Lisa Miller, the “On Faith” columnist of the Washington Post, in a strong defense of President Obama’s HHS regulations on abortifacients, contraceptives, and sterilizations, exposed what she sees as deep flaws in the reasoning and character of Catholic bishops opposed to the regulations.
The bishops, writes Ms. Miller, are “a small minority” who are annoying the president because of their stand on their “so-called freedoms.” They exploit their “clerical garb” to trample on the rights of others. She compares the bishops with the National Rifle Association, just another Washington lobbying group, wanting their “priorities” to “take precedence over everyone else’s.” She reminds readers of the “the sex abuse scandal” in the church and says that “the moral compasses of a few American bishops are extremely out of whack.” What clerical garb or lobbying or the moral failings of some bishops have to do with the current controversy, or why bishops have “so-called freedoms,” Ms. Miller did not say.
Ms. Miller states that it is “far-fetched” to her “that God should have any opinion at all about contraceptive technology.” Whether God just might have ideas different from her own, far-fetched as they may be, she did not say.
Ms. Miller states that the bishops’ “ claims to moral truth are just that — claims. Their religious vows do not make them, in any objective sense, more moral than anybody else.” Since the bishops have never claimed to be “more moral” than anybody else, and since their vows do not enter into the argument, and since their opposition to the Obama regulations is rooted in their First Amendment rights, it is once again unclear exactly what Ms. Miller is talking about.
Ms. Miller writes that “Obama made the Golden Rule the moral foundation of his 2008 campaign.” To illustrate this point, she quotes from his recent budget speech in which the president said: “Here in America, the story has never been about what we can do just by ourselves; it’s about what we can do together.” Since that quotation refers to what Ms. Miller calls our “collective destiny” (she does not say what that means), and has nothing to do with the Golden Rule (which, even in the Washington, is still “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”), it is once again not clear what Ms. Miller is talking about .
Ms. Miller dismisses the bishops as “zealots” (she uses the word three times in two consecutive sentences), the kind of people Mr. Obama should not condescend to “negotiate” with. Since the president has not attempted to negotiate with the bishops, and issued his “accommodation” without even talking with one of them, it is again not clear what Ms. Miller is talking about.
The Washington Post columnist’s exposure of the bishops as mere “zealots” may puzzle millions of American Catholics who until this piece of investigative reporting, in the Post tradition, have believed bishops are the successors of the apostles and supreme ecclesiastical rulers of their dioceses, teaching the truth of their faith, as they have for over 2,000 years.
Critics may point out that Ms. Miller, in her column, is guilty of ad hominem attacks and non sequiturs. But these are Latin terms, and Ms. Miller will no doubt dismiss such foreign-sounding, Popish nonsense as the last desperate throw of the dice by fanatics, eager to restore Latin to the vocabulary of their discredited lobbying organization as they parade shamelessly in clerical garb in the public square, exercising so-called freedoms, and happily endangering the lives of real, 100 percent American women everywhere.
— William F. Gavin is author of Speechwright and a former assistant to Senator James L. Buckley.
"But these are Latin terms, and Ms. Miller will no doubt dismiss such foreign-sounding, Popish nonsense as the last desperate throw of the dice by fanatics, eager to restore Latin to the vocabulary of their discredited lobbying organization as they parade shamelessly in clerical garb in the public square, exercising so-called freedoms, and happily endangering the lives of real, 100 percent American women everywhere."
No, they just want to end birth control for married couples, prenatal screening and require women to carry rapist-created and life-threatening pregnancies to term. No biggie.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs some group of people advocating a legal mandate that contraception be banned?
Fess up, pawn:
You can't stomach the thought of your moral judgments being divorced from the law. The moral judgments that you have concluded must be the law that everyone follows.
If not, that's evidence of other people trying to cram their beliefs down everyone's throats.
If you want access to abortion through your insurance, then don't work for a religious institution. I mean , I concede how gung-ho you were to work for such an employer before Obama's mandate became such an issue.
What a shame you've been dissuaded from applying for jobs to work among people for whom you have such unbending respect!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWrong, Rook. The Catholic Church teaches that abortion and the use of contraception are sins (there is no Catholic prohibition on prenatal screening).
What the Catholic Church wants is the ability to run itself and its affiliated organizations in accordance with its moral teachings as guaranteed by the First Amendment. Having the Federal Government dictate what morals the Catholic Church can follow and which ones it can't as part of its religious (including caregiving) missions should be repugnant to every American who believes in religious freedom -- whether you are Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, atheist, agnositic or anything in between.
Ms. Miller's lack of concern over the President's trampling on Catholic religious belief -- because bishops are imperfect human beings, are men, whatever -- flies in the face of over 212 years of Constitutional interpretation. In a word, this is tyranny. And Ms. Miller is yawning.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"And Ms. Miller is yawning."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo, Ms. Miller is actively enabling the advent of tyrrany. (But, good comment.)
Wow. Those strawmen didn't even scare the crows. Is this an ad paleas hominem attack? (Some of you conservative Catholics will have to check my Latin on that.)
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOnly you could come up with something like this...
"Those strawmen didn't even scare the crows." ~ GWB
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseNo, they just don't want to be forced to participate in activities they deem immoral. And wouldn't you know it, the 1st Amendment says they don't have to. But people like you would happily trade rights for government grants.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"bishops are the successors of the apostles and supreme ecclesiastical rulers of their dioceses, teaching the truth of their faith, as they have for over 2,000 years."
Not quite. Still at least 20 years to go to 2000.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseReading her column the overarching sense I got was "hatred."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseExactly. I wondered how someone with such obvious disdain for the topic she is supposed to write about managed to get the job in the first place. It's like a Red Sox fan getting a job to write PR for the Yankees. Either she hates her day job, or revels in the opportunity to make her subject look bad at every turn.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMs. Miller is a leftist hack. Her Newsweek bio:
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLet me see if I follow:
Obama issues a mandate that every single insurance policy must cover contraceptive, abortifacient and sterilization techniques, and no one can object on the basis of their religious beliefs, but it's the Catholic Bishops who have tried to force their views on everyone?
Since I missed it, perhaps someone -- Lisa Miller blew her opportunity -- can tell me when the Catholic Bishops announced their opposition to McDonalds employees having their contraception covered by their health insurance.
And since when did the employees of religious institutions complain of lack of access to birth control?
The hard core political left -- of which Lisa Miller is a member, despite her employer's claims of objectivity to the contrary -- is so committed to mandating that their moral judgments be the law of the land everywhere, without any use of archaic legislative tribunals (at least, not without open and notorious bribery and kick-backs), that it becomes convinced that anyone pushing a contrary moral view to their own wants to force that view onto everyone.
It really is quite precious that those advocating a mandate for everyone everywhere, at the threat of fines or prison for non-compliance, wish to complain that their opponents are trying to ram their views down everyone's throats.
I'm confident the public is not nearly as openly hostile to the concept of freedom of conscience as the political left has yet again proven itself to be.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMadisonian,
You are kicking leftist behind today!
HOORAH!
Excellent work.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat makes it funny were it not so absolutely pitiful is that the bishops have been on the left's side of almost everything except abortion: open borders, no war, no death penalty, "social justice" at every opportunity, even ObamaCare (except the abortion part). Now Obama stabs them in the back and people want to ridicule and criticize the bishops for not silently taking it. Amazing.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCorrect.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseBut when one signs up for the liberal program, as the Bishops most emphatically have done, one signs up for all of it, no exceptions allowed. And when called to serve, you will serve, no exemptions allowed. The Bishops were confident they would get a pass on this whole mandated contraception thing, but it didn't quite work out that way. As Mark Steyn has stated, it might be time for the Bishops to rethink their whole committment to the State (i.e."Social Justice," the State being it's objective correlative on earth) but they won't. A liberal catholic is a liberal first and a catholic way at the end of the line (h/t to Rush Limbaugh). Does anyone honestly believe that any of the Bishops will vote republican this year? You know the answer as well as I. They will get with the program soon enough.
Actually they finally seem to be coming around and putting these issues related to freedom of religion ahead of other considerations. They are asking people to take action like never before that I can remember.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI sure hope so. Frankly, the bishops as a body have been pretty slow in getting there. But if they stand firm and follow through, as costly as the follow through may be, then they'll sure deserve recognition by all who care about courage and principle.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseYou make a good point. This is about the Church getting burned by playing with the Devil. They weren't very concerned about others losing their right to political speech (McCain/Feingold), or the right to keep and bear arms. If they really believe Jesus didn't care what lengths one went to to help the poor (stealing, taxing) then they shouldn't be surprised that they really aren't needed or that their arguments seem self-serving. Unfortunately, the 1st Amendment belongs to all of us, not just them, and yet others are willing to give it up.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHave you noticed that liberals accuse those with whom they disagree of having character flaws, but apply a very different standard to themselves? Those who oppose the Obama administration's HHS mandate on contraceptives do so because their characters are lacking, while those who support it are good people with all the right answers.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJenna: you and your fellow travelers on the right are guilty of the same; at least admit your own flaws when indicting others for the same flaws.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse