iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Rev. Debra Haffner

GET UPDATES FROM Rev. Debra Haffner
 

Diverse Religious Leaders Affirm Contraceptive Access as 'Moral Imperative'

Posted: 09/13/2012 8:25 am

There is a picture I've seen on the Internet of an elderly woman holding a sign that says, "I can't believe I'm still protesting for birth control." As a woman who came of age in the 1970s era of easy birth control availability, neither can I. Surely, almost 50 years since the Griswold decision, I never would have predicted that contraception would once again be controversial.

After all, nine-in-10 heterosexually active women use family planning, nine-in-10 Americans believe that birth control use is morally acceptable, and three quarters of voters in 2012 agree that "we should do everything we can to make sure that people who want to use prescription birth control have affordable access to it."

Yet, during the past two years, there have been efforts to pass so called "Personhood Amendments" that would criminalize hormonal methods of birth control, the federal government almost closed down because of an attempt to defund Planned Parenthood, and contraceptive coverage in health care reform is being challenged by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, calling its inclusion as a preventive health service an attack on their "religious liberty." Given these efforts, coupled with increased restrictions on abortion and politicians' ridiculous statements on how pregnancy does and doesn't occur, the idea that there is a new "war on women" seems all too believable.

I am proud to tell you that this morning, 38 nationally recognized and theologically diverse religious leaders are joining me in affirming safe, affordable, accessible and comprehensive family planning services. They include current and past heads of denominations, such the Rev. Geoffrey A. Black (United Church of Christ), the Rev. Wes Granberg-Michaelson (Reformed Church in America), the Rev. Peter Morales (Unitarian Universalist Association), and the Rev. Dr. Sharon E. Watkins (Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)); presidents of seminaries such as Dr. Philip A. Amerson (Garrett Evangelical Theological Seminary), the Rev. Dr. Serene Jones (Union Theological Seminary) and The Very Rev. Katherine Ragsdale (Episcopal Divinity School); organizational heads such as Dr. Richard Cizik (the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good), the Rev. Harry Knox (Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice) and Jon O'Brien (Catholics for Choice); and nationally recognized theologians such as the Rev. Dr. Tony Campolo, the Rev. Dr. Larry Greenfield and Dr. Mary Hunt. They have all endorsed the Religious Institute's new Open Letter to Religious Leaders on Family Planning.

The Open Letter was developed at a Religious Institute colloquium held this spring. A dozen Christian (mainline, Evangelical and Roman Catholic), Jewish and Muslim theologians created the Open Letter in a day of dialog and discussion. They affirmed that, "in a just world, all people would have equal access to contraception. The denial of family planning services effectively translates into coercive childbearing is an insult to human dignity." They called on hospitals and health services, regardless of religious affiliation, to provide or refer to contraceptive services, and reminded those who would oppose such services, that "no single faith can claim final moral authority in domestic or international discourse." They urged religious leaders to "advocate for increased U.S. financial support for domestic and global family planning services."

There is nothing new about religious leaders supporting family planning. The Central Conference of American Rabbis (Reform Judaism) and the Lambeth Conference of the Anglican Communion passed the first religious organization policies supporting it in 1929 and 1930, respectively. Today, at least 14 major denominations, including the Church of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons), the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America and the Seventh Day Adventist Church have policies supporting contraception.

As people of faith, we must resist those who would deny individuals the ability to make their own personal decisions about their families and reproductive lives; indeed we must resist the political attempts to make such decisions and such services controversial when they are not. As the Open Letter states, "contraception allows for a fulfilling sexual life while reducing maternal and infant mortality, unintended pregnancies, abortions, and sexually transmitted diseases." Surely as the wide range of endorsers of the Open Letter demonstrates, family planning is common ground.

If you are a religious leader, please add your name to the list of endorsers by clicking here. If you are a member of a faith community, please ask your religious leader to add their name. Help us spread the word about the new Open Letter on Facebook and Twitter. Let us demonstrate to all who would once again limit contraception that people of faith understand that "contraception saves lives, promotes human flourishing, and advances the common good."

 

Follow Rev. Debra Haffner on Twitter: www.twitter.com/revdebra

FOLLOW RELIGION
 
 
  • Comments
  • 272
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wrenn NYC
'Cause I'm a smof...
05:12 PM on 11/05/2012
Some people here have said that we 'live in a time of choices'.

Every time has it's own choices.

What we live in is a time of change. We are seeing, first hand, how society changes the institutions that are part of it. How societies needs and mores change the institutions that are attached to it. Religious leaders and religious organizations and denominations are slowly changing their tune, on contraception, on homosexuality... not as fast as much of society is, but they are following.

Because if they don't follow, they will be left behind. Become fringe shadows of what they once were.

What we are seeing is a similar instance to what our great great great grandparents saw, regarding slavery. Some of you will say 'Christianity lead the way' in that, and you'd be half right. FRINGE christian groups lead the way. The mainstream religions of the day fought it. Wrote tracts and editorials and books about how slavery was right and just. Popes referred to slavery as a necessity, and in keeping with natural and divine laws. It's the smaller, fringe progressive christians who lead the abolitionist movement. Not the Mainstream Southern Baptists. Their pro slavery tracts, you can find and read, if you care to. They will enlighten you.

We are watching change. And we need to learn from it. Religious leaders are leader, yes, but they know they cannot lead us at a 90 degree angle from where society is pulling us.
07:38 PM on 10/09/2012
Many people are puzzled by the Catholic Church's teaching against contraception.

But, in a lot of ways the teaching makes sense.

For those who wish to learn more about the Church's teaching on contraception, an excellent commentary and further resource links can be found here:

http://allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/2012/02/why-catholic-church-opposes.html
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wrenn NYC
'Cause I'm a smof...
05:03 PM on 11/05/2012
Asceticism won out over over a more worldly view early on in Christianity. Study it's history and you see it.
07:36 PM on 10/09/2012
It is heartening to see so many new voices emerging to challenge the myth that the sexual revolution and contraception have been a good thing for society.

Collen Carroll Campbell, "What Women Want"
http://www.wf-f.org/12-2-Campbell.html

Rita Joseph, "Serving an Epidemic of Sexual Excess: Free Contraceptive Coverage -- A Bad Joke Played on Women"
http://www.wf-f.org/12-2-Joseph.html

Jennifer Fulwiler, "The Contraception Trap":
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jennifer-fulwiler/the-contraception-trap/#ixzz1sixRqAcS

1Flesh:
http://www.1flesh.org/category/arguments/

Mary Eberstadt, "Has the Sexual Revolution Been Good for Women? No.":
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304724404577297422171909202.html

Lila Rose, "Battle hymn of the anti-abortion feminist:"
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/74739.html

Tom Hoopes, "The Truth About Natural Family Planning:"
http://www.kofc.org/en/columbia/detail/2012_07_nfp.html

Mister H, "Why the Catholic Church Opposes Contraception:"
http://allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/2012/02/why-catholic-church-opposes.html

Janet Smith, with the classic "Contraception, Why not?"
http://shop.mycatholicfaith.org/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=17

Michael Giesler, "Contracepting America: the real war on women"
http://lifesite.net/news/contracepting-america-the-real-war-on-women

Laura Locke, "The Dark Fruits of Contraception"
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/contraception%E2%80%99s-dark-fruits
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BarryMayor
11:09 PM on 09/15/2012
The woman's body is her own, her BODY, her CHOICE, and her RESPONSIBILITY.

Whether she chooses to give birth or not is entirely up to her. Therefore, the product of her choice should also be entirely her responsibility, UNLESS a man chooses to voluntarily take that responsibility on. Hence, men should and must have the right to choose whether to become a parent to a woman's child if she decides to have one. This choice must be made within 4 weeks of being officially, in writing, notified of the pregnancy.

In this simple, but fair fashion, both men and women should and must have the right to choose. The government has no business forcing women OR men to become parents. This must stop. There must be post-reproductive choice for women AND men. Any other position is anti-choice.
08:47 AM on 09/15/2012
Birth Control/Fertility Control is a right from which everybody benefits - women, men, the family and society...and it should be FREE! Paid for by all and accessible to all...if not, the consequences will be disastrous - overcrowding in a world of limited resources, a rise in hunger, thirst and crime, not to mention higher rates of safe/backstreet abortion. If condoms are forbidden, then of course, STD, HIV and AIDS rates will soar. Is this the kind of world we have in mind? Mother Theresa once said that abortion was a threat to humanity - Those with sense and compassion would argue that forcing women to bear children who are unplanned, with small chance of being loved or conceived in violence, is a threat to our dignity as humans and a threat to a peaceful world. Those who are opposed to birth control, are you going to take out your checkbooks and feed, clothe, educate those children born as a result of your extreme views? Will you open up your home to them? Or are they condemned to become fodder for future wars? In the 60s, social scientists warned about an overcrowded world - it doesn't take too much of a leap to realize their predicted future is coming to fruition.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frjohnmorris
10:04 PM on 09/14/2012
The right of women to access to birth control and abortion is not being threatened. The War of Women is one of the biggest hoaxes in American political history. It was made up by Obama's people to divert attention away from his total failure as one of the most incompetent presidents in American history. Why should women have a right to free birth control. Men do not get free medicine for their medical problems. Birth control is available in every drug store in the nation.

Warren Morris
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:09 AM on 09/15/2012
Politicians treat this issue of birth control as a side issue, and it's not. The idea of Birth control, or as I prefer, Fertility control, touches upon all those three things Jefferson put in our declaration of independence: life, liberty, and certainly pursuit of happiness.

First of all, I'd like to get everyone to make a slight change in their perspective, 
I think the term "birth control" is a bad term.  It implies pregnancy.  Which then means that "birth control" connotes abortion.  I prefer to talk about fertility control.  Rather than try to bring the outliers at the ends  of the spectrum together, we should focus on what the majority in the middle can find agreement on, and I think it is pretty much inherently obvious that the control of ones own fertility is fundamentally an individual right, not to be abridged by the state, religion, or even ones own family. 

Therefore: if we are going to have healthcare for everyone as in Robamneycare birth control needs to be covered for everyone.

And, from a fiscal conservative point of view, the simple fact is that children are expensive, the care, training, feeding, LOVE that they need is a burden which society MUST bear if the parents cannot, therefore, society is better off economically by NOT having unintended children.

I'm a fiscal conservative, and a social libertarian, and from both aspects of the way I look at this issue, helping our citizens to have control of their fertility only makes sense.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
frjohnmorris
08:25 AM on 09/15/2012
No one is trying to prevent you from using conception control. But why does this particular medication have to be free when we have to pay for other medications ourselves? Why do men not get free medication for prostrate problems? My wife and I paid for our own conception control even when we were both poverty stricken graduate students, why can't others? Why does the government have the right to force the Catholic Church to pay for something that is against its religious beliefs? I am not against conception control, but if the government violates the religious freedom of Catholics, how long will it be before it violates my religious freedom? I am firmly against abortion. Why should my tax money be used to pay for something that I violates my moral principles? I still believe that the whole "war on women" is a cynical effort by Obama and his people to divert attention from his total failure as president.

Fr. John W. Morris
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mommadona
I paint. I blog. Therefore, I am.
05:41 PM on 09/14/2012
Uh........ just where WERE these 'leaders' when all of the attacks on women's rights (that started with "pro-life" attackers KILLING men and women in the name of "the unborn" and your "God" ~ where WERE you?

Better late, than never, I suppose.

Such a waste.

Organized religion has failed civilization. There is no 'there' there ~
photo
Emily Dietle
activist. atheist. blogger. emilyhasbooks.com
12:39 PM on 09/14/2012
It is vital to our policies and politics that more awareness is drawn to the moderates and liberal religious persons. There are many non-believers out there, like myself, that do not hear such uplifting news often enough. We need more religious voices that are supportive of women's contraception choices.
04:53 AM on 09/14/2012
We live in a time of choices. If we choose to have unlimited numbers of people by "quiver of arrows" nonsense or legislating the rights of microscopic cell clusters, eventually we'll discover we can't pray or legislate new worlds of resources and living space into existence. A mad, squalid Clown Car Earth will lead to Tatooine Earth- probably fairly quickly.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:25 AM on 09/14/2012
Anybody who thinks restricting women's access to birth control and insurance payments for birth control is a good idea, please go to the last page of these comments and read all comments by Ryan Kenneth Leddy. Well done, Ryan!
07:39 PM on 10/09/2012
This matter has nothing to do with women's health care.

Contraceptives cannot be properly classified as health care, because they do not treat an illness or disease. In fact, they do the opposite, they inhibit the natural, normal functioning of a woman's reproductive system.

Thus, in reality, contraceptives are more properly classified as a lifestyle choice and have no business being covered by health insurance.

Obviously, when the "pill" is being used as legitimate health care (such as to treat an illness like endometriosis or severe cramping), that is a different situation, and it should be covered.
04:32 PM on 11/02/2012
A vasectomy or tubal ligation would also be considered a lifestyle choice, and are often covered by insurance as well. If we are simply going to go by what's "natural", we will end up with millions of families like the Duggars which seems far from "natural" nowadays. It's simply not feasible or realistic to expect people to go with what's natural, and still be able to afford living with one child after another.

In addition, being pregnant has major health impacts, and a woman should be able to choose when or if she goes through with it.
01:33 AM on 09/14/2012
Thank you- I learned some new things reading this article, and the posts as well.

I know that this article was mostly about the moral side of ensuring easy access to contraceptives, but I want to share a thought I had on the economic side... Let me know what you guys think of this.

Inevitably, every time this debate comes up, somebody wants to know why he/she should have to "pay for someone else's birth control". Here is my analysis: Since social support/subsidization is often the only thing making contraceptives feasible for disadvantaged women, the realistic consequence of taking away any source of funding would be more pregnancies. Logically, women who have babies by accident because they can't access good birth control are probably not in a good situation to have children. Babies are expensive, and if they are born to people who aren't ready or able to take care of them, social programs have to step in to meet their needs. And social programs are funded by taxpayers.

So in the end, is it cheaper to pay for contraceptives, or for unwanted children? I admit I haven't seen any stats on this, but my guess is that children are way more expensive.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
samearl
What is truth?
12:54 PM on 09/14/2012
I agree and would guess that insurance companies agree too.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
arachne646
No more hurting people--Peace
01:36 PM on 09/14/2012
So, even though the ACA (Obamacare) doesn't subsidize anyone's contraceptives, maybe we should?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:27 AM on 09/14/2012
On the whole of it a decent article, well spoken and thought out, although it seemed to begin long ago and the efforts by this fine cadre of religious people may be too little too late in the face of the continuous onslaught by the evangelical right fundies who have the money, resources and extreme desires to have the war on women go their way.

In the face of a history replete with abuse, scorn, cruelty and dogmatic insolence toward women, the Xian Church still has the audacity and impudence to declare that it has been her friend.

Superstitition: The mother of fear and faith, from her throne of skulls, still rules the world, and will until the mind of woman ceases to be the property of priests.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sailka
honesty, morality, societal concern always
11:59 PM on 09/13/2012
The US Catholic Bishop's Conference is calling the requirement for Catholic Institutions to provide/pay for Birth Control an attack on our Religious Freedom, which it is obviously. How can contraception be called or equated to "a Health Service"? Is possibility of Pregnancy an illness/Sickness? God created things that natural, ideal way, otherwise none of us would be here. Christians shouldn't play with words, or basic Morality taught by Christ, in my Catholic opinion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
arachne646
No more hurting people--Peace
01:39 PM on 09/14/2012
Contraception is a health service, because getting pregnant is one of the riskiest things to her health a woman does in her life, not because it is an illness. Contraception promotes good health. Christians differ on morality, and Christ did not teach about birth control or childbearing.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sailka
honesty, morality, societal concern always
05:41 PM on 09/14/2012
So women shouldn't get pregnant, the human species should collapse, because pregnancy CAN be risky? Contraception is Not a Health Service, and HOW does it promote Health? Abortion Clinics are Not Licensed as medical facilities. All Religions until 1930 agreed it is Wrong, Immoral. Most people of Faith still do, although more do practise it sometimes.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sailka
honesty, morality, societal concern always
07:36 PM on 09/14/2012
Contraception is a 'health service'? Health services are Regulated. So women shoukld avoid getting pregnant? How will humanity survive? Pls name One way contraception 'promotes good health'!! All mainline religions until one in 1930 agreed contraception is wrong. Christ was obviously against birth control or casual sex.
bbailey123
Uteri of the world, UNITE
05:34 PM on 09/14/2012
it is not an ill ness or a sickness, but a medical condition
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sailka
honesty, morality, societal concern always
11:25 AM on 09/16/2012
rather  natural,  too,  or  none  of  us  would  be  here....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:56 PM on 09/13/2012
commandments.

"And pray every day to your Heavenly Father and Earthly mother, that your soul become as perfect as your Heavenly Father's holy spirit is perfect, and that your body become as perfect as the body of your Earthly Mother is perfect. For if you understand, feel, and do the commandments, then all for which you pray to your Heavenly Father and your Earthly Mother will be given you. For the wisdom, the love, and the power of God are above all.

"After this manner, therefore, pray to your Heavenly Father: Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

"And after this manner pray to your Earthly Mother: Our Mother which art upon earth, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, and thy will be done in us, as it is in thee. As thou sendest every day thy angels, send them to us also. Forgive us our sins, as we atone all our sins against thee. And lead us not into sickness, but deliver us from all evil, for thine is the earth, the body, and the health. Amen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David Redman
10:39 PM on 09/13/2012
Why is "reverend" attached to man when the only time it appears in scripture it is used with reference to God. Isn't man overstepping his authority to identify himself as "reverend" and equating himself with God? Just a thought.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sailka
honesty, morality, societal concern always
07:41 PM on 09/14/2012
Because the Bible was not written in English, and God is never called 'reverend'. Christ began an earthly Church based on the Apostles as the Leaders and Teachers. No normal person equates self with God.