COMPROMISE CAN WORK?

by Ruth A. Sheets

Well, it’s happened again, or has it?  President Obama seems to have “folded” in the face of the PR campaign by the Roman Catholic bishops.  They whined and complained that their religious freedom would be limited if Catholic employers had to cover contraception services for women working for them. 

In reality, President Obama decided to let them have their way requiring only that insurance companies cover the services for any woman in religion-related organizations who want contraception.  Before I realized this was a true compromise,  I thought President Obama had collapsed again under the Right’s onslaught.

On “The News Hour,” I heard Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of Health and Human Services explain the decision.  She said that insurance companies are willing to cover contraception services because for women who use these services, the total cost of medical care decreases significantly, up to 15%. 

This sounds like a good deal for everyone involved.  All women who want coverage even if they work for a church-based organization which employs folks of other faiths can get it, a “good” compromise!

However, hints of rejection on the part of the Roman Catholic command are spreading.  It seems that unless they get exactly what they want, they will keep fighting.  It makes no sense unless one realizes that the Roman Catholic battle is really against women who might want to make their own decisions about life and birth.  It is presented under the guise of “Religious Freedom.”

The bishops and their Right-Wing supporters cry “Religious freedom!” yet, they can’t seem to imagine that others’ desire for that same religious freedom is just as valid. 

For example, a majority of  Americans have come to understand that same sex marriage will not destroy marriage or even impact their own lives in any way.  Many believe that people’s gender preferences are God’s will or gift.  However, right-wing religious groups still pour resources into fighting the right of gay couples to marry.  What about the religious freedom of gay Americans and their supporters?

For another example, many people, like me, believe that life begins when a fetus can live outside the mother’s womb with a minimum of technological support.  We believe that God has given women their own bodies for which they   are responsible.  Choosing abortion is an option for women who cannot bear a child, do not want to have a child at the time of their pregnancy, or need to terminate the pregnancy due to rape, incest, the woman’s health, or severe disability of the fetus.

The Religious Right is doing everything to limit the religious freedom of the people who believe as I do.  They are making abortion very difficult to get and for poor women, almost impossible to afford. 

The hypocrisy is highly evident, yet, the media covers the bishops’ cry for religious freedom as though it has more validity than the religious argument for abortion or same-sex marriage.  The only way this makes sense is if this is not a religious freedom issue at all, but a way of establishing religion in America, )which as the Right so often tells us, is against the Constitution).

Maybe instead of continuing to fight contraception, the best thing for the Roman Catholic bishops and their followers to do would  be to spend their time and resources on taking care of their flock.  They could better use their money to keep more Catholic schools open in poor neighborhoods, provide more services for the children who are “rescued” from abortion.  They could spend pulpit time helping their members to be more loving and accepting of people whose beliefs and opinions are different from their own.

I know, I know!  Dream on!  As I mentioned earlier, this is not really about  religion.  It is about women getting too uppity and it’s about power and what the power of the Church can do to influence life in America.  President Obama needs to be aware that no matter what compromise he makes with the Roman bishops, he cannot win unless he tows the line with them and knuckles under to their demands, all the time on every issue.

Since he cannot do that, he should make a reasonable attempt to meet them on ground that won’t put non-Catholics at risk, then stand firm.  On this issue, he has done the former.  Now we’ll see if he can do the latter and remain strong.