E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSWhite House press secretary Jay Carney engaged in a rare back-and-forth with GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney from the podium of his briefing room on Wednesday.
Carney, who hasn’t mentioned Romney by name in almost a month, was asked to comment on the former Massachusetts governor’s condemnation of the Obama administration’s new contraceptive coverage plan, after he slammed it Tuesday as an “an assault on religion.”
Noting that Massachusetts has the same contraceptive requirements and exceptions for churches as the proposed national rule, Carney called Romney an “odd messenger” for criticism.
“The services that this rule would provide for women around the country are the same that are provided in Massachusetts and were provided under when he was governor, including contraception, including covered with no co-pay or deductible, and a religious exemption for houses of worship and churches and to church-controlled organizations such as parochial schools, but not to universities and hospitals.”
“This is, I think, ironic that Mitt Romney is… criticizing the president for pursuing a policy that's virtually identical to the one that was in place when he was governor of Massachusetts,” Carney said.
Carney has lately avoided criticizing the presumptive Republican frontrunner by name, responding to reporters’ questions about him only in general terms. He last mentioned “Governor Romney” in a briefing on January 12th, when he noted Romney’s opposition to the federal automobile bailout.
But Romney, who has made President Obama his chief target since announcing his presidential bid, shot back immediately at Carney, saying the spokesman should “check his history” and that the Massachusetts law mandating contraceptive coverage was put in place before he was governor and that he “worked very hard to get the legislature to remove all of the mandated coverages, including contraception.” (The White House noted that Carney did not, however, say Romney was responsible for the policies, only pointing out that they existed under his tenure).
Romney did, in fact, veto a bill in 2005 that sought to expand access to the emergency contraception pill by allowing pharmacists to dispense it without a doctor’s prescription. But the bill became law anyway after a wide statehouse majority overrode the veto.
Just a few months later, however, Romney’s public health commissioner ruled that Catholic and other privately run hospitals could opt out of the new law, which prompted Romney to say that he believed rape victims should always have access to emergency contraception.
“My personal view, in my heart of hearts, is that people who are subject to rape should have the option of having emergency contraception or emergency contraception information,’’ he said at the time according to the Boston Globe.
Leave a Comment:
This Baby
is blowing up in Obama's face.
Time to sell out your ethically and morally challenged base and do another 180 President SuperPac!
Speaking of 180's -
I was reading an article that a majority of dems now support Drone strikes and keeping Gitmo open.
Man, that, coupled with their support of Obama's decisions regarding unlimited detention and the Patriot act as a whole is just astounding.
I guess all that outrage when Bush did them was just for @!$%#s and giggles.
Gosh, now that Obama has gone full embrace of those evil Karl Rove Super Pacs he really is nothing more than Bush with a different haircut.
Obama's about to sign a bill that will allow drones to fly above the US keeping an eye on all of us!
ROMNEY PLAYING ALL SIDES AS USUAL:
"Now, an examination of Romney's financial investments reveals that the very same GOP frontrunner who is now petitioning the White House to extend the regulation's conscience clause and exclude more women from the benefits of birth control is himself invested in and profiting from pharmaceutical companies that produce the frequently prescribed and extremely common medication:
Romney often disclaims any responsibility for or knowledge of his own investments by claiming that they are held in a private trust. But since filing his legally-required public financial disclosure reports and certifying that the information is "true, complete, and correct" to the best of his knowledge, the trust ceased to be a "blind trust" as he knew what was in it. Romney signed such disclosure forms last August and during his unsuccessful 2008 presidential bid in August 2007."
Romney after attending Planned Parenthood fundraiser, now wants to defund it.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/07/420690/flashback-mitt-romney-attended-a-planned-parenthood-fundraiser-now-wants-to-defund-it/
Makes me wonder, Spanky, how far right the dems are willing to go to keep power. Hell, if I wanted a repub in office, I'd vote for one.
When Tim Kaine jumps ship you know things are about to get ugly for team Obama.
GITMO: GOP congressionals voted against closing GITMO.
And surely you don't mean the very same Mr. Rove:
Who is 'shocked' by the Clint Eastwood Ad,
And the "the brazenly cynical' Democrats who want to play on the same campaign cash playing field.
Rove wasn't shocked by the Eastwood ad rather Obama's cheap attempt to politicize it.
OK.
Show me what President Obama said about it.
I have not seen a single word from the White House about the Ad. It was a surprise to them, as well as me and you.
Are you talking about the same turd-blossom who had a backdrop of Cannes behind him while bitching on news for Dumb Fux?
Uh huh... thought so!
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/02/course-david-axelrod-loves-chryslers-halftime-america-superbowl-ad/48327/
Get real Rob.
From your link: "Powerful spot. Did Clint shoot that, or just narrate it?"
That is all David Axelrod tweeted. Is this what you call "an attempt to politicize" the Ad?
And btw, President Obama is nowhere in there.
I'm friends with one of the janitors. He thought it was pretty cool. Does that count?
To be sure, good friends are pure gold.
No one is excluding women from birth control. The issue is being forced to pay for it. The holdings in a blind trust or managed account are not chosen by the owner of the account - they are chosen by the managers. It is highly unlikely Romney picked those investments. (Unlike former speaker Pelosi and other members of Congress who knowingly invest in companies they have influence over).
Did Think Progress go into detail about what specifically was disclosed --- was it the value of the portfolio, or the specific holdings? Have you seen the signed disclosure document to be sure? Or do you simply assume Think Progress is giving a full and fair assessment? Generally, once a contract is signed with a money manager - especially in the form of a blind trust, values and taxable events are disclosed --- not the specific holdings.
