Categorized | Opinion

Stephen Gutowski: There’s More to ‘Random Co-ed’ Sandra Fluke than Meets the Eye





Hmmmmm.

Sandra Fluke is being sold by the left as something she’s not. Namely a random co-ed from Georgetown law who found herself mixed up in the latest front of the culture war who was simply looking to make sure needy women had access to birth control. That, of course, is not the case.

As many have already uncovered Sandra Fluke she is, in reality, a 30 year old long time liberal activist who enrolled at Georgetown with the express purpose of fighting for the school to pay for students’ birth control. She has been pushing for mandated coverage of contraceptives at Georgetown for at least three years according to the Washington Post.

However, as I discovered today, birth control is not all that Ms. Fluke believes private health insurance must cover. She also, apparently, believes that it is discrimination deserving of legal action if "gender reassignment" surgeries are not covered by employer provided health insurance. She makes these views clear in an article she co-edited with Karen Hu in the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law.

The title of the article, which can be purchased in full here, is Employment Discrimination Against LGBTQ Persons and was published in the Journal’s 2011 Annual Review. I have posted a transcript of the section I will be quoting from here. In a subsection of the article entitled "Employment Discrimination in Provision of Employment Benefits" starting on page 635 of the review Sandra Fluke and her co-editor describe two forms of discrimination in benefits they believe LGBTQ individuals face in the work place:

"Discrimination typically takes two forms: first, direct discrimination limiting access to benefits specifically needed by LGBTQ persons, and secondly, the unavailability of family-related benefits to LGBTQ families."

Their "prime example" of the first form of discrimination? Not covering sex change operations:

"A prime example of direct discrimination is denying insurance coverage for medical needs of transgender persons physically transitioning to the other gender."

This so called "prime example" of discrimination is expounded on in a subsection titled "Gender Reassignment Medical Services" starting on page 636:

"Transgender persons wishing to undergo the gender reassignment process frequently face heterosexist employer health insurance policies that label the surgery as cosmetic or medically unnecessary and therefore uncovered."

To be clear, the argument here is that employers are engaging in discrimination against their employees who want them to pay for their sex changes because their "heterosexist" health insurance policies don’t believe sex changes are medically necessary.

The Left, of course, wants us to believe that Fluke is an innocent bystander; a poor college student chosen at random who’s struggling to make ends meet and just happened to find herself in front of San Fran Nan’s hearing pushing for "free" health care for all. Then, coincidentally I’m sure, she finds herself on The View and even receives a phone call from Obama in support of her noble cause of expanding employer provided health care benefits for Georgetown University Law students while the President cuts health care benefits for active duty military personnel. Priorities.

Read the rest of Gutowski’s piece here.

 



Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • http://lenbilen.com/ Lennart Bilén

    I am glad they stick strictly to the religious freedom argument, that the Federal Government cannot force anybody to purchase something that goes against their religious belief. O.K. That is both a tenth and the first amendment violation. Right now there is no limit on what they can force down our throats using the interstate commerce clause.
    Back to the Constitution!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Ory-Hebert/1583287180 Ory Hebert

    Typo in the title!  Not being an a**hole…just helpin’ a brother out.

    Excellent post!

    • DougBrady

      Oops.  Thanks, I fixed it.

  • Freempg

    The View. Figures. It also figures that the token so-called conservative Hasselbeck probably sat there like a dolt.

    • susiepuma

      since she is a dolt – I assume she did…………………. she certainly is a lousy example for conservative women – she’s going to the dark side…………………… she likes being a celebrity – evidently it is important to her – I quit watching this crappy show when whoopie threw Hillary under the bus and slobbered all over the fraud……………. too bad many others didn’t do the same, maybe this crappy show would be off  the air – oh oops – guess it wouldn’t – lsm support their own………………………

  • conservativemama

    Ms. Fluke, for all her education is a perfect example of an unthinking, indoctrinated person.  Much like our president.  Has she never questioned all that she’s been exposed to?  Never?

    Does she not understand that her right to birth control at a Catholic institution tramples my freedom of religion?  My first amendment rights are not hers to define.

    • http://sonic.net/~ckelly/Seekay/ Repack Rider

      I don’t follow this argument.  If a major institution imposes religious values upon those who do not share them, that person’s freedom of religion has certainly been infringed, but I fail to see how any aspect of your religious expression has been affected.  How does someone ELSE’S situation affect your relationship with a Higher Power, especially if you don’t even know that person?

