Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Both parties credit Catholic Bishops for the inclusion of the Stupak amendment.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 11:46 AM
Original message
Both parties credit Catholic Bishops for the inclusion of the Stupak amendment.
The New York Times covered this yesterday.

For Abortion Foes, a Victory in Health Care Vote

Both sides credited a forceful lobbying effort by Roman Catholic bishops with the success of the provision, inserted in the bill under pressure from conservative Democrats.

The provision would apply only to insurance policies purchased with the federal subsidies that the health legislation would create to help low- and middle-income people, and to policies sold by a government-run insurance plan that would be created by the legislation.

Abortion rights advocates charged Sunday that the provision threatened to deprive women of abortion coverage because insurers would drop the procedure from their plans in order to sell them in the newly expanded market of people receiving subsidies. The subsidized market would be large because anyone earning less than $88,000 for a family of four four times the poverty level would be eligible for a subsidy under the House bill. Women who received subsidies or public insurance could still pay out of pocket for the procedure. Or they could buy separate insurance riders to cover abortion, though some evidence suggests few would, in part because unwanted pregnancies are by their nature unexpected.

Not many women who undergo abortions file private insurance claims, perhaps to avoid leaving a record. A 2003 study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute found that 13 percent of abortions were billed directly to insurance companies. Only about half of those who receive insurance coverage from their employers have coverage of abortion in any event, according to a study by the Kaiser Family Foundation.


More from the WSJ on the issue.

Late change drops abortion coverage

The House's 11th-hour change to its health bill removes abortion coverage from millions of insurance policies that consumers would get under the legislation, including from private insurers. Anyone who receives a new government tax credit to buy health insurance couldn't enroll in an insurance plan that covers abortion. A proposed government insurance plan also wouldn't cover the procedure. That's a sharp reversal from the original bill, which included abortion coverage in the public plan and allowed those with a tax credit to enroll in a plan that covers the procedure.

Abortion-rights supporters say the change would likely prevent any insurer who sells policies on the new government insurance exchanges from covering abortions, regardless of whether the purchaser is using a tax credit.

"We're really disappointed," said Laurie Rubiner, vice president for public policy for Planned Parenthood Federation of America. "It does set a new precedent."


The WSJ also agrees that the Catholic Bishops groups played a big role.

"We did not want this legislation to be a vehicle for expanding abortion or for changing federal policy on abortion in the wrong direction," said Richard Doerflinger, associate director of the secretariat of pro-life activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The abortion issue was at the center of last-minute wrangling in the House. A bloc of Democrats, backed by the Catholic bishops, threatened to scuttle the House health bill if leaders didn't take up the antiabortion measure. In an unusual show of influence, Mr. Doerflinger and other representatives of the bishops on Friday met with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to broker an agreement. Ms. Pelosi, who favors abortion rights, reluctantly agreed to bring the measure to the floor, and it became part of the broader bill that passed in the House late Saturday.


Christian groups as lobbyists now outweigh any influence on the left of our party. Groups like NARAL and Planned Parenthood were pretty much left out of the equation....left to stand on the sidelines and express regret.

And so are the rest of us who believe in women's equal rights. Standing on the sidelines expressing disapproval and regret.
Refresh | +37 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
1. SO...let the unrecs begin. Let the rationalizations begin.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
2. A bunch of old men who don't have sex telling women what to do with their bodies
How fucked up is that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. they're just jealous and withered from not having sex. They hate women.
Cannot figure out why anyone with an ounce of intelligence would be part of that sham church. Billions of dollars for the men who run around in silly costumes, pretending not to have sex. All the while, telling women what they can and can't do with their bodies, and making them subservient through lack of representation and leadership all the way down to keeping them pregnant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
get the red out Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #7
25. +1
I don't know how anyone with a brain cell bows and scrapes to that idiotic crap, but plenty do. And then our Congress invites them to make the rules for all of us.

Thanks Democratic Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Neecy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
3. Disgusting
Remember when JFK had to reassure the country that he wouldn't be dictated to from Rome?

My, times have changed. The Bishops have taken a page from the fundie right and are openly threatening Catholic members if they don't toe the line on THEIR diktats.

The Bishops have led the fight against gay marriage, and now they're aggressively attempting to destroy our right to choose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Oh, yes, JFK had to reassure us often that the church would not influence him.
I remember those days clearly.