Maybe Think Progress should along with politics include an educational financial column so that their readers can have a better understanding of what they print.
Usually you post pretty good arguments, Backhouse. With these, though, you are truly stretching.
So accomplished with the scalpel!
Way to whitewash! And with just two words, "truly stretching". You have surely perfected the dismissive arts - Bravo!
................................................
HEALTH REFORM, PREVENTIVE SERVICES AND REIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS:
"Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, most health insurance plans will cover
women's preventive services, including contraception, without charging a co-pay
or deductible beginning in August, 2012.
This new law will save money for millions of Americans. But more importantly, it will ensure Americans nationwide get the high-quality care they need to stay healthy.
Under this policy, women who want contraception will have access to it through their insurance without paying a co-pay or deductible.
But no one will be forced to buy or use contraception."
From Cecilia Munoz, Director of Domestic Policy: Health Reform, Preventive Services and Religious Institutions. Feb 01/2012. www.whitehouse.gov
Backhouse. I am simply suggesting sometimes its wise to approach "news" with skepticism, do your own research, ask your own questions, come up with your own conclusions. If you blindly believe what some website writes, you risk becoming a lemming - simply repeating what some one else tells you.
In this case, I believe the conclusions you come to may be ill-informed because it's obvious neither you nor Think Progress knows how a blind trust works. Sorry.
This is why people claim POTUS is waging "war on religion" forcing the Catholic institutions to provide birth control is against their core beliefs. Is not only a very bad idea for his campaign, it is unconstitutional.
Here is the link, that you're scolding about,
That was NOT even posted by me above.
Way to bluff it out Teacher!
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/08/420990/mitt-romney-is-financially-invested-in-the-birth-control-he-now-opposes/
The people most upset about this are not even Catholics. It's mostly old, white, evangelical men. You know, the people who already hated Obama for no good reason.
Republicans and the religious right are trying to invent a new wedge issue. Let them. Let the Republicans become the anti-birth control party. Let them adopt the Santorum doctrine. Then we'll see whose face this issue blows up in. Then maybe that party will come to its senses, realize what the first amendment actually means, and stop trying to constantly mix religion with government and politics. I know, wishful thinking, but that shift has to happen eventually.
The President gave the American people too much credit in assuming they would understand the difference between the enforcement of fair and equal labor laws and actual infringement on religious rights. This is an all out attack on women's rights and women's access to health care. Where is the outcry against Viagra? What's fair is fair, if women are to be denied access to birth control and therefore are denied the right to control their own bodies, then boys, no boner pills for you! Keep your fake outrage to yourselves all you hypocrites.
Seems to be overwhelmingly men who have a problem with women being in control of their own destiny and reproductive choices.
It amazes me to no end that the Catholic church (oh...and I was raised Catholic) tries to say this is about religion. Show me ONE place in the bible that implies anything to do with the voluntary prevention of pregnancy.
What this was always about was the Catholic church simply wanting more in their flock and preventing pregnancies reduces the number of their sheep.
There is no HIGHER spiritual cause for preventing the use of contraceptives. Of course the pedaphiles in the church did not need contraceptives since they typically raped young males and then tried for years to cover it up. How disgusting.
I have a simple solution. The Catholic or any "church"can give up all their special status and tax breaks in exchange for letting them discriminate.
Magnificent:
Two things. First, no one is talking about preventing women from getting these pills. They're only talking about not forcing a religious group who opposes it on religious basis to pay for it.
Second, if you can find me one single religious group that morally objects to viagra... well, I'm sure they aren't required to cover it in insurance.
Yes, insurance companies DO pay for viagara. So magnificent50 is correct in stating that it works both ways. If men (primarily) who are against birth control being paid for are willing to give up their viagara being paid for by insurance, then have that discussion! And, yes C. Smith, they ARE talking about preventing women from getting the pills.
c smith, this is the religious right imposing their beliefs on the rest of us. this is denying women access to equal health care and putting restrictions on their access to AFFORDABLE contraception that works for the individual. no one is making the "church" pay for birth control, only to comply with federal law to provide equitable health care coverage to employees of affiliate businesses run by the church. no one is suggesting that the Pope buy the Pill for anyone. If you are not able to separate church and state as guaranteed by our constitution, take a class or read a real book. this is a church objecting to federal law because a woman might have access to affordable and dependable birth control which over 90% of the women who consider themselves Catholic use. The ULTIMATE in hypocrisy.
Are condoms to be outlawed too, or just dependable birth control that allows women to control their own reproductive health?
Sounds like Willard is "flip flopping" AGAIN.
Given Willard's track record, this is an argument he CANNOT possibly WIN!
dang it's 7/8 PM go home to your family feity, don't you have a life?
Nuck Baked Sr, how was your recent
vacationtimeout ? ;-)Cynthia, I'm curious.
Why such a fascination with who is suspended/banned from newsvine?
It's obvious they don't apply the rules evenly across the board, but most of the time I see you comment here on FR it is regarding Newsvine business regarding folks with a different viewpoint?
It's kind of like detention in Junior High. Is it really that important to you?
it was pleasant, tonight had class on iphone, are you betty aka feisty also?
No, I'm Betty. Feisty was never Betty. Did ya miss me?
Mitt has zero credibility to criticize the President on anything that has to do with health care. He sealed his fate on this issue years ago. His face is covered in blueberry pie (apologies to Rev. Al).
Mitt...... flip,
Romney......... flop....
'nuff said. (Except he had better pay attention to Santorum or it will all be academic anyway.)
Mittens says the policy is an "assault on religion"!
Exactly whose religion is being assaulted Mitt?......Yours? Mine? or Theirs?
Just wondering!
