In Case You Missed It: NBA in Baltimore
NewsOpinionReaders Respond

Contraceptives rule: A clear affront to the First Amendment

Roman CatholicismChristianityWhite HouseBarbara A. Mikulski

Judging from all the articles in The Sun recently, Sen. Barbara Mikulski, columnist Dan Rodricks and many others are wondering what all the fuss is about regarding the Catholic Church's strong opposition to requiring hospitals and schools to offer health insurance plans that provide contraceptives at no charge. They are missing the point.

The issue is not this particular type ofwomen's healthservices. In fact, as Mr. Rodricks stated correctly, many practicing Catholics disagree with the Church's opinion on birth control. The flash point is the government's intrusion into matters of conscience — a clear affront to the First Amendment, regardless of the particulars involved.

Until now, I have been proud of my government's stance on protecting and extending religious and human rights. This is the first time I have witnessed a reversal and removal of a right — and the first time I actually fear my government for setting such a precedent.

I know I'm not alone. Surely the Church and the administration can reach a reasonable compromise.

I have voted Democratic most of my life, sensing it to be the "party of protection." But this is a game-changer. Much as I abhor the thought of a Romney White House, many people like me would consider that now.

Clark Brill

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
Roman CatholicismChristianityWhite HouseBarbara A. Mikulski
  • Why is Mikulski trying to 'fix' the Supreme Court's decision? [Letter]
    Why is Mikulski trying to 'fix' the Supreme Court's decision? [Letter]

    On her website, Sen. Barbara Mikulski proclaims that she is joining other senators to introduce a "legislative fix to protect women's health" following the Supreme Court's recent decision in the Hobby Lobby case. Whether you are for abortion or against abortion, whether...

  • Pushy pro-lifers [Letter]
    Pushy pro-lifers [Letter]

    Letter writer Mary Catalfamo claims that Planned Parenthood denies any pregnant women immediate, free access to the full spectrum of information and counseling ("Supreme Court decisions won't limit women's rights," July 9).

  • An effort to shame, cloaked in the guise of women's empowerment [Letter]
    An effort to shame, cloaked in the guise of women's empowerment [Letter]

    Regarding the recent rant by small business woman and political activist Michelle Jefferson ("Stop griping and get a grip, ladies," July 11), it seems that she missed the most basic and fundamental message of the women's movement in the last century: don't leave your sisters...

  • Global needs: food and birth control [Letter]
    Global needs: food and birth control [Letter]

    While writer Mike Gesker ("U.S. food aid still critical abroad," July 10) rightly affirms our commitment to sending food to poor countries, as a member of Catholic Relief Services he fails though to address the other side of this economic problem.

  • Misreporting the Hobby Lobby decision [Letter]
    Misreporting the Hobby Lobby decision [Letter]

    The Supreme Court decision in the Hobby Lobby case was confined specifically to exempting some employers from having to pay for medications or procedures that terminate a pregnancy after conception ("Court sides with employers in contraception case," June 30).

  • Hobby Lobby decision a case for Supreme Court term limits [Letter]
    Hobby Lobby decision a case for Supreme Court term limits [Letter]

    The inane Hobby Lobby decision clearly shows it is time to set term limits for the judges of the Supreme Court ("Corporations vs. people," June 30). It is time to get rid of Justice Antonin Scalia — the smuggest among the high court's nine, and Clarence Thomas — the...

Comments
Loading