Skip to main content

Daily Kos Staff, Front PageRSS
Daily Kos editors

Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:30 PM PST

Employer birth-control 'exemptions' are a phony issue

by HunterFollow for Daily Kos

birth control pills
Already covered.
(Ceridwen/Wikimedia Commons)
Fake. Controversy.
Twenty-eight states already require organizations that offer prescription insurance to cover contraception and since 98 percent of Catholic women use birth control, many Catholic institutions offer the benefit to their employees. For instance, a Georgetown University spokesperson told ThinkProgress yesterday that employees “have access to health insurance plans offered and designed by national providers to a national pool. These plans include coverage for birth control.”

Similarly, an informal survey conducted by Our Sunday Visitor found that many Catholic colleges have purchased insurance plans that provide contraception benefits [...]

How fake? Pretty darn fake:
“The employee health insurance plans include a prescription contraceptive benefit, in compliance with state and federal law,” DePaul University spokesperson Robin Florzak confirmed to ThinkProgress.
No, really. Really, really damn fake:
Yes, the [Georgia] law was originally passed back in 1999, four years before Republicans gained control of Georgia’s government. But Republicans have had ten years in which to change the law if they thought there was a problem with it; yet, it has remained intact through ten Republican-controlled legislative sessions.

And with no stated exceptions, this law applies to mega-employer Saint Joseph’s Hospital, a 410-bed acute care facility in Atlanta with several subsidiaries including an employed physician’s group and research facilities, with a total of 3,000 employees. And the law also applies to Saint Mary’s Hospital, a 196-bed acute care hospital in Athens, GA.

Both hospitals are members of the Catholic Health East system.

But you see, everyone just noticed that right now. Or rather, it suddenly became untenable just now.

So some Catholic bishops and assorted other anti-healthcare and anti-letting-women-have-birth-control hangers-on have got their knickers in a double bowline over something that has already been the law for many years, that Catholic institutions have been complying with without difficulty for years, and which only just now, for some inexplicable reason that nobody can quite explain, is suddenly an epic threat to Whatever. Because if we don't allow large American employers "exemptions" from national laws in accordance with their every possible religious prejudice, no matter how fringe, then the government is oppressing people.

This can only mean that once again, we have solved all of America's other problems and are at a loss for other things to complain about.

Again, since it is apparently difficult for some people to understand: We are not talking about going into churches and demanding people take birth control when they don't want to. We're not talking about going into churches at all, for that matter. We're talking about large employers, colleges and hospitals, and stating that their religious beliefs do not trump employment laws or the rights of their employees, many of whom are not even of the religion in question. Want to form a church? You can believe whatever you want, and act however you want. Oppress women, be bigoted against brown people, whatever floats your ark. Want to be an employer? Then certain rules apply. You have to provide a minimum wage, you can't chain people to their workstations, you have to have sufficient bathrooms, and if you provide them healthcare you have to provide it in a non-discriminatory fashion to both men and women, and without religious dogma attached. It's a simple concept. A college is not a church. A hospital is not a church. Putting a big cross outside doesn't allow you to treat your employees however you want regardless of the law, and America is very roundly screwed if that ever becomes the case.

This is a non-issue being pushed into the spotlight because one side desperately needs to convince people they're being oppressed and needs preferential treatment. In this particular case, the bishops don't even have the respect of their own flock, and the conservatives using it as yet another bludgeon against healthcare reform doesn't have the public on their side. Yes, yes, it's a "wedge issue." But it's an embarrassingly phony one. The White House has done themselves no favors by continually "negotiating" the non-issue, either. Show some spine, and stick up for employees. It shouldn't be up to your damn employer whether you're "allowed" to use birth control or not.

Send an email to the White House and tell President Obama to stand firm on requiring all health insurers to cover contraception without co-pays.

You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Great post, BUT... (7+ / 0-)

    As a Georgetown Law student, I can promise that no Georgetown students get birth control coverage. It is a huge bone of contention for students, and we completely support the rule. Would this rule apply to student coverage?

    •  likely...but I am not positive... (0+ / 0-)

      "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

      by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:37:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  although, I think employees already have coverage (0+ / 0-)

      so maybe not...I would be interested in the answer...

      "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

      by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:38:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  For more info... (16+ / 0-)

      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

      To which Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke said Thursday morning, "When we hear conservative Catholic organizations ask what we expected when we enrolled at a Catholic school, we can only answer that we expected women to be treated equally, to have their medical needs met. When students found out that the [Obama] administration was going to help us in this way, there was an environment of jubilation, just celebration. ... People who haven't gone to these schools don't realize it, but on the campuses, people are talking about it, they're excited about it, and they vote."
    •  If you have prescription drug coverage (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mijita, qofdisks, Involuntary Exile

      then yes, you will have birth control coverage without co-pays, because HHS is now defining the characteristics of a 'qualifying plan'.

      Am I right, or am I right? - The Singing Detective

      by Clem Yeobright on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:52:11 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, this was a great post without a "but." (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mijita

      Daniel:

      By "students," I'm assuming you mean TAs or non full-time employees. They're not treated as common-law employees, so that issue has nothing to do with this post.

      I appreciated the great examples of how the Church is feigning pain and suffering so it can assert some illusory moral imperative.

      Really.

      Sign seen in Zucotti Park: I'll believe that corporations are people when Texas executes one.

      by Rube Goldberg on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:03:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Since this is an employment issue (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mijita, earicicle, auapplemac

      I don't think it would apply to student health, but, I suspect if this carries as it should, it will move into student health.

      I think it would be helpful if students at Catholic Universities and Colleges were part of the public discussion about this issue, because the growing meme is that this is just about all Catholics as a monolith (that includes students) crying for religious freedom versus the anti-Catholic jack booted Obama administration.

      "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

      by Uncle Moji on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:03:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I went to Catholic U in the late 60s. (4+ / 0-)

      The lack of birth control availability led to 4 out of 14 women I knew getting pregnant. One married. Two dropped out. The fourth took a leave of absebce, had the baby and put it up for adoption and returned to graduate. A fifith was able to get the primitive version of Plan B from an off-campus gynie.

      The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

      by irishwitch on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:20:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  If the coverage is provided by a business (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      qofdisks

      and that business doesn't fall under any other exemptions, then yes - non-discriminatory health care for women - including contraceptives - must be provided.

      "Personally, I tend to let my melons sprawl on the ground." - OH

      by mikidee on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:02:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  A compromise is clearly in the offing - a survey (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    salmo

    Maybe Hawaii, or Wisconsin model..

    http://thehill.com/...

    "I think the Administration is working towards a final rule that reflects a reasonable compromise," Kerry, a Roman Catholic, said in a statement on Thursday. "I think there's a way to protect everybody's interest here. I think you can implement it effectively in a way that protects women's access, but at the same time protects people's religious beliefs, and that should be everyone’s goal."