The Catholics', which is why they're so up in arms about it. And if you think no one should object at the Catholic Church being legally assaulted by our government unless they're Catholic, you need to re-think things. Would you stand by in NAZI Germany while the Jews were being arrested, enslaved, and murdered? I hope not. I don't need to have my own rights violated to object to someone else's rights being violated.
That's an excellent point. It is legal and is all about constitutional rights and not about the zealots within the Catholic faith. Seems to me the Catholic leaders are the ones known for "assaults." I was raised Catholic but once I understood what they were saying in English, instead of Latin and learned of their history I fell quickly out of favor with them. They are about being self righteous, money, and power.
I do not begrudge if they want to have believes that differ, but do not force them on me; especially when I have to pay extra taxes just to allow their tax exempt status. There is NO way that you can say that they are in turn trampling on women's rights.
C.Smith.............
If ignorance is hard work you must be in a big sweat... This is NOT... NOT... NOT... any agency telling the Catholic Church what they have to believe... NOT! Get that??? NOT!
It is telling an Employer, that just like any other Employer, rules all Employers must meet... And NO One is required to use contraceptive by Law??? Nope, just access to it in Health Insurance like other Employees get...
As per your reference... QUOTE: Would you stand by in NAZI Germany while the Jews were being arrested, enslaved, and murdered? I hope not.
A "taste" of the Article: Among the many Nazi leaders who were Roman Catholics, in addition to Adolf Hitler, were Josef Goebbels, Heinrich Himmler, Reinhard Heydrich, Heinrich Müllerv and Rudolf Hoess, (not to be confused with Hitler's Deputy Fuëhrer and secretary, Rudolf Hess). Hermann Goering, on the other hand, had mixed Catholic - Protestant parentage, while Rudolf Hess, Martin Bormann, Albert Speer, and Adolf Eichmann had Protestant backgrounds. Not one of the top Nazi leaders was raised in a liberal or atheistic family.
Some things to think about for the sane while reading Markos/DailyKos via twitter & RTs:
Romney profiting from investments in birth control, including 9 different kinds of emergency contraception.
Lots of Catholic groups cover contraception now. 28 states already require it. Do the bishops KNOW?!
Catholic church vehemently opposes death penalty, Republicans support it.
Catholic church opposed Iraq War, Republicans supported.
Catholic Church supports drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants in New Mexico. GOP opposes it.
Republicans oppose Catholic bishops on immigration.
The only time Republicans kiss up to Catholics is when dealing with sex.
GOP fighting for honor of Catholics, so will it now oppose death penalty, oppose unnecessary wars, and support unemployment benefits?
Catholic bishops support unemployment extensions.
Catholic bishops support more foreign aid for poor countries, so I'm sure the GOP will join them on that effort.
Why is the White House wasting time dealing with petulant Bishops when so few agree with them?
***************
Think Progress:
Over 650 Physicians Speak Out in Favor of Contraception Ruling
Over 650 physicians and medical students, including 70 self-identifying Catholics, from 49 states signed an open letter to President Obama and Secretary Kathleen Sebelius urging them to maintain a recent HHS contraception rule providing women access to cost-free contraception through their insurers. The petition, which was drafted by grassroots organization Doctors for America, argues that “Women and their doctors should be allowed to make contracpetive decisions based on medical reasons and personal beliefs — not based on someone else’s religious doctrine.” An infographic posted on the website points out that 11.2 million American women ages 15-44 use oral contraceptives, and 58 percent of them use contraception for reasons other than family planning. — Fatima Najiy
******************
If it's 2012, it must be a presidential election year. Time for the grand old party to throw women under the bus. It's what they do best.
Thanks Pat - you covered it so well, as usual.
Here's a link that supports your post:
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/08/420990/mitt-romney-is-financially-invested-in-the-birth-control-he-now-opposes/
Right on, Pat
Pat - this is a great article on how the Church loves to give donations to other political issues such as banning gay marriage. Looks like they also like to play the Money God role when it comes to other charitable organizations attempting to help the homeless.
The more I read, the more I abhor this religion.
http://washingtonindependent.com/98024/catholic-groups-divert-charity-funds-to-anti-gay-marriage-initiatives
Thanks Backhouse, I saw that article earlier today on TProgress. Romney is about as disingenuous a candidate as we are ever going to meet. Where ever there is a buck to be made, there is Willard.
Markos M. nailed the business as usual hypocrisy BIG TIME with the GOP.
Red, I grew up a Catholic in a quite large Catholic neighborhood. It's why to this day I cannot stand the suburbs or the Catholic Church. The neighborhood was full of petty, nosy, gossipy, holier than thou mean spirited adults. And they were all every Sunday morning to church Catholics.
It was a regular Harper Valley PTA.
But us kids sure had a lot of fun pointing out all the hypocrisy that was evident all around us. And we were only like 9 years old! LoL.
We can never allow the Church or the male GOP to tell us how to live our lives. Not ever. They can't even conduct their own lives according to Jesus' teachings. Who the hell are they kidding?
Pat, as you say,
There's a disconnect between 'love of God' -- and putting it into action in the form of love of children, women & men -- with those folks.
Pat - I grew up in Pittsburgh. For anyone who doesn't know, Pittsburgh and Cleveland have a kind of hate-mildly dislike-hate relationship. That mostly stemmed from the Steelers and Browns rivalry. But it's more. Both at the time were former industrial cities trying to figure out what comes next - both were dealing with some bad effects of decades of industrialization, etc.
One thing I learned growing up in Pittsburgh was people in Cleveland could tell Cleveland jokes all day long and that was fine, but they didn't want to hear anyone from outside of Cleveland say anything about their city. We probably had the same reaction in Pittsburgh. We could joke about our river pollution, slag piles and permanently gray stained buildings.