They have come a long way now in influencing both parties. A very long way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
givemebackmycountry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
4. This is bullshit (the premise, not the post)
I rec'd it to even - I've been reading lots about this during the morning and I'm getting madder by the minute - fucking unapologetic protectors of pedophiles getting to weigh in on policy - GREAT IDEA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Lefty48197 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
6. I don't have any objection to the content of your post but...
but citing the Wall Nut Journal as a source is about the same as citing Drudge or Faux "News".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Depends on the topic.
I know who owns the WSJ, I am aware of it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
izzybeans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
9. Dissapointing but not surprising.
This may be the poison pill for the "imperfect bill".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
10. From the CS Monitor: Pelosi steps in.
Lobbyists for Catholic bishops were part of the negotiation.

On the eve of the vote, some 40 Democrats had been holding out for stronger language in the bill to ensure that no taxpayer dollars be used to fund abortion services. Various accounting devices had been proposed to isolate the federal funding, but that wasnt enough.

Negotiations over a stronger amendment went late Friday evening. A half dozen lobbyists for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops joined negotiators in Speaker Nancy Pelosis office to come to terms. There was a deal; then, an hour and a half later, it fell apart. Then, Speaker Pelosi stepped in. At the direction of leadership, the House Rules Committee after midnight agreed to allow a vote on an amendment that explicitly bans federal funding of abortions through the new exchanges created by the law.

The amendment would never have been made in order without the Speakers help, said Rep. Bart Stupak (D) of Michigan, the lead negotiator for opponents of abortion rights.
In the discussions last night there were convictions on both sides. The only way out was to let everyone vote the way they had to vote, he said.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #10
17. Catholic bishops met with Pelosi Friday night. Good access, I would say.
"Negotiations over a stronger amendment went late Friday evening. A half dozen lobbyists for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops joined negotiators in Speaker Nancy Pelosis office to come to terms. There was a deal; then, an hour and a half later, it fell apart. Then, Speaker Pelosi stepped in. At the direction of leadership, the House Rules Committee after midnight agreed to allow a vote on an amendment that explicitly bans federal funding of abortions through the new exchanges created by the law.

The amendment would never have been made in order without the Speakers help, said Rep. Bart Stupak (D) of Michigan, the lead negotiator for opponents of abortion rights.


http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/11/07/on-he... /

We need to remember this as time goes on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
KansDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #17
67. "Good access, I would say. "
Kein Schei!

A half dozen lobbyists for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops...

How about a half-dozen DUers going to Madame Speaker to "work a deal?" :woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
11. ugh...may as well let the church draw up the new bill entirely...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Blue State Blues Donating Member (575 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
12. Next the bishops will prohibit coverage for any treatments that result
from stem cell research, right?

They think stem cell research is an abomination ... so they'll just make sure that no plan is allowed to cover any treatments that are developed from stem cell research, right.

And how about infertility treatment. They opposed that, too. If a couple can't have kids, it's just not God's will. Will the bishops be allowed to prohibit any coverage for fertility treatment?

Oh, but silly me. Men also get Alzheimer's and Parkinson's and other illnesses that might be cured by stem cell research. And men are affected by infertility ... so somehow, I don't think either one of those restrictions would get through Congress.

Just the restrictions on women. I mean, it's not like women have the right of autonomy over their own bodies.

(Sarcasm, in case you missed it.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
brendan120678 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #12
75. Not all stem cell research...
just fetal stem cell research.

Just to clarify.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
joeybee12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
13. We can thank the Catholic Church for this and for Maine
FUCK THEM!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
meow2u3 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
14. The Hyde amendment would have had to have been repealed
...for abortion to be permitted using Federal funds. The law, as it stands, bars Federal funding for abortions except in cases of rape, incest, and to save the life of the mother.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Yes, religion got its way. It usually does now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
16. The Catholic and Mormon churches have WAY too much power in this country.
Edited on Mon Nov-09-09 01:55 PM by Arugula Latte
I am so bloody sick of these male religious lunatics controlling everyone else. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. It alarms me to see a Democratic forum be so casual about rights being taken.
I don't know what to think about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
get the red out Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. If big religion does it, then it's ok
Even a lot of liberals think you can't have freedom of religion unless religion is allowed to stick it's hands into everything and get a substantial say in the laws of this country.

Not fair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
18. Fuck..That. Shit.
I am sick to fucking death of the cowtowing to the religious right on social issues, and am even more sick to death of candidates being courted by the party who share those antiquated views. :mad:

I edge closer and closer to leaving the party, and it makes me sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 01:31 PM
Response to Original message
19. Getting angrier as I find out more about how they catered to the church
And becoming more and more protective of my money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
20. A real life example of what our party is dismissing so lightly....abortion coverage
and the oonsequences.

From mcjoan at Daily Kos a real life example:

What the Stupak-Pitts Coathanger Amendment Does

Mcjoan points out how narrow the bill is.

2. It includes only extremely narrow exceptions: Plans in the Exchange can only cover abortions in the case of rape or incest or "where a woman suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death." Given insurance companies dexterity in denying claims, we can predict what theyll do with that language. Cases that are excluded: where the health but not the life of the woman is threatened by the pregnancy, severe fetal abnormalities, mental illness or anguish that will lead to suicide or self-harm, and the numerous other reasons women need to have an abortion.


Consider this real-life example:

By broadly writing in that insurers can chose whether or not to cover "abortion services," pro-life amendments don't just affect their intended victims -- women seeking a way out of an unwanted or medically harmful pregnancy. They also affect another group of victims -- women whose pregnancies have already ended but have not yet miscarried. I'm one of those women, and this past Halloween I had what the hospital officially termed an "abortion."

I had learned the day before that the baby I thought was nearly 12 weeks old had no heartbeat, and had actually died at 8 weeks. I was given three options: wait for a miscarriage to occur on its own, something I was told my body had no intention of doing anytime soon, take medication that would expel the fetus, passing it in my own home (classified a "chemical abortion") or come in for a D&C to remove the fetal materials.

As much as I struggled with the sudden realization that the pregnancy was over, I also found myself trying to decide financially what I was willing to do. A chemical abortion would cost $40, but I would be alone, bleeding, and it could still be incomplete and I would require a D&C anyway, since my pregnancy was so advanced. Surgery would be quick, total, and under controlled circumstances, but would likely be our full maxed insurance amount of $1500. And of course, there was the free option of waiting for my body to finally realize I wasn't pregnant, but after 4 weeks the risk of infection was steadily climbing, increasing my chances of future miscarriage, infertility, or even death. With a toddler at home, and still nursing hopes for extending our family some day, this was not an option.

I chose the quick and total route of the D&C, despite the costs, prioritizing my health and the health of possible future children. I was lucky, and could afford to make that choice, because currently, my insurance cannot chose to refuse to cover what the hospital as termed an abortion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
22. The Catholic Church is a hate group.
The members of the Catholic Church are members of a hate group.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Beer Snob-50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #22
61. EXCUSE ME!!!!!!@!
i realize that there are many on the right in the church who are hateful, but there are many (more than most people realize) myself included, you do not support the rw position of the church. we believe in the right to a women to choose (althogh we also try to find resonable ways for that choice not having to be made), we belive in birth control, we believe in everyones right to marry.

I WISH THAT THOSE ON THIS BOARD WOULD NOT LUMP EVERYONE TOGETHER WITH THOSE ON THE MOST RADICAL FRINGES. it is insulting and personally while i am pissed at those in my church who hold these views and still believe in all the good that my church does.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #61
63. You may not agree with the hate group you chose to be a member of,
but you still chose to be a member of a hate group.

I WISH THAT THOSE ON THIS BOARD WOULD NOT LUMP EVERYONE TOGETHER WITH THOSE ON THE MOST RADICAL FRINGES.

The leaders of the Catholic Church are not the radical fringe. The Pope is not a radical Catholic, he is the leader of the group. Both the leaders of the Catholic Church and the source material of the Catholic Church are bigoted.

I know not all Catholics are bigots, but they chose to be members of an openly bigoted organization. The Catholic Church uses the money it receives from its members to spread a message of hate.

all the good that my church does

The hate group you chose to belong to does do some good deeds, I won't deny this, but they are still a hate group.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
pattmarty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
23. The catholic church should FIRST take care of the "kid fuckers"............
.............that are in their midst. FUCK the catholic church!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
nicky187 Donating Member (124 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #23
34. Concur.
Unlimited liability for the victim lawsuits would suit me just fine. And that should be extended to every profession/group covering for child molesters hiding in their profession/group.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
sundancekid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #23
51. you get a huge "Amen" from me ... casting stones - the bastards
let children be born (which is fine) and THEN TRAMPLE THEIR SANCTITY ... total effing hypocrites ... I am CERTAIN the catholic bishops bear NO RESEMBLANCE to Jesus
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
get the red out Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 02:14 PM
Response to Original message
24. WHY DO THESE MONSTERS CONTROL MY BODY?????
Why should these celebate, non-functioning, sucking at the tit of the scared of humanity, pieces of total kid screwing shit be permitted control over women's bodies????????
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DFW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. And WTF are they doing influencing national policy?
Our Congresspeople swaer an oath to defend the Constitution, which enshrines separation of church and state.

