An Overwhelming Majority of voters want the Catholic Church to STFU about birth control

President Obama’s birth control rule initially mandated that employers provide health insurance plans which would include coverage for birth control exempting religious employers but not institutions, which of course sparked an uproar (or possibly a deflection). A new poll suggests that an overwhelming majority support this mandate.

 

Catholic hospitals and other institutions also support the policy. Catholic approval for the President has remained unchanged.  95% of Catholics use contraceptives.

Abortion is frowned upon by Republicans, yet birth control is a touchy subject. 1+2 suddenly equals 4. So, in order to appease opposers, namely the Catholic Church (again, deflecting) the Health and Human Services Department gave an alternative. Still, the church and the sudden influx from Evangelicals seemingly turned Catholic, raged on.

According to the new poll by the New York Times/CBS, 65% percent of registered voters said that religiously affiliated employers should cover the cost of birth control in their employee health care plans.

A reader here suggested that we outlaw Viagra — possibly to deflect their deflection — which is a fine idea.  In addition, the Catholic church should prioritize their need to protect children, not the pedophile priests which they hide from charges.  Those children which are victimized are alive. Since when do we allow such people to dictate their feigned moral outrage onto us?

 

Image: Google+

 

  • Joris

    We have this tension in a democracy that believes in right endowed by the creator–that a majority is not always “right”–nor is “rightness” always a majority. the Athenian democracy voted to send a fleet to Syracuse–and it proved disastrous to Athens. Lincoln had the same problem. A majority wanted to punish the South, while he felt that the right thing to do was welcome their people back into the union (lower case) that they had never really left. The Catholic bishops are at times “mitered birdbrains,”–the phrase is not mine, though I like it–and their moral authority about sex is minimal, but there is a need to respect conscience here that, historically, the better angels of our American nature have respected.

  • Ron Sead

    A lot of practicing Catholics don’t abide by the birth control mandate. I came from a good-sized Catholic family. Back in the early 70’s I asked my mother why she opted to use the pill, since it was banned by the Vatican. “The pope does not have seven children” was her quick and only reply. I understood.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      So that means you can force other people to pay for it?

      • asburykat

        would you rather pay for all the resulting children’s healthcare for 18 years?

      • asburykat

        would you rather pay for all the resulting children’s healthcare for 18 years?

      • Alan

        Yes, the same way you are forced to pay for a smoker’s cancer treatment if you don’t smoke. Also pay for someone to have a child even if you use birth control.

      • Alan

        Yes, the same way you are forced to pay for a smoker’s cancer treatment if you don’t smoke. Also pay for someone to have a child even if you use birth control.

    • Teriqua Jones

      Your Mom is funny. I see areas of the the church that are becoming less strict. However, I think the Vatican will continue to support traditional Catholicism.
      I don’t think President Obama should be mandating the church to pay for something that opposes their beliefs. The Vatican has an obligation to uphold traditions of the church.

      • eugenia michelle brown

        Teriqua: You rather the Vactican continue to uphold traditions of molesting children?

    • teriqua

      Your Mom is funny. I see areas of the the church that are becoming less strict. However, I think the Vatican will continue to support traditional Catholicism.
      I don’t think President Obama should be mandating the church to pay for something that opposes their beliefs. The Vatican has an obligation to uphold traditions of the church.

      • eugenia michelle brown

        Teriqua: You rather the Vactican continue to uphold traditions of molesting children?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_B4YUCYIRTVAAXDBN4GFDC4E6LQ pdc

    I think the reason why most catholics get embarrassed by this argument is they know that they are opening the “what about alter boys” can of worms that is indefensible.

    • Joris

      That is so–that is the truth, I think; I agree wholeheartedly. The Catholic Church–laity and clergy alike–are embarrassed by this shameful moral lapse, deservedly so.

  • mohanna

    Catholics want everyone to enforce it’s ban on contraception. I want the Catholic Church to stop imposing it’s religious beliefs on everyone. Separation of Church and State people.

    • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

      You hit the nail on the head, separation of Church and state. The government should not force religious institutions to violate their teachings.

      • Nikisunshine

        And the church should not lobby the government, they don’t pay taxes, so don’t have that right.

        • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

          Actually no, the first amendment gives people the right to petition the government. The constitution applies to everyone, not just people who pay taxes.

          • Ed

            Yeah that little detail that ensures rights apply to everyone is called the 14th amendment’s “Equal Protection Clause.”

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      Nobody is banning or talking about banning contraception. They just don’t want to be forced to pay for it.

      • asburykat

        and they don’t have to, but the insurance companies do. And they are not complainingg, b/c that’s a lot cheaper than the alternative.

        • Jim Larkin

          have you ever heard of an insurance company doing anything for free? Hah!

      • asburykat

        and they don’t have to, but the insurance companies do. And they are not complainingg, b/c that’s a lot cheaper than the alternative.

        • Jim Larkin

          have you ever heard of an insurance company doing anything for free? Hah!

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

        I don’t want to pay for war. It’s against my religion. How about that?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

        I don’t want to pay for war. It’s against my religion. How about that?

    • Teriqua Jones

      I don’t think mohanna read the same news story.

    • teriqua

      I don’t think mohanna read the same news story.

    • Teriqua Jones

      Do yourself a favor…
      Read the story before you comment.

    • teriqua

      Do yourself a favor…
      Read the story before you comment.

  • shivabeach

    Maybe we should demand an end to all science. The GOP would love that, until the pope got sick

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      Why should people be forced to pay for other people’s contraception. Nobody is proposing outlawing contraception.

      • shivabeach

        Do you have healthcare? You are already paying for others contraception devices. You pay for their transfusions, you pay for their dental, you pay for their drug program, you pay for everything your health insurance covers for other people. Stop whining and grow up. Or, better yet ask to be removed from the healthcare program you are in

        The catholic church wants contraception devices done away with. No condoms, no birth control period. Ask Santorum.

        • Teriqua Jones

          The Catholic Church is not on a mission to “do away with all birth control.” As a church, they only support natural contraception.
          Get it right. If you are not sure, ask a priest.

          • shivabeach

            Wrong. They are pushing bills and candidates who will ban the sale of contraceptive devices. Which their boy Santorum wants the states to have the right to ban all birth control. Read up. Ron Paul wants the states to have the right to ban birth control as well.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      Why should people be forced to pay for other people’s contraception. Nobody is proposing outlawing contraception.

      • shivabeach

        Do you have healthcare? You are already paying for others contraception devices. You pay for their transfusions, you pay for their dental, you pay for their drug program, you pay for everything your health insurance covers for other people. Stop whining and grow up. Or, better yet ask to be removed from the healthcare program you are in

        The catholic church wants contraception devices done away with. No condoms, no birth control period. Ask Santorum.