      Similarly, and I know I’ll catch heat for this, how does the fact that my gay brother marries another man affect my 25-year marriage?  Answer, it doesn’t, and I want my brother to have the same opportunity for emotional fulfillment that the law allows me.  Who wouldn’t want their own kin to be happy?  Why should my brother be subject to religious restrictions from a faith he does not subscribe to?  Doesn’t that infringe HIS religious liberty?

      • susiepuma

        you don’t follow the story because you are a dem/prog/lib & everyone knows that logic and reasoning are no longer taught in schools – so getting one of you to understand something is so beyond your basic comprehension……………….. too bad, we used to have really good teachers and schools that actually taught things a person could and should use…………………………

        Ignorance is so prevalent on the left……………………….

      • Emerson_C

        The HHS exempts churches from the mandate on the presumption that the scope of religious expression and freedom is confined within the walls of a place of worship.  This is purely arbitrary and is a definition of religious freedom that would be entirely accepable to Joseph Stalin.  A ‘Catholic’ hospital or a ‘Catholic’ School or Unversity is a much an expression of religious faith as praying at Mass–indeed it is particularly so in the case of Catholics for whom ‘works’ are are a central as faith.  These institutions should not be coerced and bullied into acting against their moral convictions. Those who opt to work for those institution should respect that fact.  Likewise a faithful and orthodox Catholic who works in a public school should respect the secular ethos of that institution, and we would rightly reprove such a Catholic if they should to subvert that ethos, let us say by sereptitious proselytizing.

        The subject of same-sex marriage is a large subject, but it should spur us to ask the deepest questions about the entire concept of marriage.  What is marriage?  Is it important?  Why?  What compelling interest does the State have in making laws about marriage at all?  What does social history tell us?  It is quite possible to conclude on broad social, biological and demographic grounds to affirm that marriage is intrinsically a man/woman affair.

      • MaMcGriz

        Take your sorry leftist provocations elsewhere, homey.

        You’re here to start trouble. 

        • http://sonic.net/~ckelly/Seekay/ Repack Rider

          If I point out that calling people names is not addressing an argument, and then I get called names for saying that, my point has been made for me.

          I am not a troll.  If you look at my posting history here, I get an average of three "likes" per post.  I am a United States Army veteran (E-5), a small business owner who works six days a week, I remain married to my first and only wife and our daughter is an honor student at a major university.  I am 66 years old and I have never been arrested or accused of a crime.  I have a measure of worldwide fame due to my activities in the field of bicycling.  (Google: charlie kelly bike)  I consider myself a model citizen even if you don’t. 

          I express myself politely here even if I don’t always agree with everyone else.  I NEVER characterize those with whom I disagree by calling them names.

          YMMV

          • MaMcGriz

            A lie can be as politely expressed as the truth. You could have a million likes and it wouldn’t make your assertions true.

            You lie when you assert you have been called names. You lie when you assert the supposed moral high ground. You’re using blatantly leftist tactics and most of all, you sidestep the point on which you’ve been confronted.

            Like I said…..

            • ernst1776

              I am loving the lefty defense of Ms. Fluke (an oddly appropriate name)  Call them out Mama!

      • conservativemama

        The Church is not imposing its faith or its beliefs on anyone.  Joining a church is a voluntary act.  But the government telling the church that it has to provide services or products that run counter to its core belief is an imposition and it is an assault on freedom of religion.  The Church is not putting an end to contraception.  It doesn’t support its use, but it has no power to ban it.
        The government makes and enforces laws.  The Church has its beliefs that you choose to accept or not accept.  It is not about my personal expression of belief.  It is about the institution of the Church, any Church and its right to be what it is.  The Catholic Church is 2,000 years old, from the time of Christ.  It is not for this adminstration to redefine what the Church is , what it believes, the actions it will take.

        As for gay marriage, I feel what you say, because my struggle is do I have a right to deny people in love a life together.  But perhaps we’re talking civil unions, with all the legal protections of a heterosexual marriage.  It’s the term marriage that is problematic because of its purpose, to create a family through the union of a man and a woman.  I do struggle with this because I too know and love gay people in my world.

        I think this is what the left doesn’t grasp about conservatives.  My fight for individual freedom, for life, leads my heart to accept gay people because I cannot justify hurting another.  Socialism and communism are dehumanizing.  Abortion kills.  I love and respect my fellow man.  Don’t assume I’m anti-gay because I’m conservative because to dislike a person because of who they are just isn’t who I am.  It’s my conservatism and my faith that opens my heart to others.  And I’m not the only conservative who feels this way.

