Rasmussen: Majority opposes Obama contraception mandate on religious organizations

posted at 1:55 pm on February 8, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Some in the media have expressed puzzlement over the controversy generated by new HHS mandate imposed by the Obama administration that would force religious organizations to pay for contraception even if it goes against their religious doctrine.  The New York Times and the Washington Post took pains to point out that Catholics are in favor of such mandates in earlier polling.  However, Rasmussen’s latest national survey of 1,000 likely voters show a majority opposing the mandate on religious organizations — and that Catholics take an even dimmer view of such an intrusion on their beliefs:

Half of voters do not agree with the Obama administration’s action forcing Catholic institutions to pay for birth control measures that they morally oppose.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 39% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the government should require a church or religious organization to provide contraceptives for women even if it violates their deeply held beliefs. Fifty percent (50%) disagree and oppose such a requirement that runs contrary to strong beliefs, while 10% more are undecided.

Fifty-six percent (56%) of male voters are against the government requiring contraceptive coverage in a case like this. Female voters are almost evenly divided on the question. Sixty-five percent (65%) of Catholic voters oppose this requirement, as do 62% of Evangelical Christians, and 50% of other Protestants. Most non-Christians (56%) support the Obama Administration ruling.

Even apart from the question of exempting religious organizations, voters aren’t exactly applauding the new HHS insurance mandate.  A plurality opposes a government requirement to provide such coverage, 46% to 43% supporting.  A majority of voters (54%) understand that requiring no-cost coverage of contraception means that the cost of insurance will rise for everyone; only 16% thought it would not.  On the religious exemption, Obama doesn’t even win women, who narrowly oppose the revocation of the exemption by 45%, with 43% supporting the decision.

In the political demos, Obama gets more bad news.  Democrats support his mandate 60/27, which is not exactly a ringing endorsement.  Republicans oppose it 16/75, and a plurality of independents do as well, 43/49.  Every income demographic except the lowest of under-$20K and $75-100K opposes it by majorities.  Only those who never attend religious services or attend less than once a month support the mandate; all other categories oppose it by large majorities.  Even the “political class,” usually reliably liberal, opposes the mandate on religious organizations by 25/63.

John Boehner gave a rare speech on the House floor today pledging to fight this new mandate:

“This rule would require faith-based employers – including Catholic charities, schools, universities, and hospitals – to provide services they believe are immoral. Those services include sterilization, abortion-inducing drugs and devices, and contraception,” Boehner added. “If the president does not reverse the Department’s attack on religious freedom, then the Congress, acting on behalf of the American people and the Constitution we are sworn to uphold and defend, must. The House will approach this matter fairly and deliberately, through regular order and the appropriate legislative channels.”

“This attack by the federal government on religious freedom in our country must not stand and will not stand,” he said.

The Anchoress wonders if this is why Bill Daley was in such a hurry to exit the White House. Daley apparently tried to warn Obama against taking this course of action.

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

Foolish hate dumped on John Boehner for supposedly being a secret Democrat in 4…3…2…

itsnotaboutme on February 8, 2012 at 1:57 PM

I favor forcing Hindus to eat beef.

John the Libertarian on February 8, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Rush was just talking about how this hurts Romney since RomneyCare has a similar mandate.

Kaffa on February 8, 2012 at 1:58 PM

BISHOP TAKES THE PILL!

KOOLAID2 on February 8, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Zero is a political moron.

TX-96 on February 8, 2012 at 1:59 PM

They’ll double down on stupid…they keep harping ‘there are 28 states that are doing this now’ meme

And only talk about the polls where they receive the most support

cmsinaz on February 8, 2012 at 2:00 PM

Even the “political class,” usually reliably liberal, opposes the mandate on religious organizations by 25/63.

Because they know it’ll hurt their guy.

Rasmussen’s wording is better and probably explains the less favorable numbers for Obama. I think the MSM poll question was something like “Are you in favor of your employer being required to give you free stuff?”

forest on February 8, 2012 at 2:00 PM

through regular order and the appropriate legislative channels.

We still have those?

philoquin on February 8, 2012 at 2:00 PM

65% of Catholics.

This poll is wrong. Nanzi Pelosi said most Catholics agree with Obama!!

portlandon on February 8, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Sixty-five percent (65%) of Catholic voters oppose this requirement

Hey lib4life: 65% is more than enough to beat Obama :-)

Kataklysmic on February 8, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Even biden told obama there would be a problem

(via Politico)

cmsinaz on February 8, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Cling. Religion.

faraway on February 8, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Well hallelujah John Boehner! About time congress starts nuttin’ up and put a stop to this nonsense! I understand that Obamacare was passed by Congress without having been read, but it is high time to revisit some of the provisions concerning the HHS Sec. and all the discretion granted her. Make them go on record as supporting the abridgement of religion w/bill after bill that amends the legislation. Take all year if you must Boehner!!

