 2012 at 11:28 AM

If the letter that I heard read in Mass on Saturday is any indication- Bishop Placido Rodriguez of the Diocese of Lubbock has no intention of complying either.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 31, 2012 at 11:28 AM

@Marcus- IUD, prevent implantation, not fertilization.
Now can you imagine anyone putting that device inside their bodies? WTF is wrong with women?

Women who won’t eat bleached flour, see no harm in inserting a device that continually irritates the insides of one of their organs.

bloggless on January 31, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Ed, you’re a bit off with your number of how many bishops have protested.

According to Tom Peters at Catholic Vote, already at least 103 bishops have protested the move.

So it’s not just three like the article you quote from says.

Vatican Watcher on January 31, 2012 at 11:29 AM

Ahh, so in libworld separation of church and state only works in one direction.

tommyboy on January 31, 2012 at 11:21 AM

It would be better to get rid of the employer mandate all together, which is hardly a lib position. Separation works in both directions which is why there is an exemption for the RCC.

OptionsTrader on January 31, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3