      • Mary Kreitzer

        Mr. Kelly, If you are a Jewish Kosher deli owner and the government mandates you sell pork, hasn’t your right to practice your religion freely been infringed? Does not having to eat it change the fact that you are being forced to violate your principles? What if you are anti-gun and run a department store. Should the government be able to mandate that you sell guns in your outdoor section?  Forcing a Catholic to offer birth control/abortion in their health plans violates our right to freedom of conscience and the liberty not to participate in something we believe is evil. The charade that the insurance companies are doing it, not the Church, is just that – a charade. 

  • irishcoins

    Reposted from yesterday morning’s open thread:

    This morning’s mail brought this link to Jeffrey Lord’s Must Read article in the American Spectator in support of Rush:

    http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/05/rally-for-rush

    Persevere with the well researched article to find links detailing financial links between Carbonite, Sleep Country, Legal Zoom, and various Soros  funded groups, such as Media Matters. A very well written article. This excerpt addresses Carbonite:

    Now. Carbonite really deserves some special attention. David Friend is making his attack on Rush sound like he’s one upset Dad with a couple of nice young daughters. And oh, yes, he wants a "more civilized public discourse."

    Is that all there is to Mr. Friend? Quite aside that he gives a pass to Sandra Fluke for her obnoxiously intolerant behavior when it comes to the free speech of others, is there anything else going on here?

    Yes. Of course.

    Take a look here at this link to Bloomberg/Business Week which profiles Mr. Friend and affirms him as "General Partner" of an investment group called "Orchid Partners" in Boston, Massachusetts. And Orchid Partners? Yes indeed, they are the venture capital firm behind… Carbonite.

    Where Mr. Friend is listed as "Co-Founder, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President."

    So?

    So when you cross check Mr. David Friend of Orchid Partners in Boston with the Federal Election Commission, one finds — ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh shocker!……… that a Mr. David Friend of Orchid Partners in Boston has been a contributor to… ready? Here’s the list of just where David Friend spends his political money:

    MoveOn.org, America Coming Together and Democracy for America, all three listed here as
    George Soros funded groups, the latter set up by Howard Dean. Texans for Truth also drew Mr. Friend’s support. This group, according to Wikipedia, was set up by MoveOn.org spin-off Drive Democracy.org in 2004.

    Why?

    To… wait for it… challenge then-President Bush’s service in the Texas National Guard. The precise same stunt for which CBS fired Dan Rather after documents were discovered to have been forged. The Bush-Cheney campaign said of Texans for Truth that it was "a smear group
    launching baseless attacks on behalf of John Kerry’s campaign that will be rejected by the American people." They were. But that didn’t quench Mr. Friend’s affection for either the smear campaign or supporting leftist candidates such as Howard Dean, and John Kerry.

    • irishcoins

      W’s service included flying one of the most mechanically dangerous fighter jets during wartime, defending the Texas Louisiana Gulf Coast.

    • MaMcGriz

      Wasn’t there a time when this kind of thing was called conspiracy to commit a felony?

      Those were such quaint times, weren’t they?

  • Guest

    I demand an apology for this hurtful post.

    • BrianusBerkleianus

      LOL!!!!

  • BrianusBerkleianus

    Thanks, Doug!!

    sandra fluke is a Leftist operative, and she is precisely the sort of person whom the Marxists want to place on the Supreme Court.

    I imagine that fluke is already marked out for rapid advancement in the "hierarchy" of the Left: A well-paying job with a Leftist-advocacy law firm; then maybe a Federal judgeship, etc.

    This is the sort of person who will become yet another intolerant, totalitarian dictator in a black robe, bent on persecuting ordinary American citizens and abolishing our Constitutional rights and liberties, if American patriots do not rise up to CRUSH the commies!!

    God bless.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Susan-Ally/100000172241964 Susan Ally

    Sandra Fluke-professional Progressive activist-is another example of why America’s higher institutions of learning exist in a bubble which is soon to burst;  when the cost of production is higher than the value of the product produced it is inevitable that the entire structure will collaspe.

    It is ironic that students like Sandra Fluke diminish the value of a degree to the point of worthlessness
    in an environment in which overall student debt has surpassed one trillion.

    If something can’t go on forever, it won’t; the bursting of the academic bubble is a good thing and will help to restore the value of a pluralistic education.  Besides, if college campus’  have to impose free-speech zones they are simply production lines for inbred- intellectualism reproducting one Fluke after another.

    • BrianusBerkleianus

      Amen, Susan Ally!!!

      Conservative scholars can recount horror tales of TOTALITARIAN PERSECUTION in university departments, especially humanities departments, by intolerant, cowardly Leftist ideologues.