    The rule has sparked strong criticism from Catholic organizations, Republicans (including most of the presidential field) and even a few Democrats.

    Similar to Kerry, during an interview with a local radio station on Thursday, Vice President Biden said "there is going to be a significant attempt to work this out and there is time to do that."

    So I have a question...

    Let's say there is a compromise. What will be your reaction?

    Will it impact your vote and election related activity this year? Please comment below.

    I suspect the results will tell you whether John Kerry and Joe Biden will win the day, of Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray.

    "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

    by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:36:47 PM PST

    •  It will effect mine (10+ / 0-)

      As I said in another diary, I'll still vote Democrat, but my limited volunteer time and donor dollars will go to Planned Parenthood. Because it will be clear that they're my safety net, not my party.

      "There once was a union maid..." Political compass: -9.75 / -8.72

      by mijita on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:42:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The Hawai'i model is no model (8+ / 0-)

      because it shifts the burden entirely onto thousands of female employees, regardless of their religion, in time, expertise, and money to get a basic essential human service. A burden that is not similarly placed on male employees.

      The kicker for me is that if this was about access to a service, or prescription, or procedure that was equally used by men and women, then this was would be a more direct discussion about whether or not the Catholic Church has a right to impose its a religious test on its benefits for non-religious employees working for a Catholic affiliated employer engaged in non-religious services.

      It would be like the Church excluding prostate screenings from covered procedures. If you want a prostate screen you have to apply for an additional rider, complete the paperwork, pay the premium, and any co-pay and then, voila! You can get prostate screening. Congressional men would be outraged! The Catholic female pundit Christina Mathews could say "but this is about religious freedom, this additional expense that men have to undertake is no sweat for me, huzzah for religious freedom."

      This is a war on women, sadly. Women back to medieval garb, head to toe, quiet and back in line.

      "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

      by Uncle Moji on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:57:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  'Zactly. Thanks, Uncle, for getting it. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Uncle Moji, Agent99, mijita, qofdisks

        Once again, we are allowing an insane fringe element of the right to define lunatic terms of debate, and then acceding to their absurd demands for 'compromise.'

        Did Lincoln 'compromise' with the Confederacy and allow them to keep the darkest-colored slaves? Or reenslave male blacks during the height of the cotton-picking season? Or keep one 'mammy' per family? Of course not! All of these things seem patently ludicrous to us...BECAUSE THEY ARE! They are dehumanizing, discriminatory, condescending, ahistorical, offensive on SO many levels.

        But it's still okay to turn women's health into a political game?

        NO! Because it's dehumanizing, discriminatory, condescending, ahistorical and offensive on SO many levels.

        Here endeth the rant.

        BTW: Howzit, Uncle...Great to see you! We must catch up laters...I'm off to bed! ;-)

        Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

        by earicicle on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:50:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  So...what will you do if they go (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Uncle Moji, qofdisks

        with the Hawaii model?

        A compromise is almost certainly on the way. And as I have stated, it not only creates a discriminatory class, it puts ACA as a whole in jeopardy.

        So my point is, if one agrees that these compromises are unacceptable, what would you do if they come to fruition?

        "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

        by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:12:20 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't think they'll go with the (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DSPS owl

          Hawai'i model. My guess is that they plan to "discuss" this for a year, drag it out, have public opinion begin to offer a counter-weight to the "religious freedom" meme, with a greater look into why the Bishops demands are an overreach. My guess is the "compromise" will be around what constitutes an exempt employer - no to hospitals or universities, yes to certain charities, no to others.

          The dance in negotiations is that the demanding side always super sizes their initial demands with great passion, outrage, righteousness, and vigor. It's drama. And then you drag out and drain out for weeks or months, and then when all the drama queens have got it out of them, you get down to the nitty gritty. It's the boring work part.

          The compromise problem for this Administration isn't simply one about contraceptives and health care, it's about all and any kind of push back for more exemptions for religious institutions and employers, it's a precedent and practice problem. Especially since EEOC ruled in 2000 that this was an equal access issue. He can't walk back to the Hawai'i model. He's a constitutional scholar, he knows that.

          "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

          by Uncle Moji on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:47:30 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  He is a Constitutional scholar that signed (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DSPS owl, Uncle Moji

            on to indefinite detention.

            •  You are right (0+ / 0-)

              He did, and this is one of the issues that I think he is wrong about, as well as nuclear power, "clean coal", ACTA, single payer, etc...

              But man, did he come up with a solution that advances the right of women to have access to free contraceptives, and gutted the Bishops as a bonus.  

              "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

              by Uncle Moji on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:51:33 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  He was not only wrong about it, it was a (0+ / 0-)

                constitutional wrong.  They comment gave the impression that just because pres. Obama knows better that he will act with integrity.  That is not the case.

                •  My comment was about this case. (0+ / 0-)

                  I hope Obama will always do what I believe is the right thing all of the time, but I do not expect I will always be satisfied. And that has proven true.  

                  But disappointment or disagreement with Obama or with anyone I know, does not cause me to dismiss them universally.  It just causes me to work harder to encourage them to do right, and applaud them when they do, and to share my disagreement when they do not.  

                  My response to Obama is consistent with how I live my life.  

                  "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

                  by Uncle Moji on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 03:16:10 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

      •  Rec'd, rec'd, rec'd and (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Uncle Moji

        rec'd again.

        "Personally, I tend to let my melons sprawl on the ground." - OH

        by mikidee on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:17:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Old white men will win, as usual. (9+ / 0-)

      That's who gets to decide what's best for women.

      •  Best of all, (6+ / 0-)

        from the Republican point of view, is that we're no longer talking about the improving economic numbers that came out right before this shiny-object faux controversy emerged. Hey, squirrel!!!

        "It's called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it." George Carlin

        by psnyder on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:23:23 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  No. They will NOT this time. (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Uncle Moji, Agent99, koosah, mijita, Matt Z

        Droopy, wrinkly, old dicks: Let me introduce you to the power of fired-up, ready-to-go estrogen.

        You are not prepared.

        Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

        by earicicle on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:52:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  You add new meaning to "All Fired Up" (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Agent99, earicicle

          "Ready to Go"!!!

          Stand back world.

          "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

          by Uncle Moji on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:12:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  So what is the action that will be taken? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          auapplemac

          Not prepared for what?

          As far as I can tell, those of us who support women's rights unabashedly didn't stop the compromise in HIR, didn't stop the Plan B decision, and more.

          So what is different about this time?

          This isn't Susan B. Komen. These are politicians.

          "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

          by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:14:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  'You just can't stand on the sidelines.' (0+ / 0-)

            And type nattering negativity into the Internetz.

            Just sayin'...

            Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

            by earicicle on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 09:58:06 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  you should read the thread (0+ / 0-)

              Uncle Mojii and I already resolved the miscommunication and he stated he was mistaken....

              so your concern is duly noted...but you were incorrect...

              "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

              by justmy2 on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:07:11 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  No. (0+ / 0-)

                He was not mistaken. He is gracious.

                You, however, are an ass. My level of illness and pain right now are trumping my grace.

                Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

                by earicicle on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:18:51 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  ok...if you say so... (0+ / 0-)

                  I hope you feel better, truly.  I hate seeing people sick.

                  That being said, if you refuse to accept that you were incorrect I can't help you.

                  The point was not that he was conservative, it was the argument was the conservative one, and we need to make sure we have stronger arguments for the rule.  I can't make you interpret it correctly, as Uncle Mojii did eventually, if you don't want too.

                  I hope as you feel better you reassess your take, as well as not cursing or trying to demean others.  I accept that you may be in a bad mood, but always think back to the golden rule.  

                  "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

                  by justmy2 on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:26:55 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  and your sig...for that matter (0+ / 0-)

                  they are words of wisdom...

                  "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

                  by justmy2 on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:27:25 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

    •  My reaction would depend on the nature of any (0+ / 0-)

      compromise. If it truly protects access, that is what matters to me. So as long as they do that, fine.

      As far as affecting my vote, no. I'm not a single issue voter. And President Obama is on our side here. I'm pissed off at the senate democrats who are not standing with him and us... who are going along with the totally fake controversy, instead of saying just what this post says, using facts and not ass-kissing to whining religions people. But they are running for election and religion is the wedge they're going with, and it's working... so we have to understand the need to placate them in some manner, I suppose (grrrr) ...

      as long as it does not end up with making access to birth control more difficult, or setting a precedent that employers can now get away with any kind of discrimination because, let's say it's against their religion for women to have leadership roles, or even to work outside the home! Now can they hire just men? Shit, where does it end?

      •  yet...you stated you are not a single issue voter (0+ / 0-)

        so what is the incentive to not go with a model that does not protect access?

        Let's flip the argument. Where is the outrage about those currently not covered, even though there apparently is an EEOC ruling clearly stating the lack of coverage is discriminatory.

        If people are going to get mad about a compromise, they might as well start now and get it out of the way, because it is going to happen. But I don't think many votes will be changed.

        The issue is I am not sure going backwards solves the problem with those that are swayed from a voting standpoint on this.

        "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

        by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:34:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Will still vote for Obama. I hope there is a (0+ / 0-)

      compromise that saves face and resolves the matter for both religion and women.

      Even if this happens, the other side will continue to use this in one way or another.

      As I said before this was handled in the worst way possible.

      Now that the economy is showing continued upward trend, this gives the other side a new sledgehammer. Could care less about the conservatives! It's the indies that worry me. It's the "war against religion" meme that worries me.

      Time will tell.

      Progressives will win when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

      by auapplemac on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 09:51:41 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  They Know This, What They're Actually Doing is (7+ / 0-)

    advancing their agenda the next step forward, adding restrictions or reducing support and availability.

    They play long ball.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:37:08 PM PST

    •  Look back at HIR... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      salmo, Agent99

      Plan B...

      little by little, they have chipped away...and no Democratic constiuency has yet stood up to say enough.

      How many Democrats in VA will vote for George Allen or not vote because of Tim Kaine's position on this?

      I have not seen one on this site.

      I doubt I will.

      And that is why I doubt there won't be a compromise here, and why I doubt it will stop Republicans from asking for more.

      Until you draw a line in the sand, don't be surprised when you keep getting pushed back.

      What is the incentive to stand up and fight for swing state politicians? Answer that question, and you have you action plan.

      "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

      by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:42:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Btw-an example of the lack of a progressive (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        auapplemac

        voice....

        All I see is CPAC on tv today, and tomorrow, and Saturday. CNN is broadcasting from there on their morning show.

        Who wants to make a bet on whether Morning Joe will be broadcasting from Netroots Nation. Or CNN, or anyone?

        How many panels or keynotes will be broadcast?

        What is the incentive when there is very little movement against those that do not meet ones expectations?

        "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

        by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:06:42 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Apparently the Pope leaned on them (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grannycarol

      Because American Catholics were thumbing their nose at the more ridiculous aspects of there Church's teachings on sexuality.

      The scientific uncertainty doesn't mean that climate change isn't actually happening.

      by Mimikatz on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:45:56 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Pope can go fuck himself. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Uncle Moji, Agent99, Matt Z

        And only himself.

        Unlike the Archbishop of Canterbury, the leader of the worldwide Anglican Community, for example, who can go home to his wife. And thus probably can think better and make saner decisions.

        Pardon my Latin.

        Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

        by earicicle on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:56:05 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed! And it's not Latin: Fuck is an acronym, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          earicicle

          For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge.

          Which isn't even a bad word, since there is no law anymore referencing Unlawful Carnal Knowledge. That was ancient history, back in the days when Lenny Bruce was arrested for uttering an acronym in a comedy routine.

          The religious rightwingnuts really need to get with the times.
          As someone said earlier, (h/t), It's 2012, not 1220! lol.
          Fuck whoever wants to turn back the struggle for everyone's civil rights. We're all in this together.

          "Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope." ~Robert F. Kennedy

          by Agent99 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:30:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  My respect for Obama (16+ / 0-)

    (as opposed to some other men in our party) has gone up hugely as he continues to stand firm on women's health. And to the Democrats urging compromise for the sake of quiet: SHAME.

    "There once was a union maid..." Political compass: -9.75 / -8.72

    by mijita on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:37:18 PM PST

  •  The WH Needs To Tell Catholic Bishops (13+ / 0-)

    and republicans to quit using religion to discriminate against women.

    "Don't Let Them Catch You With Your Eyes Closed"

    by rssrai on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:38:04 PM PST

  •  No disagreement with what you wrote (5+ / 0-)

    ...none at all.

    And not to threadjack, or postjack, or whatever, but;

    It shouldn't be up to your damn employer
    ...should apply to more than just birth control.

    Like, where you want to smoke a little weed on the weekends to take the stress of the job out. (And JFTR, I don't "partake".)

    Or to provide your health insurance, or not.

    Or, if you never meet the public, what you wear to work.

    Just to begin the list.

    Since when has it been appropriate to talk about sex at work?

    P.S. I don't think the churches are being imposed on. I think the churches are pissed the government isn't being used to impose their beliefs on the rest of us.

    "Doing My Part to Piss Off the Religious Right" - A sign held by a 10-year old boy on 9-24-05

    by Timbuk3 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:38:19 PM PST

  •  Yeah but we're still losing the debate for now (5+ / 0-)

    We're still losing the debate.

    All this phony talk can't change that. If poll numbers rebut the diarist point, it'll be moot and a compromise is coming.

    That's the reality until public opinion is firmly on our side.

    •  sad but true (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      auapplemac

      the rw media machine is really on message right now. All we can hope for is for something to come along to knock them off message for awhile. the sad truth is that we still don't have the ability to combat their propaganda will they make a maximum effort. Often it's way too late before people realize they were scammed. think iraq war ...

      "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

      by noofsh on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:53:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Boodaddy, you're like Eyeore in every thread. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mijita, Matt Z

      The sky is falling! The bishops rule the media! We don't stand a chance! Compromise! BooHoo! Daddy!

      How about: There will be no compromise with anyone who insists on discrimination. See how easy and calm that is?

      Screw the Catholic Church. They have no say in American Law.

      Why are you insisting upon "compromise"? There is no compromising with people whose goal is to dominate others.

      "Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope." ~Robert F. Kennedy

      by Agent99 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:48:35 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you. (8+ / 0-)

    Contraception is a non-issue to everyone but a few old men who never used it, and in theory at least, never had a use for it.

    The suggestion that there is a religious implication for insurance coverage for contraception is a phony extension of a non-issue.

    "Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed." General Buck Turgidson

    by muledriver on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:40:33 PM PST

  •  Women put Obama in the White House (15+ / 0-)

    In fact, women were a majority of the voters in 2008 and 56% voted for him. An astounding 66% of single people and 66% of voters under 30 voted for him. I'd bet dollars to donuts a very tiny number of Catholic bishops voted for him.

    Obama needs to be polite but firm and make it clear to the bishops that if 98% of Catholic women have used birth control that is their problem to solve and not his. Time for them to get out of the middle ages or get lost.

    The scientific uncertainty doesn't mean that climate change isn't actually happening.

    by Mimikatz on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:41:33 PM PST

  •  What is not being discussed anywhere is that (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Timbuk3, eglantine, salmo, Agent99, Matt Z

    the procedure known as vasechtomy (sp) I believe is covered everywhere even by the the underwriters handling the Catholic Archdiocese's medical plans.

    Seems fair to me I guess...(snark).

    " The whole world is about three drinks behind" Humphrey Bogart.

    by flatford39 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:42:22 PM PST

    •  Great point if true and not snark (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      salmo

      If that's the fact, this helps the debate on our side. Why do men get a pass and not women?

      This THIS is what I mean by sharpening the debate to our side?

    •  I doubt it... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      salmo, auapplemac

      I believe sterilization, male or female, is excluded from those plans taking advantage of exemptions....

      "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

      by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:58:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  that's what's so great about (0+ / 0-)

    1000 + coordinated radio stations you can use to push any issue you want for as long as you want.

    This is a list of 76 universities for Rush Limbaugh that endorse global warming denial, racism, sexism, and partisan lying by broadcasting sports on Limbaugh radio stations.

    by certainot on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:43:23 PM PST

  •  Since last week's excellent jobs report... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CS in AZ, earicicle, pamelabrown

    GOPers have lost the economy as an issue for now, so they figured they would drum-up this phony controversy to distract everyone from the fact that President Obama is benefitting from the improving economy, and they can't have that now, can they?

    “For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country.” President Obama 1/24/12

    by BarackStarObama on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:44:55 PM PST

    •  Sorry, they did not drum it up. They've just found (0+ / 0-)

      a new hammer to replace the old one...and this administration gave it to them.

      It was handled so clumsily for supposedly astute politicians. The Rs are going to continue to use this lovely gift even if it is resolved.

      They can just keep on repeating the public made Obama back down from his "war against religion." One way or another, they've got a shiny new arrow in the quill.

      It's going to be a tight election and just a few hundred voters here and there that are picked off by this situation could put a Santorum or one of the other 3 stooges in the White House and Congress.

      Progressives will win when we convince a majority that they, too, are Progressive.

      by auapplemac on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 10:15:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  There is a petition on the WH "we the people" (6+ / 0-)

    site. People should sign that as well. One asking the rule to be revised has already passed 25k.

    The one asking Obama to keep the rule is only at 22k.

    link.

  •  Me thinks that bishops have drummed up a false (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rogerdaddy, Boodaddy, Matt Z

    issue to help their favorite son Santorum, remember both he and Newt are Catholic(which tells you everything you need to know about the Church).

      I believe there is a song that goes something like this, "You will know they are Catholic by their scum, by their scum, you will know they are Catholic by their scum."

  •  Too late (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agent99
    The White House has done themselves no favors by continually "negotiating" the non-issue, either. Show some spine, and stick up for employees. It shouldn't be up to your damn employer whether you're "allowed" to use birth control or not.
    Inevitable once HIR was negotiated in a backroom to include a mandate without a public option. If one believe ACA was a good and just first step, then one can not be mad that the WH is forced to negotiate with employers on coverage requirements. It is an employer based system, you know.

    BTW-If one believe HHS should be able to dictate requirements to the states, compromising to one employee knocks a big ol hole in the legitimacy to dictate to others. It is one thing to say "we can dictate to organizations receiving federal funds". But if you say some of the are exempt, what basis do you have to discriminate and force behavior on private businesses. Good luck arguing that in court.

    "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

    by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:49:24 PM PST

    •  looks like my s had a mind of its own on that (0+ / 0-)

      post

      "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

      by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:16:53 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It is fake but the problem is that RW is (6+ / 0-)

    blasting the media with this bullshit. They have useful idiots like chris matthews repeating their talking points. tweety had the nerve to lecture the president that he has to be the president for all the people. Fuck you tweety! When will the republicans do anything for all the people. This is the bullshit that we are up against.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

    by noofsh on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:50:23 PM PST

  •  Don't Members of Congress Own Health Care Plans... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agent99, earicicle

    cover birth control & contraception? If so, where's the outrage from Boehner, Cantor & McConnell? Are they saying they've never used a condom?

    325,000 Catholic churches are already exempt from this rule which won't be in effect until a year from now. Catholic hospitals also accept Medicare patients, so like all the other Medicare providers......they need to abide by the same rules.

    If the Bishops don't like it, they should stop accepting Medicare payments from the federal government.

    Is this how Republicans think they'll beat the President? Guess they've REALLY given up on the economy as their issue.

  •  The henny-pennyism is in full swing among Dems. (7+ / 0-)

    This is starting to remind me of the bad old days when the driving narrative for Dems was, "But what will the conservatives say?"

    Quick, let's get under the bed!

  •  the White House deserves blame on this (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    auapplemac, DSPS owl

    They're not making this very easy response, or at least strongly enough. They need to get their act together. They could have nipped this at the very beginning.

  •  And because they are (7+ / 0-)
    blasting the media with this bullshit
    it will be their eventual downfall.

    The poll numbers do not lie. And I know a number of twenty somethings who have NEVER been interested in what is happening beyond their own little circle. Voters? Yes. Care about issues. Not really.

    Until the Komen/Planned Parenthood issue. So all one has to do is tell these young adults (and anyone who uses contraceptives) that a vote for a republican is a vote against The Pill.

    I have. And they are pissed like you would not believe. Go after their private lives? No way. "Casual sex" is so much a part of their lives- more so than it was when I was young. There is no way they are giving it up.

    Growing old is inevitable...Growing up is purely optional

    by grannycarol on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 06:59:00 PM PST

  •  I don't watch tv or listen to the radio (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mijita

    is this thing really blown up that much? doesn't really seem to make many headlines except here...
    might be that so many of us remember having to fight for every sliver of bc rights and we are partly responsible for blowing this up. i mean even the WH petition where they want to end it isn't getting all that many votes either.

  •  The reason Catholic affiliated hospitals (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mijita, earicicle

    and universities offer full coverage is because they have to complete against non-religious institutions for the best faculty and clinicians.

    Forcing female employees or the female spouses of employees (professors and doctors and senior level administrators) to jump through hoops places those institutions at a recruiting disadvantage. And because of demographics, professors will soon be in short supply and the bidding is starting to heat up. MDs are always at a premium.

    Non-profits can never full complete in salary with profit based private sector, so they compete with bennies. And health care coverage, along with jobs for spouses of those relocating, 2nd mortgages or subsidized housing, and educational benefits for dependents are the biggest lures.

    "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

    by Uncle Moji on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:11:39 PM PST

    •  You just made the conservative argument (0+ / 0-)

      for a market based system, and why a mandate is not only unconstitutional, but unnecessary. You also provided the rationale for a compromise.

      Congrats...although I am not sure that was your intent.

      If it wasn't, I don't think that is a good argument for the policy.

      "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

      by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:37:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm just telling you what the current (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        earicicle

        system is. I think single payer is the answer, not a market based system, because that only answers half of the question - about what is offered to employees, it does nothing to address rising cost. Employers have to look at both to be viable.

        Most non-profit employers will tell you that the current system is broken.

        That universities and hospitals offer wider health care coverage is a reflection of a shrinking pool of highly skilled and highly compensated employees (PhD professors and MDs), and a rising bidding war - they are the outliers to the current employment trends. That these systems offer generous health benefits to all their employees is a result of the cascade effect of having to offer them to the very small slice of highly skilled employees they most want to attract, in lieu of high salary offers possible in the private sector.

        Not sure how you extrapolate this as a plus for a market based system for factory workers in North Carolina or custodians in Sacramento or the uninsured
        in Milwaukee.

        My guess is that the Catholic Bishops will do the opposite of what you consider a reasonable market based decision, and force civilian administrators of these Catholic affiliated institutions to fall in line, for political rather than religious reasons. My guess is that for the highly compensated groups within each type of institution (MDs and professors) a special "bonus" or "payment" will be paid to them annually to cover the additional costs of buying separate contraceptive coverage - a bonus that will not be offered to any other employees.

        "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

        by Uncle Moji on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:59:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  i didn't call it a plus...I said it is the (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Uncle Moji

          conservative argument...no argument from me on single payer or a PO at a minimum.

          I still don't know what your intent was...? Just to talk about the current system, FYI only?

          "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

          by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:07:21 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yup, just to discuss why DePaul (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            justmy2, Agent99, earicicle

            administrators would offer full coverage despite it being in violation of Church doctrine - the left-handed way of saying that clearly that the Catholic Bishops are demanding of Obama what they don't demand of their own Catholic affiliated institutions, as a political act, not as a faith act.

            or as my father might have said "Their right hand doesn't care what their left hand is scratching"

            Sorry if I am unclear and thick headed, I have a bad cold tonight, and the coughing is keeping me up. sigh.

            "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

            by Uncle Moji on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:31:59 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  This part of the argument is (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Uncle Moji

              the part that I didn't see in your first comment...

              the left-handed way of saying that clearly that the Catholic Bishops are demanding of Obama what they don't demand of their own Catholic affiliated institutions, as a political act, not as a faith act.
              I think that is a worthwhile argument. The rationale though, without this is almost identical to the argument conservatives have been making against the mandate, even before this rule.

              Sorry about the confusion.

              "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

              by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:35:56 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

        •  just to be clear, I read your comment again (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Uncle Moji

          on what basis did you extrapolate that I stated that the conservative argument is reasonable? That is an awfully odd interpretation of my comment. I said explicitly said it wasn't a good argument for the current policy?

          "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

          by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:32:10 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Because I am thick-headed (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            earicicle

            tonight, sorry. apologies.

            "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

            by Uncle Moji on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:33:51 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You are never thick-headed, Uncle. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Uncle Moji

              Others are clouded by their own negativity, and just determined to find blame elsewhere for frustration & sadness within themselves that they refuse to acknowledge or understand.

              It's very sad.

              Hope you're feeling better this morning! I had a crazy dream last night that my local grocery store was selling poi and mochi. Of course, I bought everything they had! Lolo, or what? ;-)

              xoxo,
              ear

              Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

              by earicicle on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:14:00 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  ??? (0+ / 0-)

        Umm, no he didn't. But thanks for playing!

        Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

        by earicicle on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:00:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  In what way? (0+ / 0-)

          What is different from what the commenter (no idea about the commenter's gender) is different from what any conservative against ACA would tell you?

          I would love to know?

          "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

          by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:08:26 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Love how you freely admit you know nothing (0+ / 0-)

            about Uncle Moji--even though your UID shows you've been here YEARS longer than I have. And yet your first instinct is to label him, after reading one comment, with making a conservative argument against health care. Even though that is a ridiculous, F-minus level reading comprehension of the comment itself.

            Uncle is a wonderful, warm-hearted man--a true member of this community. We both know a lot about community, as natives of Hawaii. It's so sad to run into those who never had the privilege that we did of growing up in such a loving, nurturing culture.

            Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

            by earicicle on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:09:10 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  you really should read the thread (0+ / 0-)

              you totally misconstrued the entire point...

              if you reread, and still have issues, please let me know...i would be more than happy to address it...

              seems like a reasonable guy...I hope after reading it, I have the same opinion of you, who has clearly misinterpreted both of our comments....

              "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

              by justmy2 on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:12:42 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I am not a guy at all. (0+ / 0-)

                But why should you know that after my being here for 4 years, nearly 25,000 comments, cofounding SheKos, and recent comments & diaries about battling breast cancer?

                Whatever.

                Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

                by earicicle on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:17:09 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I didn't say you were a guy... (0+ / 0-)

                  I said Uncle Mojii was...

                  You just did the same exact thing again.

                  Stop for a moment and if something is unclear, ,ay I suggest that instead of looking for areas to disagree and attack, that you take a step back and don't assume the worst.  99% of the people here aren't your enemy.  I would suggest not treating them as such.

                  "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

                  by justmy2 on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 10:21:36 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

  •  I'm ok with exceptions (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agent99, eglantine

    for monastaries, nunneries, and the Shakers.

    "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

    by kovie on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:14:41 PM PST

    •  Recent study recommends the pill for nuns. (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Uncle Moji, Agent99, mijita, Matt Z

      A paper in The Lancet last year documents that taking the pill would reduce the high rates of ovarian and other gynecological cancers among nuns. Turns out that suppressing ovulation lowers most gyn cancers, esp. ovarian. Nuns don't do pregnancy & breastfeeding, but the pill also suppresses ovulation & reduces the 'terrible price (cancer-wise) that nuns pay for their chastity.' Linky.

      Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

      by earicicle on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:05:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You are making the Catholic Bishops (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Agent99, earicicle

        roil in their own fulminating spit. Yoicks!

        "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

        by Uncle Moji on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:09:20 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  But then the Rx would be for a secondary use (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Agent99

        and thus not technically birth control.

        I'm also guessing that the (I assume) relatively few nuns having straight sex are doing so very, very discretely, including any birth control methods they might use, and the last thing they'd want would be a suspicion-looking line on their EOB (which I realize no one but them, their doctor, their pharmacist and their insurer are supposed to see, but who knows what happens in some of these churches).

        Damn is all this moronic fake religiosity such a stupid waste of time and energy. Let the people have as much sex as they'd like because they're going to anyway!

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:10:34 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  sometimes a cracker is just a cracker (0+ / 0-)

    but how can you really be sure?
    Hmmmmm?

    We are not talking about going into churches and demanding people take birth control when they don't want to.
    but this:
    It shouldn't be up to your damn employer whether you're "allowed" to use birth control or not.
    or your church
    or your school
    or your parents (if you're over 18 or something...)
    or your political party
    or your husband, pretty much...

    From those who live like leeches on the people's lives, We must take back our land again, America!...Langston Hughes

    by KenBee on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:21:10 PM PST

    •  Even in backwards GA, kids have a right to (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Agent99, KenBee

      health care and privacy--which includes getting birth control without parental permission.

      The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

      by irishwitch on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:25:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •   yeah, probably correct there (0+ / 0-)

        yeah, the 18 thing...well, that can be argued either way, I can sure see the case for teen birth control where the parents won't agree to it....otherwise I think there should be better communication and ...ponies, lots of ponies.

        From those who live like leeches on the people's lives, We must take back our land again, America!...Langston Hughes

        by KenBee on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:23:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  My niece got the Pill at 16. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          KenBee, mijita

          Without having to consult her Mom or get her permission. In Gwinnett County. Her mother was NOT happy, but she couldn't stop her.

          Would I like to see parents talk openly with their kids about sex? Sure. But many can't or won't. ANd then there's the fact that this is lunatic right- Purity country, and there'd be even more teen pregnancies if teens couldn't get access to birth control--and many more abortions. And down here, there are parents whoc an and do throw out their teenage daughters for getting pregnant or having an abortion.

          The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

          by irishwitch on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:41:56 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  yes, I agree, I had a brain freeze :> (0+ / 0-)

            it's dam hard to know who to trust as a parent.

            Birth control is about the only thing I can agree that the parent not be informed, but then again I live where there are mostly reasonable (altho greedy and/or full of themselves) people.

            That's why I couldn't be one.

              I can be the good uncle much better. I could be much better at the good part, but I try.

            From those who live like leeches on the people's lives, We must take back our land again, America!...Langston Hughes

            by KenBee on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:57:47 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I have issues with parental notification (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              KenBee

              for teens ahving an abortion. There are lots of people down here who'd beat the shit otu of their daughter for haing sex, let alone getting pregnant. ANd I think any judges who are court of last resort for teens seekign an abortion SHOULD be queried on their views on chocie. If you can't accept ROe, you can't be a judge for those kids.

              The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake.

              by irishwitch on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 09:01:54 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  'thinking' back, I was getting ahead of the issue (0+ / 0-)

        where the privatized schools sell the rights to use the kids for seekrit drug tests, anti-vac studies, or other any other of my paranoid situations, heh...one step beyond.

         These people bring that out in me. sorry.

        But as to this diary, this context, yes, you're right there, thanks.

        From those who live like leeches on the people's lives, We must take back our land again, America!...Langston Hughes

        by KenBee on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:51:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Here's chart of the 28 state that mandate (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HeyMikey

    Guttmacher Institute put this pdf out February 2.

    There's a chart and some details about state exemptions.

    •  those are broader... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HeyMikey

      so the question is does ACA provide a mechanism for narrowing those exemptions.

      Once the compromise occurs, those 28 that are being used by supporters will be turned against the Admin to show why "decisions should be left to the states and the mandate is too broad".

      The admin is in a real minefield at this point.

      "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

      by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:29:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  My conservative Catholic friend says... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BlueSue

        Been bashing this around with a conservative Catholic friend on Facebook.

        1. Will policies sold thru the exchanges starting 1/1/14 be allowed to offer coverage without abortion and contraception? I have told her yes, but in truth I'm not sure.

        2. My friend links me to this, which in truth I think makes some good points:

        Claim: “Churches are exempt from the new rules: Churches and other houses of worship will be exempt from the requirement to offer insurance that covers contraception.”

        Response: This is not entirely true.To be eligible, even churches and houses of worship must show the government that they hire and serve primarily people of their own faith and have the inculcation of religious values as their purpose.Some churches may have service to the broader community as a major focus, for example, by providing direct service to the poor regardless of faith.Such churches would be denied an exemption precisely because their service to the common good is so great.More importantly,the vast array of other religious organizations – schools, hospitals, universities, charitable institutions – will clearly not be exempt.

        Claim: “No individual health care provider will be forced to prescribe contraception: The President and this Administration have previously and continue to express strong support for existing conscience protections.For example, no Catholic doctor is forced to write a prescription for contraception.”

        Response: It is true that these rules directly apply to employers and insurers, not providers, but this is beside the point:The Administration is forcing individuals and institutions, including religious employers, to sponsor and subsidize what they consider immoral.Less directly, the classification of these drugs and procedures as basic “preventive services” will increase pressures on doctors, nurses and pharmacists to provide them in order to participate in private health plans – and no current federal conscience law prevents that from happening.Finally, because the mandate includes abortifacient drugs, it violates one of the “existing conscience protections” (the Weldon amendment) for which the Administration expresses “strong support.”

        Claim: “No individual will be forced to buy or use contraception: This rule only applies to what insurance companies cover.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.”

        Response: The statement that no one will be forced to buy it is false.Women who want contraception will be able to obtain it without co-pay or deductible precisely because women who do not want contraception will be forced to help pay for it through their premiums.This mandate passes costs from those who want the service, to those who object to it.

        Claim: “Drugs that cause abortion are not covered by this policy: Drugs like RU486 are not covered by this policy, and nothing about this policy changes the President’s firm commitment to maintaining strict limitations on Federal funding for abortions. No Federal tax dollars are used for elective abortions.”

        Response: False.The policy already requires coverage of Ulipristal (HRP 2000 or “Ella”), a drug that is a close analogue to RU-486 (mifepristone) and has the same effects.[i] RU-486 itself is also being tested for possible use as an “emergency contraceptive” – and if the FDA approves it for that purpose, it will automatically be mandated as well.

        Claim:“Over half of Americans already live in the 28 States that require insurance companies cover contraception: Several of these States like North Carolina, New York, and California have identical religious employer exemptions.Some States like Colorado, Georgia and Wisconsin have no exemption at all.”

        Response: This misleads by ignoring important facts, and some of it is simply false.All the state mandates, even those without religious exemptions, may be avoided by self-insuring prescription drug coverage, by dropping that particular coverage altogether, or by taking refuge in a federal law that pre-empts any state mandates (ERISA).None of these havens is available under the federal mandate.It is also false to claim that North Carolina has an identical exemption.It is broader:It does not require a religious organization to serve primarily people of its own faith, or to fulfill the federal rule’s narrow tax code criterion.Moreover, the North Carolina law, unlike the federal mandate, completely excludes abortifacient drugs like Ella and RU-486 as well as “emergency contraceptives” like Preven.

        If any of the above is wrong, I would love to know it. Please clue me in.

        "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

        by HeyMikey on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:40:38 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  some are more persuasive than others...some don't (0+ / 0-)

          hold any water...

          1. That is a pretty odd interpretation of church. Service to the poor as a major focus does nothing to stop a church from meeting this criteria.

          primarily people of their own faith and have the inculcation of religious values as their purpose
          What part of that is contradicted by service to the poor a a major focus? It doesn't say inculcation has to be their exclusive purpose.

          Weak...the last line is the point of this bullet, the rest is intended to confuse...imho

          2. As an employer, the organizations have to comply with labor law even if they consider it immoral. I do not believe, although I am not positive, a church based organization, such as a hospital, could discriminate against based on sexual orientation or marital status. For instance, hospital ask if a janitor had a live in boy/girlfriend, and fire them for it? As an employer, they make some concessions. The pressure item is not a mandate. That is a red herring. Are they saying their convictions are not strong enough.

          3. Those same people pay taxes that provide funding to planned parenthood at some level. The indirect payment argument is awfully weak. Based on this argument, they should have their own plan without any intermingling of funds at the corporate level. It isn't as if one companies plan is the full insurance pool. If they have such a conviction, they need to create a Catholic only insurance exchange, because they can't maintain this argument otherwise.

          4. no clue about drugs, but this is a "what constitutes abortion" argument...not going to that for now...

          5. seems to be true

          "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

          by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:03:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Point #1 holds water. (0+ / 0-)

            St. Luke's Espicopal, Central Presbyterian, Trinity United Methodist, all in downtown Atlanta, have significant homeless ministries. The number of homeless people each church serves is probably greater than the number of members in each church. It's a safe bet most of those homeless people aren't Episcopal, Presbyterian, or Methodist.

            I'm sure there are many similar churches.

            "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

            by HeyMikey on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 11:05:32 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  That wasn't my point. (0+ / 0-)

              I will try to articulate it better.

              Simply put, the critieria itself DOES NOT exclude churches with a primary focus on service the poor.  They are not mutually exclusive.

              The criteria requires proof of having the inculcation of religious values as their purpose.

              There is nothing in that sentence that dictates it must be the churches PRIMARY purpose.  

              A church can be a shelter and still hold services, a homeless shelter can't be considered a church because that isn''t the purpose of the shelter itself.

              "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

              by justmy2 on Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 11:17:20 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  wonderful post, as always Hunter (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z

    but linking to that email to the White House...oy. since when does criticizing any interpretation of the bible equal smart advocacy?

  •  little known fact: Huguenot's have been buying up (0+ / 0-)

    the Catholic's Eucharist cracker supply chain for a few years now, no cause for alarm, but.....

    From those who live like leeches on the people's lives, We must take back our land again, America!...Langston Hughes

    by KenBee on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:27:23 PM PST

  •  Lawrence O'donnell really wants compromise (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ahumbleopinion, Matt Z

    Apparently a lot of the 28 states actually do have big holes that Catholic institutions can use.

    My problem with all this is that no one on the left is really having Obama's back on this. There are no loud voices of support out there for him - he's just standing on his own getting bashed by republicans, a few and rapidly increasing number of dems, and lawrence odonnell.

    Why are womens groups staying so quiet on this? Where are organizations like Planned Parenthood and such?

    •  hate to say this...but (0+ / 0-)

      I seem to remember a Plan B decision signed off by Sebelius and abortion language in HIR that didn't sit well with those groups....

      Could be some unfortunate consequences....

      Not attempting to judge....maybe it is subconscious....

      But if they truly believe this is a women's rights issue, this isn't the time to make a point. If they actually believe there are alternatives, it could be retribution.

      One could also argue the plan b decision swayed Sebelius' advice.

      "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

      by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:41:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Where are the Labor and Civil Rights leaders? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mijita, Matt Z

      Catholic women may stay silent individually because they are afraid that they'll be kicked out of their church; that their children will be kicked out of their schools. The Catholic Church is mean like that.

      Otherwise, I've seen plenty of women speaking out, loud and clear. Young women (and men) are absolutely incredulous that any frickken church could have the nerve to tell them what they may do with their lives.

      The days of churches dictating rules about sex are dead and buried.

      "Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope." ~Robert F. Kennedy

      by Agent99 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:49:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Catholic bishops have no standing. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ahumbleopinion

    The Catholic Church has no standing whatsoever to pursue this issue. None of the leadership, from the Pope on down, Bishops, priests, nuns...have any claim that they are directly affected by health care coverage which includes contraceptives.

    They are the only human population on the planet which has chosen, as a group, for fricken centuries, to refuse to participate in sex, to never engage in family life, to never, ever give birth to and raise children.

    Why the fuck would anyone consider the opinion of someone who has absolutely no stake in the issue? The courts damn sure don't.

    Screw all religions who try to force women to obey their bigoted bullshit. They will face a fierce smackdown. We fought this fight already. We won.

    "Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope." ~Robert F. Kennedy

    by Agent99 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:37:02 PM PST

  •  Teh Pill (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agent99, postxian

    Is over the counter in Italy.

    Raise fake ire to MAXIMUM!

    F*ck those idiots and the voters they rode in on.

    by roninkai on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:41:00 PM PST

  •  Catholic Orgs' love our tax dollars but they (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agent99

    refuse to obey government regulations. I mean, seriously? lol

  •  Is this a strategy by Pres. Obama undercut Mitt? (0+ / 0-)

    By forcing Catholic hospitals and universities to offer contraceptive coverage(exactly what Mitt Romney did in Massachusetts), it will solidify conservative support against Mitt Romney. Santorum in the next debate can ask Mitt why did he create such a plan that was so hostile to Catholics in Massachusetts.

  •  The herpderpy concern trolls are out in full force (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Agent99, askew, DesignGuy, mijita, Matt Z

    "OMG public opinion is against us!" "RW propaganda machine! OMG! DOOM!"