You've left the Church, so presumably it's not a big part of your life anymore. For a lot of remaining Catholics, it is - and a more central part than most if not all political issues. Catholics know people are flawed (actually that's part of the faith, right?).
I guess the point I'm rambling toward is a comment that your side of these political questions should recognize the risk of sounding like a Pittsburgher making fun of Cleveland. Catholics know the institution has its issues. They know the clergy, when commenting on these overlapping issues, don't always come across as smooth political operatives. But if things degenerate to a point of Catholics thinking they have to choose between their Church and any political party, well, flaws and all it is their Church. Some life-long Catholic Democrats might just bolt, if things degenerate to that point.
In my experience women are way more practical than that.
A Woman can choose whether she wants the contraceptives or not. And she should have the choice and the opportunity to do so. Many women are reported as saying they wouldn't be able to afford to pay for them on their own.
The Catholics I know, also realize that you don't have to go to church to be a good person.
There is nothing cut and dried & in a box here.
One's spiritual feeling and expression is personal, not institutional.
I think it is odd that there are so many good Christians coming out of the woodwork when the reproductive rights of women are on the chopping block. Same ones that come out for Christmas and Easter.
Obama has gone to far. What ever happened to liberty in this country?
Since when did liberty become your right to deny birth control to others for your beliefs?
True liberty and freedom is your right to choose for your own body and everyone else is none of your business.
In 2012, a woman's decision on birth control should be respected.
She should be trusted to make the right decision for herself and her family.
Having choice, opportunity and healthcare coverage helps her to do so.
No one is being denied birth control. You can pick it up at just about any drugstore.
If you believe that abortion is an acceptable form of birth control, it is wildly expensive both in dollars AND emotions. Do you honestly believe that abortion is more efficient or safer than the pill or another form of contraception? If you do, then women's health is not your interest in all this.
mikehataway ~ Did I miss something?? Did someone actually say they believe abortion is an acceptable form of birth control?? Yikes!!!
Mike- This has nothing to do with abortion, please don't change the subject. Birth control and the morning after pill are NOT used for abortions.
As for the topic, a church is a church and a hospital is a hospital, only one should be allowed to decided they want to not provide access to something due to religious reasons. The church has had a long history of trampling on the rights of gays and woman for ever, yet when someone says that the same standards of care need to be applied everywhere they get all up in arms. The stats that I've heard (I'll try and find a source to list) says that 85-90% of all catholic woman use birth control even though the leadership of the church (all men by the way) say they shouldn't. Not everyone can afford birth control so forcing one group to pay out of pocket because of where they work is discriminatory. The rights of the individual come before those of the church.
Americans, and when did it become my duty as a citizen to pay for somebody else's birth control? nobody is denying them access; the Catholic church isn't going to pay for it, tho.
No one is asking the church to pay for birth control, dirt. Get it right. It is about equal access to health insurance for employees of the BUSINESSES owned/run by religious institutions. The church doesn't buy contraceptives, good Lord, how stupid. BUT, as an employer, "the church" has no right to violate or even expect an exemption from labor laws.
Obama thought the American people were smart enough to understand the difference. On that front, he was wrong. His only dip into naivete is in that he overestimates the level of understanding, tolerance, and intelligence rampant in this country right now. We are not the good people he assumes us to be. Basically, we suck.
Actually, magnificent, as an employer, "the church" has EVERY right to expect an exemption from a wide variety of labor laws. Look it up. And the argument here is that, while most of these laws grant an exception to religiously-owned/backed businesses, this one doesn't. If you don't provide mainly religious services by your congregation for your congregation, you have to provide this coverage. That means even soup kitchens have to.
no smith, you look it up. the only law that provides exemption from labor laws for the church is to employees of the actual church, not institutions that it is in some way affiliated with. The priest in your local parish may employ a secretary under exemptions from some labor laws, but a university or hospital cannot. Particularly if MY tax dollars help pay the bills. The right is screaming about where their tax dollars go, well heres one for you - I am strongly opposed to my taxes being used to fund the affiliates of any church for any purpose unless the employees of that affiliate are give equal access to all benefits owed them under the federal labor laws without exemptions.
Part of separation of Church and state includes the Government not dictating to churches what they beleive and what they will do.
The government is not telling Catholics they have to take or use contraceptives.
Thank you, RedDev, I was waiting for someone to reach the same conclusion.
If the Catholic Church offers contraceptives but nobody uses it then what is the big deal?
Oh, but you feel it is okay for the CHURCHES to dictate to citizens what THEY will believe and what they WILL do?????
Now, honestly... where is the true hypocrisy in this picture?
John2474116@#8--Part of separation of Church and state includes the Government not dictating to churches what they believe and what they will do. I agree with this but I also think churches should not dictate to the Government as to what the Government should do. If churches want to get into politics they should give up their tax exemption's.
Also if Church's venture into the business world they should be expected to play by the same rules as every other business, not try and hide behind "the church" No one is forcing catholic women to take anything against their or the church's teachings. By the same token just because you work at a catholic hospital why should you be denied the same insurance benefits that you would get if you worked at a city hospital?
Redev, please read about this. it isn't about providing or using it;' it's about the Catholic Church saying they won't pay for something that is against their beliefs. period.
dirt- If the Catholic Church wishes to not pay for this due to religious grounds, then they should stay out of Secular Businesses like Hospitals. They have an exemption for all actual Churches and Parochial Schools. But they can not claim that a Secular Business enterprise that services and employess thousands of non-catholics, falls under the exemption clause.
Ryandubya, they do stay out of SECULAR business. They engage in RELIGIOUS business. The Bible commands us to care for the poor, the sick, the elderly, the orphan, etc. I think EVERY SINGLE Christian denomination uses this as a justification to build hospitals, schools, orphanages, soup kitchens, and the like.
Also, this debate isn't about preventing women from getting or using contraceptives. This is about forcing a religious group who opposes such drugs based on their religion to pay for them anyway. If Catholic women, or women employed by the Catholic Church, want to get birth control, they can. Just don't require the Catholic Church to pay for it.
Error caused double post.
Most catolic women use birth control. They realize they should not be bound by rules handed down by men unjustly based solely on their ill concieved notions which often are in contradiction to the teachings of Christ. The last I heard most priest were homosexual and/or child molesters both of which are spoken negatively about in scriptures. Christ obviously taught that we should not be as promiscuos as we are but just because we go against that teaching is no need to fill the world with unwanted babies and bastards. This foolishness they have expoused about a pregnancy being Gods will to bring forth a sacred life is stupid. The only thing God has to do with most pregnancies is that he created man and woman so that if they have sex at a particular time of the month they could cause a pregnancy just like dogs and other life forms. Does God approve of abortiions? I doubt it, probably no more than he approves of the act that caused the need for one. I believe the bible talks about the earliest form of abortion. I know it talks about fornication and its negative consequences. While the catholic church does a lot of good work through their charities and other outreach they are by no means qualified to make moral decision for anyone. They can make decisions for themselves as individuals but have no right to try to force their ignorance on others as they have attempted to do for almost 2000 years. Any church not just the Catholic has no right to try to force their ignorance on others. , this particularly includes the right wing religious nut jobs and the politicians that try try to use the beliefs of those people to gain political favor.
John, the Mormons would like to discuss the seperation of Church and State with you. I assume you are all for religious polygamy, then?
dirt-303814
By that logic then we should not be giving tax exempt status to Religious organizations. Why should I be paying more taxes to make up for the taxes that the Religious organizations do not pay. Your logic is a very slippery slope.
this has nothing to do with what churches should believe it makes sure all women have the same rights as men when it comes to healthcare.
Mitt, Rick and the rest of them are desperate and will say anything if they think it will get a vote or two on their side.
baldeagle11 - Mitt, Rick and the rest of them are desperate and will say anything if they think it will get a vote or two on their side
Mittens and the rest of these clowns are out of their league. I'm not even sure if they are even qualified for local politics.
Mitt should just cut his loses and go back to being what he's best at, a vulture.
Ricky can become a priest, Newt can go to the moon and start building his condo's,
and Ron is so old, it won't be long before he'll just be lying around playing with his poop......
Obama/Biden 2012 --- Its in the bag!
WAR ON RELIGION!!!
In the eyes of the GOP, "War On Religion" is bad!
...unless, of course, you're waging them against the appropriate religion, right, gentlemen?
"Governor Romney opposes the construction of the mosque at Ground Zero. The wishes of the families of the deceased and the potential for extremists to use the mosque for global recruiting and propaganda compel rejection of this site." - Romney Spokesperson Eric Fehrnstrom, 8/10/2010
"[President Obama] is ignoring the will of the American public. The [Muslim] community center would desecrate the ground of those who were murdered by people who practice the faith, or at least an element of the faith, that is being represented by that mosque. Islam is not just a religion, it is also a political doctrine." - Rick Santorum, 9/14/2010
"There is no reason for us to accept a mosque next to the World Trade Center." - Newt Gingrich, 8/16/2010
You reap what you sow, unfortunately. The Catholic Bishops supported Obama's Health Care Bill, and he would not have been elected without the Catholic and Jewish vote. Obama has screwed both of them. Israel first and now the Catholics. This is not about choice. People that choose to work for a Catholic institution know, or should know, their stance on these issues. This is about forcing, or attempting to force, the religion to concede to the dictates of the administration. This will cost Obama. First the Jews, then the Catholics. People will reject him rather than hold their breath to see who is next.
Ron, I don't think so - this comment which was R/T by Keith O says it all:
If every Catholic who never used contraceptives is angry at the Obama administration, it could cost him a couple hundred votes in November.
The GOP are making this an issue because they're dictators by nature. They do it every four years, when there is a
presidentialPope/fanatical religious election here in America.And, Ron, those who believe in the Constitution may change their mind about Obama after seeing this. This should scare the hell out of everybody. Let's see what's next? Let's just the say the WH has decided that white meat is good and pork is a white meat. They decide to tell any Muslim or Jewish institution that they must serve pork. Is that ok, too? Even if obama backs down, it will return if he is re-elected. We haven't seen anything yet. if he gets back in and won't be worried about being re-elected, he will jam all his socialist programs down our throats. VOTE HIM OUT!
Too much fox news for you. If you are speaking about separation of church and state; that works both ways the government only in a few cases have told the church what they must do but every dang day some fanatical religion is trying to force their views on the country at large. Where were you when the government was dictating to Rastafarian's and the Mormons. I did not vote for Obama but he is the first president I remember that has stood up for the rights of the citizen above that that of greedy lovers of filthy lucre. You must not understand what socialism actually is. He wont back down and he will be reelected most people aren't as narrow minded as you as you are.
dirt-303814
Rant rant rant... What a joke. If you had any idea what you were talking about in regards to the constitution you would realize that the reason this is being legally (and has been in 28 states) implemented is that it IS based on constitutional rights. As I have mentioned before stop the goose that is laying the golden egg for these self righteous religious organizations. Stop the tax breaks they all get. Then see how quickly they agree that this is not really a bad thing and that the good of all outweighs the twisted beliefs of the few.