      The liberation of our schools and universities from these thugs would be the beginning of America’s liberation.

      Maybe scholars and teachers of merit and guts, like Victor Davis Hanson, like Sarah’s dad, Chuck Heath, like Vince Lombardi (high-school LATIN teacher before he became coach of the Green Bay Packers) would then occupy our seats of learning.

      There are honorable exceptions, of course, but to a great extent, commies have made academia their own private fiefdom where they can make a living without really working, and damn the students, and damn the country.

      Patriots must oust these traitors, these tenured radicals, WITHOUT QUARTER OR MERCY from the posts they have seized and usurped.

      The future of America depends on it!!

  • blackbird

    Thanks for the post Doug. Sandra should be the poster girl for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SlutWalk

  • WEL2

    The latest hero of the Democrats is a 30-year-old, unmarried "student" who who wants the federal government to make other people provide $1,000-per-year contraceptives for all of her recreational sex.  That tells us much about the Democrat Party.

  • http://sonic.net/~ckelly/Seekay/ Repack Rider

    Characterizing Ms. Fluke as a bad person is dangerously close to shooting the messenger.  I believe that it is possible to disagree politically without gratuitous ad hominem.  She has a First Amendment right to her views, and I prefer that the argument focus on what she said, not inflammatory suggestions of what she is.

    For example, you can disagree with Mr. Limbaugh’s point of view without reference to his draft dodging, drug addiction, obesity, Viagra smuggling and money laundering, all of which are more true than what he called her.

    (Disclaimer: because I served honorably during the Vietnam War, which I opposed, I have ZERO respect for a man who supported the same war but didn’t serve.  Mr. Limbaugh does NOT speak for me even when I agree with him.)

    • PCR1

      Oh, go to hell!

      • susiepuma

        dem troll – they lurk in dark places – that’s why when they try to appear in the sunshine – all the dirty little secrets come out………………………………they belong in hell………

        • Fionared

          How Christian of you.

          • ernst1776

            Who says susie is a Christian?  Susie is right excpet for the "they belong in hell"  My take is the dem troll leftits marxist live a life of ‘living hell’.  May the all see the ‘light’ some day!!!

            • John B. Hefmier

              Fionared is a troll. Read her comment history on her "Activity" tab. She spends a lot of time commenting and liking anti-Palin remarks on the ADN articles.

    • Nancy6

      "I prefer that the argument focus on what she said, not inflammatory suggestions of what she is"………and this is how Obama got electetd.
      Obama was not vetted, he was lauded as the greatest orator ever, and that is all that mattered.
      Now, Breitbart is beginning the vetting process, and incredibly, Obama is exactly who we thought he was, but who he was/is was covered up/never investigated by the lsm.
      Looking at who this woman is, and how the Democrats manipulated her testimony that day, is very relevant to why she is saying the words she does.
      She is as biased as the people who are using this situation to take away our freedoms/ram through legislation that the American people do not want.

      This whole thing was propaganda from the get-go.

      • BrianusBerkleianus

        Amen, Nancy!

    • WEL2

      Fluke demands that the federal government force other people to pay for her $1,000-per-year recreational s x. Do you support her position?

      Do you believe Fluke is a moral person?

      You made a gratuitous ad hominum attack on Rush Limbaugh.

    • eando

      First of all she was originally presented to us as a 23 year old co-ed, she’s 30 and far from a typical co-ed.  The Democrats originally tried to substitute her for a more qualified speaker at Issa’s hearing, when their request was declined because she was not qualified to speak about the issue at hand, (whether or not Obama had the right to demand religious institutions follow mandates against their beliefs), Pelosi had a "fake" hearing.

      So, let’s focus on what she actually said. She said that people "like her" spend $3,000 on contraceptives over the course of 3 years of law school.  A blatant lie.  Contraceptives are available at Target for $9 a month.  As to "others" who have had medical problems due to lack of free contraceptives, that’s BS as well.  The university’s health plan does cover those medications when they are necessary for a "medical" condition.

      It’s a totally bogus issue all the way around.  Contraceptives are easily and cheaply available, no one is trying to stop her from getting them, and even at a Catholic University such medications are available if needed for conditions other than contraception.

      So, Ms. Fluke is at the very least a liar.  I would like her to verify at least one of her claims, other than the one that the University won’t give her "free" contraceptives.  Oh, actually, let’s verify that those contraceptives are actually "free."  Somebody has to pay for them don’t they?  Last time I looked they didn’t grow on trees.  OK, so now we’ve got her entire statement as one big lie,

      Ms. Fluke may not be a bad person in your book, but someone who appears at a fake congressional hearing, under false pretenses, and spouts lies doesn’t sound like a very good person to me.

