Republican Men Stop Women from Testifying on Birth Control in House Hearing: Their Religion=Slavery
Posted: February 16, 2012 Filed under: religious extremists, Reproductive Health, Reproductive Rights, right wing hate grouups, War on Women 54 Comments
Well-known Republican thug Darrell Issa has stopped minority witnesses and women in general from testifying before a house committee hearing on contraception stating the hearing is on “religious” liberty.
A Capitol Hill hearing that was supposed to be about religious freedom and a mandate that health insurers cover contraception in the United States began as an argument about whether Democrats could add a woman to the all-male panel.
“Where are the women?” the minority Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., asked early in the hearing.
She criticized the Republican committee chairman, Rep. Darrel Issa, for wanting to “roll back the fundamental rights of women to a time when the government thought what happens in the bedroom is their business.”
“We will not be forced back to that primitive era,” she said.
Issa bristled at the charge and said Democrats could not add their witness because she was not a member of the clergy, but a student at Georgetown. He also faulted Democrats for not submitting the name of the witness, Sandra Fluke, in time.
Fluke would have talked about a classmate who lost an ovary because of a syndrome that causes ovarian cysts. Georgetown, which is affiliated with the Catholic Church, does not insure birth control, which is also used to treat the syndrome.
Issa said the hearing is meant to be more broadly about religious freedom and not specifically about the contraception mandate in the Health Reform law.
Maloney and Eleanor Holmes Norton left the room in protest.
Ranking committee member Elijah Cummings (D-MD) had asked Issa to include a female witness at the hearing, but the Chairman refused, arguing that “As the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration’s actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience, he believes that Ms. Fluke is not an appropriate witness.”
And so Cummings, along with the Democratic women on the panel, took their request to the hearing room, demanding that Issa consider the testimony of a female college student. But the California congressman insisted that the hearing should focus on the rules’ alleged infringement on “religious liberty,” not contraception coverage, and denied the request. Reps. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) walked out of the hearing in protest of his decision, citing frustration over the fact that the first panel of witnesses consisted only of male religious leaders against the rule. Holmes Norton said she will not return, calling Issa’s chairmanship an “autocratic regime.”
Maddow Blog reminds us that both Catholics and self-identified GOP voters agree with the HHS mandate that provides universal birth control coverage to women with insurance, medicare, and medicaid. Republicans and the Catholic Bishops continue to make this about religious freedom after numerous Constitutional lawyers have stated that the policy will not conflict with the first amendment right of “free exercise”.
The ostensible point of a congressional hearing is to provide lawmakers with information they need to shape public policy. In this case, Issa has invited nine “expert” witnesses to discuss contraception coverage — and all nine are men who represent religious institutions.
How many of the witnesses will offer testimony in support of the administration’s position? According to Democrats, zero. How many can speak to issues regarding contraception and/or preventive health care? Again, zero. Issa invited nine people to testify, and each of them will tell Issa exactly what he wants to hear.
Dems were initially offered a chance to have one witness testify, but when they selected a female law student at Georgetown, Republican committee staffers rejected the choice, arguing that she would only be able to speak to issues regarding contraception access — and this was a hearing about religious liberty.
ECHIDNE of the snakes provides this photo showing the stacked deck.
Notice the number of old boys on the panel who are supposed to not be involved in politics and are given tax exemptions as a religious institution. I guess starting a war on women isn’t considered political.
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
ecocatwoman
mablue2
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/02/15/alabamification-america-take-two
Well, I’ve said it before and I’ll keep repeating myself: letting religion anywhere near precedence over the law of the land is the end of the rule of law. My religion really is going to be to kill your religion pretty soon.
That’s what this asinine, totally unnecessary, I’ll-dump-civil-rights-so-a-few-bishops-will-vote-for-me anti-contraception anti-women bullshit has done.
It’s opened the door for an endless stream of this crap, and until people start standing on principles again, and stop accommodating garbage because it’s easier than cleaning it out, it’s going to continue. It is continuing.
The only thing that amazes me is that it makes me feel even sicker than I thought it would.
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/feb/15/contraception-con-men/
Good point Quixote. Unfortunately, this is the Pandora’s Box that Obama opened when he fell into the trap of “compromising” with them on the contraceptive coverage issue, whereby, to appease the god freaks, he came up with an unnessessary “accommodation”. He created the “religious liberty” doctrine that allows religion to become a basis to discriminate within the public square. Now the nutjobs are taking it to the extreme in an effort to undermine the Affordable Care Act, and to enslave women. If was so predictable and his response was SOOOOO unnecessary. His lack of political savvy is showing. I remember Hillary Clinton warning us of this very type of thing. I think its 3:00 am for all those feminists and women who voted for him over Hillary, as if he was a better choice to defend our basic human rights.