This is being blown WAY out of proportion by the Right Wing Evangilists because they do not have much to cling to given economic improvements and a joke of a candidate field.
Georgetown, Catholic University to name a couple already support the fundamental concept that not all of their employees are of their strict faith. This is nothing more than Red Meat for the extreme fringe.
dirt-303814
Rant rant rant... What a joke. If you had any idea what you were talking about in regards to the constitution you would realize that the reason this is being legally (and has been in 28 states) implemented is that it IS based on constitutional rights. As I have mentioned before stop the goose that is laying the golden egg for these self righteous religious organizations. Stop the tax breaks they all get. Then see how quickly they agree that this is not really a bad thing and that the good of all outweighs the twisted beliefs of the few.
This is being blown WAY out of proportion by the Right Wing Evangilists because they do not have much to cling to given economic improvements and a joke of a candidate field.
Georgetown, Catholic University to name a couple already support the fundamental concept that not all of their employees are of their strict faith. This is nothing more than Red Meat for the extreme fringe.
Ron-374386
Lose a few bishops, gain the women vote...sounds like a good trade to me.
I thought republicans were against abortions. But now they are against contraception?
I can't believe the republicans want to push Catholic doctrine of no contraception on our whole nation and call it freedom. Yet they tell us to fear Sharia Law because they want to push their doctrine on even the people that don't want it.
If you don't want to use contraception or abortions then don't, you have the freedom to not do those things in this country. Why is it your right to take that right of choice from others and then have the nerve to call it freedom.
Think about it, what if Democrat were trying to pass law making you take contraception or making you have abortions? Wouldn't you think it is none of lawmakers business? Isn't your having the right to choose the real freedom?
I don't think religious freedom should mean the death of personal freedom. Your health insurance providing birth control if you want it has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with personal choice.
Why should religion be able to take it away from everybody to make those pushing Catholic Sharia law doctrine happy?
"If you don't want to use contraception or abortions then don't, you have the freedom to not do those things in this country. Why is it your right to take that right of choice from others and then have the nerve to call it freedom." Really? I don't think the Catholics are taking anyone's supposed right to contraception away. They just aren't going to offer it in their insurance plans. It's a choice. That doesn't mean it should be paid for by people that believe it's a sin. The Catholics believe it's a sin and don't want to offer it in their insurance. In other words, if you choose to commit a sin (in their eyes) they chose not to be complicit. Can you wrap your brain around that?
Ron,
Employer provided insurance plans are the only access to health insurance for most working Americans. So, business run by Catholic orgs are denying women's right to healthcare.
These orgs can choose not to obey the requirement and pay the fines. If employers do not cover healthcare expenses, tax payers like me end up footing the bill so the fines are fair. These Catholics orgs have a choice.
I realize the Catholics have proved themselves to be holier that the rest of us and due to that should have the right to push their beliefs as if they acted like the chosen ones of God.
I am thinking they committed a few sins worst than offering birth control in their insurance and somehow managed to look the other way or wrap their brains around it for many years. Men in power in the church even moved these holy men around to more unsuspecting children.
Forgive me if I don't take seriously their concern about this sin of contraception just being offered by their insurance. Move into this century a lot of Catholics use birth control already.
In my mind birth control is pretty low in the level of sins you could commit.
Much worse would to bring a child into this world with the republicans vowing to make sure it doesn't have health insurance. With the republicans vowing to never raise taxes on the richest in our nation while cutting the safety net to shreds. With the republicans vowing to never raise taxes on the richest in our nation while cutting education and food to our children.
I can think of a lot of sins worse than taking birth control.
Diane,
They also have a choice whether too work there or not.
thetotas
Sometimes these 'faith-based' healthcare organizations are the only game in town. Where is nurse to go and work if the only hospital is faith-based? Unless you live in a smaller town you may not understand but the fact is that this scenario is more prevelant than you think.
Governments have slowly been giving over the healthcare facilities to faith-based in order to save money. And the organizations are taking government monies. So if they want the taxpayers to help fund them then they have to play by the rules. Otherwise, stop taking government money.
Americans, then pay for it yourself!
dsb, is that really any justification for forcing a religion to pay for something it opposes? What if the only hospital was atheist? Should it pay for Bibles for the Christians that it employs? Should it be told it has to employ a Chaplin?
If women want birth control, they can pay for it themselves. Or better yet, make the guy pay for it. Condoms aren't that expensive.
dirt-303814
I have to laugh out loud about your analogy considering the Catholic church said that eating meat on Friday was a sin. This forced all public schools to accommodate the dietary needs. Funny how it is no longer a sin...lol I feel for all those sinners that forgot which day it was or sneaked a piece of meat while it was a sin. I guess all those dammed souls are now free to rise up to heaven now that the sin has been abolished.
OBAMA= ONE BAD A$$ED MI$TAKE AMERICA.......$16 Trillion and counting to
bankruptsy.
Oh yeah, just imagine how much more debt there will be after the neocon nuts make birth control illegal.
Sorry Operator, try again. It would seem that half of you rebubs have already forgotten the Bush years, the other half can't seem to comprehend the utter destruction that comes with YEARS of drawn out wars and GREED from the "Job Creators". You just love to throw out things like "$16 Trillion and counting". Yes I know Obama is spending money. But, if the country wasn't totally run into the ditch by your blood thursty Oil Man he wouldn't have to spend so much to get us back on our feet again!
Diane,
It's not about making birth control illegal it's about letting catholic hospitals choose if they want to participate. You can always go to a non catholic instituion and get your birth control.
Diane,
It's not about making birth control illegal it's about letting catholic hospitals choose if they want to participate. You can always go to a non catholic instituion and get your birth control.
96
No, you don't understand the mandate. It's not about catholic institutions giving out birth control. It's about making them cover it under the insurance they provide to their employees, many of whom are not Catholic.
These women will go to their own doctor and get the script. And the insurance will pay for it. If the woman doesn't want to take birth control nothing says she has to.
The Operator
Hey Troll...stick to the TOPIC. But I suppose you can't because you need to have more than a 3rd grade education to stay on topic and actually contribute something.
Another land mine in the Obamacare Crap legislation.
I think America is in bad shape. We are more polarized as a nation now then we ever have been. People cannot have a civil discussion or disagreement without insulting each other. I am glad I am an independant and have voted for Presidents on both sides of the aisle. I am not a blind loyalist or slave to either party. Obama has done well on foriegn policy (1 point blues), I have mixed reviews on his handling of the economy. I will hold judgement on that until after the summer (neutral). However on this issue, I believe he has overreached and violated religious freedoms (1 point reds). Just my perspective from an independant thinker and a registered inedpendant.
mitch17
Something to munch on... Tell me at what point do religions stop having powers that supersede the constitution. Here is a hypothetical scenario.
Suppose I have an illness and am sent to the emergency room owned by a religious affiliation. Now suppose that religion believes that I am the devil incarnate because I am from a different faith. The hospital's religion states that it is a sin to help me. What should be the prevailing law? Should I be forced to be treated or die in the emergency room. With the institution being stuck between legal and moral issues, what should be the outcome?
mitch17
Something to munch on... Tell me at what point do religions stop having powers that supersede the constitution. Here is a hypothetical scenario.
Suppose I have an illness and am sent to the emergency room owned by a religious affiliation. Now suppose that religion believes that I am the devil incarnate because I am from a different faith. The hospital's religion states that it is a sin to help me. What should be the prevailing law? Should I be forced to be treated or die in the emergency room. With the institution being stuck between legal and moral issues, what should be the outcome?
sorry...no idea why the double posting...
Everyone seems to be totally missing the point.
First, it's issues like this that come out a year or two after the massive healthcare bill was passed. Nancy was right that it had to be passed in order to find out what's in it. New suprises spring up all the time. No one knows what's in the bill! And the power given to HHS allows them to simply make rules up as they go along. Lord knows what HHS will come up with next.
Second, President Obama assured religious organizations that the bill would not force them to purchase policies with these provisions. And now it does. It's now a matter of honesty, trust and respect.... or lack thereof.
Most importantly, though, is this: It's not up to the government to decide what benefits an insurance company has to provide. That's a function of the free market. And that's a function of the consumer. Consumers should have choices. If you want to buy a policy that covers birth control, you should be able to do it. If I don't need a policy that covers a particular service, the cost for that service shouldn't be included in the premium I pay.
ObamaCare dictates a single male must have an insurance policy that pays for pap smears and breast exams. Does that make sense? Would his premiums be different -- possibly lower - if those services weren't included? The way to reduce costs is to include services people actually need......or choose.
The government is telling us what we have to buy from insurance to birth control to light bulbs and electric cars. When the government tells us what we have to buy we lose our liberty of choice. And that is the point that everyone seems to be missing.
Candice,
The government is telling us what we have to buy from insurance to birth control to light bulbs and electric cars. When the government tells us what we have to buy we lose our liberty of choice. And that is the point that everyone seems to be missing,
Everyone has taken a side, and know one wants to listen. Its very disheartening
Yeah, everyone is missing the point except you. What if you work in an agency run by Christian Scientists and the employee related health insurance forbids certain medical procedures (like surgery)? Why not have the employee health insurance cover contraception and have the individual (not the government or the employer!) decide if they want to use it.
Go to:http://www.whitehouse.gov/healthreform/timeline
And see for yourself what is in the health care bill, now the law of the land.
It is not hard to understand, despite what the myth-makers say.
Millions of Americans know exactly what is in it.
And you can go and look at it yourself, without Candice's permission or uninformed/skewed take on it.
Backhouse,
Only a political neophyte would believe anything from "Whitehouse.gov" is not biased no matter who is occupying the house itself.
Bush used it for political tripe spreading and now Obama using it the same way. Come up with a source other than the whitehouse or a democrat sympathetic organization.
President Bush may have done that, but this Whitehouse is the most transparent in American history.
The details on the Affordable Health Care Act are of course on the WH website. The health care reform law is from this Administration.
Many Presidents have tried over the last 100 years to achieve health care reform and failed.
Go check it out at www.whitehouse.gov.
See for yourself.
The destruction of our liberty happened long before Obama became president.
Good evening Candice ... Is not a single woman's insurance paying for what some man may need, and if that is the case then it should all balance out?
Hi, ideology. If consumers could choose the type of coverage they need or want, they could choose the pricing they need or want too. Prices would come down, consumers would have choice, insurance companies would have to compete and more people could afford coverage. And controversies like this would be avoided. The Government's role could be limited. I'm just saying some things should be dictated by consumers and the free market - not by Government intervention.
Even if you can achieve a competitive insurance industry, America's health costs will still far outstrip the rest of the developed world's and to no real benefit if you look at their statistics. I fail to understand why profiting from someones misfortune via the insurance industry is defended so strenuously.
Excellent point, ideology!
Candice
We don't have a free market when it comes to insurance. If someone gets their insurance through their employer they can't shop around. They are tied to the benefits that the insurance offers. They HAVE NO CHOICE. Get it?
Wow how typical, Asking a Presidential Elect as if he is to be held accountable for the moral agency of each American citizen. The NT states where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty. If a person is raped, is it to mean "Amen" to her ability to choose; to choose whether to keep the baby if pregnancy occurs?
