Although I am not a Catholic (surprised?) it was not that difficult for this Jew to determine that the rant by Jamie Stiehm in today’s US News, was both anti-Catholic and to be quite honest, kind of ridiculous.
As you may remember, on New Year’s Eve Justice Sotomayor issued a temporary stay of the implementation of Obamacare’s contraceptive rules based on an appeal by the Little Sisters of the Poor. Ms. Stiehm uses that single action to determine Justice Sototomayor has abandoned women, put religion in front of the constitution and of course that there are too many Catholics on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Et tu, Justice Sonia Sotomayor? Really, we can’t trust you on women’s health and human rights? The lady from the Bronx just dropped the ball on American women and girls as surely as she did the sparkling ball at midnight on New Year’s Eve in Times Square. Or maybe she’s just a good Catholic girl.
The Supreme Court is now best understood as the Extreme Court. One big reason why is that six out of nine Justices are Catholic. Let’s be forthright about that. (The other three are Jewish.) Sotomayor, appointed by President Obama, is a Catholic who put her religion ahead of her jurisprudence. What a surprise, but that is no small thing.
In a stay order applying to an appeal by a Colorado nunnery, the Little Sisters of the Poor, Justice Sotomayor undermined the new Affordable Care Act’s sensible policy on contraception. She blocked the most simple of rules – lenient rules – that required the Little Sisters to affirm their religious beliefs against making contraception available to its members. They objected to filling out a one-page form. What could be easier than nuns claiming they don’t believe in contraception?
First of all if Ms. Stiehm is implying that the court doesn’t have enough Jews she will have to fight it out with Pat Buchanan who in 2010 said there are too many Jews on the court. Secondly the nuns objected to the form because it authorized others to purchase he contraceptive part of the insurance—so in the Nuns minds it was just as sinful.
Stiehm goes on the say that those nasty Catholics are always trying to impose their beliefs on others. Well not all Catholics, just the female ones. Well not all the female ones—all of them except for Nancy Pelosi.
I have to be honest..two of the Jewish Justices are female. My wife happens to be Jewish and female, my mother, daughter and the vast majority of females in my family are Jewish. NO ONE…I mean NO ONE pushes those ladies around. I am reminded of the boy who came home and told his Jewish Mother that he is playing the part of a father in the school play. His mother said, “you go right back there and tell the teacher you want a speaking part.”
But seriously if the Catholic women were that persuasive (except for Nancy Pelosi) then every Supreme Court decision since its only female and Catholic Justice–Sotomayor joined the court would be 9-0.
Catholics in high places of power have the most trouble, I’ve noticed, practicing the separation of church and state. The pugnacious Catholic Justice, Antonin Scalia, is the most aggressive offender on the Court, but not the only one. Of course, we can’t know for sure what Sotomayor was thinking, but it seems she has joined the ranks of the five Republican Catholic men on the John Roberts Court in showing a clear religious bias when it comes to women’s rights and liberties. We can no longer be silent about this. Thomas Jefferson, the principal champion of the separation between state and church, was thinking particularly of pernicious Rome in his writings. He deeply distrusted the narrowness of Vatican hegemony.
Again Ms. Stiehm is being dense. First of all those six Catholics hardly vote en masse, they certainly didn’t in the ruling about the Obamacare individual mandate. didn’t split when it came to the Obamacare mandate. If she had done any research Stiehm would realize that Jefferson was against Federal government and state not all church and state. She would also understand the purpose of the separation was not to protect government from the church but to protect church from the government which is precisely what the “Little Sister’s Case” is all about. There is no need to address Jefferson’s feelings on the Vatican because it is irrelevant to the discussion and seemingly just another opportunity for Stiehm to take another smack at the Catholic Church.
She follows with another smack, a reference to recent Church Scandals.
The seemingly innocent Little Sisters likely were likely not acting alone in their trouble-making. Their big brothers, the meddlesome American Roman Catholic Archbishops are bound to be involved. They seek and wield tremendous power and influence in the political sphere. Big city mayors know their penchant for control all too well. Their principal target for years on end has been squelching women and girls – even when they should have focused on their own men and boys.
In one stroke with ominous implications, there’s no such thing as Catholic justice or mercy for women on the Supreme Court, not even from a woman. The rock of Rome refuses to budge on women’s reproductive rights and the Supreme Court is getting good and ready to strike down Roe v. Wade, which became the law of the land 40 years ago.
Where is the indication the Court is getting ready to strike down Roe v. Wade? Based on a temporary injunction which basically says don’t do anything till the court decides? Me thinks its time for Ms. Stiehm to calm down maybe she should switch to decaff.
And what about the Nun’s right to free practice of their faith? That became the law of the land on Dec. 15, 1791, with the other nine amendments called the bill of rights.
Meanwhile, the forces arrayed against women’s right to self-determination have been busy taking their campaign to the statehouses. In roughly half of them, women’s human rights have been eroded. On the airwaves, the anti-woman conspiracy goes on, with Rush Limbaugh leading the pack of thousands of men. He uses the Obamacare contraception mandate to say, just about every workaday, that young women are just using the government to get sex, or some such thing. He wins the prize for virulently infecting the public dis-coarse.
Wait a second is she now claiming that Rush Limbaugh is a Catholic woman?
Jamie Stiehm has written a piece that is nothing more than an angry rant against one of the world’s great religion.