Obama Attacks Mitt Romney On Birth Control

WASHINGTON -- The White House is taking on GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney over his criticism of President Barack Obama's birth control coverage mandate.

Press secretary Jay Carney says Romney is an "odd messenger" to be attacking Obama over the issue. The mandate requires that church-affiliated employers such as hospitals or charities provide birth control coverage even if it runs counter to their religious beliefs.

Romney has accused Obama of an "assault on religion" over the issue. But Carney says a virtually identical policy is in place in Massachusetts, where Romney served as governor, and that it's ironic for Romney to criticize Obama over it.

The rule is causing an election-year furor for Obama. Carney says the White House wants to search for ways to address Catholics' concerns.

Also on HuffPost:

 

 

Comments

[agnes n]

11:24 AM on 02/09/2012

Sorry I'm running on, but as a Catholic I want to say one more thing about the church. You are a dictatorial, not a representative institution. You tell people what to do, you do not in any way take the temperature of Catholic people and then change your views to represent those peoples’ interests. That is ok, it is the Catholic church’s place as a religious institution, but PLEASE stop saying that you are protecting the rights of Catholics. If you are not representative, you are not representing rights. The VAST majority of sexually active Catholics in America (98%) have used modern contraception. If you were actually protecting Catholic peoples’ rights based on what they want, you would support contraception, not oppose it. Once again, go ahead and oppose contraception, it is not my place, even as a Catholic, to stop you. But do NOT do it in my name.

[agnes n]

11:24 AM on 02/09/2012

One more thing, as members of society and as financial contributors to multiple group programs, EVERYONE pays for things they may not agree with or believe in. That is part of being in a society. You have to make compromises because you don’t get to decide that everything is always your way. This includes healthcare. What if a person thought that no one who smoked should get coverage for lung cancer? Would we allow them to interfere with that care? This may be about a difference in opinion, and that is ok, but as a healthcare issue, these laws need to be made based on what is medically sensible and what makes sense to society (including those members of society who are poor). If we allow everyone to look at a list of healthcare services and determine which they want to contribute to and which they do not as taxpayers and as insurance clients, we would have a system that would completely fall apart. You can say that you don’t believe this law is a good one, but you cannot say that you refuse to contribute. Maybe I don’t want any taxes to go to building a sports arena. Do I get to withhold the portion of my taxes that would have been contributed? You can vote against things, but you do not get to determine what parts of group programs you want to take part in and what you don’t.

[agnes n]

11:23 AM on 02/09/2012

Further, I am sick of the idea that doctors, or any group, has the right to interfere with healthcare based on their religious beliefs. If you chose to become a doctor, your mandate as a doctor is more important than any religious mandate you hold. If this is difficult for you, than you must find another job. If you cannot act within the ethical bounds (provide the highest possible level of care, inform people of their options and allow people to make essential decisions in their healthcare) of this position that is so essential to society you CANNOT be a doctor. If the owner of a company were a traditional Jehovah's Witness and didn't believe in blood transfusions, could s/he disallow transfusions in their employees’ insurance? If a doctor were a conservative Christian Scientist who didn’t believe in medical interference would we allow them to refuse care or, as a person in a position of trust, advise people against essential healthcare? The religious right has fought really hard to ensure people remain on life support. What if that is counter to the doctor’s beliefs?
No Catholic requires a Catholic doctor to lead them in their faith. If they do not believe in birth control they simply tell ANY doctor they don’t want it. Easy. Doctors are not, and should not, be leading people in their religious beliefs. I can’t believe that elevating a doctor’s right to religion over their patients’ rights to the same has even become a discussion.

[agnes n]

11:16 AM on 02/09/2012

Unbelievable that they are using religous freedom to push this. If my employer or my doctor refuses to allow me to determine for myself how I feel about birth control as a Catholic, Jew, Muslim or any other faith, they are absolutely stepping on my right to freedom of “thought, consciousness and religion”. This isn't about freedom of religion, it is about deciding that institutions have a right to religious freedom while their members do not. Essentially, when some members of a group are allowed to define and interpret a religion and then force those interpretations on the rest of the group, what we end up with is a creation (or strengthening) of power classes that are then allowed to use religious mandates to maintain their position of power. This type of thinking is exactly what human rights covenants are trying to protect people AGAINST with religious freedom. Religious freedom is NOT about the right of an institution to tell people what to do, it is about the right of each individual to determine for themselves how they believe and think. By elevating the institution’s right to inflict their will on their members, patients or employees over the individual’s right to determine for themselves how they interpret their faith, we would be acting in OPPOSITION to religious freedom. Well played Romney and Gingrich. Very clever and incredibly ironic, but this demonstrates exactly how you feel. Individuals are not important, powerful groups are.

[Stan DaMann]

06:23 AM on 02/09/2012

Are any of the Ugly Republican candidates of hatred ever going to make a single legitimate argument about an important issue?

[TheNative]

06:36 PM on 02/11/2012

Not unless it supports their personal gain

[Roy Merritt old car guy]

05:47 AM on 02/09/2012

It isn't just Mass. that has this same mandate but 28 states all together have the same mandate. This is just so rediculious that it would funny if it wasn't so sad.

[charleshbuchannan]

11:17 PM on 02/08/2012

"Welcome to a nation that has a First Amendment that prtoects religious freedoms. It is a First Amendment violation to force a church to offer and pay for something that it finds immoral and against it's religious beliefs."

No.

Let's look at the actual words:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;......."

Congress cannot establish a religion as the state religion. It cannot stop citizens from exercising their religion.

But it can stop a business (hospital or university) from operating under different rules as the rest of the nation.

Otherwise Congress is establishing the right of a religious employer to deny employees rights that employees in other sectors enjoy.

No, the Catholic Church cannot open up a soup canning company and deny their employees the same coverage mandated by Congress on all soup canning companies.

Nor a long-haul trucking company. Or a building contractor business.

Can't do it.

Don't like it? Sell off the hospitals and universities.

[One more Thing]

09:17 AM on 02/09/2012

Furthermore, religious run businesses such as hospitals, adoption agencies, etc. should all be required to erect signage over their entrances which state in prominent bold letters "YOU ARE NOW ENTERING A BUSINESS RULED BY RELIGION."

[charleshbuchannan]

11:08 AM on 02/09/2012

What if the Church decided that cross race adoption was wrong? Who could stop them?

[TEDDY LJ]

12:28 PM on 02/09/2012

charleshbuchannan, i love you, couldn't have said it better. I dont understand why the Repubs are saying they are forcing the churches to do this. I read institutions like hospitals and such. Why and where is the problem here. These people should spend money outsting these Bishops who rapes our kids

[charleshbuchannan]

01:05 PM on 02/09/2012

Imagine if the Church had a company that canned peas. They could deny their women employees birth control coverage?

[TheNative]

06:41 PM on 02/11/2012

The are saying it because it is politically expedient for them to pursue it. They have nothing else that can energize their base like religious contorted innuendos. Once in a position of power, attitudes change.

[charleshbuchannan]

10:56 PM on 02/08/2012

The one sure way to defeat poverty is to empower women in the control of their own fertility.

No other measure in human history has been as universally as successful in bringing a people out of poverty.

This in no small part explains why Protestant nations tend to be wealthier than Catholic nations.

Look at the Philippines. Try to advocate for birth control there and you are liable to be murdered by some Catholic whack job.

Look at Egypt. 80m people in an economy that can support 30m with comfort. Go advocate for birth control there and some whacked Mullah will have you killed.

Welcome to America. We have laws that are blind to religion for a good reason. And not just because the Blessed Fruit of the Enlightenment (our Founding Fathers) thought it was a good idea.

But because it IS a good idea.

The Catholic Church does not like it? Get out of businesses that require you to conform to employment laws like everyone else. Just like you must employ blacks as equals to whites.

[Sojanar]

07:10 AM on 02/10/2012

South Germany (Catholic concentrated as Germany goes) is wealthier than North Germany;Austria is wealthier than Holland.Anyway the most happiest persons on the earth live in Bhutan, by no means a wealthy country.Get out of business that is what is going to happen.If you want carcinogen,carcinogen will you get.Nobody is stopping you.

[charleshbuchannan]

10:42 AM on 02/10/2012

What ARE you jabbering about?

How wealthy are Seeden and Switzerland?

[charleshbuchannan]

10:49 PM on 02/08/2012

It is primitive religious dogma to believe that the empowerment of women to control their own reproductive process is a sin.

This is America. We don't have laws to accommodate din gbat religious dogma.

Sorry.

[Dodger300]

10:34 PM on 02/08/2012

The birth control issue works in Obama's favor, not against him.

Most of us Catholics realize that it only matters to the church hierarchy that likes to play politics with the issue.

In the meantime, surveys show that 98% of Catholic women who are sexually active have used birth control at one time or another. Do you think they support the bishops trying to make it more difficult for them?

In fact, an even higher percentage of us Catholics support the requirement that health care plans should be required to cover birth control than Protestants or Evangelicals.

27% of the electorate is Catholic, and the majority supports Obama's position. 53% of the electorate is women, and most all of them do.

Source: http://www.freep.com/article/20120208/NEWS07/120208008/Survey-Majority-of-Catholics-support-including-birth-control-in-health-care-plans

[One more Thing]

09:20 AM on 02/09/2012

Makes sense. Just watch some billionaire come along and spend a fortune to convince everyone that they are wrong!

[HumbleTruth]

06:14 PM on 02/08/2012

Obama wishes he was pro-choice - since he mandates health care, tells religions what they can't and can practice and wants to take away any personal choice that the federal constitution offers. Sorry about the pun, but Mr Taxaholic doesn't know how to invest in the American people, he just keeps taking out our money and bailing out failing organizations. That's unconstitutional.

[One more Thing]

09:22 AM on 02/09/2012

Have you sought medical advice on your hate problem?

[TEDDY LJ]

12:33 PM on 02/09/2012

Here we go Foxing around again Hmble Truth, is it impossible for you to find anything else to do like cleaning your nails.

[JAMES GORMAN]

05:08 PM on 02/08/2012

OBAMA PROMISED CATHOLICS AT NOTRE DAME amid the outrage of Catholics that nothing
was to fear: he would respect the Church's teachings in regard to abortion, and no governmental
interference would force funding for contraception or abortion from those whose moral beliefs
were violated. Now we see what the President's messianic promises mean!! James Mccormick.
Irish Catholic Democrat who won't be back this November in the "Donkey" column.

[charleshbuchannan]

10:44 PM on 02/08/2012

90+% of Catholics use birth control.

You don't scare me!

[JAMES GORMAN]

05:04 PM on 02/08/2012

WE AWFUL Catholics who believe that something more than free condoms is necessary
to give sex any meaning should be appalled at Obama's posturing over contraception
posturing: at Notre Dame amid the abortion outrage he gave wide-spread promises to assure
Catholics that no government pressure would be used against our beliefs: now we have the
full force of the President's Health Insurance extravaganza forcing Catholic hospitals to violate
their religion's teaching----and of course abortion paid by us is the next step---despite all his
promises at Nortre Dame. The president has no principles, and only starry-eyed Liberals or
ex-Liberals as myself care enough to squabble. This country has no moral principles for sexual
conduct, and an opportunist President is glad to oblige. James McCormick, mere citizen

[Mistmash]

05:18 PM on 02/08/2012

Any woman should have a choice regardless of their beliefs
Tell your moral principles about sexual conduct to the children being molested by wonderful clergy

[dcbarton]

10:02 PM on 02/08/2012

Women have a choice, what they do not have is the right to force others who may have different beliefs(and the right to their beliefs)to pay for something that those others find immoral and contrary to their religious beliefs.

[john rajah]

05:25 PM on 02/08/2012

Please try to get the facts.

Do not rely on the letter read on Sunday at Mass.It was written by the same people who nullified Newt Gingrich's marriage/s, and covered up paedophilia

[One more Thing]

09:23 AM on 02/09/2012

Words worth repeating!

[Mary Sue Mc Cormick]

04:45 PM on 02/08/2012

I think the Church doesn't want birth control for women because their priests are getting a little...lonely! Hypocrites! All of them!

[Mistmash]

04:53 PM on 02/08/2012

I agree
but they do not have to worry so much about Birth Control. Little boys don't get Pregnant

[Rosalee Harris]

04:34 PM on 02/08/2012

WHenver Romney attacks the President for doing something you can bet there is a Flip Flop on Romney's part on that very issue. This guy is an empty suit No convictions no core no soul

[charleshbuchannan]

11:01 PM on 02/08/2012

Now now.

Romeny's not that good.