The politics of women’s rights versus religious freedom
Anyone who thinks women’s issues are being ignored just hasn’t been paying attention. Recently the media had a veritable field day with controversial, or at least problematic, decisions, several of which they had bypassed in favor of campaign news. Snore.
First: Susan G. Komen For the Cure announced the cancer foundation would no longer fund Planned Parenthood. The backlash was amazing and a Komen spokesperson quickly said the charity would reinstate its support for the country’s largest provider of breast exams and mammogram referrals.
Then retailer jcpenney essentially ignored protests by a group called One Million Moms against its agreement with TV host Ellen DeGeneres to become the company’s spokesperson. CEO Ron Johnson said the company and DeGeneres have shared values and they were happy to have her as spokesperson.
In the same week: California’s ban on same-sex marriage, known as Proposition 8, was judged unconstitutional, although implementation of gay marriage is delayed pending appeal. An Arianna Huffington look-alike on NBC’s Saturday Night Live referred to “angry bishops” in decrying the whole thing.
Also: Women in the U.S. Army have been active for a long time, flying combat missions, etc., using the term “embedded” rather than “deployed” in official orders to get around bureaucratic nonsense that deemed women ill-equipped or inappropriate for combat. It seems now they will be considered fit for everything but infantry (hand-to-hand combat) missions.
But the noisiest flap ensued over the Obama administration mandate that contraception be included in religious organizations’ employee health plans as part of the implementation of the healthcare reform act. Note: 28 states already passed such laws. How did the President and HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius not see the coming train wreck? Issued first on Jan. 20, Obama reportedly turned down Catholic leaders’ requests for an exemption. Then after much pushback from church leaders, he announced a compromise: Workers at such institutions (even those that self-insure) will be able to get free contraception directly from health insurance companies. This theoretically would relieve religious institutions from the dichotomy of defying church teaching to comply with government regulations.
Will it work? The jury is still out, while many are still weighing in.
True, the Catholic hierarchy would have liked to ignore all controversy over birth control and women’s reproductive rights, knowing that more than 90 percent of the faithful ignore the Church position against birth control. Metropolitan dailies (New York Times, LA Times) buried the story on back pages, taking more than two weeks for it to land above the fold and on op-ed pages. The church then responded by sending delegates to the TV talk shows, apparently with orders to reframe the discussion as one of “religious freedom.” Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan of New York appeared on MSNBC “Morning Joe” and successfully avoided co-hosts Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski’s attempts to frame it as an issue of women’s rights or reproductive freedom.
After Obama’s reworking of the regulation, Dolan said the changes were a “first step in the right direction.”
In the days since, everyone is weighing in with conflicting opinions on the controversy.
Everyone, that is, except GOP hopeful Mitt Romney, who seems to dance around any social, religious or personal question. He’s probably not hiding anything more than a deep aversion to personal commitment on divisive issues.
This controversy comes amid the ongoing “personhood” movement by some states (i.e., Mississippi) to define an embryo as a person with rights. This is a political issue driven by staunch abortion opponents that may eventually wind up in the Supreme Court. If it were upheld, could an abortion provider be prosecuted for murder? Would the court overturn Roe v. Wade? I hope not.
Those of us who grew up before Roe became law have terrible memories of botched procedures that cost women their lives or the possibility of future viable pregnancies. Parents, driven by a fear of shame, forced their pregnant daughters into homes for unwed mothers where their babies were given up for adoption. People who want to overturn Roe should be careful what they wish for.
It should be noted that insurance companies seem glad to pay for contraception, understanding that prenatal care, delivery and pediatric health are far more costly than contraception.
The gender-equality issue comes down to this: How is it fair for religious institutions or their insurers to deny contraception to women while paying for Viagra?