    Shut the fuck up, good lord. This whole thing is coming just days after the most famous and trusted nonprofit organziation in the country got dragged through the mud because of their opposition toward an organization that provides abortions -- not just contraception.

    The public isn't putting up with this shit any longer. And while the White House may be forced to carve out an exception because of idiot Blue Dog Democrats, you're insane if you think this is going to be an issue that hurts Obama in the general election. If anything, it's going to help him. "Obama wants to give you contraception. R-money thinks it should be done away with. Hmm, who are women going to vote for?"

    Seriously, is WebMD down tonight, so you had to bring your concerning over to DKOS?

    Proud supporter of nuclear power!

    by zegota on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 07:56:29 PM PST

    •  Thank you, thank you, thank you. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Agent99, mijita, Matt Z

      There are a handful of posters here who have been concern trolling all over the place about this issue. What's funny is these same people are the ones who criticize Obama for "caving" all the time and now they want him to cave.

      President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

      by askew on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:15:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  that being said, compromising here has some very (0+ / 0-)

        serious ramifications in my opinion, and it seems to me that very few, if any, have proposed any action that will stop it from occurring. And at this point, all signs point to some type of compromise at some point occurring.

        Each individual will have to determine if there is a compromise is acceptable to them. The Catholic Church, the people starting this, have already said no compromise is valid. It seems to me that is reason enough to stick to your guns. But that is just me.

        "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

        by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:27:26 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I am less worried about the Obama admin (0+ / 0-)

          changing their rule than I am about Senate Dems voting with Senate Reps to override the rule or even worsen it.

          President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

          by askew on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 10:33:34 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  A reasonable point... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      qofdisks

      but ACA is also part of the equation. Placating blue dogs quite likely could put ACA itself at risk during SCOTUS arguments this summer, before the general election issue comes into play.

      Additionally, they will also be looking at the impact on House And Senate races, although I don't know that it would be any different.

      But my point, at least in this thread, is how do supporters of the current rule stop the compromise from occurring, if they find it a hard line.

      "But once John Boehner is sworn in as Speaker, then he’s going to have responsibilities to govern. You can’t just stand on the sidelines and be a bomb thrower." - President Obama, 12-07-2010

      by justmy2 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:23:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Email John Kerry (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Agent99, mijita, Matt Z

        And tell him to shove a sock in his fucking mouth.

        Proud supporter of nuclear power!

        by zegota on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 08:45:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Forward to every Rep and Sen who dares to suggest (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mijita

          that we should grant exemptions to any frickken employer who whines about not wanting to abide by civil rights and labor laws.

          People fought and died for these rights. I will not let them be compromised by assholes who think the law does not apply to them. The KKK called themselves xtians, and defended their bigotry on religious grounds. Don't ever forget. There is no compromise available with this mindset. Give them an inch, and they will drag you a mile down a dirt road until you're dead. Fuck them.

          "Each time a person stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope." ~Robert F. Kennedy

          by Agent99 on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 09:09:30 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  They complain that they don't want to subsidize (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    qofdisks

    the use of contraception since they care so deeply about their moral convictions. Yet a plan that doesn't cover contraception is going to cost more because of the risks and expenses of pregnancy and childbirth. That extra cost is passed on or at least shared with the employees. In effect the employees are subsidizing the employers.

    Moreover, even in a plan that covers contraception, since people who don't use contraception have higher medical bills, in effect the people who do use contraception are subsidizing those who don't.

  •  Ask Republican wives how they are (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Nance

    controlling their reproduction. This needs to be asked publicly and often.
    If they have 10 children, mock them.

  •  New Mexico (0+ / 0-)

    It shows up on those maps showing the 28 states that already require such coverage. New Mexico is, IIRC, second only to % of the population that's Catholic. Or maybe it's first? Nobody here seems to mind that much.

    Meanwhile, on another health care front: The VA has opened a clinic in Taos. There's a pretty high proportion of military veterans in rural Hispanic New Mexico (& Native Americans, too.) Not having to go all the way to Albuquerque for everything is a real help to many of the local families.

    One wonders which aspect of the federal health care system under Obama will get more notice? I rather suspect that it's the ability to use the clinic right in town, rather than a 2-3 hour drive each way to Al buquerque...

    It's downright bonkers that now we're having the airwaves inundated about people trying to limit access to birth control. I'm guessing birth control's available at the new VA clinic, and no one much minds about that.

    Grab all the joy you can. (exmearden 8/10/09)

    by Land of Enchantment on Thu Feb 09, 2012 at 10:11:16 PM PST

  •  Employers Should Not Pay for Healthcare (0+ / 0-)

    This isn't even the right issue. The right issue is this: Why are employers paying for healthcare?

    Why isn't the government paying for healthcare? Why don't we have a national, publicly-funded healthcare system?

    It is bad economic policy for employers to pay for healthcare. It creates non-uniform coverage. It burdens employers with the cost of healthcare, making their products (should they be in the business of exporting anything) less competitive with those of countries that have good healthcare systems.

    And then it leads to some jerk whining about his religion.

    We need to parlay this into the right issue. When are we going to get national, publicly-funded healthcare?

  •  Not just employees (0+ / 0-)

    also their family members insured under that policy -- including, now, young adult children up to age 26.
    So when my (ex)spouse taught at a parochial school, I and our teenage (and then college-age) daughter were covered. (None of us are Catholic; it was just the best job offer he got.) And this is somehow controversial?

    Bumper sticker version: If you're against contraception, don't use it.

  •  "provide contraception benefits" (0+ / 0-)

    Is there a co-pay?

    Nance

  •  Court challenges failed for NY & CA law (0+ / 0-)

    Both New York and California have laws that mandate contraception coverage and that do not exempt institutions like hospitals and universities.

    The Church made the same argument when Pataki signed the law in 2002:

       

    When news broke of the compromise, the state's Catholic Conference announced that it might challenge the new law in court, describing it as an attack on the Catholic Church and a violation of First Amendment principles. In particular, the conference lamented the fact that the law's exemption would not apply to Catholic hospitals, nursing homes, schools and charitable agencies. In 2001, a state appeals court ruled against a challenge to California's exemption, finding that the state had a right not only to define the exempt group as it chose but also to have passed a law without any exemption. The case is currently before California's supreme court.
    Link

    Both the New York and the California laws were challenged in court:

       

    On October 1, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court turned down a request to review a New York state court decision that requires insurance companies to include contraceptive coverage in drug benefit packages. The request to review the decision was made by Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany and eight other New York-based Catholic and Baptist organizations.
     
    The ruling follows a similar decision in 2004 by the California Supreme Court, which rejected a challenge to a nearly identical state statute. In that case, Catholic Charities of California was also denied a hearing before the Supreme Court.2 The Supreme Court’s decision to not hear the case leaves the law in effect.
    Link

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.