home
RSS
February 1st, 2012
09:23 PM ET

Is Obama losing the Catholic vote?

By Eric Marrapodi and Brianna Keilar, CNN

(CNN)–After years of bridge building with the Catholic Church, the Obama administration may have damaged some of the good will it built up with the nation's 70 million Catholics, which could have steep consequences at the polls in November.

Some rank and file Catholics are beginning to express the same frustrations as clergy about a new U.S. Department of Health and Human Services policy requiring all employers, including religious ones, to pay for FDA-approved contraceptives, such as the birth control pill and Plan B, through health insurance plans. Churches are exempt but hospitals and schools with religious affiliations must comply. The new policy goes into effect August 1, 2012, but religious groups who oppose contraception have been given a yearlong extension to enforce the policy.

"What's offensive is that we're being told, our Catholic institutions which serve this nation well, are being told you who find these things offensive, you should pay for them, in fact you must pay for them," Cardinal Donald Wuerl, the archbishop of Washington, told CNN.

Catholic teaching opposes the use of contraceptives.  Wuerl acknowledged the clergy and the faithful have been at odds over the teachings on contraceptive use. But on this policy he said both are in lockstep over what is being perceived as a violation of religious liberties.

"This time around what people are seeing this isn't a question of one moral teaching or another, it's being able to teach at all. Our freedom, and everyone has a stake in freedom in this country, and I think that's why this resonates across the board," he said.

CNN's Belief Blog – all the faith angles to the day's top stories

Wuerl is calling his congregants to action, asking them to call congress and the White House to express their displeasure.

"We're beginning to say to our people this is what the issue is, it's wrong, we've never experienced this in the history of our country before, this is a violation of the basic rights of conscience and religious liberty. So you need to know that and you need to speak up," he said.

The timing of the administration's announcement has drawn criticism for being tone deaf, coming just three days before tens of thousands of protesters, many of them Catholics who oppose abortion rights, came to Washington for the annual March for Life on the anniversary of Roe vs Wade, which legalized abortion nationwide.

"In my estimation it's a huge misstep politically," said Stephen Schneck a political scientist from Catholic University who has consulted with the administration on Catholic issues. In 2009, Schneck also worked with pro-abortion rights Democrats in Congress on the president’s signature health care reform measure to find language that ensured government funds did not pay for abortions.

"The way in which the narrative is being developed is that the administration is at odds with the Catholic Church fundamentally. What I'm seeing in the pews is something of a waking up, a Catholic solidarity. That I think could very well carry over into their political activities" Schneck said. "There's nothing like having a sense of opposition to you to rally the troops and I suspect that's going to happen here."

Schneck pointed particularly to states with large Catholic populations where this new solidarity could have a far-reaching political impact.

"If you look at where those Catholics are, they're in places like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado and Florida, which are of course critical states for anyone who wants to become president of the United States," he said.

In 2008, President Obama won 54% of the Catholic vote, according to the Pew Research Center. Early on in his presidency, Obama reached out to Catholics. He appointed prominent Catholics to several cabinet positions and ambassadorships.

In May 2009, the president delivered the commencement speech at the University of Notre Dame, where he spoke of working together on abortion.

"Let's honor the conscience of those who disagree with abortion, and draft a sensible conscience clause, and make sure that all of our health care policies are grounded not only in sound science, but also in clear ethics, as well as respect for the equality of women. Those are things we can do," the president said to rousing applause from the crowd in South Bend, Indiana.

In shaping the new Health and Human Services policy, the administration reached out to New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan, who is the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, the public policy arm of the church in the United States, and other Catholic leaders in November to seek their input in the process. Many of the same Catholic leaders received a heads up on January 20 several hours before the administration announced the policy.

"This decision was made after very careful consideration, including the important concerns some have raised about religious liberty. I believe this proposal strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services," Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in the statement about the policy.

On Tuesday in the White House briefing room, Press Secretary Jay Carney again defended the administration's decision when pressed by reporters.

"After very careful consideration the administration believes that this strikes the appropriate balance between respecting religious beliefs and increasing access to important preventive services. We will continue to work closely with religious groups during this transitional period to discuss their concern," Carney said.

The administration is extremely concerned this will affect Catholic voters’ support.

