While you're not watching the Mukasey hearings, perhaps you'll enjoy reading about the person President Bush appointed yesterday as acting deputy assistant secretary for population affairs -- chief of family planning programs, that is -- at the Department of Health and Human Services. Dr. Susan Orr will administer $283 million in annual grants (via Title X of the Public Health Services Act) for increasing access to contraception, comprehensive sex education, and counseling and preventive health screenings, especially for low-income families.
Or... not. Orr, who at the time held the post of "senior director for marriage and families" at the Family Research Council -- who are no fans of the humble condom -- has stated that contraception is "not a medical necessity." Other resume highlights: praising the global gag rule, opposing RU-486, appearing to be slightly less of a wackjob than her predecessor Eric Keroak. (Which of course -- hat tip to Michael Musto -- is like saying Waterworld wasn't as bad as Cutthroat Island.) So what's she gonna spend the $283 mill on? Promise rings? Drapes?
This appointment does not require Senate confirmation. On the up side, HHS may still tap someone else for the permanent job, as Orr -- let's remember -- is holding it only in an acting capacity. Yuh. Acting as if she's not among the last people on earth who should have it.
-- Lynn Harris
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Monday, October 1, 2007
Catholic Charities' birth control debate
Today marked the final round of the face-off between Catholic Charities and, put simply, the reproductive rights of women in the state of New York. The loser, by total knockout: Catholic Charities.
Praise the Lord!
Catholic Charities petitioned to have the right to deny employees birth control coverage, citing religious objections to the use of contraceptives. The problem, for Catholic Charities, is that New York's Women's Health and Wellness Act prevents employers from discriminating against birth control in employees' health insurance prescription drug coverage. The act does provide a liberal exemption for organizations with "a mainly religious mission that primarily serve followers of that religion," reports the Associated Press -- but Catholic Charities doesn't qualify for the exemption. Today, the Supreme Court decided against hearing the case and let stand a previous state ruling against the petition.
Catholic Charities is surely outraged. Shortly before the decision, the group offered this ironic gem: "If the state can compel church entities to subsidize contraceptives in violation of their religious beliefs, it can compel them to subsidize abortions as well," the group argued. Oh, but look on the bright side: Perhaps covering birth control will make subsidizing abortions a lesser issue!
-- Tracy Clark-Flory
Praise the Lord!
Catholic Charities petitioned to have the right to deny employees birth control coverage, citing religious objections to the use of contraceptives. The problem, for Catholic Charities, is that New York's Women's Health and Wellness Act prevents employers from discriminating against birth control in employees' health insurance prescription drug coverage. The act does provide a liberal exemption for organizations with "a mainly religious mission that primarily serve followers of that religion," reports the Associated Press -- but Catholic Charities doesn't qualify for the exemption. Today, the Supreme Court decided against hearing the case and let stand a previous state ruling against the petition.
Catholic Charities is surely outraged. Shortly before the decision, the group offered this ironic gem: "If the state can compel church entities to subsidize contraceptives in violation of their religious beliefs, it can compel them to subsidize abortions as well," the group argued. Oh, but look on the bright side: Perhaps covering birth control will make subsidizing abortions a lesser issue!
-- Tracy Clark-Flory
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)