JAM on February 8, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Obama will put this on hold for a year to take the issue off the table.

JPeterman on February 8, 2012 at 2:04 PM

State dictating to church = permissible
Church in state institutions = unconstitutional?
I thought separation of CH&ST was a two way street to the libtards. Guess not.

nobar on February 8, 2012 at 2:05 PM

The real problem here, for not just this administration, is that if there isn’t a reasonable compromise on this, a future administration/Congress could throw this problem to where this goes completely the other way.

J_Crater on February 8, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Per gallup.com, on 12/23/2011:

This Christmas season, 78% of American adults identify with some form of Christian religion. Less than 2% are Jewish, less than 1% are Muslim, and 15% do not have a religious identity. This means that 95% of all Americans who have a religious identity are Christians.

Evidently, Obama just does not understand…anything.

kingsjester on February 8, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Why does President Barack Hussein Obama hate the United States of America?
Why does President Barack Hussein Obama hate Democracy?
Why does President Barack Hussein Obama hate Christians?
Why does President Barack Hussein Obama hate Unborn Babies?
Why does President Barack Hussein Obama hate hard working rich people?
Why does President Barack Hussein Obama hate Capitalism?
Why does President Barack Hussein Obama hate everything America stands for?

FlatFoot on February 8, 2012 at 2:07 PM

BFD, a majority opposed ObamaCare too…..who does these polls?

Hey pollsters, here’s a poll for you to do.

Does this President give a damn what Americans think about
any issue??

Bet those results never see the light of day.

ToddPA on February 8, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Guess Obama should have followed Clinton’s example of poll-testing policy ideas before carrying them out…… oh, wait, dictators don’t bother with such things.

Bitter Clinger on February 8, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Thanks OC

cmsinaz on February 8, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Tha Catholic Church supported ObamaCare, mistakenly thinking only someone else’s liberty would be seized. Now, the church has had to learn the hard way. The lesson will continue if Obama gets reelected, with the possibility for a mandate to performing abortions (and, someday, euthanasia) in Catholic hospitals.

Welcome to the fight Catholic bishops. I just wish you had been here from day one, but hypocrisy can be forgiven if you are willing to stay with this battle and not make some face-saving, back-door Chicago style deal with the administration.

MTF on February 8, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Rush is talking about Boehner’s speech and playing it now.

Mord on February 8, 2012 at 2:08 PM

Fifty-six percent (56%) of male voters are against the government requiring contraceptive coverage in a case like this. Female voters are almost evenly divided on the question.

Why are men even being polled?

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Hope and change you can believe in!

I think the same Cardinal that cut a deal with Mussolini and Hitler in WWII must have worked the deal with obama and pelosi.

Strange you cut a deal with the devil and then act surprised when he screws you. You get what you deserve.

acyl72 on February 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

obozocare isn’t about healthcare. It’s about lunatic-left d-cRAT socialist CONTROL of one-sixth of the US economy, lunatic-left d-cRAT socialist WEALTH AND INCOME RE-DISTRIBUTION, lunatic-left d-cRAT socialist EXPANSION OF ABORTIONS WITH TAXPAYER MONEY, lunatic-left destruction of the Catholic Religion and every other Christian religion that opposed it’s dictates and unlimited lunatic-left d-cRAT socialist NANNY STATE COMMANDS and RULES for the American people.

In addition to being an insult to the US Constitution, obozocare is an affront to the American people. It must be removed, along with each and every lunatic-left d-cRAT socialist that supports it.

Our new president, along with the new Republican controlled House and Senate must, as their first official act, repeal obozocare, then tear it up into a million pieces, burn the pieces, bury the ashes and cover the burial site with 1000 tons of concrete.

TeaPartyNation on February 8, 2012 at 2:10 PM

This is an open letter to Former Democratic Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper.

On February 7, 2012, Ms. Dahlkemper said that she was shocked that the Obama Administration would implement an executive order that would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the morning-after pill to induce early abortions.

My question is this. “How can she be shocked?”

We’ve been covering this sort of government overreach into religious liberty for decades.

Simply put, she should have known.

Subject: You Should Have Known

Dear Congresswoman Dahlkemper:

I’m sorry, but you should have known.

