The Widdershins

There has been a great deal said about religious liberty of late.

Apparently, mandating the coverage of birth control pills is tantamount to insisting upon human sacrifice.  Catholic bishops and Republican political figures are suddenly  brothers in umbrage.  Even usually liberal commentators are shocked and appalled by this move – at least, the male liberal commentators plus Mika Brzezinzki.  Not too many other female voices have been heard.  Sens. Barbara Boxer and Jean Shaheen have gotten a word in edgewise, but that’s about it thus far.

The problem as stated by the men involved is government infringement on religion, which they interpret as a First Amendment violation.  The First covers a lot of ground: freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to free assembly, freedom of religion, and the right to petition Congress.   (Norman Rockwell did some lovely art work for four of them – I guess he just couldn’t figure out how to do a neat rendition of a lobbyist.)

We re all aware that we do not enjoy absolute freedom of speech.  Threatening an elected official, yelling “fire” in a crowded building, or inciting a riot will definitely buy you a ride downtown.  The right to free assembly is long gone.  There are limitations on the sizes of crowds, the areas in which you might assemble, and the length of stay should you manage to assemble anywhere.  Permits are usually required for large groups, and have a number of stipulations.  Freedom of the press has been impinged – reporters have been imprisoned for refusal to name sources, and reporters took a beating at some of the Occupy sites.  Reporters Without Borders now ranks the US as 47th in freedom of the press.  That’s ugly, people.  Three very basic freedoms have been compromised.

The right to petition Congress is as lively as freedom of the press is not.  We are all free to contact our representatives on an ongoing basis, if they can manage to fit us in between the lobbyists, “consultants” ala Newt, and political intelligence operatives.  And, for the most part, there has been freedom of religion.  We have been free to practice – or not – the religion of our choice.  It is no more illegal to be an agnostic or a humanist than it is to be a Methodist.  This is the part that is getting crushed in this debate -  we don’t have to ractice any religion whatsoever.  Never, ever, ever.   State assemblies are rushing to pass laws banning Shari’a while they are decrying the fact that they can’t erect monuments to the Ten Commandments.  Somehow, the subtleties seem to be eluding them.  But, this is American law as it currently stands.

As it currently stands – and we’d best be damned careful that it continues to stand.  Ever since the flap over the Catholic church providing birth control methods to its employees hit warp speed, the noise level from the right has been absolutely deafening.  Griswold v. Connecticut established birth control as a privacy issue, but ever since the Patriot Act, we appear to have little or no  privacy as American citizens, and we need to be vigilant here.  Yes, thus far the noise is over who pays for said contraception.  The Catholic church feels strongly that their ironclad belief that women shoud not practice birth control supercedes the needs of any number of women with hormone imbalances, dysfunctional uterine bleeding, and ovarian cysts who require the therapy.  Pregnancy is God’s will, and I suppose that bleeding to death would be as well.  Who knows?  Somehow, both the Right and the Left male intellegentsia are just fine with this.

Enter Rick Santorum, stage (far, far) right.  He has an even better idea:  no one should use birth control.  Yep, the 99% of Americans who do are just dead wrong.  Why, this is the sort of thing that leads one down the primrose path to promiscuity.  He absolutely promises that if he’s President that he will not interfere with anyone’s right to practice contraception.  His main complaint, it seems, is that the President’s agenda not motivated by the Bible.  Check this out, from The Huffington Post:

COLUMBUS, Ohio, Feb 18 (Reuters) – Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum challenged President Barack Obama’s Christian beliefs on Saturday, saying White House policies were motivated by a “different theology.”

A devout Roman Catholic who has risen to the top of Republican polls in recent days, Santorum said the Obama administration had failed to prevent gas prices rising and was using “political science” in the debate about climate change.

Obama’s agenda is “not about you. It’s not about your quality of life. It’s not about your jobs. It’s about some phony ideal. Some phony theology. Oh, not a theology based on the Bible. A different theology,” Santorum told supporters of the conservative Tea Party movement at a Columbus hotel.

When asked about the statement at a news conference later, Santorum said, “If the president says he’s a Christian, he’s a Christian.”

But Santorum did not back down from the assertion that Obama’s values run against those of Christianity.

“He is imposing his values on the Christian church. He can categorize those values anyway he wants. I’m not going to,” Santorum told reporters.

A social conservative, Santorum is increasingly seen as a champion for evangelical Christians in fights with Democrats over contraception and gay marriage.

Maybe it’s me, but I sense the erosion of many more liberties to come.  If women lose control over their bodies, they will then lose control over their professional lives.  What’s next – the right to vote and own property?

Dear Lord, deliver me from your followers.  Amen.

This is an open thread.