The following is a joint message from Jon O'Brien, president of Catholics for Choice, and Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America.
The overwhelming majority, 98 percent, of sexually active Catholic women use a form of modern contraception.
Two-thirds of Catholics, 65 percent, believe that clinics and hospitals that take taxpayer money should not be allowed to refuse to provide procedures or medications based on religious beliefs. A similar number, 63 percent, also believe that health insurance, whether private or government-run, should cover contraception.
A strong majority (78 percent) of Catholic women prefer that their hospital offers emergency contraception for rape victims, while more than half (55 percent) want their hospital to provide it in broader circumstances.
These are the facts that Archbishop Timothy Dolan probably didn't share with President Obama last week.
Despite these facts, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is lobbying hard to take reproductive healthcare options away from everyone. It is clear that the bishops have failed to convince Catholics in the pews. But it's not just Catholics who support access to family planning. Public health advocates and reproductive rights groups have been pushing for this as well because it is sound public policy to enable women and men to plan their families.
Providing no-cost family planning is good public health policy and an important advancement under the Affordable Care Act. But the bishops want to grant a broad refusal clause that will enable them to discriminate against millions of Americans, both Catholic and non-Catholic, simply because of where they work or go to school.
Expanding refusal clauses to allow some institutions and universities to refuse to provide coverage for contraception is not what the president promised when we initiated the healthcare reform process. Giving in to the bishops' demands will mean preventive healthcare will cost more -- not less -- for millions of employees, including those who work as nurses, administrative staff, janitors, and teachers.
The Catholic bishops' opposition to birth control is not the majority view among Catholics, to say the least. We should remember that it was not that long ago, in 1968, that a majority of the pope's hand-picked advisors agreed that there was no moral, theological or pastoral reason to ban Catholics from using contraception. The representatives of the bishops talking to the press today, however, would like us to forget that moment in Catholic history.
So, as we counter their anti-contraception campaign and fight to ensure that all voices are heard in this debate, there is one especially important person who needs to hear the message about Catholics and contraception: President Obama. Contact him via Twitter, email and phone to tell him that all women should have access to family planning, no matter where they work.
To contact the White House, click here or here.
Follow Jon O'Brien on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Catholic4Choice
Ben Stevens: The Catholic-Protestant Schism: Competing Histories
Angela Bonavoglia: Will Obama Abandon Women for Bishops?
I can only infer in catholic bishop world, the men play and the women pay.
The people are not willing to throw out the baby with the bathwater so they aren't leaving the church but when the church starts preaching weapons grade nonsense they ignore it.
The church is mad and is trying to get the state to MAKE its members do something they disagree with.
It is the church MEMBERS, the catholic PEOPLE, who ultimately fund every single thing the church does. That money they are spending? It's the catholic PEOPLE's money.
And the catholic people are absolutely cool with it being used this way.
So how about it catholic ladies? Are you going to listen to some celebate collar-backward cheerleader or use your god-given intellect and right to plan your families? This isn't the middle ages and it's about high time the bishops were put in their place. If you don't it's you who will remain in the place they have deemed for you. Fetal containers and brood mares.
1--> Catholic bishops and clergy officials have made their position clear that they would prefer to cancel health care plans vice provide these benefits. How would the taxpayer benefit if a few hundred thousand employees of Catholic institutions are now forced to get their health insurance on the open market - presumably subsidized under Obamacare - vice only needing to pay a small amount out-of-pocket for birth control?
2. It Catholic institutions can be force to pay for procedures and prescriptions that violate church doctrine, what other religions are going to lose in the long run? What about the existing provisions that allow for conscientious objectors to opt out? How does this fit with existing law?
This doesn't seem to be well thought out.
So how are they trying to force their ideas on people when they prohibit nothing?
The Government then distribute those pills, free of charge to all licensed, American pharmacies that request them.
The retail pharmacies would provide the pills under their usual procedures, only they don't charge, or charge only a nominal fee.
Any loss of income to the retail pharmacies could be compensated in one of three ways:
1. Allow the birth control manufacturers to produce a variety of pills in a variety of "designer" packages, with no restriction as to price. Allow the pharmacies to sell them at the price they choose.
2. Allow the retail pharmacies to use the birth control pills to be used as a "loss leaders" given free with the purchase of another product.
3. Place a half a percent (Federal) excise tax on the retail sale of all cosmetics, including those intended for males, and refund the tax to the retail pharmacies.
Why is this not a win for the Catholics (I am not one), the pharmacies (I don't own one) and women (I am not one), and the United States Constitution (Of which I am a supporter)?
Full disclosure: I have contributed to both NARAL and Planned Parenthood. I was not raised in the Catholic Church.
THE END
The retail pharmacies would provide the pills under their usual procedures, only they don't charge, or charge only a nominal fee.
Any loss of income to the retail pharmacies could be compensated in one of three ways:
1. Allow the birth control manufacturers to produce a variety of pills in a variety of "designer" packages, with no restriction as to price. Allow the pharmacies to sell them at the price they chose.
2. Allow the retail pharmacies to use the birth control pills to be used as a "loss leaders" given free with the purchase of another product.
3. Place a half a percent (Federal) excise tax on the retail sale of all cosmetics, including those intended for males, and refund the tax to the retail pharmacies.
Why is this not a win for the Catholics (I am not one), the pharmacies (I don't own one) and women (I am not one), and the United States Constitution (Of which I am a supporter)?
Full disclosure: I have contributed to both NARAL and Planned Parenthood. I was not raised in the Catholic Church. Based on "arms length negotiation"
A simple solution to solve this problem:
The cost to an America retail pharmacy for a month's supply of birth control pills is between $2.00 and $4.00. (I do not have a link for that, but if anyone has a link that disputes that, please provide it to me). Or better yet, one that supports my research.
My information comes from an "open source" request I made on Huffington Post.
The United States Government purchase all the birth control pills produced in the United States, and its territories, at fair market price.
Based at "arms length negotiation"
To be Continued
At the cost of being called a troll, and a wearer of tin foil hats, consider this nothing more than a "wedge" issue that has no real impact, except to wear down progessive elements.
Besides the Catholic Church, who's sincererity I have no standing to judge, I wonder where the money is coming from to promote this "wedge issue.
I am completely opposed to the Catholic postion on abortion, birth control, homosexuality and gay marriage. But their right to hold those rights is an important part of American democracy.
I am a hawk on the first amendment. I don't like it when my hometown newspaper the St, Petersburg Times publishes their regular attacks on the Church of Scientology, which is located in my county.
Now, I believe that no religion should be required to do something for their employees that they consider immoral. Would anyone require the Hassidic Jewish movement be required to give Christmas Hams out?
A simple solution to solve this problem:
Continued in Part II
And they can go on being as misogynistic and backward as they like, they just can't do it and remain tax exempt. Infuriating!