As the opposition grew this week, the administration noted to reporters there were Catholics in and out of government who support the measure, as well as interfaith groups.

Late Wednesday night the White House launched the first part of an information campaign to spell out what the policy change does and does not do.

An administration official also pointed to nearly $2 billion in federal grants that have gone to Catholic-related charities since the beginning of the administration as a sign of the willingness to work together.

James Salt, executive director of Catholics United, which hasn't taken a position on the HHS policy, said there could be a silver lining for both Catholics and the administration on this issue. He said with more women able to access contraceptives there could be a reduction in abortions stemming from unplanned pregnancies as a result of the policy.

"More needs to be done on both sides. It's not just a question for the administration, it's a question for the pro-life community and the pro-choice community to put aside their heated rhetoric and find common ground," Salt said.

- CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor

Filed under: Abortion • Barack Obama • Belief • Bishops • Catholic Church • Christianity • Church and state • Politics

soundoff (2,744 Responses)
  1. Tony from Oakland California

    Catholics tend to be compassionate towards Society regarding the poor, Unions, and Immigrants. This compassionate example by Catholics is an oxy-moron in comparison to Republican behavior. For the Editor of this article.....your information is not accurate. The aforementioned facts actually propel Catholics towrds the Democratic Party. There has never been a Catholic Republican President.....but there has been a Catholic Democratic President named John F. Kennedy. One of the most famous Democrats of all time.....
    Sorry Republicans.......you'll have to take your "pipe dream" of capturing all religous voting bases with a grain of salt...it won't happen.....because Republicanism is against the poor.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:37 pm |
    • chevy

      Typical California freebie mentality. Republicans believe in providing opportunity for all. Dems believe in doing for everyone what they should be doing for themselves, and delusionally see this as caring. I told my 4 yr old son I could clean his room for him, and it would be messy again in an hour, or he could do it for himself and it would remain clean. He chose the latter. Even a 4 yr old has more sense than the average dem voter.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:06 pm |
  2. Thinking7

    This is about a law that gives Catholics no option of not paying for abortion and contraceptives in their premiums. It is unfair and illegal. It is taking from our religious liberties. If you want to have an abortion or use contraceptives or have an abortion, you may do it on your own dime. This law needs an opt out clause, and Obama knows it. It is not about health care. It is about population control. The people who are angry about Catholics and other Christian groups saying no to this do not understand this simple fact. We would have to pay for it in our premiums regardless. You tell me how that is fair.
    I am in management in the insurance industry. This law will require Catholic hospitals to provide insurance to all of their employees. Coverage that contains abortions and contraceptives is in direct contract to the church's teachings. It will also happen at Catholic and other Christian schools. Catholic universities. You think this is fair to push this on all of these employers???

    February 2, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
    • Bruce

      They still have the option to go out and purchase any health insurance policy they want, or none at all. They just have to pay a tax penalty if they do so (or their employer does).

      They have options. Nothing is forced.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:38 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      OK, your portion of the premiums will only go to kidney transplants. Better?

      February 2, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
    • GodPot

      Yeah!! Wheres the option on my taxes to opt out of all military spending!! I don't want a single dollar of mine to be used to buy bullets that kill children in our war zones!!

      Still don't get it yet Thinking7?

      You do not get to decide how to spend your money in a DEMOCRACY, it's decided by majority rules, and you p h u c k e r s are not the majority, so pay your fair share and shut the hell up!! Or convince the majority that there is an invisible man in the sky that demands we never cover our junk.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:45 pm |
    • Formerly A Democrat Catholic-this did it

      I agree with you and disagree with you. It does need an opt out clause, and in its current form is a clear violation of the first amendment. Where I disagree with you is why the Obama administration is doing it. I think Obama is trying to push Catholocism out of the social welfare scene. We are not wanted, Obama at his core (and his advisors) think we are ignorant hilbillies, and only pander to us for our votes. They are opportunists and marginalize us when they feel they can get away with it. I didn't used to think this way, but I just started reading some of the bigoted comments supporting the president and I started rethinking things.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:45 pm |
    • CarrotCakeMan

      Sorry but you are NOT "thinking," you're repeating the same GOP propaganda the bishops are pushing. This has NOTHING to do with abortion. Shame on you for "thinking" that the GOP bishops should be able to deny their secular, non-Catholic employees birth control.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
    • BRC

