Quote of the day

“In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences.  To force American citizens to choose between violating their consciences and forgoing their healthcare is literally unconscionable.It is as much an attack on access to health care as on religious freedom. Historically this represents a challenge and a compromise of our religious liberty.”

– Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, President of the USCCB, 20 January 2012

Read more.


  1. Fiergenholt says:

    Dolan is only one of many. Our local bishop released a similar statement about two hours ago.

  2. Well said. And FWIW I am not Catholic.

  3. Oregon Catholic says:

    Does Orthodoxy have any healthcare institutions in North America? Does this law have any impact on you?

  4. Fiergenholt says:

    Fascinating commentary by “HuffPost” — a liberal on-line media:


  5. vox borealis says:

    One year before implementation…in other words, conveniently after the election.

  6. Not that I am aware of. The Orthodox Church is quite small in N. America with only a fraction of 1% of the total US Population being Orthodox. We do have seminaries and some other minor bodies that might be affected. But nothing along the lines of the Roman Catholic Church.

  7. What a one year delay does allow is congressional action. Hopefully the bishops can make their case and lobby their position. They now have ample opportunity to go to the pews and stir the membership to advocate on their behalf. Of course, many states already have mandatory contraception benefits and the church and its organizations manage to exist. Hopefully too much time won’t be wasted demagoguing allies needed in future fights that actually can be won.

  8. naturgesetz says:

    It also gives the Republicans a chance to make a campaign issue out of it.

  9. Oregon Catholic says:

    Maybe the best thing to come out of it is a wake-up call to the bishops and Catholic Hospital Assoc. who supported Obama and his healthcare plan. They are realizing Obama just kicked them to the curb. It’s good to see his lies exposed.

  10. Absolutely unconscionable. Crazy. Grotesque, really.
    A year from now this goes into effect. So a year to get this changed. Either that, or, please God, we must anticipate large acts of civil disobedience. An unjust law is no law at all.

  11. Can anyone now deny that Obama is the most anti religious, anti Catholic president in our nation’s history? I would like to see the Liberals defend him now.

  12. Fascinating? It was repulsive.

  13. Mary Russell says:

    Liberal boilerplate. It duidn’t add anything to the conversation and just repeated liberal talking points.

  14. Oregon Catholic says:

    I’ve already seen their talking points. ” Most catholic women use ABC already so it’s no big deal”. “Many states already mandate this and the Church is surviving.”

  15. Why would anyone care what huffington post had to say on anything? I agree with Manny without having to go to the site because you know it would be repulsive. After all, they are pro death abortion mills.

  16. Oregon, the issue is the stomping on religious conscience protection in the Constitution. Most of the states with this type of thing, if not all, allow religious conscience protection. Here the choice is for Catholic institutions to either stop providing healthinsurance or to violate church teaching and allow the destruction of life and families, the very basis of those teachings on birth control.

    And remember we just had that wonderful meeting between soon Cardinal Dolan and Barry. The Cardinal just got a message for Barry; up yours Dolan.

    Barry is throwing a bone to the abortion loving democrats who were ticked off they did not get to expand their abortion killing desires to young girls with over the counter abortion pills. Kind of like killing the pipe line as a move to send the environmental nuts of the left at the expense of tens of thousands of pretty high paying jobs. It is all about Barry and keeping his job.

    Wake up Bishops, you have someone in the white house closer to Satan than Christ when it comes to the killing of babies.

  17. It should also give the USCCB a wake up call to get energized to end this guys term in office. If it is bad now, wait until he never has to run again.

  18. It seems like they’ve occasionally had interesting stuff on entertainment or the arts. They had the full list of things Leslie Knope of “Parks and Recreation” is “pro.”


    But politics? Yeah they’re an intentional Progressive/Left organization on that so if a person isn’t into that they can be annoying.

  19. Well after his Presidency Millard Filmore was the candidate for the Anti-Catholic “Know-Nothings.”

  20. Bishop Conley cited President Barack Obama’s Jan. 23, 2011 statement in which he said that the Roe v. Wade decision helps ensure that “our daughters have the same rights, the same freedoms and the same opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.”

    This is a “tragically confused perspective,” Bishop Conley said.

    “In order to protect the rights of our sons and daughters, President Obama, and many more, believe that we must deny the most fundamental, inalienable and God-given right—the right to life.”

  21. The article itself is pretty much same-old, same-old; doesn’t really shed much light. If you read the comments it gives an idea why the administration took this path and risked alienating the USCCB. The comments were about 99% in favor of coverage of contraception. Admittedly the readership is skewed to the liberal side. And you always want to take comments on these news sites with a grain of salt. However it is an indication of the general mood; a lot of them said something like, “I’ll make my own decisions, thank you.” Some of them brought up the sex scandals in the Church. Which is rude, but it’s what is out there as far as feeling. Since most employer-based insurance plans already cover contraception, some felt that they didn’t want to lose what they already had.
    There is a worse battle for the bishops and the Church than just the present administration. We can decry Obama all we want, but this is probably one of the more popularly accepted provisions of the health care plan. It points to the need for evangelization of society.

  22. Huffington Post also has informative articles on Technology for those who are interested. Their cyber-security reporter recently had an article on parents who steal their children’s social security numbers.

  23. Considering its origins with Fr. McGivney, maybe it’s time for the Knights of Columbus to provide comprehensive health insurance. (They already offer a long -term insurance plan.)

  24. If opponents of ABC insurance coverage don’t use such items, then of what consequence is this decision?

    If adherents of religions that ban ABC use it anyway it means the message from the pulpit was ineffective. That being the case it is wrong to use government to reinforce the pulpit message — that is not the job of government in this country.

  25. Deacon Greg Kandra says:


    Part of the problem isn’t just who uses the coverage, but who supplies it. The government is requiring institutions that are morally opposed to contraception to supply it through health care and, in effect, actively support the contraceptive industry.

    Dcn. G.

  26. Oregon Catholic says:

    I think we have to look at this from an ideological, constitutional perspective and not a practical one. Constitutionally, it’s catastrophic to religious freedom and that’s why it needs to be opposed. Practically speaking not so much. I haven’t had an employer sponsored insurance option that didn’t cover contraceptives since I don’t know when, so practically speaking I’ve been paying for them for years through my premiums.

  27. Deacon Greg:
    If offering contraceptives is required but those Catholics who are covered, do not, for conscience reasons, avail themselves of the coverage, why would that actively support the contraceptive industry?

  28. Does not the recent SCOTUS decision involving the LCMS church (Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, et al.) speak to (and against) this draconian law? Is not this law the sort of thing that SCOTUS *just* said cannot be made?

    I’m not asking rhetorically. I don’t know how these things work. Lawyers out there?

  29. Oregon Catholic says:

    It’s complicated by the issue of services to and taking money from people outside the Church. I’m not a lawyer, but I would guess that a Catholic run insurance pool that served only Catholics would be exempt. The effort underway is to marginalize the Church to the extent that our religious rights don’t extend past the walls of our homes and institutions, effectively silencing us.

    There is a same sex marriage bill now in WA state that ONLY exempts churches from accomodating SSMs if they don’t rent out their churches and reception halls to the public. Once again it seeks to marginalize religion. All priests, ministers, etc. are exempted on moral/religious grounds fortunately.

  30. Oregon Catholic says:

    Clarification: …ONLY exempts churches from accomodating SSMs if they don’t rent out their churches and reception halls to the public – FOR WEDDINGS. It doesn’t apply to any other public sales like bake sales, auctions, etc. Just weddings and wedding receptions.

  31. I think this reasoning is ultimately faulty. Eric Bugyis of Commonweal is I think correct in stating the employer has no legitimate interest in how or why a benefit or other compensation is used by the employee. There are social interests involved, but those are best addressed through the legislature, not by the employer class reigning over the employee class.

  32. kind of like saying a porn magazine has some interesting articles. When you blend them with porn, they become porn. Once leadership in an organization accepts and support the holocaust of babies, and in many ways, it is kind of like avoiding the near occasion of sin or in any way supporting those who hold those views. Again, if one searches through the organizations that supported the nazi’s, you might find they had other things of value hidden away to try to attract us to the dark side and to pay for their ability to continue to push the death camps.

  33. The issue has nothing to do with birth control and everything to do with ending religious freedom and also freedom of speech. Newt on his acceptance speech pointed out one topic he would take to Obama was his administrations direct assult on religious freedom in this country. That needs to happen as there has been very little debate.

  34. What it has to result is Catholic employers being forced to not offer healthcare insurance to their employees because they have been denied their religious conscience protected in the very first line of the bill of rights. Nothing was more important to the founders and those who would ratify the constitution than protection from government of religious freedom. That is the issue, if the Constitution of the US actually means anything at all under this administration and this president. For those of us who value the Constitution as written and who place our faith first in life as called upon by Christ, this is something that obviously has struck a cord and should with anyone who values their faith and the Constitution of this land.

  35. The employee who works for a religious organization has an option of abiding by the handbook of the employer. The supreme court has ruled that religious organizations have the right to have religious protection in what they have in this handbook including the ability to fire someone who violates Catholic (or other) Church teaching as witness by those who violate church teaching on in vitro fertilization or having children out of marriage. The court will rule that the Church has the right to offer the type of insurance that meets with Church teaching if it gets that far. In fact, by doing this, I would suspect that the court will have additional ammunition to put out all of ObamaCare based on this decision. That protection clause in the bill of rights has been under attack for the last 50 years and I suspect that those on the attack have gone to far and we will see this reversed over the next 50 years. It is too important to this country to not have solid protection of religious freedoms.

    This article is also clearly anti Catholic in its total presentation with bias showing in lines like this: “represents a Church that is decidedly non-democratic in its constitution”.

  36. Oregon, this shows a major flaw in ObamaCare. What else will they try to add beyond birth control in the future. How about mandating that the insurance cover those who want to have their life ended or for abortion. If you cave on one that might have some minor argument, you set precident which is what the left does all the time.

Leave a Comment