      • MaMcGriz

        In the ‘olden days’ people like her were correctly regarded as lying seditionists, traitors and criminals.

    • sodakhic

      Like Maher disagrees with Palin. Every ad hominem filthy word he could think of to a descent woman and he’s subsidizing one of Obamas SuperPacs  Disgusting.

    • sodakhic

      Now that you mentioned draft dodging, drug addiction, sexual perversion and money laundering, that would describe Clinton, Edwards, and Obama.

    • MaMcGriz

      The woman is a self-admitted fraud.

      It is she who characterizes herself.
       
      Likewise, your post identifies and characterizes you as most likely playing for the very same team as she.

  • virginiagentleman1

    Why is anyone surprised when a spokeman for any democrat bill or agenda turns out to be fraudulent? It is the way marxists have always done business. When they wish to change the narrative from something important, they pull these frauds out of the thin air so that media focuses on them rather then more important issues. And you know what? It works almost every single time! The fraud becomes the debate!  How many more times will we fall for this crap? Right up to the end of the Republic?
    Conservatives, stick to your guns! Stop falling into such obvious marxist traps!

    • BrianusBerkleianus

      Right on, VG!!!

  • PCR1

    She’s not only a slut – she’s crazy!

    In other words, she’s the typical Obama supporter.

  • cathmom

    So Laura Ingraham had the class to accept Ed Shultz’s slut apology, but this Fluke chick will not accept Rush’s apology.  This holier than thou crap from the left makes me sick.

    Also, there is no amount of money that would make me watch the Fluke chick on the View…..as Rick Santorum says, it would make me want to throw up.

  • cuttingboardblues

    Liberal women want to have their cake and cry on it too.  I love how one day she’s this trailblazing, feminist, law student.  The next day, after someone insults her, she’s a victim, in shall we say a fetal position.  I’ve seen snippets of interviews with her.   Slightly against my will I might add.  She seems a little unhinged.  

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_N7HCPR7JLQP6R33GXP5DO5XKDM 1776er

    Lest the Marxists in the White House, Nancy Pelosi and her fellow Marxists on the Hill, the Marxists in the LSM and finally, the Marxists in the Catholic Church, think that Holy Mother the Church is going to take this unconstitutional attack on Religious Freedom lying down they had better read this letter from the President of the U.S. Catholic Conference of Bishops, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, to his fellow Bishops on this issue:

    http://usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/loader.cfm?csModule=security/getfile&pageid=51472

    The times call forth the leaders.   This is beginning to look like Timothy Dolan’s time.  He may be the next John Paul II, American style.  He may do to the Marxists mentioned above what Carol Wojtyla did to the Marxists in the Warsaw and the Kremlin.  

    If you read between the lines you can see that Tim Dolan, in his own Irish Catholic way, is warming to the idea of a fight with the Marxists.  You can practically see him licking his lips to take on Obama in a donnybrook.  Irishmen love a good donnybrook.  Especially when it’s about their rights.

    The Catholic Church moves slowly, even ponderously, but when it moves it moves with authority.  Dolan is marshaling his forces.  He is getting his order of battle straightened out.  He is calling his officers to a council of war in June.  There will be a battle plan.  It will be coordinated.  

    Here’s the bit I personally like in this letter:

    "Given this climate, we have to prepare for tough times. Some, like America magazine,want us to cave-in and stop fighting, saying this is simply a policy issue; some want us to close everything down rather than comply (In an excellent article, Cardinal Francis George wrote that the administration apparently wants us to “give up for Lent” our schools, hospitals, and charitable ministries); some, like Bishop Robert Lynch wisely noted, wonder whether we might have to engage in civil disobedience and risk steep fines; some worry that we’ll have to face a decision between two ethically repugnant choices: subsidizing immoral services or no longer offering insurance coverage, a road none of us wants to travel."

    Timothy Dolan to Barack Hussein Obama:  Nothing is off the table.   You think the Israelis know an existential threat when they see one?  He ain’t bluffing.  

    "…we might have to engage in civil disobedience…..".  Look close, Barack,  it’s a quiet little Catholic threat to your re-election campaign buried innocuously waaay down deep in this letter.  Dolan is telling all of us Catholics to get ready for tough times.  He is going to take it to you, Barack.  Nice timing, fellah.  Why it is positively Palinistic. 