Get your hangers ready ladies, because that’s were we are headed. The American Taliban has come to town, and Obama just invited them to dinner.
Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993
Maybe this is a new construct for some of you but Obama didn’t open the door to these sort of attacks. In fact, the compromise is essentially the law as currently applied in New York and California in the hope of surviving any legal challenge. The Taliban has been in town for a long time.
Ralph,
Here is the press release from a California Rep. Jakie Speier:
WV. That’s correct and the CA and NY rules are essentially the same as the federal rule. The federal rule has to pass legal challenge just like they did. That’s what I mean when I say Obama did not start this mess.
Thanks for that, Ralph. I wasn’t aware until I read it elsewhere this morning that all this nonsense began under Clinton. I’m just sick about this.
Ralph,
I refer to Obama from the beginning thinking he was there to make nice with Republicans and constantly offering up things with out letting the base know. We need to elect more women, women need to represent women and women must speak to women issues.
I am tired of the concept of making women out to be whores, for wanting reproductive care, it is hard enough caring and working for your family….I know I couldn’t raise 11 children. Not to mention the cost to women and often time the cost in the lives of women. I never knew my grandmother (on mother’s side) as she died shortly after giving birth and her baby died a few months later. The cost is too great, my mom was two when her mother died, it simply is insane to allow madness to continue.
Jackie Speier carried the legislation in California and it met the challenge yet those in the patriarchy continue to try and enslave us. I might add that it was a WOMAN Jackie Speier that stood and defended legislation she introduced and she is a Catholic. Please show me some legislation Obama passed as a legislator to insure the health care of women?
If he wants the trust of women like me, then he needs to over turn the Stupak Executive Order that he signed and see that women’s rights aren’t negotiable. Women’s health and lives are at stake.
There is a reason Issa didn’t let women speak, because we have real life stories to tell, stories that tell of the real impact in people’s lives and how those stories could be common place again in our society.
Any hoo, I know I sound upset, and I am. I am taking time away now. I am not upset with you, I just don’t think people really get the idea of someone’s mom being dead and what that does to the children they leave behind.
I agree and we have to push back on this endless war on women.
Congress Woman Jackie Speier has a press release:
She is a lawyer and knows her law. We need more Jakies in office!
Needs repeating…
Hey Minx. Check this out. Just in case you dont already know about it, maybe this might be a good strategy. Hope the info helps….
http://health.yahoo.net/videos/droz/alternative-medicine-repair-kit
Hillary 2012
Let’s go for efficiency! The best way to prevent women from having abortions would be to mandate that all male babies be sterilized at birth, using a procedure which can be reversed when he is age 21 provided that he is married and has his wife’s consent. Efficiency!
good idea. Men should also need the consent of their “clergy” and wives to get viagra.
Just got back in, turned on the computer and “this” suggestion made me laugh out loud.
I listened on the car radio to a crack by Santorum’s current Sugar Daddy, who said the whole contraception conversation was ridiculous, that in ‘his’ day [ of course, you have to believe he’s ever had a day before 1900], the way to prevent pregnancy was to have a woman squeeze an aspirin between her knees.
That’s going to get a lot of votes!
These men are Neanderthals and are running with this sanctimonious routine for what they believe is a political advantage. They also, I sincerely believe, neither like nor trust women as equal partners. This is a ‘get thee to a nunnery’ repeat.
I’m guessing there’s a backlash coming–Soon.
I would comment but I’m dumbfounded. I’ll leave my comment to Huey Lewis, mainly cos I heard it in the car on the way home from work, “Is this the 50s, or 1999?”
Okay, I think I found my voice, did they not invite women because they might have come with a reasoned argument based on experience, or simply because they’re a-holes?
Could be both.
Issa obviously thinks women aren’t even relevant to a discussion on religious freedom. He’s a misogynistic a-hole.
Rick Santorum sugar daddy Foster Friess on contraception (Notice that Andrea Mitchell just about fell over listening to the Christian Taliban…’asprin between their knees’ 😯 )
So, they still want to have sex, just not pay for it, risking women’s lives, while out front being sanctimonious making women out to be evil. Good grief…
Yup, that’s the comment I heard. Sorry WV, I didn’t see you’d posted this.
ummmm….because they’re A-holes?
I think it’s time for another schism in the Catholic church. It is waaaay past time for the Catholics who are tired of this nonsense, and tired of the all-male priestly shenanigans that get swept under the rug – to split and form their own church – where priests can marry and have kids so they know what they’re talking about.
Where’s a good schism when you need one!
That’s what I figured.
I’m not sure where a good schism is when you need one, possibly with the Catholic women?