Satan would rather dictate, and take away the gift of free agency from mankind. There is one eternal plan, which we should all learn and then follow. The biggest moral questions that are in debate today have been answered by the Father of our spirits already, so we can debate all we want but the creator of us has given us the answers already.
"us" is you Pacific12, it is not I.
Pacific12,
Each individual is subject to the specifics of his or her own faith.
There is only one choice as far as god is concerned either you make a good choice or a bad one, but, at all times it is between you and your god. No Man will ever know what choice was made. Not even god takes away your right to choose.
the whole argument about this is bass ackwards, The government in making contraception available to as many men and women is the right thing, by forcing any group or person to help make it available against their will is wrong.
There are times when the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, just as there are times when the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many. The constitution is the rule book on when which one takes precedence.
The president and Sebelius are simply wrong on this one, the government should not be forcing their will on any individual nor group....
Serious political mistake....
No-one is forcing a woman to buy or use a contraceptive.
What is being provided is choice and opportunity, hopefully for all women. They should be trusted to make the right decision for themselves and their family.
Backhouse,
There might be people claiming this, but I haven't seen any myself, I certainly didn't claim it.
That being said, what I did say was this,
It is forcing someone to pay for it that doesn't support abortion drugs on religious grounds. The fact that both sides have spoken to the issue of abortion on this, is proof that this is about health insurance paid abortion drugs paid for by the Church amongst other things.
Because of the backlash that is causing even amongst Democrats is reason for any reasonable person to give pause, think twice about this political use of force during an election year.
Especially on such a hot button issue, it works well in enraging the core supporter doesn't it?
Backhouse and all of you others touting this policy. If you force the policy that birth control is in the insurance plan, the cost goes up to cover such charges by the participants. It isn't free to the employer (not the participating employees) to provide the coverage. The premiums increase with the usage possibilities. All companies have to have employees fill out a "survey" when signing up to a plan to determine the insurance companies risk going in as far as what they may have to pay out dependent on the participants health issues going forward. To force them to provide it, GovCo is dictating that they have to pay an increased premium per participant. Especially if it is a "no co-pay" mandate and therefore "free". Get it?
What about all the little blue pills that insurance covers for men that would enable them to impregnate the woman? What's the church's stance on that? Boner pills are ok but not contraceptives?
Not in my book. They shouldn't be covered either. However that's apples and oranges. the "blue pill" is occasional use in most cases. Birth control is ongoing.
Newsflash: This is the year two thousand and twelve.
This is at the core about denying women equal access to health care. No, Hand, it is not "apples and oranges". Viagra and its brothers serves only one purpose. Birth control pills on the other hand are prescribed for other reasons besides contraception. But men who know nothing about women's bodies outside of the reason they use Viagra, think they have all the answers and know what is best for us. It is about control of one gender over the other, control of men over women. And that is a very fundamentalist religious belief; women are supposed to be subservient, according to the teachings of many religions. That ok with you Ladies?
Redefining the definition of rape, allowing perpetrators of domestic violence off the hook without punishment, and the no holds barred assault on women's health care and reproductive rights are nothing more than examples of the right wing movement to keep the little woman at home, barefoot and pregnant.
Pacific12
Say what?
At the end of the day, using or not using contraception is an individual choice not a church's. If catholics oppose contraception then don't use it. If you want to express your moral disdain, hit the streets and protest the catholic church's horrible record in handling priests that diddled little kids. Clean your own house before moralizing to the rest of us.
I so agree. I know several people, who work at a catholic hospital, and they are not catholic. Why should they be forced to follow the catholic church's doctrine against birth control, when this is not their religion? If these institutions only employed catholics, it would be a different story, but they don't. I find it a little hypocritical, that the catholic church is crying about freedom of religion, and at the same time, trying to force their religious beliefs on others.
Exactly!!
I can't wait for Willard and the President to have a debate. In this case Willard will be shown as the hack he is.
Did Obama mis-calculate? or is he playing chess with the Republicans? There is still a primary going on. Wouldn't it be nice to have Rick Santorum nominated.
The WH needs to pull out
on this sparring
Buck is statement #24 a comment on your idea of birth control? Just asking.
magnificent50
As far as the position of screwing the catholic hospitals? Yes he needs to pull out before he fathers a political abomination!
egilman, i believe i meant that taking into consideration bucks other posts, the withdrawal method is probably the only method of birth control of which he approves. you too? The government, and I mean Obama, needs to fight this one out and protect women's rights from the current movement to take those rights away.
magnificent50
I was making a joke to make a political point, a common occurance around here.
Do not judge someone when you do not know what they believe in.
There is no current movement to take anything away, the government started this one, no one else. And, what the government is taking a long standing compromise and throwing it out the window in favor of election year politics.
Fire up the base, quickest way to do this is create an atmosphere of taking a "Right" away, the only taking this time is the government forcing it's policies upon faith based medical institutions that have a constitutional black letter law exception to what they are attempting.
This, will not work out well for the administration, so far there has really been nothing done in the election on the democrat side to enrage anyone, until they raised this issue, Huge mistake if they allow this to stand, huge mistake if they do not allow it to stand.
And they did it to themselves, can't blame the republicans nor the Congress for this one..
This is yet another non-event being made into s**t pies by the teapugs ... DePaul University; the largest Catholic college in the US already provides insurance coverage for birth control for their employees and nobody forced them ... 58% of Catholics are in favor of this (more, in fact, than the general population at 55%) and think that the bishops have their mitres up their ass.
I thought it was up the Choir and Alter Boys'
On the News this morning, 28 States already have this Labor Requirement...