Obama’s ‘Unacceptable’ Compromise, and Lies

CatholicCulture.org and cnsnews.com both have coverage of the Bishops’ response to President Obama’s “compromise” on the HHS contraceptive mandate. Worth noting in the Bishops’ statement is their  assertion that “coverage of sterilization and contraception, including some abortifacients” is

…both unsupported in the law and remains a grave moral concern. We cannot fail to reiterate this, even as so many would focus exclusively on the question of religious liberty. [Emphasis in original]

If I’m reading this right, the Bishops are pointing out that sterilization and contraception are evils in themselves, prescinding entirely from the issue of religious liberty. They are not evil simply because the government is imposing them on us against our religious beliefs and, therefore, our consciences; they are evil because they violate God’s moral law. That contraception is morally illicit no matter who does it is something Catholics are not saying enough. Therefore, let us reassert it over and over again: Contraception is a violation of the natural law, and is therefore morally wrong.

(A rather unexpected support of the Church’s stance against birth control comes from Business Insider, whose Michael Brendan Dougherty and Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry take issue with their own editor and claim, stunningly, that it’s “Time To Admit It: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Control”.)

Another objection that the Bishops make is that “all of these stakeholders” in the mandate — including all employers, employees, and students — should be exempted from paying into these immoral “services,”: “not just the extremely small subset of ‘religious employers’ that HHS proposed to exempt initially.” The Bishops are saying that a for-profit Catholic business owner, and indeed, anyone with a moral objection to this abomination, ought to be exempted from paying into plans that cover such morally illicit acts as chemical abortion, contraception, and sterilization.

In his press conference, President Obama repeatedly claimed (and Kathleen Sebelius echoed him in her interview on FOX News) that contraception is a “fundamental right.” The President of the United States, and his nominally Catholic HHS appointee, also lied by claiming that contraception is preventive medicine that is good for women’s health, and that it will save money down the road because of the diseases it will forestall. This is an insult to the intelligence of everyone watching them. Legally, it is an abomination to claim free contraception a “fundamental right.” Whence comes this totally new and gratuitous claim based upon absolutely nothing but lust and ideology? Since when it it law? A “fundamental right”? Says who?

Thankfully, I am not alone in these observations. A gent named  Geoff Caldwell has lampooned this faux “right” on his site: Supreme Court Unanimous: Free contraception a fundamental Constitutional right.

Contraception of various kinds leads to all sorts of health problems. As “preventive” medicine it prevents children, ergo, as the Bishops pointed out, babies are thereby equated with disease by this administration. But beyond preventing only babies, contraception causes health problems in women. According to DitchThePill.org, “Since the introduction of the Pill, there’s been an explosion of women’s diseases and maladies in a scope never experienced before in the history of medicine.”

Included on their list of these diseases and maladies are:

  •     Migraine headaches
  •     PMS
  •     Breast Cancer
  •     Heart Disease
  •     Heart Attacks
  •     Strokes
  •     Blood Clots
  •     High Blood Pressure
  •     Uterine Cancer
  •     Infertility
  •     Depression
  •     Post-Partum Depression
  •     Uterine Fibroids
  •     Unnecessary Hysterectomies
  •     Anxiety Disorders

Remember all the problems with IUDs? Remember Norplant? Pharmaceutical companies are big businesses whose norms are dictated by the bottom line, not sound medical ethics or the benefit of consumers. The irony here is that many a feminist piously dedicated to the cause of environmentalism has dumped into her own body extremely harmful chemicals that she would not want dumped into a rain forest or swamp.

We also know of detrimental social effects of contraception.

The use of contraception is dictated by a desire to divorce sex from procreation. This is exactly what the Church opposes. By rending asunder what God Himself has joined together, the onanist has exposed himself, his bedfellow, and his society to a multitude of medical, psychological, social, and moral ills. Now that big government is coercively perpetuating these disorders, the Church is in a great position to show the world what she truly is and always has been: the guardian of humanity’s best interests.