I do hope this ends well, but I don’t think it will. I know these people are in a minority, but they seem to be wielding a whole lot of power without a whole lot of sense.
I wish you luck, but religion is a difficult thing to change.
Many Catholics already left the church or just ignored the lunacy back in the ’60s, which is why the church is so panicked right now. Please read the article by Garry Wills that I linked below. Even Catholic doctrine doesn’t require unthinking surrender by individual church members. This entire argument is nearly as insulting to Catholics as it is to women.
Catholic women don’t even need to leave the church. They just need to quit doing all its work. If they’d sit in the pews, smile, and do nothing else, the priesthood would fall apart quickly. You’d be surprised how many parish activities wouldn’t exist with out women doing all the work. It would help to stop tithing, but that’s even less of a problem than simply NOT VOLUNTEERING for anything.
Will do BB and Kat, what a simple and brilliant idea.
Read the article BB, think I’m beginning to understand, it’s not about Catholicism at all, it’s just a bunch of misogynists hiding behind what has been interpreted as the Catholic version of the Bible. I don’t think that’s any better, but at least it’s straight in my head. No good reason, just hate women, got it. And these people are in office you say? How does that happen? See, you get one confusing question answered and another one pops up.
How long can this insanity be sustained?
The Party who declared war on Obama from the beginning by declaring “No” to every proposal has now turned its sites on women with the very same message.
Who’s next?
Could be anybody who doesn’t follow their line of BS. They need to be shown the door and placed into the street, so far as power in America is concerned!
I think we are living in two alternative realities — in one reality EVERYONE is insane, bat shit crazy. In the second reality — we know that the first group is nuts/insane and we are smart enough to understand the concept of following an idea to a logical conclusion.
So one group wants to go back in time where women knew their places and died — these less than human individuals are white males with a few female chauvinist pigs.
We’ve already fought these battles you jack ass Republicans.
I watched most of the hearing. It was one of the most horrifying things I’ve ever seen in Congress. A whole panel of men and their Republican enablers discussing “freedom of religion” as if the purpose of the first amendment is to allow religions to do whatever is necessary to control women’s reproduction. I’ve never seen anything like it in my life! One congresswoman tried to speak a couple of times and they found ways to cut her off. Norton and Maloney walked out early on.
At the NYRB today, Garry Wills (a legitimate Catholic intellectual) explains very succinctly why the arguments of the Catholic bishops aren’t even based on actual Church doctrine.
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2012/feb/15/contraception-con-men/
Here’s what he says about Rick Santorum:
Sorry, just noticed Dak linked the Wills article up above. Just be aware that Garry Wills is an expert on Catholic doctrine and church history. He is one of the few remaining Catholic intellectuals writing today. He knows whereof he speaks.
After I watched that outrageous hearing I was so enraged that I had to take a break for awhile. This isn’t even nominally about religion at this point. It’s about punishing women. People in this country are so ignorant, uninformed, and anti-intellectual at this point that they’ll believe anything–even Bishops who lie about church doctrine.
I agree with Garry Wills and good for him for voicing it. And yes, Wills is a respected Catholic academic.
Santorum may believe what he’s saying but his sanctimonious act ends when there’s money to be made. For himself and friends. He left a very bad taste in the mouths of PA residents. It’s one of the reasons he lost his last election by 18 points.
It gets worse every day. I can’t take it anymore…and walking away to take a breath isn’t going to work this time.
Freedom of Religion — seems to be a code word to re open the doors to the abuse of women and the slavery of women.
The Fundamentalist LDS — enslave their women — and the excuse that this cult uses is the same one the Catholic Church uses — Freedom of Religion.
0bama is at fault for the current mess because of he was all too pleased to sign away women’s rights to equal health care with the executive order to placate Stupak. WE knew that nothing good would come out of 0bama’s willingness to bargain with women’s health.
I know no one is seeing my comments, but I have to add this anyway (maybe someone will get down to this part of the thread eventually). Having this woman testify would have been another red herring. I hear people using the argument that birth control pills are used for other purposes than preventing pregnancy.
That is simply beside the point. I agree with Quixote. We need to confront this head on. This isn’t about convincing bishops to be reasonable and let women use bc for non contraception purposes. This is about the American Taliban trying to take away women’s freedom and dignity in one fell swoop (although it’s been building for a long time).
This is a war, and we need to start fighting tooth and nail.
I agree, BB. There should be no excuses or apologies from women for using birth control pills. We don’t have to beg or explain why our doctors prescribed the drug anymore than men have to explain any of their medications.
Thanks Janicen. Exactly. Does anyone ask men why they are buying Viagra? Do they have to justify it? Of course not. They are assumed to be adults. Women are being patted on the head and treated like irresponsible children.
