Republican Hearing on Contraception: No Women Allowed

[fskimospy]

Yes, to be clear, the bishops are complaining that employees of their various businesses must be provided contraception by a third party that is not Catholic if they so desire it, with absolutely zero payment or involvement from the church. Obama has entirely removed the church from the equation, the only complaint now is that the church feels like it is insufficiently able to control the reproductive rights of its employees.

(there actually is an issue with those catholic organizations that self-insure, but when this original change was announced Obama already said they would work something out)

This has to be one of the stupidest stands I've seen in an awfully long time. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[HomerJS]

I know this is hard for some of you dopes to understand, but the issue is not contraception and whether people should use it or should have access to it. The issue is forcing religious institution to pay for something that goes against their religious beliefs.

A priest is qualified to talk about religious/church doctrine.

BTW - I found out yesterday that these same religious institution's insurance polcies cover vasectomies. In case you didn't know it but that is birth control. So why are vasectomies in line with their beliefs and birth control pills not?

 

[thraashman]

BTW - I found out yesterday that these same religious institution's insurance polcies cover vasectomies. In case you didn't know it but that is birth control. So why are vasectomies in line with their beliefs and birth control pills not?

Because a vasectomy doesn't allow them to control a woman's choices, so it doesn't matter. Remember, according to many of these crazier religious people, women should not have careers and should stay at home as baby factories.

 

[Ausm]

Good read here and let's hope this will come to fruition.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/17/10434132-first-thoughts-shades-of-schiavo

 

[Ausm]

BTW - I found out yesterday that these same religious institution's insurance polcies cover vasectomies. In case you didn't know it but that is birth control. So why are vasectomies in line with their beliefs and birth control pills not?

Actually I think Santorum's Sugar daddy has found the solution!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...contraception/2011/03/04/gIQAcHbNIR_blog.html

Does batshit crazy ring a bell??

 

[Siddhartha]

Is the GOP's going the Culture War mattresses going to get their base motivated?

 

[Ausm]

Is the GOP's going the Culture War mattresses going to get their base motivated?

The have no more cards to play 2 years of rampant GOP obstructionism alienated almost everyone except or the most Rabid of followers so they have to reinstitute the culture wars to fire up their dwindling base.

 

[Thump553]

This renewed culture wars mystifies me. Wasn't the whole rationale behind the tea party and revitalized GOP to get back to it's roots and focus on fiscal conservatism? Is the tea party now dead and gone, or just irrelevant?

 

[OrByte]

Bishops are More Qualified to discuss the religious practices of their religion.

I'd argue Bishops would indeed be more qualified to discuss the religious RULES of thier religion.

Something tells me they would have a lot harder time discussing the PRACTICES within their religion, since I'm not entirely convinced that the Bishop's at these committee's are representing the majority of their flocks PRACTICES.

 

[MovingTarget]

BTW - I found out yesterday that these same religious institution's insurance polcies cover vasectomies. In case you didn't know it but that is birth control. So why are vasectomies in line with their beliefs and birth control pills not?

I know quite a few teachers at my local catholic school. Their insurance has exclusions for birth control, sterilization, and abortion. This includes vasectomies. (note: I am not commenting on whether or not I think this is right..I'm just stating details here..)

It may differ between types of Catholic institutions, as some are merely affiliated with the Church and not run directly by it.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

"No Women Allowed" is a lie...mods must be a little short-handed today.

 

[spidey07]

Title needs to be changed, it's an outright lie.

 

[MovingTarget]

Yes, to be clear, the bishops are complaining that employees of their various businesses must be provided contraception by a third party that is not Catholic if they so desire it, with absolutely zero payment or involvement from the church. Obama has entirely removed the church from the equation, the only complaint now is that the church feels like it is insufficiently able to control the reproductive rights of its employees.

(there actually is an issue with those catholic organizations that self-insure, but when this original change was announced Obama already said they would work something out)

This has to be one of the stupidest stands I've seen in an awfully long time. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

Do you have any details on the bolded above? I'm honestly curious about how that situation works...

 

[Riparian]

Actually I think Santorum's Sugar daddy has found the solution!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...contraception/2011/03/04/gIQAcHbNIR_blog.html

Does batshit crazy ring a bell??

Best comment I've seen about the aspirin trick comes from this article:

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/how-the-gop-went-back-to-the-1950s-in-just-one-day.php?ref=fpa&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=1950

“Some will see it as reinforcing the impression a lot of people have of Rick Santorum as the candidate straight out of the 1950’s. I bet it gets played up that way,” she said. “I think most of us know you can keep your knees together and still, um, do it.”

 

[Ausm]

Best comment I've seen about the aspirin trick comes from this article:

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/how-the-gop-went-back-to-the-1950s-in-just-one-day.php?ref=fpa&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=1950

hahaha Posting on Facebook! I wonder if the GOP wants to go back to the 1950's tax rate too?

 

[CallMeJoe]

Title needs to be changed, it's an outright lie.

I would point out that the thread title is a direct quote of the title of the OP's linked article, but I know that you care far less about accuracy than you do about getting your daily ration of outrage.

 

[spidey07]

I would point out that the thread title is a direct quote of the title of the OP's linked article, but I know that you care far less about accuracy than you do about getting your daily ration of outrage.

Thread title is still a flat out misleading lie.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Thread title is still a flat out misleading lie.

At the time the article was written, only the first, all male, panel had been seated. The composition of the later panel was unknown.

Again, see above concerning accuracy vs. outrage...

 

[HomerJS]

Thread title is still a flat out misleading lie.

My title was not editorialized it was a quoted from the article's title.

More arachnid delusion!

 

[Riparian]

The Democrats selected a Young Female Student that was unqualified. They should choose better IMO. That was probably the best they could come up with, some poor ignorant 19 year old.

Not entirely sure why she was deemed unqualified. From other news reports, her testimony was meant to relay her experience with her friend while attending Georgetown Law School (Catholic affiliation) where her friend lost an ovary because she Georgetown's insurance would not cover contraceptives and the use of the pill in this case would not have even been for the purpose of contraception but for saving an ovary. Here's the article I'm getting this information from:

http://www.religiondispatches.org/dispatches/sarahposner/5705/

The particular quote of relevance:

One of the witnesses Issa refused to allow the Democrats to call was Sandra Fluke, a student at Georgetown University (where Holmes Norton teaches at the law school) , which Holmes Norton called "the foremost Catholic university in the country.

Had she been permitted to testify, said Fluke, she would have discussed the stories of Georgetown students* who are denied birth control coverage, including a woman who has lost an ovary because she was even denied coverage for pill not even needed for contraceptive, but for medical purposes. As a result of not having the proper medical care, the woman, now 32 years old, lost an ovary and is experiencing an early menopause, threatening her ability to have children.

Issa denied Fluke the opportunity to testify because she was "not qualified." She said, "women impacted by the [policy] are the most qualified to speak." Those voices, she said, "were silenced today."

 

[spidey07]

My title was not editorialized it was a quoted from the article's title.

More arachnid delusion!

Doesn't change the FACT that is is an outright misleading LIE.

 

[senseamp]

Scott Brown committed political suicide over this. Nice. Keep it coming

 

[PokerGuy]

BTW - I found out yesterday that these same religious institution's insurance polcies cover vasectomies. In case you didn't know it but that is birth control. So why are vasectomies in line with their beliefs and birth control pills not?

If the institution has an issue with it, they can negotiate with their insurance companies to not include that coverage. In other words, it's not part of a government mandate that they MUST provide that coverage. If there is such a mandate, it should be tossed out on the same grounds.

Look, if you have a problem with the 'crazy' beliefs of the institutions, that's fine, but that's NOT what this whole discussion is about. The discussion is not about their beliefs and whether they are hypocritical or justified or not. That's irrelevant. The issue is forcing religious institutions to pay for something that goes against their beliefs.

 

[PokerGuy]

I'd argue Bishops would indeed be more qualified to discuss the religious RULES of thier religion.

Something tells me they would have a lot harder time discussing the PRACTICES within their religion, since I'm not entirely convinced that the Bishop's at these committee's are representing the majority of their flocks PRACTICES.

Those practices are not relevant to the discussion.

 

[HomerJS]

If the institution has an issue with it, they can negotiate with their insurance companies to not include that coverage. In other words, it's not part of a government mandate that they MUST provide that coverage. If there is such a mandate, it should be tossed out on the same grounds.

Look, if you have a problem with the 'crazy' beliefs of the institutions, that's fine, but that's NOT what this whole discussion is about. The discussion is not about their beliefs and whether they are hypocritical or justified or not. That's irrelevant. The issue is forcing religious institutions to pay for something that goes against their beliefs.

But these institutions are not paying so the only other thing we are debating is birth control.