    There it is.  Right during your re-election campaign.  Sept to Nov 2012.  Faithful Catholics being dragged to jail in front of the White House and every U.S. Federal facility in the country.  It will be the Catholic version of Cloward-Piven strategy the Marxists love so well.  77.7 million Catholic voters, or a surprisingly large number of them,  will be filling up the jails and wondering what’s for lunch.  Good luck with that all you guys down at the DNC.  

    Saul Alinsky used the term ACTION a lot. He was all about radicals and leftists seizing power through ACTION of all sorts and manners.   His action took the form mostly of provocations of one sort or another.  They were designed to elicit a REACTION of one sort or another that would work to the radicals advantage.  We have witnessed an action by the Marxists, this unconstitutional mandate  and the attack on Religious Freedom it represents cynically pushed by the Marxist in the White House designed to provoke a REACTION from the Church designed to mobilize their eroding support among women. 

     The White House appears to WANT a fight with the Church to split the Church and turn its members against itself.  Three for one.  Kill the Church, mobilize Catholic women to support the Marxist agenda and set Catholic against Catholic, and energize the feminists to re-enlist in the Marxist cause in defense of "women’s rights".   The attack on the Catholic Church is a designed, deliberate tactic of radical ACTION designed to elicit a desired REACTION.

    But Tim Dolan appears to be a man of ACTION as well:

    "Twice in recent weeks, I have written you to express my gratitude for our unity in faith and ACTION as we move forward to protect our Religious Freedom from unprecedented intrusion from a government bureau, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). I remain deeply grateful to you for your determined resolve…"

    Two can play that radical Alinskyite game of ACTION and REACTION.  You think the Catholic Church can’t play that game?  Ask the communists in Warsaw and the Kremlin how well the Catholic    Church can play the ACTION and REACTION game of big time politics.  Stand by for some ACTION, Barack, and we will watch your REACTION.  It’s going to be interesting.  

    My money is on Tim Dolan and the Catholic Bishops.  

    Oh, BTW, the Ad Hoc Committee on Defense of Religious Freedom will be examining the position on Religious Freedom of all those Democrat represented Congressional Districts as well.  They won’t just be taking it to  the President. Nancy can figure on some. Joe Biden, of course. And all the rest of those Catholic Congress people.  They will all be called to take a stand for Religious Freedom this fall.  I bet they are just all delighted and wee-wee’d up to take that on.  Luck to ya!

    Nothing personal, just business.

    • virginiagentleman1

      Agreed, 76er, my money is on Cardinal Dolan as well!

    • carmtom13

      Great post. My money is on Cardinal Dolan too.

    • BrianusBerkleianus

      Thank you, 1776er!!

      The MAN takes his RED Cardinal’s robes seriously!!

      Let us pray for him.

      My money is on him!!

    • Emerson_C

      I think your analogy with Poland and Eastern Europe and the role of John Paul II is not accurate. 

      For one thing a majority of Poles were loyal Catholics.  There were not too many Kennedys, Pelosis and Sebelius’s in their midst.  Next they had then experienced over 30 years of the Marxist/statist tyranny, fraud, lies and racketeering.  There were no scales left in their eyes.  Unlike most Americans as yet, when the Poles switched on their TVs and opened their newspapers, they asked "what lies do they want me to believe today?"  Americans have only had a 3/4 year glimpse of the darkness that threatens them and their children.  And their mainstream media, as Gov Palin has brilliantly shown, is even more thoroughly debased and corrupt that it was in Eastern Europe.  The Poles had no illusions left and had come to recognise a World Historical Big Lie when they saw it. 

       American Catholics are in a much more confused state of mind, (and much more confused than their Evangelical brothers and sisters).  They have not yet suffered the destructiveness of overweening state intrusion in theiir religious and secular lives.  Like most Americans (whose voting patterns they reflect), they have been thoroughly brainwashed by a debased media, school system and academia.  There has been over fifty years of dissent and division within the Catholic people about many issues, but particularly the conflicted issue of artificial contraception.  There is a liberal Trojan Horse within the gates. 

      Cardinal Dolan may well be an excellent man, but the moral prestige of the institutional Church leadership has itself been gravely compromised by the clergy abuse scandal.  Massachuessetts was the epic centre of that scandal.  Does anyone really believe that had the Church not been gravely weakened in Mass, that ‘gay’ marriage would would have driven though that breach, or that the Church would have been forced to close its fosterage and adoption programmes because it refused to accept gay adoption?