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/JKR6BLH7ENCIR4V42PYWLQISZQ Ninita

    I am a 27 years old doctor,mature and beautiful. and now i am seeking a good man who can give me real love, so i got a sername Andromeda2002 on Agedate.СòM, a nice and free place for younger women and older men,or older women and younger men, to interact with each other.Maybe you wanna check out or tell your friends.

  • canoko18

    Majority makes right? If the group surveyed that represent your “overwhelming majority” are represented by the type of people who have posted these shallow and inane comments, you may be right – and it’s a sad day for America. I’m sure you could also get most of them to put on brown shirts, click their heels and dance around the burning of the Constitution.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Cerullo/100000712050672 John Cerullo

      There is nothing remotely unconstitutional about this mandate. The brown shirts were right wing thugs, by the way – a good many of them “Christians.”

      • canoko18

        “There is nothing remotely unconstitutional about this mandate.”

        You can’t see that this flies in the face of the First Amendment which bans government interference in the practice of religion? Motivated by the sanctity and nobility of human life, the Catholic Church practices its religion to a large degree through the operation of hospitals, schools, and other charities. The “free exercise thereof” means nothing if a government can require the violation of concscience to stay in business.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

          You should do a little research concerning the Free Exercise clause. It’s never been unlimited, nor could it be — unless we are prepared to allow human sacrifices in the name of religion, and I don’t think we are.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

            Again, how do you equate human sacrifice with not wanting to be forced to pay for someone else’s contraception?

      • canoko18

        “There is nothing remotely unconstitutional about this mandate.”

        You can’t see that this flies in the face of the First Amendment which bans government interference in the practice of religion? Motivated by the sanctity and nobility of human life, the Catholic Church practices its religion to a large degree through the operation of hospitals, schools, and other charities. The “free exercise thereof” means nothing if a government can require the violation of concscience to stay in business.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

          You should do a little research concerning the Free Exercise clause. It’s never been unlimited, nor could it be — unless we are prepared to allow human sacrifices in the name of religion, and I don’t think we are.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

            Again, how do you equate human sacrifice with not wanting to be forced to pay for someone else’s contraception?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Cerullo/100000712050672 John Cerullo

      There is nothing remotely unconstitutional about this mandate. The brown shirts were right wing thugs, by the way – a good many of them “Christians.”

  • Davedave

    Any institution receiving 2.9 billion dollars of tax payers money (including the 71% of the US that aren’t Catholic, not to mention $2.9 is 14.5% of NASA’s total fiscal budget) a year should not be able to simply quote their ancient scripture as their reason for not providing women with contraceptives. It is outrageous that these elected lawmakers don’t feel some sort of humility when they say “my faith tells me blah blah blah” and the reason they don’t is because even in 2012 it still remains taboo in the United States to question or offend someone’s faith. Religious intolerance is appropriate and necessary in these sort of circumstances.

    • Ed

      Religious intolerance is never appropriate. This country was initially formed by people trying to escape from religious intolerance, which is why the first amendment forbids the government any right to either establish a religion or prohibit the free exercise of religious beliefs.
      But then also consider the folks who murder others (such as those who perpetrated mass murder on 9-11, or such as Hitler’s death camps) because of religious intolerance.
      No, it is never time for religious intolerance for all that creates is totalitarianism on one side and mass murderers on the other.

    • Ed

      Religious intolerance is never appropriate. This country was initially formed by people trying to escape from religious intolerance, which is why the first amendment forbids the government any right to either establish a religion or prohibit the free exercise of religious beliefs.
      But then also consider the folks who murder others (such as those who perpetrated mass murder on 9-11, or such as Hitler’s death camps) because of religious intolerance.
      No, it is never time for religious intolerance for all that creates is totalitarianism on one side and mass murderers on the other.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      Why is free contraception a right all of a sudden?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

        Why is free Viagra a right? Insurance covers that, no questions asked. Answer me that!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      Why is free contraception a right all of a sudden?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

        Why is free Viagra a right? Insurance covers that, no questions asked. Answer me that!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1436021825 Jeremy Johnson

    Separation of Church & State …… is a good thing. If the church has a problem with it they can start paying taxes:)

    • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

      *facepalm. The Church paying taxes would be a violation of the separation of Church and State. Just like the government forcing religious people to violate their consciences is a violation of the separation of Church and State.

      • indolering

        How is paying for the roads that people use to get to church, police to keep their church safe, and all of the other services that government supplies a violation of the separation of church and state? It was my understanding that it was their utility as a public good was why they are a subsidized by the taxpayers. We actually PAY the catholic church ~3 billion/year* to carry out many of those functions. I personally would prefer to have them carried out by a well-funded social saftey-net, but…

        *http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/us/for-bishops-a-battle-over-whose-rights-prevail.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

        • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

          Why would you tax a non-profit charitable organization? The Catholic Church is the largest charitable organization in the world. The advantage the Church has over a safety-net is that it’s a lot better organized and it has free volunteer labor. The Church can do more good with less money than any government program could ever dream to. If you don’t see the charitable works of the Church it’s probably because you aren’t homeless, hungry, orphaned, or imprisoned.

          • canoko18

            Bang on Matt – but Obama and the rest of these big-government Socialists don’t care about efficiency or freedom. This is all about hate (as can be seen by the comments here). Their secular religion has, as its core doctrine, sexual licence and of course the right to terminate any resultant life, so of course they want to snuff out any voice of conscience.

          • canoko18

            Bang on Matt – but Obama and the rest of these big-government Socialists don’t care about efficiency or freedom. This is all about hate (as can be seen by the comments here). Their secular religion has, as its core doctrine, sexual licence and of course the right to terminate any resultant life, so naturally they want to snuff out any voice of conscience.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

            Or because you don’t fall into a group they _choose_ to help. I don’t have any family to speak of, I don’t go to Church, and I don’t want to have to depend on my neighbors to take care of me someday. I want the legal safety net that I’ve been paying taxes to support for nearly 40 years.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

            Well then you should have been fighting to keep more of your money for the last 40 years. Then you wouldn’t need a safety net.
            And anyone that knows anything about safety knows that you are not supposed to rely on safety nets. Your implying that is what you want.

          • Teriqua Jone

            I am assuming Kenni is referring to our Social Security when he says “Safety Net”. As Americans, we all have to pay in. However, Obama is giving us a smaller voice in how he spends it.
            (family vacations and golf trips??)

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

            Government pays for important social goods that are not, inherently, profitable. Like police, military, and support for people, infrastructure, and the like. If you kept more money, we wouldn’t have roads, and police and firefighters. Are you implying that is what you want? I think your earnings would take a big hit, in such case.

            Government should pay for healthcare as well, as is done in the rest of the industrialized world. This nonsense about profits being important in healthcare is just ruining us. How is it in the financial interest of medical and pharmaceutical companies to keep us well? Seems to me, they would go out of business if we were well and healthy, correct?

            Let’s think it through.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

            Or because you don’t fall into a group they _choose_ to help. I don’t have any family to speak of, I don’t go to Church, and I don’t want to have to depend on my neighbors to take care of me someday. I want the legal safety net that I’ve been paying taxes to support for nearly 40 years.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

            Well then you should have been fighting to keep more of your money for the last 40 years. Then you wouldn’t need a safety net.
            And anyone that knows anything about safety knows that you are not supposed to rely on safety nets. Your implying that is what you want.

          • teriqua

            I am assuming Kenni is referring to our Social Security when he says “Safety Net”. As Americans, we all have to pay in. However, Obama is giving us a smaller voice in how he spends it.
            (family vacations and golf trips??)

        • Mikeparklane

          You must live in Massachusetts?

      • indolering

        How is paying for the roads that people use to get to church, police to keep their church safe, and all of the other services that government supplies a violation of the separation of church and state? It was my understanding that it was their utility as a public good was why they are a subsidized by the taxpayers. We actually PAY the catholic church ~3 billion/year* to carry out many of those functions. I personally would prefer to have them carried out by a well-funded social saftey-net, but…

        *http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/us/for-bishops-a-battle-over-whose-rights-prevail.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

        • Mikeparklane

          You must live in Massachusetts?

      • http://www.facebook.com/aerius.yang See Yang

        Separation of Church and State is about keeping religion out of politics, not the other way around. You are free to believe what you want within the scope of the law.

        • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

          Haha no sir, when you separate things, you keep them apart, it’s a two way street.

          • Ed Rude

            To both See Yang and Matt Scholand – The actual separation of Church and State as stated in the Constitution forbids Federal government “Shall not establish any religion nor prohibit the free exercise thereof”
            The primary effect is to keep the government out of our personal lives and from interfering with matters of conscience that are part and parcel of the free expression of any religious view-point.
            As a point of fact one of the Supreme Courts rulings found that even a governmental agency that could define what a “religious cause” is violates the first amendment – our Bill of rights.

          • hero

            The actual “separation of church and state” is not in the constitution and is actually a quote from Thomas Jefferson in a letter. “… I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
            So the origin of the quote literally shows that the separation works both ways: the government can’t prohibit a religion, and the religion can’t impose or violate the laws of government.

          • bluelock

            You fool. That quote makes the exact point you are arguing against.

            Jefferson’s quote puts no restrictions on religion and says the government shall not prohibit the free exercise of religion.

          • bluelock

            You fool. That quote makes the exact point you are arguing against.

            Jefferson’s quote puts no restrictions on religion and says the government shall not prohibit the free exercise of religion.

          • Ed Rude

            To both See Yang and Matt Scholand – The actual separation of Church and State as stated in the Constitution forbids Federal government “Shall not establish any religion nor prohibit the free exercise thereof”
            The primary effect is to keep the government out of our personal lives and from interfering with matters of conscience that are part and parcel of the free expression of any religious view-point.
            As a point of fact one of the Supreme Courts rulings found that even a governmental agency that could define what a “religious cause” is violates the first amendment – our Bill of rights.

        • hero

          “… I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.” -Thomas Jefferson
          So no, it definitely goes both ways.

          • bluelock

            An “establishment of religion” is a governmental restriction — not a religious one.

            “Prohibiting the free exercise therof” is a governmental restriction — not a religious one.

    • Partneylr777

      Churches are guaranteed religious freedom with the First Amendment. Our freedoms of speech, assembly and what we think are based upon religious freedoms. Our nation was formed by religious freedom seekers who took the Bible and used its principles to form village, town, city, county, state and national governments. The basis of our law system is founded upon religious freedoms and Biblical laws. You want to take away religious freedom, go to Cuba and see what it is like to live in a country where religious freedoms are supressed. China and the former Soviet Union do/did the same. You live in a great country because of its desire to have religious freedom. Take that away and you will loose your freedoms.

    • Partneylr777

      Churches are guaranteed religious freedom with the First Amendment. Our freedoms of speech, assembly and what we think are based upon religious freedoms. Our nation was formed by religious freedom seekers who took the Bible and used its principles to form village, town, city, county, state and national governments. The basis of our law system is founded upon religious freedoms and Biblical laws. You want to take away religious freedom, go to Cuba and see what it is like to live in a country where religious freedoms are supressed. China and the former Soviet Union do/did the same. You live in a great country because of its desire to have religious freedom. Take that away and you will loose your freedoms.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

    Actually your own source has the number at 61%. Either way, the Catholic Church is not a democracy. As for the rest of your assertions; please provide sources for your information.

    • Rissa

      @ Matt- I see you defending the Catholic Church with every comment. Are you a priest?

  • http://www.facebook.com/RonaldLaRue Ron LaRue

    The constitution must be the measure for all American policy… Even the socialist President must be bound by our desire of complete freedom and separation of church and state. I am all for contraception. But I am completely against a government mandate. We have more than enough of those already! I wish to return to the constitution in all matters… Including the stances concerning a federal bank and income taxes.

    • Eric

      Did this really make Digg #1? I’m disappointed in the lack of content here..

  • http://www.facebook.com/RonaldLaRue Ron LaRue

    The constitution must be the measure for all American policy… Even the socialist President must be bound by our desire of complete freedom and separation of church and state. I am all for contraception. But I am completely against a government mandate. We have more than enough of those already! I wish to return to the constitution in all matters… Including the stances concerning a federal bank and income taxes.

  • Eric

    Did this really make Digg #1? I’m disappointed in the lack of content here..

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Cerullo/100000712050672 John Cerullo

    This country should be leading the world in working toward the goal of contraception information AND supplies available to anyone who wants it, here and everywhere else. The idea that this mandate, OR our president is “socialist” is patently ridiculous.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Cerullo/100000712050672 John Cerullo

    This country should be leading the world in working toward the goal of contraception information AND supplies available to anyone who wants it, here and everywhere else. The idea that this mandate, OR our president is “socialist” is patently ridiculous.

    • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

      So free goods and services for all is in no way socialist?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

        It’s not free, and no one is seriously saying it is. Insurance, and thus the services covered by the insurance, is paid for by premiums, which are at bottom paid for by the insured. Even when the employer directly pays some or all of the premium, it does so using money which should otherwise have gone to the employee as compensation for the work performed.

        The track record shows that the majority of people are more likely to use the preventive services if there is no co-pay, and that when they do so, the overall costs drop, which saves all of us money.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

          Why should the employer be forced to provide it.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

        It’s not free, and no one is seriously saying it is. Insurance, and thus the services covered by the insurance, is paid for by premiums, which are at bottom paid for by the insured. Even when the employer directly pays some or all of the premium, it does so using money which should otherwise have gone to the employee as compensation for the work performed.

        The track record shows that the majority of people are more likely to use the preventive services if there is no co-pay, and that when they do so, the overall costs drop, which saves all of us money.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      Why? People can’t be responsible on their own? People should have food, too? Should we provide that for free? Housing? Where does it stop?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

        David, I agree that people should be responsible, and I welcome the men to take over childcare and household chores and all other family responsibilities for these children that you so desperately want to see them have. How about it! Take some responsibility. Last time I checked, there is a man involved in every case of pregnancy. So, be responsible, man, and take care of those kids. Every time you have sex, you are intending to produce another child that you can take care of. Cool! Go for it.

        Or, how about mandatory vasectomies for all males over the age of 14? Oh, it’s your body, you say? Well, women want control over their own bodies as well.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jean-Luc-Aufranc/100000690503162 Jean-Luc Aufranc

    The issue here is not religious. The very issue is that insurance companies have to pay for birth control. This is really silly. This will increase the cost of insurance. It also defeats the whole purpose of insurance, which is to insure you in case something happens to you. Not before it happens. If birth control is covered by birth control, why not cover clothes as well (if you don’t wear clothes you may get sick) and food (you’ll surely die if you don’t eat)..

    • http://twitter.com/MarvinMarks Marvin Marks

      Preventative care decreases health care costs (birth control is far less expensive than an unplanned pregnancy.)

      The comparison to shirts etc is ridiculous. You know better right? “Slippery slope” arguments are almost always dumb, and this one is certainly no exception.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

        So… answer the point? Why wouldn’t the insurance company cover it if it truly does reduce cost?

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

          Listen up. The insurance companies ARE paying for it. NOT the Church-affiliated institutions that accept billions of dollars of taxpayer money for their “businesses” which are NOT non-profit, btw.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jean-Luc-Aufranc/100000690503162 Jean-Luc Aufranc

        The only parties that benefit from such mandate are insurance companies and companies that manufactures products for birth control. Employers, customers and/or employees will bear the extra costs one way or another.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

      So you also oppose insurance coverage for annual physicals, mammograms, pap smears, prostate exams, and all other preventive coverage?

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

        He isn’t opposing the insurance. He’s opposing the mandate. He is supporting only liberty.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jean-Luc-Aufranc/100000690503162 Jean-Luc Aufranc

        If people want to pay extra for an assurance plan that provides those (including birth control) that’s OK. But then the extra cost of insurance would probably be higher than buying it yourself. If this kind of things were not forced by the government, they would not be part of insurance plans because it would make little financial sense.

        To employees where the employers pay for health care it looks free. However, the employer needs to pass this cost somewhere: decrease his margins, increase the costs of services/products, lessen salary increases, etc…

        I understand it is only mandatory for women (correct me if I’m wrong), so it could lead some employers to discriminate against women when they look to hire.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jean-Luc-Aufranc/100000690503162 Jean-Luc Aufranc

    The issue here is not religious. The very issue is that insurance companies have to pay for birth control. This is really silly. This will increase the cost of insurance. It also defeats the whole purpose of insurance, which is to insure you in case something happens to you. Not before it happens. If birth control is covered by birth control, why not cover clothes as well (if you don’t wear clothes you may get sick) and food (you’ll surely die if you don’t eat)..

    • http://twitter.com/MarvinMarks Marvin Marks

      Preventative care decreases health care costs (birth control is far less expensive than an unplanned pregnancy.)

      The comparison to shirts etc is ridiculous. You know better right? “Slippery slope” arguments are almost always dumb, and this one is certainly no exception.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

        So… answer the point? Why wouldn’t the insurance company cover it if it truly does reduce cost?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

      So you also oppose insurance coverage for annual physicals, mammograms, pap smears, prostate exams, and all other preventive coverage?

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jean-Luc-Aufranc/100000690503162 Jean-Luc Aufranc

        If people want to pay extra for an assurance plan that provides those (including birth control) that’s OK. But then the extra cost of insurance would probably be higher than buying it yourself. If this kind of things were not forced by the government, they would not be part of insurance plans because it would make little financial sense.

        To employees where the employers pay for health care it looks free. However, the employer needs to pass this cost somewhere: decrease his margins, increase the costs of services/products, lessen salary increases, etc…

        I understand it is only mandatory for women (correct me if I’m wrong), so it could lead some employers to discriminate against women when they look to hire.

  • http://twitter.com/MarvinMarks Marvin Marks

    These right wing nuts are just freaking out because all of their years of lying about Obama haven’t worked. Now they’re going to try to win an election by being anti-birth control. …. …

  • alissa mower clough

    It’s amazing how many people who cry “Abortion is Murder!” are little girls and old women….

  • Guest

    That Poll really made me feel better about the american people as a whole. It seems the vast majority of Americans are rational, sensible individuals. It’s funny, that, as a non-American, the media has completely warped my perception of Americans as extremist nutjobs who don’t seem to have a rational bone in their body.

    But this poll indicates Americans are pretty sensible and, Dem or Rep, seem to have pretty middle of the road, rational views.

    Americans, your media is making you look like fools to the rest of the world.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      Yeah, those extremist nutjobs that believe in liberty and responsibility.

  • Phillip Demers

    The great thing about this is that the ‘overwhelming majority’ will be underwhelming in just one or two generations…

  • Louis Partney

    It doesn’t matter how many agree or disagree. All churches have as a basis for their beliefs based upon the Bible. I personally try to stand upon the Bible and what it teaches. To take an unborn child by contraception or abortion is murder. So…what gives the right for government to step in and say, “Church, you are going to pay and provide for contraception regardless. It is clearly an infringement of religious freedom.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1269981632 Jeff W Turner

    I do not think any employer should be made to pay for birth control. Birth control is up to the individual person. If you don’t want children then pay for the birth control yourself…. or deal with the children when you end up pregnant.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

      I think you should deal with the children you father, when you have sex with a woman who is unable to afford birth control or you refuse to wear a condom.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

      I think you should deal with the children you father, when you have sex with a woman who is unable to afford birth control or you refuse to wear a condom.

  • Rose Jones

    One of the biggest problems in the whole world are unwanted children. I mean think of it – children which should be wanted, loved and cared for are NOT because it is not the right time for them. Obviously family planning/birth control is a crucial area for women’s health and freedom and for the sanity of the nation. The Catholic church has a lot going for it -generally tends to care for poor people, but when it comes to sex – it is really, really messed up!

    • canoko18

      Rose, the Catholic church has nothing against family planning and birth control. In fact if you want a healthy option to chemical birth control with its increased risk of cancer, check out the Billings Ovulation Method which is 99.5% effective. http://nfpaware.com/faq/
      Any Catholic church can also put you in touch with people who teach these courses.

    • canoko18

      Rose, the Catholic church has nothing against family planning and birth control. In fact if you want a healthy option to chemical contraception with its increased risk of cancer, check out the Billings Ovulation Method which is 99.5% effective. That’s way better than your chemicals. http://nfpaware.com/faq/
      Any Catholic church can also put you in touch with people who teach these courses.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      I must have missed where the article said the Catholic church was for banning contraception.

  • http://ohnimus.wordpress.com/ Christian Ohnimus

    This is silly. All the Catholic church wants is to not be forced to cooperate with something that violates its tenets. The new “accommodation” still requires insurance companies to cover the entire cost of contraception which means that Catholics still must front the cost when they pay their insurance premiums. Also, to assert that this will save insurance companies money is ridiculous: if that were true insurance companies would have taken that initiative on their own – instead they’re being forced to pay by executive mandate.

    For more information on why Catholics are upset go here: http://ohnimus.wordpress.com/2012/02/12/the-hhs-mandate-and-the-compromise-that-wasnt/

  • RealityCheck

    Thank GOD we’re a Constitutional republic and not a democracy, then, and an “overwhelming majority of voters” dont get to decide what religious freedom Catholics do and dont have!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

      Unfortunately, based on a lot of writing and what I see on TV (particularly MSNBC), even the fact that we are a republic won’t save us much longer.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

      Is anyone forcing a Catholic to use birth control? So exactly what freedom is being restricted here?

  • RealityCheck

    Also, frightening that the ignorant totalitarian author of this Digg post is so eager to violate the real rights of religious minorities for the BULLSH*T nonright to “free contraception”. Get the eff outta my country you nazi slave driver!

    • Dickott

      Oooh You must really have problems with your self image sweetie

  • William Salam

    What is STFU?

    • Anomaly

      It i means, ‘shut the fuck up.’

      • Joe1

        This is the first time I’ve visited Digg and I’m shocked at the bigotry that’s written above. How can this be written and accepted as a news article? It’s already placed this website in a bad light. If the article was about specific colour of skin or ethnicity there’d be an uproar, but because it’s about Catholics, it’s OK?

  • William Salam

    What is STFU?

    • Anomaly

      It i means, ‘shut the fuck up.’

  • Iamjoetheplummer

    Those darn Catholics. Why can’t they ever just give in to popular opinion? Why do they always hafta follow their beliefs?

  • Joe1

    This is the first time I’ve visited Digg and I’m shocked at the bigotry that’s written above. How can this be written and accepted as a news article? It’s already placed this website in a bad light. If the article was about specific colour of skin or ethnicity there’d be an uproar, but because it’s about Catholics, it’s OK?

  • Aftab Kenneth Wilson

    It is written ” Thou Shall Not Kill”.

  • Aftab Kenneth Wilson

    It is written ” Thou Shall Not Kill”.

  • SONDRA

    READ THE CONSTITUTION… The original 13 states refused to sign the Constitution until the BILL OF RIGHTS was included as Amendments 1 – 10.
    The Issue is not necessarily about a religious belief ; it is about the violation of the First Amendment which guarantees the right to ” freedom of religion “…
    It seems that the Law of America and our rights as American citizens have been eroded little by little with every year since the Revolutionary War of 1776. If we do not demend that the Rule of Law be followed, one day we will wake up to a nation that has no guarantees of our rights and freedoms.
    HISTORY IS A STERN TEACHER… IF YOU DO NOT LEARN FROM HISTORY, YOU ARE CONDEMENED TO REPEAT HISTORY.
    Read the Declaration of Independence and read the Constitution, and you will marvel how these truths were self-evident to the Founding Fathers. Remember… the freedoms we have today are only because Americans fought ,bled and died for you to have those freedoms. God Bless America.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

      If you are suggesting that the Free Exercise clause prevents any regulation of religion, kindly explain how you would deal with those religions whose rites call for human sacrifice?

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

        What a total diversion of the issue.
        Human sacrifice is a rights violation. Not wanting to be forced to pay for contraceptions… violates nobody’s rights.

  • SONDRA

    READ THE CONSTITUTION… The original 13 states refused to sign the Constitution until the BILL OF RIGHTS was included as Amendments 1 – 10.
    The Issue is not necessarily about a religious belief ; it is about the violation of the First Amendment which guarantees the right to ” freedom of religion “…
    It seems that the Law of America and our rights as American citizens have been eroded little by little with every year since the Revolutionary War of 1776. If we do not demend that the Rule of Law be followed, one day we will wake up to a nation that has no guarantees of our rights and freedoms.
    HISTORY IS A STERN TEACHER… IF YOU DO NOT LEARN FROM HISTORY, YOU ARE CONDEMENED TO REPEAT HISTORY.
    Read the Declaration of Independence and read the Constitution, and you will marvel how these truths were self-evident to the Founding Fathers. Remember… the freedoms we have today are only because Americans fought ,bled and died for you to have those freedoms. God Bless America.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Kenni-Judd/100001516154617 Kenni Judd

      If you are suggesting that the Free Exercise clause prevents any regulation of religion, kindly explain how you would deal with those religions whose rites call for human sacrifice?

  • V_kshemkalyani

    I am an Indian Hindu writing my comment from India. Almost all the asian countries are facing multiple problems due to their over population. I strongly suggest that use of contraceptives for birth control need not come within the purview of religion.

    • http://fabulousdates.net/ fabulous dates

      65% percent ??? i don’t belive !

  • Mr.Vikas Kshemakalyani

    I am an Indian Hindu writing my comment from India. Almost all the asian countries are facing multiple problems due to their over population. I strongly suggest that use of contraceptives for birth control need not come within the purview of religion.

  • Upaces

    I don’t know who took this poll; but it is NO ONE’s business to tell that “specific” Church what they can and can not do. It is the division of Church and State.

  • Upaces

    I don’t know who took this poll; but it is NO ONE’s business to tell that “specific” Church what they can and can not do. It is the division of Church and State.

  • Mikeparklane

    Ironically this is not about Contraception, it is about stomping on the First Amendment. Catholic really are not gaga about contraception but are not upset about it the way the Liberal Media has presented it. People in America (until Obama gets reelected) have freedoms that they do not want messed with and Obama has put his dictatorial finger in the hornets nest.

    • asburykat

      no, it’s about a bunch of uptight old men trying to control women’s sexuality.

      • Rixar13

        Republicans are just like insurance companies… This is just a distraction..

      • Teriqua Jones

        WRONG!! The Catholic church is being targeted by Obama.

        I am assuming you don’t know this, but the Catholic Church has always stood against artificial birth control.

        No one is required to be a member of the church. But in the United States of America, the Government should not be forcing the church to pay for something that violates their beliefs.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

          The Church is not being forced to pay for anything!

          And, most of the employees of these “religious corporations” are not even Catholic! Or whatever religion.

          So, effectively, if the Bishops got their way, women must be forced to accept Catholic dogma on this subject.

          The witch burnings were largely directed toward herbalists, who were midwifes and attended to the health needs of their communities. Including birth control. Perhaps you do not fully comprehend the extent of the torture and death inflicted by this same Church, who is so intent on controlling women.

  • Mikeparklane

    Ironically this is not about Contraception, it is about stomping on the First Amendment. Catholic really are not gaga about contraception but are not upset about it the way the Liberal Media has presented it. People in America (until Obama gets reelected) have freedoms that they do not want messed with and Obama has put his dictatorial finger in the hornets nest.

    • asburykat

      no, it’s about a bunch of uptight old men trying to control women’s sexuality.

      • teriqua

        WRONG!! The Catholic church is being targeted by Obama.

        I am assuming you don’t know this, but the Catholic Church has always stood against artificial birth control.

        No one is required to be a member of the church. But in the United States of America, the Government should not be forcing the church to pay for something that violates their beliefs.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

          The Church is not being forced to pay for anything!

          And, most of the employees of these “religious corporations” are not even Catholic! Or whatever religion.

          So, effectively, if the Bishops got their way, women must be forced to accept Catholic dogma on this subject.

          The witch burnings were largely directed toward herbalists, who were midwifes and attended to the health needs of their communities. Including birth control. Perhaps you do not fully comprehend the extent of the torture and death inflicted by this same Church, who is so intent on controlling women.

  • http://twitter.com/mikesitolla mike sitolla

    THRU THE BIBLE.COM

  • http://fabulousdates.net/ fabulous dates

    65% percent ??? i don’t belive !

  • jeremiah wright

    So if some majority is okay with trampling a religion’s basic rights, it’s okay? And if that religion, in its 2000+ year history has its moments of shame, then it no longer deserves those rights?

    Lots of bigots on this board, and lots of people who don’t seem to understand much about our Constitutional freedoms, the very things that make/made America great.

    Maybe this little yarn will make the picture a little clearer for some of you: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/the-parable-of-the-kosher-deli

  • sam

    The only reason I’m commenting is that this asshole blog keeps spamming my email. Though this article sucks there are some good comments. But here’s the cold hard fact about how most people feel about ideas and people who base their ideas on political philosophies. I don’t care if you want to be a butt-fucking, baby-killing, whore… just don’t expect me to pay for it. (Its not a right)

  • jrchambers

    Birth control is a very important issue with the RCC because every baby born is a new member if the parents are Catholic. Catholics do not evangelize. It is necessary for them to practice “forced baptism.” Forced baptism is exactly what it is, considering the infant knows nothing about it. This, of course, is contrary to what the Bible teaches. The RCC has suffered a loss of membership due to the pedophilia scandals involving their priests. Even though 95% of married Catholics practice birth control, it is necessary for the RCC to condemn it due to the stated reasons.

    • Joris

      You have little sense of history–what brought us to this; the RCC could care less about numbers, and the hierarchy (and tradition of the last1000 years or so) see in every fetus a child of God; “forced” baptism is an ignorant statement, I am sorry to say–an issue waged since the time of Constantine (circa 300-440 of our years) never looked on it as “forced” but simply a practice to get people into (a generic for everyone baptized) heaven. The big discussion at that time was whether to wait till just before dying or to have infant baptism. Most settled on infant baptism to “insure” heaven. I disagree with the Bishops, but your reasoning needs more facts. I have to laugh because your lack of facts makes you sound so Republican–I recall the Senator who said that 90 or 95% of Planned parenthood is abortions, but he did not mean that to be “factual statement.” Know your facts, please, before you reason with thin air.

  • jrchambers

    Birth control is a very important issue with the RCC because every baby born is a new member if the parents are Catholic. Catholics do not evangelize. It is necessary for them to practice “forced baptism.” Forced baptism is exactly what it is, considering the infant knows nothing about it. This, of course, is contrary to what the Bible teaches. The RCC has suffered a loss of membership due to the pedophilia scandals involving their priests. Even though 95% of married Catholics practice birth control, it is necessary for the RCC to condemn it due to the stated reasons.

  • http://butimbeautiful.wordpress.com/ Englishrose659

    Hang on though, does birth control actually COST that much? Can’t people go out and buy a packet of condoms without bothering their religiously affiliated insurers? I have to say, to an Aussie America’s not so much a different continent as a different planet..(but we love yous all).

  • Mangumwhitehouse

    Church should be disconnected completely from politics otherwise we are going back in time again.

    • Joris

      Adolph Hitler disconnected religion from politics very successfully. He just made Nazi-ism his state religion, though he did not call it that. If religion were absent, chaos would reign. If religion runs things, we have totalitarianism. In this country, we balance–see-sawing back and forth–sometimes political expediency wins (polygamy) or Dred Scott (where political principles (and Southern sympathies) caused the Supreme Court to decide that he was more property than human); sometimes religious principles (or prejudices–e.g., polygamy again) wins.

  • Mangumwhitehouse

    Church should be disconnected completely from politics otherwise we are going back in time again.

    • Joris

      Adolph Hitler disconnected religion from politics very successfully. He just made Nazi-ism his state religion, though he did not call it that. If religion were absent, chaos would reign. If religion runs things, we have totalitarianism. In this country, we balance–see-sawing back and forth–sometimes political expediency wins (polygamy) or Dred Scott (where political principles (and Southern sympathies) caused the Supreme Court to decide that he was more property than human); sometimes religious principles (or prejudices–e.g., polygamy again) wins.

  • http://adamjustice.me/ Social Media Marketing Expert

    I have never saw an article on the Internet take other people’s objections so far out of context. I see why the author posts under a pseudonym, and am thinking about installing some kind of software that filters out this domain from my Internet, and anything with ‘STFU’ in the title for future reference.

    You can’t have seperation of church and state on a basis of what works for you. Catholics don’t want to be told what to do, period. Nobody does, but if you like telling others what to do, and this is what you want, you’re dancing like a chimp when something like this sneaks through congress. If people who work at Catholic institutions feel so strongly about working somewhere that offers birth control, they should go put their application in at Planned Parenthood.

    • http://www.facebook.com/BloggerX Bathazar Xavier

      a word of advice, “I have never saw an article on the Internet…” pretty much negates the whole idea that you’re a social media marketing expert. i pretty much stopped reading when i saw that. at least STFU is proper grammar.

  • http://socialmediasun.com/ Adam Justice

    I have never saw an article on the Internet take other people’s objections so far out of context. I see why the author posts under a pseudonym, and am thinking about installing some kind of software that filters out this domain from my Internet, and anything with ‘STFU’ in the title for future reference.

    You can’t have seperation of church and state on a basis of what works for you. Catholics don’t want to be told what to do, period. Nobody does, but if you like telling others what to do, and this is what you want, you’re dancing like a chimp when something like this sneaks through congress. If people who work at Catholic institutions feel so strongly about working somewhere that offers birth control, they should go put their application in at Planned Parenthood.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sally-Yan/100003537104322 Sally Yan

    A place to meet military singles and admirers in the world! m i l i t a r y l o v e r.c om You can find friendship, love, romance, marriage or even more.Sign up is totally free,It’s the best time to join now,have a try,you will love it.

    • Teriqua Jones

      Hey Sally, STFU!! Take your trolling elsewhere.

  • militarylover

    A place to meet military singles and admirers in the world! m i l i t a r y l o v e r.c om You can find friendship, love, romance, marriage or even more.Sign up is totally free,It’s the best time to join now,have a try,you will love it.

    • teriqua

      Hey Sally, STFU!! Take your trolling elsewhere.

  • Susan_paul_feb

    NICE

  • Teriqua Jones

    I hope the Catholic Church stands their ground. Demanding any American group or individual to adhere to a president’s rule is pushing the envelope to socialism.

    As far as your reader who suggest outlawing Viagra; I did some research for you. The Catholic Church has done done a lot to protect children. Including, a class action lawsuit, paying millions to the victims of any and all abuse by priests. During this process, a list of priests involved was compiled. Lastly, the church removed all of the priests involved in this scandal.

    Because this news is about a decade old, many of those boys are now grown men. How do you think they feel reading that? So, I feel your reader was cruel to bring up Viagra.

  • Rixar13

    Republicans are just like insurance companies… This is just a distraction..

  • Minervagarza55

    The Catholic Church is not now nor has it ever attempted to impose its religious beliefs on any one. What it wants is to be given the same courtesy it gives to others. To not be obliged to follow someone else’s beliefs against the will of devoted practicing and faithful Catholics. I believe that the government should not force this venerable institution to do something that goes against its practices and against it’s people

  • blairjohn62

    That is a bunch of bologna, a lie and a sin to boot! Catholics-(especially 95%)DO NOT SUPPORT THIS PRESIDENT OR THIS LAW SO DO NOT PRINT FAKE INFORMATION!!!!! YOU’RE STARTING TO JOIN NBC, ABC and CBS HUH????

  • blairjohn62

    That is a bunch of bologna, a lie and a sin to boot! Catholics-(especially 95%)DO NOT SUPPORT THIS PRESIDENT OR THIS LAW SO DO NOT PRINT FAKE INFORMATION!!!!! YOU’RE STARTING TO JOIN NBC, ABC and CBS HUH????

  • blairjohn62

    Eugenia: For YOUR INFORMATION: The Catholic Church has thousands and thousands of excellent, professional priests and no one approves of ANY TYPE OF MOLESTATION, now, if you realize that all the other Christian Churches in the country are not organized as the Catholic Church IS. IF you did add all of the other Christian Preachers, Ministers and Deacons, etc. together, they too would have a bunch of Molesters also, but being as there is only 1/1000 of 1% of the Catholic Preists that were actually CONVICTED (and that too, I add, is too many) so don’t just put it all on “Catholics”, The Church cannot control each and every individual that gets a Theology Degree, it is a world wide problem, include Muslims, Jews and all other denominations that don’t turn in their Elders, but choose to hide them, do you not think there is corruption in all denominations? There is.

  • blairjohn62

    Eugenia: For YOUR INFORMATION: The Catholic Church has thousands and thousands of excellent, professional priests and no one approves of ANY TYPE OF MOLESTATION, now, if you realize that all the other Christian Churches in the country are not organized as the Catholic Church IS. IF you did add all of the other Christian Preachers, Ministers and Deacons, etc. together, they too would have a bunch of Molesters also, but being as there is only 1/1000 of 1% of the Catholic Preists that were actually CONVICTED (and that too, I add, is too many) so don’t just put it all on “Catholics”, The Church cannot control each and every individual that gets a Theology Degree, it is a world wide problem, include Muslims, Jews and all other denominations that don’t turn in their Elders, but choose to hide them, do you not think there is corruption in all denominations? There is.

  • blairjohn62

    indolering: Wow, for a name like that (indolering) , I would think that you are smarter than that but then again, I see that you wrote your letter from where you work, The New York Times, another one of the governments “favorites”.

  • blairjohn62

    indolering: Wow, for a name like that (indolering) , I would think that you are smarter than that but then again, I see that you wrote your letter from where you work, The New York Times, another one of the governments “favorites”.

  • Garyjminter

    With the bad economy and overpopulation in urban areas, we must consider sterilization of those receiving public funds for their survival. After one or two kids, if the parents are dependent on taxpayer funds for their survival, they should be encouraged to be sterilized.

  • http://twitter.com/stanchaz stan chaz

    What a circus. Republicans condemn condoms! Republicans praise rape as a gift from God. Republicans endorse trans-vaginal probes. Republicans hate women (and men who want to plan their families). What’s next? Republicans mandate missionary-position only? Hey, Newt was right. ‘Cause Newt and all his Republican friends SHOULD set up a moon colony…. AND GO THERE! Then, they could tell each other what to do and how to live and who to love…. while leaving the REST of us alone, here on Earth. Newt, I always KNEW that you were a problem-solver. Unfortunately, you and your Republican friends ARE the problem…

  • williameb

    Separation of Church and State is what the Catholic Church wants. Don’t pass laws which force the Church to do what is against its beliefs. Freedom of religion is basic to the United States. If this law isn’t changed the other Christian churches will join with the Catholics and opposite it.

    The way that the law is written is difficult to understand but its bottom line is making people do what many consider sinful. If it was simply an option no one would be upset.

  • Believer

    I agree with the separation of Church and State… the state shouldn’t interfere with the affairs of the Church.

  • MOHAWK225

    ITS NOT A TWO WAY STREET.. IT WAS WRITTEN TO PREVENT THE GOVERNMENT FROM ESTABLISHING A STATE CHURCH LIKE THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.. PERIOD. END OF HISTORY LESSON.. GO STUDY IT.

  • Malby

    The last three words in the headline are unnecessary.

  • Joris

    We have this tension in a democracy that believes in right endowed by the creator–that a majority is not always “right”–nor is “rightness” always a majority. the Athenian democracy voted to send a fleet to Syracuse–and it proved disastrous to Athens. Lincoln had the same problem. A majority wanted to punish the South, while he felt that the right thing to do was welcome their people back into the union (lower case) that they had never really left. The Catholic bishops are at times “mitered birdbrains,”–the phrase is not mine, though I like it–and their moral authority about sex is minimal, but there is a need to respect conscience here that, historically, the better angels of our American nature have respected.

  • Ultium

    The catholic church historically has been a dark stain on the conscience of humanity and even recently has taken major steps to protect pedophiles in 100s of cases. The better angels of our American nature need to focus on issues that matter, not a pretend controversy over contraception which an overwhelming majority of people including Catholics actually support.

  • Joris

    “dark stain on the conscience of humanity:” — it has been the saintly side of humanity as much as the “dark stain” – do not exaggerate, the way so many propagandists do. it is a human institution, and seeing only the “dark” side is an exaggeration. In the early Middle Ages, it did raise the people as best it could, even while John XII and his mother worked against the good of the people. It has been both, as a good historian will tell you. Do not exaggerate. I will repeat that “conscience” is something apart from that church, and is the deeper and more significant issue here.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

    They support the right to access contraception. They don’t support forcing other people to pay for it. Why is that so hard to understand?

  • Joe Beaubien

    saintly side? Really…which part?

    – The part when they abused little kids and purposefully hide it.
    – The part where they purposefully keep half of the population (ie: woman) from having any power in their institution?
    – The part where they try to impose on people morality that they never ever abided by?
    – The part where they say to africans that condoms are causing aids?
    – The part where they would CHARGE MONEY to people to forgive them of their sins?
    – The part where they have RIDICULOUS amounts of riches and use it for their own sake instead of actually helping the widow and the orphan.
    – The part where they burned people alive?
    – The part about the different inquisitions?
    – The part where saying something against them would have you killed?
    – The part where they kept the entire world from advancing for close to 1000 years…ie: the dark ages (this one alone is enough to have the entire religious establishment taken to the back of the shed…).

    Shall I go on?

    Yes…they build hospitals and orphanages (which was a good way to get rid of the children born from a noun/priest). But that is nowhere good enough for all the horrible things they did.

    On the balance of things, religion has given nothing good to the world.

    However, what it has given is a crutch for the weak minded to lean on…and to group around, to pick on the people that don’t think like them. Basically a nice way to control people. Why think for yourself when someone already wrote down everything you should do… (oh and of course, don’t forgive to give a cut)…

  • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

    Where do you get this idea that the Church is responsible for the “Dark Ages?” The Dark Ages started with the collapse of Christian Rome at the hands of Pagan Barbarians. Christian monks preserved and copied manuscripts in monasteries for centuries during the “Dark Ages.” I see this assertion all over the place and no evidence given.

  • Teriqua Jones

    Speaking to the first item you spewed… ” The abused children started telling their parents. The church did not try to hide it. In fact, they made every attempt to remove priests involved in this. I’m certain you heard about a class action lawsuit, which the church agreed to paying millions to the victims of any and all abuse by priests. During this process, a list of priests involved was compiled. Lastly, the church removed all of the priests involved in this scandal.
    Because this news is about a decade old, maybe you forgot that part.
    You were on one crazy rant! So, I will stop there. The rest is pathetic fiction…
    Nouns having babies? Do they give birth to adjectives? Really :/

  • Nikisunshine

    Actually it was vice versa. The christians torched the Library of Alexandria and demonized everything pagan. Mostly because they stole their traditions from the pagans and then tried to destroy them. Please don’t mistake your biased views as the truth.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

    Uh no, the “Dark Ages” started when Rome fell, not when the Library of Alexandria was destroyed. I’m looking for a reason that Christianity is responsible for the “Dark Ages.” The problem that assertion presents is that we get into a totally theoretical discussion about would would of, could have, or should have happened if history had happened differently.

  • http://www.facebook.com/mattscholand Matt Scholand

    Uh no, the “Dark Ages” started when Rome fell, not when the Library of Alexandria was destroyed. I’m looking for a reason that Christianity is responsible for the “Dark Ages.” The problem that assertion presents is that we get into a totally theoretical discussion about would would of, could have, or should have happened if history had happened differently.

  • Nikisunshine

    Rome falling didn’t happen on a Tuesday. It took a few hundred years. While the year is cited at 476, it was a long time coming and the burning of the Library in Alexandria was part of a larger movement.

    I suggest that you read The Pagan Christ by Tom Harpur, any writings from Origen or even about his life, and of course, Edward Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Harpur is an Anglican Priest, Origen is an early Christian and Gibbon is an aethist.

  • Ed

    “Dark Ages” is a term used by the propagandists of the “Renaissance.” They thought they were coming out of a time of “darkness” The proper term is “middle-ages.” The Time of Feudalism in the West. And, you are right, it would have happened with or without the destruction of a library filled with magical texts.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

    Who sponsored the Inquisition? The Crusades? Hitler? Who burned women at the stake?

  • Nikisunshine

    Rome falling didn’t happen on a Tuesday. It took a few hundred years. While the year is cited at 476, it was a long time coming and the burning of the Library in Alexandria was part of a larger movement.

    I suggest that you read The Pagan Christ by Tom Harpur, any writings from Origen or even about his life, and of course, Edward Gibbon’s The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Harpur is an Anglican Priest, Origen is an early Christian and Gibbon is an aethist.

  • Ed

    “Dark Ages” is a term used by the propagandists of the “Renaissance.” They thought they were coming out of a time of “darkness” The proper term is “middle-ages.” The Time of Feudalism in the West. And, you are right, it would have happened with or without the destruction of a library filled with magical texts.

  • Louis Partney

    It doesn’t matter how many agree or disagree. All churches have as a basis for their beliefs based upon the Bible. I personally try to stand upon the Bible and what it teaches. To take an unborn child by contraception or abortion is murder. So…what gives the right for government to step in and say, “Church, you are going to pay and provide for contraception regardless. It is clearly an infringement of religious freedom.

  • Teriqua Jones

    You seem determined to prove you are a fool. Or at least you are giving Matt a chance to enlighten us.

  • RealityCheck

    Thank GOD we’re a Constitutional republic and not a democracy, then, and an “overwhelming majority of voters” dont get to decide what religious freedom Catholics do and dont have!

  • Iamjoetheplummer

    Those darn Catholics. Why can’t they ever just give in to popular opinion? Why do they always hafta follow their beliefs?

  • RealityCheck

    Also, frightening that the ignorant totalitarian author of this Digg post is so eager to violate the real rights of religious minorities for the BULLSH*T nonright to “free contraception”. Get the eff outta my country you nazi slave driver!

  • Dickott

    Oooh You must really have problems with your self image sweetie

  • http://twitter.com/mikesitolla mike sitolla

    THRU THE BIBLE.COM

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_EMKNBTS4I7OW57ZFM3EVA7CCHA David

    Unfortunately, based on a lot of writing and what I see on TV (particularly MSNBC), even the fact that we are a republic won’t save us much longer.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

    Is anyone forcing a Catholic to use birth control? So exactly what freedom is being restricted here?

  • Minervagarza55

    The Catholic Church is not now nor has it ever attempted to impose its religious beliefs on any one. What it wants is to be given the same courtesy it gives to others. To not be obliged to follow someone else’s beliefs against the will of devoted practicing and faithful Catholics. I believe that the government should not force this venerable institution to do something that goes against its practices and against it’s people

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cedar-Cat/100000282706489 Cedar Cat

    How long did it go on before the Church was forced to confront it? And, I might add, it was not until the Priest rape of BOYS was publicized was anything done. 1 in 3 women will be raped or beaten in her lifetime. But we don’t care, unless it’s hurting BOYS! Let’s ask the abused children, boys and girls, whether all the priests have been removed.

    Catholic orphanages were, indeed, begun to house the unwanted children born to priests and nuns. The author simply made a typo.

  • MOHAWK225

    ITS NOT A TWO WAY STREET.. IT WAS WRITTEN TO PREVENT THE GOVERNMENT FROM ESTABLISHING A STATE CHURCH LIKE THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.. PERIOD. END OF HISTORY LESSON.. GO STUDY IT.