We warned you hundreds of times. And we’re warning you again.

But Democrats, moderates, and centrists like you all across the country say we’re just paranoid.

We told you then as we tell you now that this type of government intrusion into personal liberties has been the goal of radicals all along. For that we’ve been demonized.

Well, Ms. Dahlkemper. You should have known.

We’ve been screaming it our entire lives, but you refuse to pay attention.

And then on February 7, you had the audacity to say you were shocked that the Obama Administration would issue an executive order to require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and morning-after pills to induce early abortions.
This after the President committed to not doing so in the final days of securing votes in order to pass the legislation.

I’m sorry to let you know Ms. Dahlkemper. You’re a Catholic and an American.

You should have known.

We warned you that the far left of the Democratic Party (which controlled Congress and the White House for two years and passed this monstrosity of a healthcare bill) was seeking to expand government control of our lives and seeking to reduce individual liberties in this country.

We told you things like this would happen…

But you don’t believe us when we say that the Federal Government is continually expanding its grip and reducing personal liberties protected by the Constitution… that “outdated” thing that some of your fellow Democrats once swore to uphold.

You see, this isn’t a just a Catholic issue. This is an American issue.

It’s not a left or right issue… It’s an up or down one.

So when you said that you wouldn’t have voted for Obamacare if I’d known about HHS regulation, you are being completely untruthful.

We were telling you in the papers, on the news, on the floor of Congress.

We were telling you that it was just a matter of time before this Administration usurped control from Congress on the most controversial issue that is central to the faith of billions of people around the world.

When you write, “I trust that the President will honor the commitment he made to those of us who supported final passage,” what you don’t realize is that you have been completely snookered.

We warn you constantly that the government will amend laws at the agency level and create mandates that circumvent the votes of the people chosen to assemble on their behalf.

Yet centrists, moderates, and certain independents around the country continue to ignore what it is that these people ultimately want.

Control of your life in every single capacity.

The ability to tell you what you can put in your body (at a time that agencies are suggesting what we can and can’t choose to eat.) The ability to tell you where to work (In which a government board of unelected officials, the NLRB, told Boeing where it has to do business). This country has witnessed example after example of government intrusion into our daily lives, yet you call us paranoid.

We talked about the wolves at the door, but your think they are going to simply act like sheep.

Or your party members brand libertarians as racists even though the percent of racists in the Libertarian Party is out on the 37th deviation of the bell curve.

For your information, the term “deviation” is a word used in statistics in order to measure…

Oh, never mind. You probably didn’t study economics either.

That’s why you signed the Dodd-Frank Act and the Stimulus Bill, but didn’t understand that centralized planning and crony capitalism have never worked out over a sustainable period, and more importantly, are not qualities of the free market.

You might think that your anger is just the result of the President affecting something that is central to your life now that you’ve left Washington.

What you don’t realize is that this is something greater.

You’re just returning to America to see this rising, corrupt Roman city in the distance for the first time.

We’ve been saying for years that it has created a failed, crony system that needs to be restored to the free market disciplines and individual liberties that allow people to make their own decisions and not be forced to do something that is against their moral conscience.

You’re just realizing that the government is tightening its grip on people who pine so deeply for the right to pursue his or her life, liberty and happiness.

So the next time you hear one of us tell you that the Far Left is aiming to punish your liberty due to their radical beliefs, and that they will use you in order to accomplish each goal one step at a time, remember this decision to force Catholic Churches to fund contraception and abortion pills in their healthcare plans.

Remember that this administration has the arrogance to tell people, who follow a Church founded by another Man who is their God, how they have to live and what they should believe…

Think about that for one second, and then remember who our leaders think they actually are.

The Far Left in this country is not about compromise. They are about fiat action, believing they are the powerful autocracy to whom citizens report.

Not to God, but to the State.

They conducted these sorts of activities the last time that radical Democratic leadership rose to power 70 years ago. They did it again three decades prior. And now with the most liberal Democrats ranking in seniority positions, and the most liberal president in 30 years, they are back at it again.

Until you realize that you were used for your vote, I have no sympathy for you.

You should have known they were going to do this.

And now you’re just trying to pretend that you were a complete fool for believing them.

Maybe next time, you’ll listen.

Sincerely,

The Libertarian Party

Washington Fancy on February 8, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Why are men even being polled?

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Oh, I know! With test-tube technology, why even have men around?

John the Libertarian on February 8, 2012 at 2:11 PM

OmahaConservative on February 8, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Yes!

Don’t hold your breath on the second question, I would be pleasantly suprised if they did.

MontanaMmmm on February 8, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Why are men even being polled?

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

This is a democracy in which both sexes have a say in what the government does.

philoquin on February 8, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Why are men even being polled?

libfreeordie

Uh, b/c they have to pay for it too. Duh? Many are Catholic. Duh?
Many are Christian. Duh? They are 50% of the population. Duh?

Why do you breathe?

JAM on February 8, 2012 at 2:13 PM

The Anchoress wonders if this is why Bill Daley was in such a hurry to exit the White House. Daley apparently tried to warn Obama against taking this course of action.

Wasn’t Mr. O’s wife leery of Bill D and those other Chicago folks???

ted c on February 8, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Now who ya gonna believe, the NYT/Wapo. or Rasmussen? Media carrying Obama’s water as usual. They have no shame.

they lie on February 8, 2012 at 2:13 PM

Oh, I know! With test-tube technology, why even have men around?

John the Libertarian on February 8, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Until a woman decides to have a child with a man, men should have no say or impact on her reproductive health or decisions.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

As more and more realize what exactly is being shoved down our gullets by this piece of garbage, the tide will turn even more against it.

I want to thank Obama, and his gang that couldn’t shoot straight, for their ham-handed attempt to force this through, against both the constitution and the will of those that are well informed. (I wish there were more of them).

Alferd Packer on February 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

I’d be curious if Congress could override a veto on this issue if it came to it.

philoquin on February 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Santorum has to be loving this stuff. One of the bigger arguments against him all along was that he was overly focused on social issues, and now the door is wide open for him to go to his bread and butter.

It’s hard to overstate Obama’s stupidity on this issue. He needs a lot of Christian voters in order to get elected and probably needs at least half of Catholics. Pennsylvania is at least half Catholic in and of itself, and there’s really not a map to the White House for Obama that doesn’t include a state like that.

LukeinNE on February 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

you just rose to new heights of stupidity w/ that comment

chasdal on February 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

I say Obama should force all Moslems to use prayer rugs made of pigskin.

/Quid pro quo

Key West Reader on February 8, 2012 at 2:15 PM

MontanaMmmm on February 8, 2012 at 2:12 PM

I also hang out on a Pan-Lutheran forum and don’t believe ELCA has issued a statement. I do know they already have contraception/abortion coverage in their heath care plan for the clergy…

OmahaConservative on February 8, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Until a woman decides to have a child with a man, men should have no say or impact on her reproductive health or decisions.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Nice straw man.

philoquin on February 8, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Bad news for Bambi.

He pays lip service to God, but he WORSHIPS polls.

PackerBronco on February 8, 2012 at 2:16 PM

I favor forcing Hindus to eat beef.

John the Libertarian on February 8, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Or at least contribute to slaughter houses so that my right to do so isn’t infringed cause I don’t want to pay for meat.

Esthier on February 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

A majority opposes most of what Obama has done.
Yet the same majority will re-elect him.

It’s weird, but that’s how this is shaping up.

angryed on February 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

The fact that men are significantly more opposed to requiring all health insurers comply with free birth control regulations tells me everything i need to know about what’s really motivating this (and what has always motivated Catholic hypocrisy on birth control). This is about exerting control over female sexuality and being enraged that women can enjoy sex without having to worry about having a kid. For some people it just makes them really angry.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Until a woman decides to have a child with a man, men should have no say or impact on her reproductive health or decisions.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Well, I guess we figured out your gender.

John the Libertarian on February 8, 2012 at 2:18 PM

To the people supporting Romney after Romney attacked Obama on this edict:

The White House is taking on GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney over his criticism of President Barack Obama’s birth control coverage mandate.

Press secretary Jay Carney says Romney is an “odd messenger” to be attacking Obama over the issue. The mandate requires that church-affiliated employers such as hospitals or charities provide birth control coverage even if it runs counter to their religious beliefs.

Romney has accused Obama of an “assault on religion” over the issue. But Carney says a virtually identical policy is in place in Massachusetts, where Romney served as governor, and that it’s ironic for Romney to criticize Obama over it. LINK

This is what Romney will be up against. For anything Romney accuses Obama of, Obama can reach back and sling out the same thing Romney did in his political life.

timberline on February 8, 2012 at 2:18 PM

My collie says:

What will we see next from the Obama administration Nazis? Contraception concentration camps?

Why can’t the Obamanites see that Catholics don’t need or want contraceptives because they are simply trying to have the babies that Americans are too lazy to have?

CyberCipher on February 8, 2012 at 2:18 PM

+1 KWR :)

cmsinaz on February 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM

There are no scriptures which prohibit the use of contraception. This is cultural dogma that’s infiltrated Catholicism. My new religious belief is that all Republicans in my courses should get an F, religious liberty!

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 39% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the government should require a church or religious organization to provide contraceptives for women even if it violates their deeply held beliefs.

WTH is wrong with that 39%? Have Americans become that anti-religion?

mbs on February 8, 2012 at 2:20 PM

ibfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

.
There is an upside to Sharia.

FlaMurph on February 8, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Until a woman decides to have a child with a man, men should have no say or impact on her reproductive health or decisions.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

As you say, “he should have no impact on her reproductive health”, which means he shouldn’t be forced to pay for what, as you say, are completely her decisions.

Now where are those posts where people like you claim that since the government sends money to Cathlic Churches it has a right to tell them how to run their operations?

Sauce. Goose. Gander.

PackerBronco on February 8, 2012 at 2:20 PM

I also hang out on a Pan-Lutheran forum and don’t believe ELCA has issued a statement. I do know they already have contraception/abortion coverage in their heath care plan for the clergy…

OmahaConservative on February 8, 2012 at 2:16 PM

That is why I said don’t hold your breath.

MontanaMmmm on February 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Imagine the GOP had a nominee who DIDN’T also create the exact same mandate as governor. This might actually be a way to attack Obama. With Romney….

Romney: I oppose forcing churches to do this
Obama: But your bill in MA is identical to mine.

Romney: Yeah well, I oppose providing abortions via O-Care?
Obama: But your bill does the same thing, in fact it goes even further than my bill with regards to abortion.

Romney: Yeah well, well, my hair is cooler than yours. So suck it Barry.

angryed on February 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Well, I guess we figured out your gender.

John the Libertarian on February 8, 2012 at 2:18 PM

You’ll never know, Am I a woman, am I a gay man? Am I a straight guy who likes to mess around with gender norms, who knows and more importantly who cares.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

This is cultural dogma

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM

That’s right! Belittle it, that’s sure to make it go away! Like I said before: all Hindus should be forced to eat beef!

John the Libertarian on February 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Until a woman decides to have a child with a man, men should have no say or impact on her reproductive health or decisions.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Men should have no say. We should just pay for it. Right?

angryed on February 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Actually the majority of Americans disagree with many – if not most – of Obama’s decisions. The media won’t publicize this or even cover his most unpopular decisions. Unfortunately, the GOP has done a poor job of informing the public.

Santorum did a good job last night with his “President Obama thinks he knows better than us.” He needs to keep up the attack.

bw222 on February 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

Speaker Boehner isn’t going to do anything but run his mouth. Remember when he threatened to defund the Justice Department over their non-enforcement of the Defense of Marriage Act?

Mike Honcho on February 8, 2012 at 2:22 PM

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

oh is that it?? im “angry”?? i just thought i didnt want my tax dollars paying for an elective procedure and one i find morally repulsive. thanks for clearing that up for me.

chasdal on February 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Sorry for the o/t but did anyone see this new web site? According to article from American Thinker:

Meanwhile, rather than tease out the connections between the big banks, unions, alternative energy companies, entrenched market incumbents, institutions such as the Center for American Progress and its Action Fund, and the policy apparatus of the Democratic Party, the press is far happier to mock Republicans as rubes and incompetents and to cover with relish Mitt Romney’s latest gaffe.
What would happen, though, if a website covered the left in the same way that the left covers the right? What picture of the world would one have in mind if the morning paper read like the New York Times-but with the subjects of the stories and the assumptions built into the text changed to reflect a conservative, not liberal, worldview? What would happen if the media wolf pack suddenly had to worry about an aerial hunting operation?
You are about to find out. The Washington Free Beacon is here to enter the arena of combat journalism. Our talented staff will add to the chorus of enterprising conservative reporters, publishing original stories, seeking out scoops, and focusing on the myriad connections between money and power in the progressive movement and Obama’s Washington. Our research and war room divisions will supplement that reporting with context, additional materials, and breaking video. At the Beacon, you will find the other half of the story, the half that the elite media have taken such pains to ignore: the inside deals, cronyism cloaked in the public interest, and far-out nostrums of contemporary progressivism and the Democratic Party. At the Beacon, all friends of freedom will find an alternative to the hackneyed spin, routine misstatements, paranoid hyperbole, and insipid folderol of Democratic officials and the liberal gasbags on MSNBC and talk radio. At the Beacon, we follow only one commandment: Do unto them.
The Beacon appears to directly challenge the liberal Center for American Progress and their execrable blog Think Progress. Good. The right needs a bull dog who can fight just as hard as the left – and make plenty of noise in the process.
Other staffers include Senior Editor Bill Gertz, who spent decades at the Washington Times as national security correspondent and staff writer Andrew Stiles, an up and comer in conservative journalism who is coming over from NRO.

http://freebeacon.com/about/

FLconservative on February 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

As you say, “he should have no impact on her reproductive health”, which means he shouldn’t be forced to pay for what, as you say, are completely her decisions.

When leftists point out that employers are engaging in unfair labor practices the right responds and say “well people have the right to look for a job somewhere else.” By that logic men aren’t forced to work for health insurance industries or providers if they don’t believe in birth control pills.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Am I a woman, am I a gay man? Am I a straight guy who likes to mess around with gender norms, who knows and more importantly who cares.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

And now your age comes tumbling out. You’re a young woman fairly fresh out of indoctrination, er, college.

John the Libertarian on February 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Catholics Support White House Contraception Mandate

snip..A majority of Americans, including Catholics, believe that employers should be required to provide health care plans that cover contraception and birth control at no cost…

snip..Catholics are more likely than Americans in general (52 to 49 percent) to say that religiously affiliated employers should have to provide contraception coverage…

Karmi on February 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

There are no scriptures which prohibit the use of contraception.
libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM

There are no scriptures that force me to pay for your contraception.
Take care of yourself.

Electrongod on February 8, 2012 at 2:25 PM

oh is that it?? im “angry”?? i just thought i didnt want my tax dollars paying for an elective procedure and one i find morally repulsive. thanks for clearing that up for me.

chasdal on February 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Taking a birth control pill is an elective procedure you find morally reprehensible? Really?

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Until a woman decides to have a child with a man, men should have no say or impact on her reproductive health or decisions.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Didn’t you say that you’re a man? Why are you speaking on this issue at all? Legally you have no say. Even if you both have an accident, only she gets to decide if it’s one worth “correcting” or living with. Even if she swears she’s on the pill but secretly is trying to get pregnant, even if she destroys your condoms without you realizing it, nothing matters but whether or not she wants your child.

As women, our choice is powerful. If we want a child, then the fetus is a baby that everyone will celebrate and talk about as though it’s a child, long before viability. If we don’t want a child, then the fetus is just a clump of cells, and no one else should even butt their nose in our business, not even the man who we’d be able to force to pay child support had our whim gone a different way.

As a man, you are completely irrelevant on this issue.

Esthier on February 8, 2012 at 2:25 PM

This is about exerting control over female sexuality and being enraged that women can enjoy sex without having to worry about having a kid. For some people it just makes them really angry.

libfreeordie

YOu truly are a simpleton with a lazy intellect. There must always be a victim with you liberals. I suppose you see yourself as a victim b/c someone else won’t pay for you. Why does access to BC and Plan B trump religious freedom? If you want your OCs covered by your healthplan, don’t work for a Catholic-affiliated institution. Period. This is a stupid hill to die on, but by all means go fall on your swords on this hill! It’s going to be delicious to watch!

JAM on February 8, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Fifty-six percent (56%) of male voters are against the government requiring contraceptive coverage in a case like this. Female voters are almost evenly divided on the question.
Why are men even being polled?

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Because they pay taxes and vote and buy health insurance.

talkingpoints on February 8, 2012 at 2:26 PM

Until a woman decides to have a child with a man, men should have no say or impact on her reproductive health or decisions.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:14 PM

You say men shouldn’t have a say in reproductive matters (i.e. contraception) yet you want them to pay for it…oh, and don’t dare give an opinion on it.

Shut up they say. Love your Liberal Fascism.

WisRich on February 8, 2012 at 2:27 PM

There are no scriptures that force me to pay for your contraception.
Take care of yourself.

Electrongod on February 8, 2012 at 2:25 PM

We’re not a theocracy. Women who wait until they are ready to conceive tend to do better on a range of social indices than women who get pregnant before they are ready. And since abstinence doesn’t work, birth control pills should be free to all women who want them. Don’t like it, then please leave the health insurance profession.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Fifty-six percent (56%) of male voters are against the government requiring contraceptive coverage in a case like this. Female voters are almost evenly divided on the question. Sixty-five percent (65%) of Catholic voters oppose this requirement, as do 62% of Evangelical Christians, and 50% of other Protestants. Most non-Christians (56%) support the Obama Administration ruling.

Only 65% of Catholics oppose this? I understand (well, not really) that Catholics voted for Obama for reasons beyond abortion but I am disgusted that this is the level of opposition that can be mustered from Catholics on this issue. This and illegal immigration are why I can no longer be a part of the Catholic church and cannot in good conscience bring my kids up Catholic.

iwasbornwithit on February 8, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Fifty-six percent (56%) of male voters are against the government requiring contraceptive coverage in a case like this

56% against??? That stat is too dang low!

44% wanting to use the coercive powers of government to force a group to act in a certain way is too high.

WashJeff on February 8, 2012 at 2:28 PM

By that logic men aren’t forced to work for health insurance industries or providers if they don’t believe in birth control pills.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

But they are still forced to subsidize these things due to the mandate. There is no escaping this.

Esthier on February 8, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Imagine the GOP had a nominee who DIDN’T also create the exact same mandate as governor. This might actually be a way to attack Obama. With Romney….

Romney: I oppose forcing churches to do this
Obama: But your bill in MA is identical to mine.

Romney: Yeah well, I oppose providing abortions via O-Care?
Obama: But your bill does the same thing, in fact it goes even further than my bill with regards to abortion.

Romney: Yeah well, well, my hair is cooler than yours. So suck it Barry.

angryed on February 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Romney takes most of the attacks on Obama off the table, except that he run businesses. Obamacare, and it’s associated mandates like this one, where supposed to be the issue that completely destroyed Obama and the democrats, notice how that issue has been dropped now in favor of the economy, which between it improving slightly despite Obama and the media hyping it day in and day out will no longer be a differentiating issue in Nov. Obama, you lucky dog you!

neuquenguy on February 8, 2012 at 2:29 PM

And since abstinence doesn’t work,

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Then you are doing it wrong.

Electrongod on February 8, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Daley apparently tried to warn Obama against taking this course of action.

Valerie Jarrett won…

d1carter on February 8, 2012 at 2:30 PM

This is about exerting control over female sexuality and being enraged that women can enjoy sex without having to worry about having a kid. For some people it just makes them really angry.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Ever heard of oxytocin? Nope? Yeah, didn’t think so!

MISFern on February 8, 2012 at 2:30 PM

There are no scriptures which prohibit the use of contraception. This is cultural dogma that’s infiltrated Catholicism. My new religious belief is that all Republicans in my courses should get an F, religious liberty!

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:19 PM

’cause you’re non-partisan, right? (not to mention a real ace at logic!)

BlueCollarAstronaut on February 8, 2012 at 2:30 PM

And since abstinence doesn’t work, birth control pills should be free to all women who want them. Don’t like it, then please leave the health insurance profession.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:27 PM

I’m only aware of one instance where abstinence failed to prevent a pregnancy.

iwasbornwithit on February 8, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Tru dat d1carter

cmsinaz on February 8, 2012 at 2:32 PM

You’ll never know, Am I a woman, am I a gay man? Am I a straight guy who likes to mess around with gender norms, who knows and more importantly who cares.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Wow! you’re a hermaphrodite!

ToddPA on February 8, 2012 at 2:33 PM

And since abstinence doesn’t work, birth control pills should be free to all women who want them. Don’t like it, then please leave the health insurance profession.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Abstinence is the only thing that definitively works. A large number of abortions are the direct result of failed contraceptives.

Besides, why just women? Why not free condoms to all men who want it? At least those protect against STDs, you know, an actual health issue that prevents an actual disease.

Esthier on February 8, 2012 at 2:33 PM

FLconservative on February 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Cool site. I bookmarked it.

Key West Reader on February 8, 2012 at 2:33 PM

This is about exerting control over female sexuality and being enraged that women can enjoy sex without having to worry about having a kid. For some people it just makes them really angry.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

You completely miss the point. It’s true that women can have sex without worrying about having a kid, but it’s false to think her employer should have to pay so she can have safe sex. Since having safe sex is optional and not a disease, it is the responsibility of the woman to protect herself, not her employer. Sex is optional. You will not die for lack of it. What should be mandatory is dental care. Now that’s a health issue and an infection is a disease. This is a clear case of Obama pandering to the woman vote. For Obama, everything is political. Once he gets what he wants, he’ll throw you to the gutter. What he can do with this now, he will do something else to another group. It’s not about Catholics. It’s about the government dictating how you should live and what you must buy.

And you’re worried about Catholic institutions not paying for “the pill” because women want to enjoy sex without having to worry about having a kid. . People who think like you are the reason Obama can pull these shady stunts off. Either you don’t care or you’re too dumb to see the big picture.

timberline on February 8, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Why are men even being polled?

Last I checked, conceiving a child still requires a key ingredient from a man. For all the talk about a woman’s right to choose, what about a man’s right to choose?

…since abstinence doesn’t work, birth control pills should be free to all women who want them.

Somewhere, you failed to bridge the logical gap. You could have said, “birth control pills should be an alternative”, which is fine. Mandating they be “free” (i.e. paid for by someone else) is ludicrous.

Don’t like it, then please leave the health insurance profession.

Careful what you wish for, the doctor shortage in this country is already dangerously low.

Hootie on February 8, 2012 at 2:34 PM

This is about exerting control over female sexuality and being enraged that women can enjoy sex without having to worry about having a kid. For some people it just makes them really angry.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

No, it’s about forcing people to pay for someone else’s sex life, but not everyone’s of course, just women. It’s not even equal protection.

Esthier on February 8, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Why are men even being polled?

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

I guess only women are being taxed to pay for it, right?

As far as religious dogma goes, when this gets jammed down the Catholics throats, how about getting rid the foot-baths and prayer rooms for the muslims. After all its ‘just religious dogma’.

belad on February 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Only 65% of Catholics oppose this? I understand (well, not really) that Catholics voted for Obama for reasons beyond abortion but I am disgusted that this is the level of opposition that can be mustered from Catholics on this issue. This and illegal immigration are why I can no longer be a part of the Catholic church and cannot in good conscience bring my kids up Catholic.

iwasbornwithit on February 8, 2012 at 2:27 PM

I don’t know how many times this needs to be explained. The majority of people in this polls are “cultural Catholics” they do not practice the faith not hold its beliefs. If you took a poll only actual (practicing) Catholics the results would be very different. Obama and obamacare were forcibly opposed in my diocese and our neighboring diocese, and 1000 people (the whole church) stood up and applauded when our priest condemned this mandate. The real number for practicing Catholics is probably close to 100% opposing. But the media loves to use this fictitious figure which includes a majority of Catholics in name only because it supports their agenda.

neuquenguy on February 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

So is it 40% or 60% of Americans who just aren’t smart enough to go to the store, and buy pills when needed?

Good God, is the IQ of the typical American even at room temperature, anymore?

MNHawk on February 8, 2012 at 2:36 PM

When leftists point out that employers are engaging in unfair labor practices the right responds and say “well people have the right to look for a job somewhere else.” By that logic men aren’t forced to work for health insurance industries or providers if they don’t believe in birth control pills.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Yes, but The One says all insurance companies must provide this. So where are we supposed to go?

And why would you need birth control pills if you weren’t involved with a man in the first place (in regards to your earlier post). Seems kinduv a waste of time to use a turkey baster and then abort the child.

deadite on February 8, 2012 at 2:37 PM

war on women continues apace.

But nooo, no electoral fallout will occur.

We know what’s best for these silly women.

Sluts and Nuts, all of then that disagree.

freshface on February 8, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Why are men even being polled?

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Are only women’s insurance costs going to go up?

dominigan on February 8, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Unless you’re a wacko.

deadite on February 8, 2012 at 2:38 PM

This isn’t about access to services. This is about forcing people to pay for something they believe is morally wrong.
There are other ways to get contraception than through employer provided health care. The majority of Catholics use contraception.
This is about the great wrong of forcing a religious organization to fund actions their doctrine holds as sinful.

I’m pro-choice. The government has no business getting involved in women’s reproductive decisions. They have no business telling a religious organization what reporductive services they must cover.

talkingpoints on February 8, 2012 at 2:38 PM

This is about exerting control over female sexuality and being enraged that women can enjoy sex without having to worry about having a kid. For some people it just makes them really angry.

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Actually, it can be argued that abortion and contraception are about men being able to use women as objects without having to face the consequences. The first proponents of abortion rights where men who convinced the early pro-life feminists to take up the cause of abortion.

neuquenguy on February 8, 2012 at 2:39 PM

libfreeordie on February 8, 2012 at 2:25 PM

yes, and in your forays out of the lib echo chamber im sure you have encountered many people who think that. it just doesnt register w/ you since your just trolling around

chasdal on February 8, 2012 at 2:40 PM

http://freebeacon.com/about/

FLconservative on February 8, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Good link, FL…the site also has an RSS feed link.

timberline on February 8, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3