Hey BB – I read your comments!
And a very good point. This actually is about freedom from religion. My hope is that if any of these whacko bills make it far enough, SCOTUS will unanimously put these lawmakers in their places. This was decided long ago as Dakinikat has repeatedly pointed out, with even Scalia agreeing.
I agree. This needs to stop now.
Just to clarify to Ralph’s earlier point about the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. This ruling was about individuals being able to practice their OWN religious beliefs, such as ritual drug use or whale kills in the case of Native Americans. It in no way guarantees for anyone to shove their religious beliefs down someone else’s throat.
If the Catholic clergy are able to convince their flock from the pulpit not to use contraception, that is their domain. But when these large, tax funded employers claim their religious beliefs are encroached upon by anyone who does not believe in or practice what they do, they are overstepping the bounds of someone else’s rights. As so many have pointed out, federal law says one cannot discriminate based on gender or sex. They take federal tax dollars, if they want to discriminate, then they should opt out of that.
And when Mormons get up and say they don’t want to cover black people because that is the mark of the Laminites, diseases such as sickle cell can be opted out. Or people with epilepsy will be denied because that shows they are possessed. Or Orthodox Jews who will not allow women to touch them or enter rooms when they are menstruating because they are “unclean”. Or myself and many others who are mixed race and therefore the devil’s spawn. Where does it end? By allowing all this religious nonsense legitimacy, by trying an end run around them instead of standing firmly up to them, yes, Obama has opened the door.
It’s funny, because it feels like both parties don’t feel like they need the women’s vote. They’re both fighting over the same religious nutbags. I’m hoping that before–when it was the fight over abortion, it split women because so many feel like that would never happen to them–but now, we’re hitting closer to home because so many women use contraception not just for family planning but health as well, not even to mention protection from STDs.
First they came for the poor woman and cut off her access to care…and I didn’t speak out because I could afford a doctor.
Then they came for the rape and incest survivor…and I didn’t speak out because I was safe at home.
Then they came for the pregnant woman who might bleed to death if she doesn’t have an emergency abortion…and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t on that table.
Then they came for me…
That ruling was indeed about individuals. But surely you don’t think any case that went before the SC wouldn’t get adequate attention from Opus Dei Scalia and his allies? Any case which could reach the court would be structured fairly narrowly and have a somewhat sympathetic plaintiff. The best thing is to follow the CA and NY laws to avoid that altogether. That’s what the HHS did.
You are perilously close to a Godwin here anyway.
Your transmutation of the old poem … too true, Outis.
Evidently the Santorums have done everything they take stands against now.
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2012/02/primarily-disastrous_16.html
Yeah, Santorum–the big Tort Reform cheerleader. Except when a suit and possible payout relates to him and his.
The man’s a raging hypocrite and has a hangup with sex. Other people’s sex.
(You don’t actually know. He may have a hangup about his own sex as well. My money would be on hangups, plural.)
Question: In the last picture of the all-male “testifiers,” does anyone know what or who the row 3 yellow clad women represent
My question exactly…thnx for asking.
Two women did appear on the second panel, but I can’t find identification of them or what they said during their testimony.
Anyone?
You can watch the second panel here.
Here is the list of the participants in panel II. They are from religious universities.
Panel II
John H. Garvey
President
The Catholic University of America
Dr. William K. Thierfelder
President
Belmont Abbey College
Dr. Samuel W. “Dub” Oliver
President
East Texas Baptist University
TnT Form
Dr. Allison Dabbs Garrett
Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs
Oklahoma Christian University
Laura Champion, M.D.
Medical Director
Calvin College Health Services
What I saw was two passive submissive women — enemies of all women — who are trying to force their warped views on women.
Everyone on the panel had exactly the same view. And their aim is to create a church sponsored religion. This hearing crossed the line between the separation church and state.
If these women want to be submissive and obey the male prophets/gas bags — that is their choice. But I question if any of these women have free choice — if the ever had free choice. Girls who are born into these fundamentalists religions are brain washed. Many of these churches encourage home schooling (brain washing) and the church dogma is repeated in all church meetings. CULTS. And some of these strict fundamentalist cult are abusive in their treatment of children.
(I’m remembering a young woman, member of a fundamentalist cult, who was raped — resulting in her getting pregnant. She was forced to stand in front of the church and apologize. Then she was sent away. Some strict fundamentalist women endure years of abuse and never leave.)
“ It wasn’t until this past February that the victim, who is now 28, decided to come forward after reading about other similar cases, realizing for the first time it wasn’t her fault that she had been raped, she told the police.”
http://tinyurl.com/6oydymp
Rapist got 15 -30 yrs. jail time.
Churches like this are tax exempt — why?