If they have had a change of heart on this matter, let them move to the Vatican or Iran, but stop perverting
the Constitution of OUR country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. Amen, DFW
Something is terribly wrong with this picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
get the red out Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Exactly!
Why do they give them so much power and honor. They don't wield power well and they have zero honor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
27. In a few days, we will have let this all slide by just like every other time.
We just gripe a few days over something unjust, and then we move on to acceptance. Then they move on to taking more and more stands with the extreme right...and we accept that after a few days.

It's amazing how we just consider it all a normal thing to do. :shrug:

And we will call those who speak out on it various names like dividers or one issue people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tnlefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #27
45. Not for me, I'm still furious and it's not abating anytime soon.
Edited on Mon Nov-09-09 05:53 PM by tnlefty
I read earlier that Rep. Cao from LA had asked the President to intervene, and then I think that cal04 posted something about it. I'm livid about the trampling of the seperation of church and state, and I'm Not Catholic and I REALLY resent the hell out of their interference. GLBT issues, women's issues, I've had more than enough.

And no, I won't forget. :mad: I must get back under the bus now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
31. The RCC needs to be taxed, pronto.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
edc Donating Member (407 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
32. With all due respect.
The Vatican and all other foreign states need to stay the fuck out of domestic American politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
nicky187 Donating Member (124 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 04:58 PM
Response to Original message
33. Being Catholic ...
... I'd have to say that I value separation of Church &
State more than the Bishops do. Time to revoke their
tax-exempt status for playing politics. In fact, time to take
away the tax-exempt status of every religious group that's
just acting as a lobbying group. Start with the RCC and work
your way down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #33
42. I'm not Catholic, but I certainly agree. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 05:47 AM
Response to Reply #33
57. By your reasoning 99% of all non-profits would lose their tax exempt status
because almost everyone of them takes positions and rallies their supporters to support/oppose pieces of legislation
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
juno jones Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
35. K&R! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
36. Since when is our legislation held hostage by
Catholic Bishops? Damn, I am so freakin sick of this type of pandering ... let's take away the Catholic Church's tax-free status and start getting some money out of them - that will shut them up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. What breaks my heart is to see so much of DU turn against women's rights.
It is amazing. Just look around here. To defend this amendment they are accepting any excuse.

It is sad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. The really sad thing is that the justification is
Edited on Mon Nov-09-09 05:38 PM by waiting for hope
that "they got what they needed" and to hell with the rest. When the final bill gets passed, it will be so watered down, so full of holes and probably no PO and mandates with huge non-compliance penalties - it will suck sooo badly no one will benefit from it other than the Insurance Companies, the next Republican in the WH will dismantled it all so fast and trash the whole damn thing. Then where are we? Who is going to have the courage to do this all over again? If it's going to be done - DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME. No loopholes, no controversy, no wishy-washy promises that can be turned around in a heartbeat - something the American public will applaud, benefit from and scream bloody murder if taken away. I feel certain now that they all want it to fail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #37
40. They turned against LGBT rights when we complained about Rick Warren
Welcome to the underside of the bus!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #40
44. I noticed that.
Two groups were used as scapegoats to get religious votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #40
46. LGBT families get the shaft from this bill, too
Edited on Mon Nov-09-09 05:56 PM by KamaAina
because thanks to DUMA DOMA, they aren't considered "married couples" and so won't be getting as much subsidy. One of our very best DUers is concerned she may have to drop out of college and go work at a McJob just to pay for her partner'sd mandaetd insurance. :grr:

edit: spelling
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. Some fans of the prez are like preteens with a crush - nothing else registers. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tnlefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #37
47. The bill passed the House and that's all that matters!
:mad: I'm not sure who thought it was such a grand idea to rile up and really piss off a voting block, and I've worked elections for many years (phone banking, holding signs on the sidewalks of busy streets, driving people to the polls to vote during early election and on election day), and the women who are volunteering vastly outnumber the men.

Grand plan don't ya think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 05:50 AM
Response to Reply #36
58. It's not Catholic Bishops per se
It's the process

If you got money to throw at these politicians or can provide access to people who can throw money at them then they listen

If you can't -- they don't really give a damn
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
39. What happened to separation of church and state???? Fuck the Dems. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
43. I guess the Dems decided that the Catholics
were more stylish than the Dominionists. Pretty much the same goals though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #43
49. Trouble is both were involved in this process.
And Rachel covered the members of the Family involved tonight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
48. Clarence Page argued on Hardball it would extend to hospitals...
and that it would affect women who were willing to pay for an abortion. He said the intent was to push it far as they could.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
50. Rachel M. and Jeff Sharlet point out not just Catholics, evangelicals deeply involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 06:59 AM
Response to Reply #50
60. The same two groups deeply involved in the president's faith-based offices...
...which look to me to violate the Establishment Clause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #60
65. The president's faith based office is a carry over from Bush.
Obama should abolish it.

Let's have some change here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #65
69. He's actually expanded it to be involved in every dept. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-09-09 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
52. Welcome to the American Theocracy!
Edited on Mon Nov-09-09 11:54 PM by Raster
Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, Transgenders, WOMEN, children... your lives are now at the mercy of the American Theocracy. The line between church and states becomes even more cloudy and blurred.

""We did not want this legislation to be a vehicle for expanding abortion or for changing federal policy on abortion in the wrong direction," said Richard Doerflinger, associate director of the secretariat of pro-life activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops."

Legislation to bring healthcare to all American citizens was, in essence, held hostage by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BolivarianHero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 12:30 AM
Response to Original message
53. You know what happened when Quebec told the Bishops to fuck off 50 years ago?
Life generally got better, Francophones made enormous in business, government, and intellectual circles, some of the most progressive policies ever implemented in North America became law (Obama would have been considered a social conservative in Quebec THIRTY-FIVE fucking years ago...LGBT Quebecois enjoyed more protections under Levesque's 1976 government than their American counterparts do today), Quebec became one of the best educated societies in the world (Quebecois learn more about English Canada's history than most of English Canada does), and every HDI flew off the charts.

Too bad Americans are, save a few isolated pockets, too ignorant, to reactionary, and to full of hate and fear to do some thing today...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #53
54. Your post is most interesting.
Our congress doesn't have the guts to tell them to f*** off...there is so much pressure from the religious community, both Catholic and otherwise. They give in to them rather than to the ones who voted them in.

Unfortunately, much of the ignorance is due to the dumbing down of the schools since Reagan started the road to privatizing them without regulation. The process is being completed under this Secretary of Education. The goal is more charter schools that can be turned over to private companies....the goal is testing more testing. Not real learning.

In my state and many others creationism is still accepted as reality.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 01:09 AM
Response to Original message
55. I have gotten to the point where phone calling, visiting reps, canvassing,
protesting, petitioning and participating in the local Democratic Party just isn't enough.

Not sure where to go from here. Will continue the same but am ready for more.

I wrote my state Dem chair just now about this and more.

Anyway, rec'd this earlier, so here's a kick as well.

Keep on, keepin' on, Mad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 01:13 AM
Response to Reply #55
56. I am feeling kind of lost about it also.
Not sure where to turn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Paper Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 06:35 AM
Response to Original message
59. What gives the Catholic Church the right to speak for me?
For that matter, to speak for millions of Americans who do not practice that faith?
Our elected officials in Washington should keep in mind that a great many people find this intrusion into our lives to be an abomination. In their rush to pass something, did the members of the House think we would not care about this? I swear, they get dumber by the minute.

This cannot stand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ellie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
62. Oh, a bunch of men in dresses
are going to tell women what to do? Every time I think about returning to the church they pull something like this bullshit. The Catholic Church can fuck off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ensho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
64. the religiously insane are dangerous and should never hold political


power of any kind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #64
66. Agreed.
Religiously insane is well put too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Zoeisright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
68. So a bunch of stupid old men who know NOTHING about women
get to decide how women are treated in this country? Good God.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #68
70. I'm amazed that there is a single Catholic woman in the world...
Why would a self-respecting woman listen to these crackpots??
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #70
71. delete - dupe
Edited on Tue Nov-10-09 01:11 PM by waiting for hope
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #70
72. That goes hand in hand with Republican women ...
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. True - I guess they liked to be treated like second class citizens. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
73. I was raised Catholic and know these bastards for what they are
Apologists FOR and enablers OF child rape.

They have NO moral authority whatsoever, and will surely end up in the place run by the guy with the widow's peak and the fork (if that place actually exists--I sure HOPE it does, just for their sake...).
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-10-09 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
76. The group called "The Family" may have had something
to do with it, according to Rachel Maddow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Nov 26th 2014, 03:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC