Constitutional Law, Politics, Religion, Society

Catholics, Contraception & The Heretical 98%

By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger

Last Sunday, most U.S. Catholics heard a letter read from the pulpit imploring them to oppose the Obamacare provision requiring most healthcare plans to cover contraceptive services for women. The reason given was that Catholic hospitals and universities would have to “shutter their doors”  in order to avoid heresy and be true to the faith. As part of the concerted effort, the chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on Religious Liberty announced that the Obama administration’s requirement goes against “the mandate of Jesus Christ.”  Even though the earthly mandate contains an exemption for purely religious organizations, the all-male U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is clearly on the offensive in this politically charged debate about women, privacy, and the right of families to decide for themselves the number of children they can support.

Since the 1930s, most denominations have left the issue of contraception up to the conscience of the parishioners. The Catholic Church has stood virtually alone since 1951 by requiring its adherents to use only the “rhythm method” as a means to prevent pregnancy.  All other forms of contraception were deemed an interference in God’s Plan and hence heretical.  In the early 1960s with the reforms of Vatican II in full swing, the Pope appointed a 90 person committee to evaluate the Church’s position on contraception. 75 of the 90 recommended the Church allow contraception by means other than the rhythm method.

Disregarding the recommendation, Pope Paul VI issued his famous encyclical, Humanae Vitae, which reaffirmed the Church’s solitary position. The Pope reasoned that, “The Church, nevertheless, in urging men to the observance of the precepts of the natural law, which it interprets by its constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life.”  The Pope then waxed philosophic about the danger of government mandated contraception akin to that seen in China:

Careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone.

That textual cudgel has now been taken up against Obamacare.  Catholic apologists like Jennifer Brinker in the St. Louis Review have argued that the Pope was right and the government is now in the business of  pushing contraception for political reasons. Brinker even argues ironically that the mandate is a “dissolution of freedom.” Brinker reminds Catholics that disapproved contraception is a “sin” and that most Catholics don’t understand the reason for the ban.

What do Catholic women think about the Church’s unyielding stand on artificial birth control? In April of  last year, Reuters reported that a Guttmacher Institute poll showed that 98% of sexually active U.S. Catholic women used contraception methods outside of the Church’s teachings.  The numbers held up for women who regularly attended Catholic services as well as those who didn’t. In fact, the findings showed American Catholic women were just as likely to use artificial contraception as those in other denominations.

“In real-life America, contraceptive use and strong religious beliefs are highly compatible,” said the report’s lead author Rachel Jones.  Catholics overwhelmingly rely on the most common methods of birth control. Nearly 70 percent of Catholic women use sterilization, the birth control pill or an IUD, according to the Guttmacher Institute research.

What then are we to make of the schism between Church’s dogma and the reality of its followers?  Are 98% of the Church’s women sinners and heretics? Can a religion be viable if one of its fundamental tenets is  ignored on a daily basis by almost all of its “faithful”?  Can a male dominated authority maintain credibility in the modern world when it dictates to women on issues that are overwhelmingly that gender’s concern?

These questions do not seem to be troubling Church fathers.  In fact, they appear to be looking for a testosterone fueled showdown. As one recently said, “We cannot — we will not — comply with this unjust law.” They may do well to look over their shoulders as they climb up that political hill, theological banners flying. A cursory view of their ranks will likely find few honest Americans and almost no honest women.

Source: CNN

~Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger

178 thoughts on “Catholics, Contraception & The Heretical 98%”

  1. Pro-Choice GOP Warns Party That Contraception Fight Will Be A Disaster
    Evan McMorris-Santoro February 8, 2012
    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/pro-choice-gop-warns-party-that-contraception-fight-will-be-a-disaster.php

    Excerpt:
    Pro-choice Republicans are begging their party to drop this fight over contraception before it’s too late. Turning to a discussion about access to birth control will be nothing short of a disaster, they say.