      In short, yes. Organizations aren't people.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
    • chevy

      godpot is a freaking d-bag. You are the problem with our society. And I find it ironic that one who whines about some group wanting to have some voice in the way our government runs is likely the same one who is throwing glitter all over people who don't vote his way. tool.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:16 pm |
    • GodPot

      @chevy – Right, i'm the problem. I'm the one demanding that everyone ignore science in favor of my belief in invisible winged fairy's.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:29 pm |
    • chevy

      yes, godpot, you ARE the problem. And your buddy in the White house is the one trying to force HIS (and by association YOUR) beliefs on others. So go cry to your comic book store friends about how Catholics are oppressing you–here the real story is vice versa.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:50 pm |
  3. Joel

    I'm Jewish and I'm sure as hell not voting for that fraud. All one has to do is check a blog such as this and see the spite this man has helped ferment.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
    • Colin

      Judaism is the belief that an immortal, intifinetly old super-being, powerful enough to create the entire Universe and its billions of galaxies, has a personal interest in how much skin I have on my d.ick.

      Atheism is the beliefe that the above belief is ludicrous.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:41 pm |
    • Descarado

      The biggest treat to the survival of Israel is not a nuclear Iran, Hamas or Hezbollah. It is Barack Obama occupying The White House until he is removed by the electorate this November.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:41 pm |
    • Descarado

      The biggest THREAT

      February 2, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
  4. Sue D

    Not voting for Obama. Ecomnomy sucks , Culture sucks, You can't go on a message board without seething hatred and class warfare rhetoric. Enough his enough.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
    • Descarado

      Obama know how to divide everyone, but he conquers no one.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:37 pm |
    • Bruce

      President Newt Gingrich is going to clean up these message boards, right after he makes a lunar colony!

      February 2, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
    • J.W

      Only republicans think there is class warfare.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:56 pm |
    • GodPot

      We already have a lunar colony, er well, a loony colony at least, who were likely the decentdants of flat earthers who now believe invisible winged men will come and save mankind and want to make sure and vote in a President who believes the same thing so they can prepare for the invisible winged mens arrival and they don't want to get caught paying for any latex products that inhibit the invisible winged mens plans for spermicidal domination.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:00 pm |
  5. GodPot

    My girlfriends mother was hit by a drunk driver and was in critical condition when she refused a blood transfusion that might have saved her life because she was a Jehovahs Witness and so she died. The drunks defense attorney used that as an excuse saying it was her religion that got her killed, not his client, of which this was his third DUI. He ended up getting 15 years for manslaughter, but what do your "Christian" morals tell you was right in this case? She held a strong religious belief which is all fine and good when it comes to your own person, but now her religious conviction may have let her die instead of being saved by the doctors and thus a case of serious bodily injury turned to manslaughter for the drunk to deal with.

    Catholics cry foul whenever someone infringes on their religious freedoms, but when the freedoms don't make sense to them or are some other religions ritual you just leave them to fight for themselves since it doesn't concern you, hypocrites.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • chevy

      What the hell are you talking about??? A person made a personal decision, and you blame this on the entire Catholic community? Didn't sound like there was a single Catholic in that whole story? Just shows how some people blame anything on anybody else they can think of.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:54 pm |
    • GodPot

      " Didn't sound like there was a single Catholic in that whole story?" You are right. But the fact that you cannot see the comparison between one faiths belief system based on their religion and your own is abhorrent. You want everyone to accept your beliefs and make exceptions for them, but I doubt you would have a problem with forcing others to spend their tax dollars on blood transfusions to save lives even when there are those who believe strongly against it.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:20 pm |
    • chevy

      Pot: you are a nut job. Nobody forced her to have a transfusion, or to do or not do anything. You are delusional, and I really believe pot is your god. Quit hating everybody who doesn't believe just as you want them to. I know many Catholics, and many atheists, Witnesses, etc. and by far the most intolerant group is yours (the anti-religious). Please feel free to vent your story of how you have been scourged by some religious group so you can begin to heal. Go ahead...otherwise, live and let live.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:59 pm |
  6. Lutheranemailuser

    Barack Obama is a wolf in sheep's clothing. He was from day one. The problem is, there were too many people in 2008 who were too blinded by their own selfishness to see that. Selfishness is the center of what is going wrong with America these days. It's either selfishness that results in a hatred for the successful, or selfishness which spawns a hatred for others, and an intolerance for their point of view. Chrsitiniaty is targeted for people to hate these days. Obama uses hatred, bitterness, and covetous sentiment to tap into others hearts by way of the negative, rather than the positive. Remember: He touted hope and CHANGE. Nobody really asked him what that change meant, did they? It just meant really sticking it to the other guy. Congratulations, everyone. We're about to find out what it is like to live in a socialist republic. Many of you have no idea as to what kind of a future you sold your children (and your souls) to when you voted for him.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • Lutheranemailuser

      In other words....The Pied Piper

      February 2, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
  7. Troy

    I love how the media seeks out any excuse to group people together and make broad generalized statements about how "Catholics" feel about President Obama. I'm a catholic...have been my whole life. I voted for him in 2008 and will again in 2012. I along with many other Catholics are not in "lockstep" with the clergy on any number of issues including this one...and that doesn't make me any less Catholic. I am not upset about contraception issues. I'm much more concerned with a backwards facing Vatican that condemns condoms in Africa, rejects our fellow GLBT Catholics, turns a blind eye to child abuse, won't allow priests to marry nor allow women to join the priesthood while our clergy numbers dwindle, funds evaporate and the church insists on becoming increasingly irrelevant in our modern world.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • Bradley Kisia

      You are Catholic in name, but you don't believe the message? Thinking you are talking for us Africans in Africa? Strange. You like the king and not the kingdom. Trying not to be blunt and judgemental, but cannot help but say you are Catholic in name.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
    • Its not suprising.

      You are not Catholic, if you want all that I suggest finding your religion. Nobody is holding you hostage in Church, nobody is forcing you to stay there. Start your own church something like Rock crawling believers of napkin.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:03 pm |
    • Phillip

      I am a Catholic also and I beg to differ with you. You ARE less of a catholic if you're not in "lockstep" with the church on such a key issue such as this. I would suspect the real reason you're not in "lockstep" with he Lord and His church is because you don't really know and understand who the Lord is and what he and His church stand for. I really suggest that you learn what we stand for and the reasons WHY we stand for them the way we do before you come out and badmouth our church the way you have! THAT IS NOT VERY CATHOLIC! The reason I say " you really don't know who the Lord is and what He and His church stand for" is exactly this: You are either ignorant of His teachings so therefore once you became informed, you would agree with us because of your new found understanding or you do know what we stand for and you are really just badmouthing us and stating what you don't like about the church. So which person are you? Because an authentic catholic knows that one must conform his or her conscious to Christ and His church because as St. Joan of Arc so eloquently said" All I know about Christ and the church is this: they are simply one thing! And we shouldn't complicate the matter!

      February 2, 2012 at 7:06 pm |
  8. prezhussein

    Jill Stanek, a registered delivery-ward nurse who was the prime mover behind the legislation after she witnessed aborted babies’ being born alive and left to die, testified twice before Obama in support of the Induced Infant Liability Act bills. She also testified before the U.S. Congress in support of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act.
    She said her testimony “did not faze” Obama.
    Twice as state senator, he voted to deny medical care to babies born alive after a late term abortion.
    It would defeat the purpose he said

    February 2, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • Descarado

      Denying survival care to an aborted baby born alive? Does anyone need a better description of the Obama regime conscience compared to the Catholic conscience? These people are EVIL!

      February 2, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
    • sarahsmart

      yeah right wheres your link?

      February 2, 2012 at 3:06 pm |
  9. Joe Schuss

    Either you are a Catholic and follow the religious principles of that faith or you do not and then you are not a Catholic

    February 2, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
    • sarahsmart

      HAHAHA thats funny. If you are baptised in the Catholic faith than you ARE Catholic, regardless of how many sins you commit.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:08 pm |
    • Tom

      Exactly.

      February 2, 2012 at 3:10 pm |
    • Tom

      Why do people self-identify as Catholic if they don't adhere to the faith?

      February 2, 2012 at 3:12 pm |
  10. bayou2

    I'am a catholic, and we pay for the priest that abuse those little boy.
    This is bovine scatology, if one is bad than the other is also.
    Move the priest and everything will be ok.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
    • GeorgeRS

      The incidence of pedophilia in the Church is actually lower than in society at large. Nice try though.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • Sue D

      99% Catholic priests don't do this. If you were Catholic you'd know that instead of spewing hate.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • wcl

      "Move the priest and everything will be ok."
      Yea, everything at your parrish will be OK. What about the one they move him too. This is exactly what the church has been doing, up until now.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
  11. Amazing

    This is one Catholic who will continue to vote for President Obama.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • Joe Schuss

      Why?

      February 2, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
    • Formerly A Democrat Catholic-this did it

      I did in 2008 and would have in 2012, but now this has me reconsidering for a few reasons
      1. This does make me question the President's commitement to First Amendment rights
      2. His handling of the situation suggests a lack or respect for Catholics, or religiously minded people more generally
      3. Some of the bigoted anti-Catholic comments on here supporting the President have led me to question whether the Democrat party is as aligned with my faith as I thought it was. Reading half these comments, I now realize that a significant portion of democrats take Catholics to be backwards and ignorant. I guess I was fooling myself in thinking democrats were tolerant. Sad.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
    • sarahsmart

      And I am another high five amazing!

      February 2, 2012 at 3:09 pm |
  12. Furious Styles

    Wouldn't it be nice if Catholics were this energized every time a priest if found to have molested boys? One could only wish.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:25 pm |
    • Mike

      This is a profoundly ignorant and bigoted comment and should be removed by the moderators.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • SeanNJ

      @Mike: "This is a profoundly insightful and brilliant comment and should be highlighted by the moderators."

      Fixed your post.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
    • Thinking7

      Very ignorant statement and rude, too.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
  13. Linda Operle

    The problem w/the catholic church is their flock, if these members didn't use Birth control there'd be no problem right? Obviously the flock wants to use Birth control. YOu won't stop catholics from using birth control by refusing to reimburse for it. They don't seem to mind paying for lawsuits incurred by the priests rampant pedophilia!

    February 2, 2012 at 2:24 pm |
    • Khumundu

      You make me laugh. So Catholics will continue using contraception; I guess they will continue going for confession if they are Catholic coz receiving communion while on contraception in our Church is a sin ... you either believe or you don't; if you don't then for my foot's sake, don't claim to be Catholic ... by baptism yes, but that is as far as it goes. Catholicism is a faith ... faith requires belief, if you don't then scoot!

      February 2, 2012 at 2:48 pm |
  14. James PDX

    Can anybody tell me where in the bible it says you cannot use birth control? Thanks.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:24 pm |
    • Tom

      Matthew 18:18.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • boocat

      There's a quote in the bible that says "Be fruitful and multiply." The RCC uses this line as an excuse to outlaw birth control. Believe me. I had 18 years of bull**** teaching of this stupid religion. I know what I'm saying is correct.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • Joe T.

      I know an argument against condoms is something about "not spilling your seed on the ground". There was a character in the Bible who was killed for that. I'm sure they use the same reasoning.

      It makes you wonder why the Catholics don't follow every other scripture in the Old Testaement to a "T". Like the part about not having idols? Oh, that means they'd have to get rid of their Virgin Mary statues.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
    • Bruce

      "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry." Matthew 19:10

      Actually, it says the opposite. No marriage, no births at all, extinction–yay! So sayeth the Word!

      February 2, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
    • katmoondaddy

      Fruitfulness in the marriage act is a command from God that is repeated numerous times in the Bible (for instance Genesis 9:1 and Genesis 35:11). The use of contraceptives violates the heart of this command as this is an attempt to prevent couples from being fruitful and multiplying. Nowhere in the rest of the Bible is this command retracted, we've seen that it was re-emphasized by Jesus our Savior, and therefore remains a command for us all.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
    • Bruce

      katmoondaddy: You're wrong. Jesus disparages both marriage and family. Paul says it would be better if people didn't marry and followed his celibate example.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
    • Khumundu

      Talk to the priest in your parish if you are seriously looking for the answer, if you aren't then try talking to the pope.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
    • Joe T.

      katmoondaddy, are you saying that if it's not for procreating, men and women shouldn't engage in intercourse? Does this mean that women who have gone through menopause are no longer allowed to have intercourse?

      February 2, 2012 at 2:56 pm |
  15. dberube

    Look maybe this has been said all ready ... but ... if you work for a Catholic hospital and you don't want a script for contraception because you believe it's wrong fine! If you are Catholic or not and you want a script than get it! It's your choice. As a practicing Catholic I have a "free will" I can make my own decisions thank you ... and be judged when it's my time.

    The Catholic hospital is a business like any other business ... follow the rules or get out of business. If you don't like the rules change them if you can otherwise move on

    God Bless

    February 2, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
    • Khumundu

      i think the churches are actually considering leaving the 'business' coz I guess it is not an act of charity any more. you may then keep your business hospitals and we will go back to what we have been doing ... praying.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:52 pm |
  16. GodPot

    "What's offensive is that we're being told, our Catholic inst i tutions which serve this nation well, are being told you who find these things offensive, you should pay for them, in fact you must pay for them,"

    I find it offensive that I have to pay taxes for roads even when I don't have a car or believe in them for they are violent dangerous blocks of steel inhabbited by demons that puff smoke!!

    I find it offensive that I have to pay taxes for the fire department even when I don't own a home and I believe the spirits of fire should be allowed to burn free instead of being doused by evil!!

    I find it offensive that I have to pay taxes to check on food quality, I don't believe in germs so I know it's a big waste of my money looking for invented microbes that obviously don't exist...

    I find it offensive that I have to pay taxes that help keep the local Church on the corner in a tax exempt status because I do not believe there is any spirit or divinity to it and I believe they are just sucking away community dollars. (True)!!

    I'm offended at selfish ignorance that keeps so many people in the dark ages, wake up your morons or you will be swept under the rug of history much like the flat earthers and heavensgate idiots.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
    • boocat

      Excellent comment...

      February 2, 2012 at 2:24 pm |
    • Thinking7

      There are lots of things I don't like paying taxes for. They may be necessary things as a whole. However, abortions are not necessary. Neither are contraceptives. We shouldn't have to pay for those things.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:28 pm |
    • wcl

      ...and lets add 1 more:
      I, however, am very happy that I don't have to pay taxes for health insurance, because good health is not a right for all, it is a privlidge only for the rich or those employed with good health plans.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:29 pm |
    • GodPot

      @Thinking7 – "However, abortions are not necessary. Neither are contraceptives. We shouldn't have to pay for those things."

      So I guess when you say "Thinking7" you mean thinking like a 7 year old and you completely missed my point. There are lot's of people who think lot's of things are not necessary, and it's a good thing we don't rely on the guy who doesn't believe in germs to do our food safety checks. It's also a good thing we don't have idiots like yourself administering the contraceptive programs because anyone with actual knowledge on the subject would laugh in your face.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:39 pm |
    • katmoondaddy

      I find it offensive that I belong to the same species as you. God help us all. The ignorant are multiplying in droves. That's why Obama is President today.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
    • GodPot

      "I find it offensive that I belong to the same species as you." Well if you are unable to see the logic in my post then it's possible i've evolved past your simple brain or maybe the religion you immerse yourself in has been the catalyst for a devolving of your own brain. Either way, your response is like a person replying to a well thought out position with "Nuh Uh!!"

      February 2, 2012 at 2:51 pm |
  17. dugee

    Let me get this straight. The church is angry because their peeps now have to pay for contraceptives that the church does not want them to use in the first place. Shouldn't the church be in favor of decreased access to contraceptives?

    February 2, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
    • Thinking7

      No, it is not the Church's job to tell people that are not Catholics whether they can or cannot use contraceptives. That has nothing to do with this. It is about the government making Catholics and other Christian groups pay for abortions and contraceptives in their premiums. You are not on target with what this law is about.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
  18. Thinking7

    This is about a law that gives Catholics no option of not paying for abortion and contraceptives in their premiums. It is unfair and illegal. It is taking from our religious liberties. If you want to have an abortion or use contraceptives or have an abortion, you may do it on your own dime. This law needs an opt out clause, and Obama knows it. It is not about health care. It is about population control. The people who are angry about Catholics and other Christian groups saying no to this do not understand this simple fact. We would have to pay for it in our premiums regardless. You tell me how that is fair.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:20 pm |
    • wcl

      Thinking7 – Why do you think contraception is bad?

      February 2, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
    • boocat

      And I don't think it's fair that I have to pay for men who take viagra either. Viagra is covered by most insurance companies. Why should I have to pay for something that helps a man get his rocks off????????? Why aren't you complaining about that?

      February 2, 2012 at 2:29 pm |
    • BRC

      @Thinking,
      I don't think you understand the law. No individual has to pay for their own coverage. The EMPLOYER the COMPANY must pay for and furnish a health care policy at no cost to the employee. That's why so many conservatives hate this law. It's not making you pay for anything you dont' agree with, it's forcing your employer to be willing to pay for you to recieve certain treatments, regarless of whether or not the employer agrees with them.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • Thinking7

      boocat – Though I do not agree with that either, this is not about a life issue. The health care legislation will force Christians everywhere to pay for premiums that include abortions and contraceptives. Abortions cause the death of babies. Death is murder. Viagra is not.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
    • Thinking7

      BRC – I most certainly do understand this law. I am in management in the insurance industry. This law will require Catholic hospitals to provide insurance to all of their employees. Coverage that contains abortions and contraceptives is in direct contract to the church's teachings. It will also happen at Catholic and other Christian schools. Catholic universities. You think this is fair to push this on all of these employers???

      February 2, 2012 at 2:34 pm |
    • wcl

      Thinking7
      Isn't that only if they accept government money, like medicaid/medicare reimbursements, etc...?

      February 2, 2012 at 2:39 pm |
    • BRC

      @Thinking,
      I made a poor asumption about your level of understanding, and I apollogize for that. But I still completely disagree with your premise. YOU the individual, aren't paying for the insurance, nor is any other person. Businesses, hospitals, churches, corporations are, and frankly, I don't care about them. The law was passed that says that all citizens would recieve X standard of coverage and care, their employer's disagreeing with the law should not be allowd to deny them the coverage of that law. No, I don't think businesses have the same rights as people, they are not as important, and if they have to pay more money to give their people the protection described by the law, and the same protection that ALL citizens are required to recieve.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
    • GodPot

      " I most certainly do understand this law. I am in management in the insurance industry."

      I work for a major insurance company and work with many managers and underwriters and to my surprise, they don't even have to have insurance licenses to do their work as we do dealing with actual clients, so i'm not so sure that means anything since they know lots of company policy details but very little insurance law.

      February 2, 2012 at 8:11 pm |
  19. Descarado

    If the Obama regime can jam contraceptives down the throats of unwilling Catholics, how far down the road will it be before the Obama regime demands that your church or synagogue conduct gay marriage ceremonies?

    Not far. Not Far. Those are the Obama regime's best friends.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:19 pm |
    • Thinking7

      That's for sure. He has a control agenda.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:21 pm |
    • boocat

      You are accusing Obama of doing EXACTLY what the RCC and other religions do now. YOU JUST DON'T GET THE IRONY!!!!

      February 2, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
    • RA

      Slippery slope fallacy. Find a real argument. Better yet, find one that isn't factually incorrect.

      You aren't buying contraceptives. You aren't violating your faith. No more than your advocating of the repeal of a law that would benefit so many more Americans. That many Americans that would die each day are allowed to live because of this bill. Weigh that on your golden scales.

      February 2, 2012 at 2:23 pm |
    • Faithful

      Actually, there ARE churches who conduct gay weddings. There is no law against that, only against civil marriages. But what if the government banned churches from conducting gay weddings? See how many people would get their panties in a twist over that!

      February 2, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
  20. hhp

    What about men who have vasectomys - do they go to hell for preventing pregnancies?? Insurance covers this proceedure and there is almost no issues or questions from the anyone. How many children have these priests had?? I believe the church should fix its inner problems before becoming holier than thou. I am catholic and attended catholic school and I would never send my children or recommend anyone to send them to a catholic schools. I am to old to be worried about having a baby, but it would still be my choice not doctrine coming from a church that would hide these sick men.

    February 2, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
    • Joe Schuss

      That is nice but it has nothing to do with the question of the government overruling religious convictions

      February 2, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • josh1

      joe: How far do you want to take the right of religions to form their own set of laws??? Should we allow this for other religions??

      February 2, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.