Catholic bishops reject Obama offer on contraceptive coverage

Comments (21)
Bfstk wrote:

The Church, that wonderful moral force that has permitted the vast amounts of sexual abuse of children, is taking up the moral issue with President Obama. Actually, their purpose is to discredit the President and not matter what he proposes they will reject. Meanwhile, the immense fallout from the sex scandal rocking the church continues unabated. The church leaders have even tried to squash the good sisters whose vital work with the poor and downtrodden remains a beacon for goodness in this world. Shame on the church leadership for its hypocrisy and it Janus approach to health care for all; something the good sister have been fighting for for many years with little support from church higherups.

Feb 07, 2013 7:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
akcoins wrote:

Of course a bunch of old white guys oppose Obama’s contraception plan. They don’t want their victims, er I mean parishioners to have access to contraception.

Feb 07, 2013 7:21pm EST  --  Report as abuse
UncleNed-222 wrote:

Ignore the child-molesting Catholics! They are no moral authority; in fact, they are quite the opposite.

Feb 07, 2013 7:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DeanM.Jackson wrote:

The Second Amendment to the Constitution says,”Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

Religion is not confined to the actual house of God, but in the life of the believer, therefore when any government interferes with one’s “free exercise” of religion, no matter what the issue, the government must step back and respect the believer’s position.

Feb 07, 2013 7:52pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Common-Man wrote:

It is interesting this article states “The contraceptives coverage is backed by liberal Catholic groups and women’s rights activists.”

It is impossible to be both Catholic and for contraceptives. Can’t have both.

Feb 07, 2013 9:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
mb56 wrote:

If the Churches want to be involved in politics – which they increasingly are, then it’s time to have a serious look at eliminating their tax exempt status.

Feb 07, 2013 10:20pm EST  --  Report as abuse
forzapista wrote:

@DeanMJackson. Your ignorance of contstitutional law is astounding. There always must be a balance between the rights of the people to practice their religion and what is “reasonable” to the rest of society. If a religion advocating marrying underage females to older males (the FLDS Church), the government steps in and stops that practice, regardless of the constitutional rights of the believers.
In this case, the courts will ultimately decide if a woman’s right to healthcare services (and yes, contraception is healthcare) trumps the pedophile church’s beliefs.

Feb 07, 2013 10:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
breezinthru wrote:

Catholic medical facilities are free to turn down federal money if they don’t like the conditions that come with it.

Feb 07, 2013 10:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Raelyn wrote:

There is an overabundance of testosterone in this world, which explains the awful condition it is in..

Feb 07, 2013 10:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Cyberblunt wrote:

the church needs to stay out of the medical morality as it should stay out of government.

Feb 08, 2013 5:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
Cyberblunt wrote:

the church needs to stay out of the medical morality as it should stay out of government.

Feb 08, 2013 5:29am EST  --  Report as abuse
tatman wrote:

i think the motive here is quite evident: access to contraceptives = a reduction in sweet, innocent young children to molest. can’t have that, can you, priests?

Feb 08, 2013 11:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
Sensibility wrote:

The government intends to force Catholics to do something they believe is morally wrong. In this way, the views of a minority are subjugated to the views of the majority. At its basest level, this is un-American.

Feb 08, 2013 11:13am EST  --  Report as abuse
scillaa wrote:

What!? The bishops are against an Obama proposal? I’d only be shocked if they were FOR anything the President proposed! These guys aren’t happy unless we go back to the rules of the middle ages. Their intransigence has pretty much made them irrelevant at this point….

Feb 08, 2013 1:41pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OneOfTheSheep wrote:

@Sensibility,

So in your view polygamists must be allowed multiple wives, female genital mutilation must be allowed, it’s OK to shoot Malala as long as she doesn’t actually die. America is denying muslims their right to kill infidels as directed by the Koran. Please.

Either conform to our society’s law or leave or suffer the consequences.

Feb 08, 2013 1:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OneOfTheSheep wrote:

@Sensibility,

So in your view polygamists must be allowed multiple wives, female genital mutilation must be allowed, it’s OK to shoot Malala as long as she doesn’t actually die. America is denying muslims their right to kill infidels as directed by the Koran. Please.

Either conform to our society’s law or leave or suffer the consequences.

Feb 08, 2013 1:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
TheGame2 wrote:

Pedophilia is just fine but contraception is unacceptable.

When the King…oooops I mean the Pope decided decades ago that contraception was against the Catholic religion, did he get those instructions directly from God… or maybe Jesus… or perhaps from good old Mother Mary… or did he simply decide that contraception isn’t a good thing for “The Church” … (like it’s the only religion on earth)… because they want to control as many lives as possible, and they want as many little Catholics running around as possible… creating a pool of poor Catholic families with 7 or 8 kids that they can’t afford to feed even rice and beans to… but they’ll all grow up to become adult Catholics paying their weekly tributes in cash so the King can eat filet mignon every night but Friday.

Feb 08, 2013 1:58pm EST  --  Report as abuse
OneOfTheSheep wrote:

@Sensibility,

You believe it “un-American” to subjugate the views of a minority to that of the majority? What you advocate isn’t America, it’s an Idiocracy.

In America Mormons can’t practice polygamy. Faiths that believe illness and injury are “God’s judgment” must still allow transfusions and chemotherapy to their minor children or be prosecuted for not doing so.  We don’t allow female genital mutilation or “honor killings, and muslims can’t kill “infidels”. In any civil society, “values” must frequently be compromised.  I know genuine and meaningful “compromise” is not a concept absolutists of faith find easy or accept as legitimate, but it’s time they get used to the necessity.

Church-affiliated universities, hospitals and charities that are currently allowed non-profit status are NOT “houses of worship”, and should not be exempted from taxation or regulation as such. Indeed, it should be carefully reconsidered whether actual “houses of worship” that are active political advocates deserve the exemption from taxation that has henceforth been automatic and eternal.

Give them a choice. SHUT UP or pay like every other organization.

Feb 08, 2013 2:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ccrider27 wrote:

We’ll listen to what the Catholic church says as soon as it turns over all of its child molesters and all of the evidence it is hiding over to the proper authorities.

Until then, they can shut up!

Feb 08, 2013 5:42pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Sensibility wrote:

The nice thing about America is that you have the freedom to say whatever you want, even if it’s bigoted (see above).

The government does not, however, have the luxury of being bigoted. Which is why attacks on religious freedom by that same government should give everyone pause, even if you’re not Catholic, and even if you don’t practice a religion at all.

“For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection, should demean themselves as good citizens.” – George Washington

Feb 08, 2013 9:26pm EST  --  Report as abuse
DeanMJackson wrote:

forzapista says (in response to my comment), “There always must be a balance between the rights of the people to practice their religion and what is “reasonable” to the rest of society.”

Response: What is so unreasonable about this issue from the Catholic perspective? Is anyone being killed? Has the American Catholic Church formed its own version of the Kali cult? Is the American Catholic Church attempting to legally sanction child molestation based on the government’s and media’s 50-year silence on the priest-pedophile scandal? I don’t thin so.

Why couldn’t the Obama administration have been reasonable and met the American Catholic Church halfway by writing regulations that allowed for Catholic institutions’ health insurance policies to allow for contraceptives only if such contraceptives were used for non-contraceptive purposes? That would have been a very reasonable move on the part of the Obama administration. But no, Obama and “Comrades” (and I do mean Comrades) were intent on waging a battle with a weakened American Catholic Church, believing the American Catholic Church would just roll over. Well, it won’t and now the ball is on the Courts side of the net, a game that needn’t have been played in the first place.

forzapista says (in response to my comment), “In this case, the courts will ultimately decide if a woman’s right to healthcare services (and yes, contraception is healthcare) trumps the pedophile church’s beliefs.”

Response: Since the Church, properly understood, is not under the control of believers, then one can’t point fingers at the Church over the pedophile scandal.

In fact, the “power struggle” going on within the Vatican is not what the media is telling you. The real “power struggle” has to do with Moscow’s infiltration of the Vatican by at least the Pontificate of John XXIII. This dating for the infiltration is good, since it coincides with the inexplicable refusal to release the Third Secret of Fatima by no later than 1960.*

Why would Communists worry about releasing what to them would be a silly superstition? The fact that the “silly superstition” mentioned the infiltration of the Catholic Church by what the document called “Satanic” forces would have been enough to keep the “inconvenient” document sealed. There was no way such a document was going to see the light of day, since its release would compel a closer examination of the Vatican by independent observers, possibly compromising Moscow’s recent usurpation of the Holy See.

However, thanks to the recent Vatican “power struggle” breaking into the open, Communists within the Holy See were forced to reveal their presence by the incredulous appointment of the Marxist-oriented, liberation theologist Bishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller to head up the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the purpose for the appointment to plug the damaging leaks from the Vatican. This is the man that the supposedly “conservative” Pope Benedict knows he can trust 100% to prevent any more embarrassing leaks from the Vatican…a Marxist-oriented, liberation theology enthusiast. Does this make sense to you?
We now have proof that the current “power struggle” within the Vatican has nothing to do with a clash of “conservative clerics” vs. “liberal clerics”.

This explains the Vatican’s inexplicable, and relatively new policy (fifty years old or so), of passing onto other parishes priests that sexually abuse children, ensuring (1) that the number of such sex crimes would increase geometrically; and (2) encourage pedophiles to join the seminaries. Now, such a policy could not be kept under wraps for long (as the Vatican well knew), since the massive number of crimes would have eventually reached a critical mass, exploding into the news headlines as they did. Only an INTENTIONAL Vatican policy of encouraging child sex crimes by priests explains the Vatican’s behavior these last fifty years. Believers in Christ wouldn’t subject children to sexual abuse, but Communists would in order to weaken the Catholic Church.

Believers would never institute a policy of passing sexual deviant priests onto other unsuspecting parishes since such an act would condemn the policy’s benefactors to everlasting Hell! Of course, Communists laugh at the concept of Hell, therefore they would have no trepidation nor see a moral problem with subjecting children to sexual abuse. Communists believe the ends justifies the means, so if children must suffer to bring about the Communist victory over the West, then the policy is moral.

Those of you not familiar with the true events taking place within the “former” USSR these past 21 years will naturally ask, “Wouldn’t the Moscow network within the Vatican have fallen apart as soon as the collapse of the USSR took place in late 1991?”

For the answer to that question, first Google: “Bulgaria protestant communist agents” and “Bulgaria orthodox communist agents”.

Bulgaria is the only nation to have created (belatedly) a Files Commission looking into Communist-era agents still in power there. Guess what they found? Communist-era agents still in control of the government, media, Churches and other institutions (and the Files Commission is only chartered to investigate from 2003 onwards).

If Files Commissions had been created in all not-so-former East Bloc nations/USSR republics, then we’d get the same results as Bulgaria: That Communist agents are still in control there too.

What this means is that the “collapse” of the USSR in late 1991 was a strategic ruse, as predicted by KGB defector Major Anatoliy Golitsyn (Golitsyn actually correctly predicted that East Bloc nations/USSR would first “liberalize” before they “collapsed”) , the only Soviet-era defector to still be under protective custody in the West, proving (1) the collapses of the USSR/East Bloc were strategic ruses; and (2) that all other Soviet-era defectors who followed Golitsyn were still loyal to their respective Communist intelligence agencies, since all of them provided incorrect intelligence on the future of the USSR/East Bloc.

Unless you’ve read Golitsyn’s 1984 book, “New Lies for Old” (available at Internet Archive), and become familiar with the Communists’ “Long-Range Policy” (which all Communist nations signed onto in 1960 as their “new” and more subtle strategy to neutralize the West), you are ignorant of all matters concerning foreign policy.

Beginning to get the wider picture now?

Now you know why the Russian electorate in 1992 failed to create a de-Communization program in order to ferret out Communist agents still in power. If the “collapse” of the USSR had been real, such a de-Communization program would have been immediately implemented.

The above also explains why the Russian electorate are only electing Soviet-era Communist Party members for President/Prime Minister. If the “collapse” of the USSR had been real, the Russian electorate would never have elected such Quislings back into power.
————————————————————–
*Forty years later in 2000, the Vatican released a four-page forgery, not the one-page, approximately 25-lined document that had been read by a select few before 2000.

Feb 09, 2013 1:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.