    The new and unexpected war over contraception may not end up as only a battle between the White House and the Republican party. It could end up as a fight between the GOP and itself. As we saw during the 2011’s push to defund Planned Parenthood — when some Republican Senators rebuked their colleagues in the House for attacking the organization — Republicans on Capitol Hill do not speak with one voice on matters of women’s health. Now, as Speaker John Boehner seemingly prepares to turn the House GOP’s attention to contraception, pro-choice Republicans are warning that the GOP may become the next Komen For The Cure.

    “I think this week’s outrage over the Komen decision should be a warning to the Republican party about how quickly there was a mass outrage over further and further attacks on general women’s health,” Kellie Ferguson, executive director of Republican Majority for choice, told me Wednesday. “You could see the same backlash on attacks on contraception.”

    Ferguson calls the Republican rhetoric on contraception “crossing the line” — taking the discussion away from choice issues (where Republicans can find some broader, if still national minority constituency) and into the realm of the fringy extreme.

    “For the last number of years, we in the pro-choice community in general — and we specifically as Republicans — have been saying as this pandering to a sort of social conservative faction of voters continues, you’re going to see the line pushed further and further and further,” she said. “And we’re now crossing the line from discussion of when we should regulate abortion to when we should now regulate legal doctor-prescribed medications like birth control, which is woven in the fabric of society as an acceptable medication.”

    She pointed to widely-reported polling showing that a majority of Americans — and a majority of Catholics — support the White House policy and urged her party to take a step back before it’s too late.

    A high-profile debate over contraception will only serve to alienate voters and deny Republicans the White House in the fall, Ferguson suggested.

    “There’s a big leap between people who vote at a Republican caucus and the majority that will vote in a general election,” she said. “I think pigeon-holing the party as against women’s health in general not only hurts the party, but it hurts our key candidates.”

  3. Joe S:

    “As for the Church and contraception, we are patient with her.”

    ***********************

    Given the Church’s obstinant stance against contraception in sub-Saharan Africa where rampant AIDS results is widespead death daily, your infinite patience with “her” is quite lethal and quite undeserved.

  4. We are the 98 percent
    Catholics who ignore the church’s teaching on contraception shouldn’t expect Obama to follow it
    By Joan Walsh
    http://www.salon.com/2012/02/07/we_are_the_98_percent/singleton/

    Excerpt:
    The Obama administration is facing a political crisis for making a common-sense decision: acting on the Institute of Medicine’s recommendation that health insurance plans cover contraceptive services. This is a test for the forces that mobilized to get the Susan G. Komen Foundation to reverse its politically cowardly decision to cut funding for Planned Parenthood. Clear political thinking about women’s health made a comeback in the backlash against Komen’s move; we need to make sure that clear political thinking prevails on the new Health and Human Services contraception regulations, too.

    Predictably, the GOP presidential candidates are whacking Obama on the issue; fittingly, Rick Santorum is surging again, as this latest battle in the culture war rages. As always, the biggest hypocrite is Mitt Romney, who is attacking the president’s decision even though he went along with the same regulations in Massachusetts. And when the state enacted the universal health insurance law he used to be proud of, it covered the same “family planning services” as the new HHS regulations.

    I knew the president’s decision would be controversial, but I underestimated the firestorm he would face. Since 98 percent of Catholics practice forms of contraception forbidden by the church at some point in their lives, according to the Centers for Disease Control, I assumed many of them would speak out in favor of the new regulations. How could they expect the president to follow church teachings if they did not?

    I was wrong. Too many Catholics are insisting that while they may personally disagree with the church on contraception, they defend the bishops’ opposition to the HHS moves as a matter of “religious liberty.” Others are silent. But silence lets the most right-wing forces of reaction prevail. It’s time for the 98 percent to speak up.

    This is indeed a matter of religious liberty – the liberty of non-Catholic women who work for Catholic employers to have the full spectrum of healthcare coverage, regardless of what the church believes.

    Twenty-eight states already require church-run agencies to cover contraception in the health insurance they provide employees. Catholic Charities sued to oppose the regulation in New York, and lost. The world didn’t end; Catholic agencies in New York and those 27 other states now cover contraception. And they should: Women who have access to family planning services have lower infant mortality rates and healthier babies than those who don’t. Others take the birth control pill to deal with endometriosis or other reproductive system issues. Contraception has to be part of comprehensive healthcare for women.

  5. Joe S.,

    The Catholic Church deserves the criticism. The bishops should realize this is the 21st century–and that not all married couples can afford to raise all the children they would procreate if they could not use contraceptives. Would the bishops suggest that married couples abstain from having sex if they don’t want more children? After all, the rhythm method isn’t the most effective way to prevent a pregnancy.

  8. ……”the Catholic Church and her Republican allies……….”
    How smart was this politically? Do you really want to push an issue that will tend to move some Catholic voters to the right?
    As for the Church and contraception, we are patient with her. As for the anti-Catholic sentiments unleashed here, not so much.

  9. Funny they don’t say jack shyte nothing about the fact that many health plans already cover “you can’t get yours up” meds like Viagra and Cialis. Not a peep from them about that. How friggin sexist is THAT?

  10. I feel like I am being swirled down the rabbit hole when I read some of the linked articles.

  13. Great lins Elaine. The right is betting that running on outlawing contraception is a winning hand. That is a losing hand.
    OS,
    The right to life only matter when it is a fetus. Once they are born, they on’t give a crap

  14. Otteray,

    The “right to life” folks don’t seem to think that women have a right to control their own lives.

    Did you hear the latest out of Oklahoma?

    *****

    Oklahoma Democrat Adds ‘Every Sperm Is Sacred’ Amendment To Personhood Bill
    By Marie Diamond on Feb 8, 2012
    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/08/421018/oklahoma-democrat-adds-every-sperm-is-sacred-amendment-to-personhood-bill/

    Despite being rebuffed by voters in Mississippi and Colorado, proponents of the “personhood” movement are still pushing to enact legislation in states like Ohio and Oklahoma that would give zygotes the same rights as American citizens. These bills would not only criminalize abortion in all circumstances, they would also outlaw common forms of contraception, as well as in vitro fertilization.

    To poke fun at the absurdity of the measure, Oklahoma state Sen. Constance Johnson (D), has tacked on a provision affirming — in the words of a famous Monty Python song — that every sperm is sacred:

    State Senator Constance Johnson of Oklahoma City has served Oklahoma’s 48th Senate District since 2005, but it was yesterday’s introduction of Senate Bill 1433 that really pushed her over the edge. The bill sought to define human life as beginning at the moment of conception, before it’s even implanted in the womb, and offers full legal protection to those tiny multicelled lumps. In the words of the bill, “the unborn child at every stage of development (has) all the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents of this state.”

    Johnson submitted an amendment of her own to the bill, which would have added the language,

    However, any action in which a man ejaculates or otherwise deposits semen anywhere but in a woman’s vagina shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child.

    Among other things, Johnson’s amendment would essentially outlaw oral sex, anal sex, and masturbation. Were it not a satirical bill, it would almost certainly be deemed unconstitutional.

    To prove that her amendment was in jest, Johnson voted with her colleagues to table it later in the day. But it does illustrate a serious point: only about half of fertilized eggs develop into a pregnancy. If Republican lawmakers are willing to declare every cluster of cells with the potential to become a fetus a person, why stop at fertilized eggs? Why not sperm as well?

    To protest the inherent sexism of the personhood bill, another Democratic senator attempted to add an amendment that would require the father of the child to be financially responsible for the mother’s health care, housing, and other expenses while she is pregnant.

  15. Elaine, I am waiting with bated breath for the “right to life” folks to raise a hue and cry about spending taxpayer money on the death penalty. You could raise a kid from birth to adulthood and pay for some higher education for the price of one execution by the time you figure in all the costs of trial, endless appeals and finally, the execution itself.

    Where is the sanctity of life for the condemned on death row?

  16. Most of Obama’s “Controversial” Birth Control Rule Was Law During Bush Years
    The right has freaked out over an Obama administration rule requiring employers to offer birth control to their employees. Most companies already had to do that.
    —By Nick Baumann
    Feb. 8, 2012
    http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/controversial-obama-birth-control-rule-already-law

    Excerpt:
    President Barack Obama’s decision to require most employers to cover birth control and insurers to offer it at no cost has created a firestorm of controversy. But the central mandate—that most employers have to cover preventative care for women—has been law for over a decade. This point has been completely lost in the current controversy, as Republican presidential candidates and social conservatives claim that Obama has launched a war on religious liberty and the Catholic Church.

    Despite the longstanding precedent, “no one screamed” until now, said Sara Rosenbaum, a health law expert at George Washington University.

    In December 2000, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ruled that companies that provided prescription drugs to their employees but didn’t provide birth control were in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prevents discrimination on the basis of sex. That opinion, which the George W. Bush administration did nothing to alter or withdraw when it took office the next month, is still in effect today—and because it relies on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, it applies to all employers with 15 or more employees. Employers that don’t offer prescription coverage or don’t offer insurance at all are exempt, because they treat men and women equally—but under the EEOC’s interpretation of the law, you can’t offer other preventative care coverage without offering birth control coverage, too.

    “It was, we thought at the time, a fairly straightforward application of Title VII principles,” a top former EEOC official who was involved in the decision told Mother Jones. “All of these plans covered Viagra immediately, without thinking, and they were still declining to cover prescription contraceptives. It’s a little bit jaw-dropping to see what is going on now…There was some press at the time but we issued guidances that were far, far more controversial.”

  17. As Contraceptives Rule Enters GOP Race, Will Reproductive Rights Affect 2012 Election?
    http://www.democracynow.org/2012/2/8/as_contraceptives_rule_enters_gop_race

    Excerpt:
    JON O’BRIEN: Ninety-eight percent of Catholic women in the United States have used a method of birth control that the bishops don’t approve of. When the bishops talk, they talk on behalf of the 350 U.S. bishops. They don’t speak for 68 million Catholics. It’s very clear Catholics support the use of contraception. Catholics even support, at a higher level than most Americans, the idea that contraceptives would be covered as part of health insurance.

    It’s clear to me that what’s going on here really is that the bishops are looking to have their cake and eat it. They actually want to run hospitals and schools, very often taking taxpayer dollars to do that, but they want to be exempted from the same rules as everybody else. The idea that an employer could actually determine what you do in your personal life, if you use birth control or not, by virtue of blocking your access to insurance coverage is really outrageous and very un-American.

    This is, in no way—and I think the Republicans may be making a big mistake, because what they’re trying to do is they’re trying to politicize an issue around healthcare. The Institute of Medicine determined that contraception was preventative healthcare. It’s important for women’s health. The idea that the Republicans now are trying to use this as a wedge issue to criticize President Obama is really striking a very low chord, and I think it does not resonate with women. Women know that birth control is very important for their healthcare. Birth control can be very expensive. It can cost $500 or $600 a year. In the United States at the moment, when many people are suffering from the economic downturn, the idea that you could get coverage for your birth control is something that I think most American women and most American voters will actually appreciate.

    It’s really, you know, a—it’s Orwellian for the bishops to suggest that their religious freedom has been trampled on. What they actually want to do is they want to impose their view on contraception, which is very much a minority view within the Catholic Church, on Catholics and non-Catholics who actually work in hospitals and schools. Catholics and non-Catholic workers in hospitals and schools should have the freedom of conscience, of their conscience, to follow their religious or non-religious beliefs to use contraception. The idea that an employer, that a bishop, can get between you and your birth control, there’s something that’s very un-American and wrong about that. Freedom of conscience is an essential part of actually being a Catholic. So, at the end of the day, it really is for individuals to make this decision, and the bishops, as an employer, should butt out of it.

    And the Affordable Care Act, which the Obama administration created and included birth control in, I think that most Americans and most American voters, and certainly most Catholics, are supportive of the idea of birth control being covered. It’s a good thing, as well. It prevents unplanned pregnancy. And we would have—I would have thought that the Republicans, who talk so much about abortion, would have been interested in achieving that end goal.

    NOTE: Jon O’Brien is president of Catholics for Choice, a nonprofit organization that represents the voice of Catholics on reproductive and sexual health.

    ***********

    LORETTA ROSS: Well, really, we need to talk about the fact that this rule really allows low-income women, women who are dependent on their healthcare, to access birth control—women of color, in particular. And we need to also point out that freedom of religion also encompasses freedom from religion. And if you don’t want to use birth control, don’t buy it, don’t use it. But don’t block others who do want to use it, who cannot afford it, from accessing it. And so, it’s really unfair that they are punishing women in this political fight over who wins the Republican nomination, and they’re unfairly putting pressure on the Obama administration for upholding scientific evidence that birth control is preventive care, that that is something very important to women. And while they talk about values and conscience, let’s not lose sight that there are women being damaged by this political football men are making of our lives.

    NOTE: Loretta Ross is national coordinator of the SisterSong Reproductive Justice Collective and longtime human rights activist.

  19. Many Catholic Universities, Hospitals Already Cover Contraception In Their Health Insurance Plans
    By Igor Volsky on Feb 7, 2012
    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/02/07/420114/many-catholic-universities-hospitals-already-offer-contraception-as-part-of-their-health-insurance-plans/

    Catholic leaders and the GOP presidential candidates have intentionally distorted the Obama administration’s new rule requiring employers and insurers to provide reproductive health benefits at no additional cost sharing. Conservatives are seeking a way to politically unite Republican voters around a social issue and portray the regulation as a big government intrusion into religious liberties. In reality, the mandate is modeled on existing rules in six states, exempts houses of worship and other religious nonprofits that primarily employ and serve people of faith, and offers employers a transitional period of one year to determine how best to comply with the rule.

    It’s also nothing new. Twenty-eight states already require organizations that offer prescription insurance to cover contraception and since 98 percent of Catholic women use birth control, many Catholic institutions offer the benefit to their employees. For instance, a Georgetown University spokesperson told ThinkProgress yesterday that employees “have access to health insurance plans offered and designed by national providers to a national pool. These plans include coverage for birth control.”

    Similarly, an informal survey conducted by Our Sunday Visitor found that many Catholic colleges have purchased insurance plans that provide contraception benefits:

    University of Scranton, for example, appears to specifically cover contraception. The University of San Francisco offers employees two health plans, both of which cover abortion, contraception and sterilization…Also problematic is the Jesuit University of Scranton. One of its health insurance plans, the First Priority HMO, lists a benefit of “contraceptives when used for the purpose of birth control.”

    DePaul University in Chicago covers birth control in both its fully insured HMO plan and its self-insured PPO plan and excludes “elective abortion,” said spokesman John Holden, adding that the 1,800 employee-university responded to a complaint from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission several years ago and added artificial contraception as a benefit to its Blue Cross PPO.

    Christian Brothers University in Memphis, Tenn., offers employee health insurance via the Tennessee Independent Colleges and Universities Association, a consortium of Christian Bible and other private college and universities. Its plan excludes abortion, but probably covers artificial contraception as a prescription drug, said C. Gregg Conroy, the executive director of the TICUA Benefit Consortium.

    Boston College, the six former Caritas Christi Catholic hospitals in Massachusetts, and other Catholic organizations that are located in one of the 28 states that already require employers to provide contraception benefits could have self-insured or stopped offering prescription drug coverage to avoid the mandate — but didn’t do so. Instead, they — like many Catholic hospitals and health care insurers around the country — chose to meet the needs of the overwhelming majority of Catholic women and offer these much needed services.

Comments are closed.