      And given the manner that this corrupt administration have framed the issues, what about ‘women’ ‘women victims’ and ‘women heatth isssues’–you can fill in the rest yourself–liberal vipers are entirely predicatble–what chance a group like that can be played successfully against a group  that can be depicted a ‘patriarchical, alll male and ‘celibate’ ‘power structure’.  Why doubt it?  It is happening before our eyes.

      I don’t wish to be depressing but I believe that Obama and his henchmen and henchwomen have thought this through and believe that they can win.

      But there is still time.  What should America’s Catholics do?  First, pray!

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_N7HCPR7JLQP6R33GXP5DO5XKDM 1776er

        Well, I agree with a lot of what you say but not all of what you say or the overall conclusion which you infer that the Church is incapable of mounting an effective resistance.

        I agree with your observation that there are many so-called Cafeteria Catholics who pick and choose what they want to believe, or what is convenient to believe, and leave the rest.  That is a problem of Catholic education and a dismal failure of the local clergy to guide the flock.  

        I also agree that there has been a dumbing down of the priesthood over the past couple of decades and in particular their ability and willingness to vigorously defend the faith.  A lot of the problems can be traced to Vatican II which "opened the windows" of the Church to exposure to modern humanism, i.e., popular secularism.  The consequences have been devastating for the Church, particularly in America.  You can take any statistic of health of a religion and they are all down in the American Catholic Church.  

        Having conceded that, there is reason for hope for the American Catholic Church.  And it most evident in the most unexpected place–Catholic youth.  Young people –in their twenties–are more conservative than those just ahead of them in their 30′s and 40′s.  They actually have enthusiasm for the Church and will work for the Church.  They have a different vibe.  Older Catholics–Boomers–also are entering a new phase in life in which they are becoming more reflective about the end stage of their spiritual journey.  They are wiser now.  

        So while we may concede that there is a lot of rot throughout the Church it is not rotten all the way through.  There is a core of strength and it is a surprisingly strong core, IMO.

        There are 77.7 million Catholics in America today.  If only 1% of Catholics are radicalized to defend the faith that is 770,700 Catholic activists raging against the machine and standing up for the faith. That’s a lot of activists with the potential to conduct the kind of ACTION that the Marxists will understand,   Let us hope that 1% of Catholics can be shaken out of their stupor to recognize the threat and do something about it.  Particularly at the polls.  I think that is a minimum and the real willingness to stand up for the Church is much larger.

        The issue is leadership.  Will the Bishops lead? 

         If the  Bishops summon the will and determination to lead then rank and file Catholics will get on the buses and follow. The Bishops will have to lead personally.  Unlike Obama, they will have to lead from the front. They will have to go to jail like Cardinal Josef Mindszenty in Hungary.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3zsef_Mindszenty

        This issue is of a different timber than even abortion.  It is oppression.  It is Government suppressing the Catholic Church.  This is not a personal crime against God that one might perhaps rationalize to themselves and their doctors and their sympathetic confessors.  Read Dolan’s letter.  He is not confused about the nature of this attack.  Health issue?  Insurance issue?  Women’s rights issue?  No, no, no my friend.  This is much more fundamental and serious than those over-hyped temporal passing contretemps. The Bishops are perfectly capable of educating the people in the pews about the real foreboding nature of this attack. This is iron fisted public oppression.  Different problem altogether that will elicit a less conflicted response from the Catholic faithful.  

        My money is still on Tim Dolan.  

        My guess?  He will be the first one in the slam.  He will be in contempt of court.  He won’t pay the fine.  If they let him out he will go right back to the front of the Federal Building in NYC and lie down in the doorway.  He will be on TV every night of the week.  

        I think he has now indicated pretty strongly that he will lead.  He will rally Bishops all across the country.  They will rally diocesan clergy who will rally the folks in the pews. Some of the local clergy will not lead out of timidity or marxist sympathy. But many others will follow the Bishops lead. 

        The Bishops will likely try a program of calibrated response.  They will start small, prayerful polite protests,and yes they will pray.  They will  escalate the nature of the ACTION and the tactics if the Government does not relent.  They will develop some  tactics to gradually increase the pressure on the Marxists in Washington.  The Bishops will be in it for the long haul.

         Bannon said it was going to take 5-10-15 years.  Perhaps the army of Restoration and Sudden and Relentless Reform will have an unexpected ally in the Catholic Church.  The Lord works in wondrous ways.  

