commentaries

I would hope it is not only the Catholics that are not fooled. A wolf in sheep clothing.

Note to Michael Gerson: Women are not fooled by politicians who promote anti-family social policies, who work to subvert economic justice, who vote against VAWA. Women are not fooled by disregard for a woman's right to freedom of conscience. Politicians with a death-by-a-thousand-cuts agenda fail to realize that low-information voters--their natural base--are outnumbered by organized, involved and outspoken champions of women and families.

Never mind the fact that even if this exclusion were broadened to an appropriate degree consistent with the historical respect shown to religious organizations by the Federal government (until now), no woman's "freedom of conscience" would be compromised in the least, since Uncle Barack would make those generous ol' insurance companies pay for "free" contraception anyway. No one's access to contraceptives would be threatened in the least. “Economic justice” would not be threatened in the least. The passage or non-passage of VAWA would not be affected in the least.

But perhaps the blood pressure of radical, angry, feminist agitators who conflate the removal of an unconstitutional imposition on religious organizations with the repeal of the Nineteenth Amendment would be affected. That's OK. No one gets 100% of what they want 100% of the time. Radical feminist agitators should realize that and move on to some other part of their agenda, not all of which, surely, is lamentable, as is their regrettable support for the Obama regime's anti-religion crusade.

If religious care about abortion, they should applaud provisions that expand contraceptive access.

@barefootpaul-"If religious care about abortion, they should applaud provisions that expand contraceptive access." **** Sorry, but this is a red-herring argument. One (lack of "free" contraceptives) does not cause the other (abortion). You act as though without this Obama care provision, women will not have access to contraceptives and thus they will have to turn to abortion. Hogwash.

Why don't the Catholics trust their members enough to know that they will not use the contraceptives regardless whether or not they are available? This whole Harry Potter belief system may work on Sundays but in the real world all workers have to deal with life decisions that only affect them and their families and this decision needs to be out of reach of a "church".

"radical, angry, feminist agitators"------Wow, I feel like I was just transported back to 1973. Anyone still railing against "feminists" obviously hasn't gotten the word that the battle is over and the world has moved on. I don't know anyone under about age 70 that would even use the word "feminist", and still be upset by it. Do you still feather your hair and wear the collar of your Izod shirt up, too? Too funny. Thanks for the giggle.

Until the Catholic Church and its affiliates announce that it will also deny their unmarried female employees health insurance coverage for pregnancy and birth related medical care, I don't buy their "religious freedom" argument. If, as Catholic dogma stipulates, sex is for married procreation and for no other reason, shouldn't it at least be consistent in its application of its faith? Since it is most certainly not consistent, I see this move for what it is — yet another attempt by this institution to prevent women from controlling their lives.

I have yet to see a medical plan that does not limit certain treatments and drugs. So why all of a sudden is it mandated that a certain pharmaceutical must be provided? Every drug plan has formularies of drugs that will be covered and ones that you must buy on your own. So let the religious institutions have the same freedom. Even the Catholic Church has methods of birth control that are permissible.

I'm a Christian Scientist business owner. Should I be able to disallow any medical insurance coverage due to my strongly held "religious beliefs". What a cost saver!