        Wouldn’t it be interesting to see the Church set up a Super Pac in time for the election?  Wouldn’t it be interesting to see the Church running negative ads on Obama and Pelosi and all the rest? Time for a special collection every Sunday –The Catholic Faith Defense Fund.  Keep circulating the basket and nobody goes home until the basket is full. Carpet bombing Catholic style.  The options for ACTION are practically limitless.  

        Don’t be surprised if the Bishops don’t enlist allies in all the major religions in this resistance to this oppressive attack on FREEDOM OF RELIGION.

        The language Dolan is using is not soft. Read his letter carefully.  Then read it again. There is velvet covered iron in those words.  The Church seemingly is determined to not be coerced into co-operating with evil.  That’s not the Church’s style ever in its history.  It can’t knuckle under.  It is Marxism vs Christianity.  Evil vs Good.  Satan vs God.  Obama vs The Church. Who wins? 

        You think God is going to abandon His Church in America?  You think God will not raise up the men and women and the leaders to defend His Church?  You think those men and women are not in the Catholic Church in America today waiting to be activated, energized and led to ACTION?

        My money is on Tim Dolan.

        • Speaking Heart

          Agreed.
          I’m not part of the Catholic Church (or any institutional church at this time). But I strongly believe that those who poke the Catholic Church in the eye will rue the day.

  • sparrow17

    Our country deserves better than this kind of discourse.  We are in dire straits and this is what its come to.  God help us. 

    • virginiagentleman1

      Indeed, Milady Sparrow, we certainly need, and pray, for God to help, and bless once again, our Republic.

  • HuntingMoose

    since the left wants to put this type of subjects on the table, here is a question from me:

    ================================================================

    When will child protective services start protecting the babies who survive a botched abortion?

    When will they take away the children of those that advocate this infanticite and harm to babies?

    When will they take Obama’s children?

    ======================================================================

    and don’t give me this crap on health issue for the mother. Once born, the only issue to the mother is her wallet and at that moment, her wish to killing and abandon is cause for the child protective services to prevent harm to the baby. When will they arrest those conspiring and advocating these killings?

    • Fionared

      Why take Obama’s children?

      • HuntingMoose

        Glad you asked.

        I am toying here with 2 absurdities of the left at an overlap that Obama is occupying.

        One absurdity (or call it more appropriate by it’s German name), is the child protective services in this country that won’t do anything when there is a clear cause for them to act and on the other hand they act when there is only a remote risk and with their action actually can cause major trauma to the child (e.g. the child who draw a picture of her father fighting evil monsters with a gun)

        The other absurdity of the left is Obama who advocate(d) the killing of unwanted new borns because the adminstrative decision that was made earlier to kill it was based on the premise that it could harm the mother. Never mind that once born, there is no physical harm to the mother , only an administrative kill order of a child whose only crime is not to die despite the harm brought to it while still in the womb.

        So if we think it is OK for protective services to get into action with that father defending his child, for sure they should get into action to get to protect the children of someone who does not mind the killing of a child who does not do any harm

        • Fionared

          I am not someone that agrees with the majority of actions by Children’s Services. To me they are a small gov’t agencythathas been given WAY too much authority.

      • MaMcGriz

        ADN troll looking for fools to quote for obama….?

        Better check this one’s posting profile and think….

        • Fionared

          Just trying to understand HuntingMoose point. I was not flippent nor rude.

        • Fionared

          How am I a "Troll"? I said nothing inflammatory or off topic. And trying to get me removed? Jeesh!

  • mder4thegov

    Meet Sandra Fluke, the Anita Hill of 2012.
    This lady (?) just guaranteed herself a salary for life.  She did what Nancy Pelosi asked, and she’ll be "taken care of"–for as long as she lives.  That’s how the dems operate:  through deceit and manipulation–using vulnerable, desperate people–to achieve their goals.
    Has anyone noticed, Anita Hill, who tried to "bring down" Clarence Thomas in the early 90′s, has been employed at liberal Occidental College–since she allowed herself to be a pawn?  I wonder how that happened (wink wink)?

    • BrianusBerkleianus

      Exactly; these commies take care of their own.  As I have written elsewhere, they would like to make fluke a Federal "judge," I would guess, and maybe even a SCOTUS "Justice" someday.

      The Lefties have made academia and the courts their private fiefdom, to reward their slaves, and to persecute Free Peoples.

      Patriots must wrest control of these institutions out of their sordid hands!!

  • VADMCollingwood

    First, we were Borked.  Now, we’re Fluked.  What’s next?  

    • BrianusBerkleianus

      Well-stated!!!

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_N7HCPR7JLQP6R33GXP5DO5XKDM 1776er

      Spit my milk!

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets