January 08, 2014

Anti-Catholic Rhetoric At USNews.Com


The venerable old US News and World Report bit the dust some time back, but remains as a news website with a number of blogs by columnists. Frankly, I haven’t followed it – and now I’m rather glad about that. You see, it has descended from the best and most serious of America’s weekly news magazines to become instead a cesspool of bigotry – as exemplified by columnist Jamie Stiehm’s latest piece that constitutes one long foray into anti-Catholicism.

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.

Let’s look at this – Justice Sotomayor enjoined enforcement of an Obama Administration policy that many Americans view as an infringement on religious liberty and a number of courts around the country have struck down on that basis. In doing so, she maintained the status quo in the United States for all of its previous history – namely that the government cannot force religious organizations to engage in activity that are explicitly against the teachings of that organization. And such orders are common in major cases, leaving things as they are until the matter is resolved. What's more, in 90% of the cases that have been decided thus far, the courts have granted the very sort of injunction that Sotomayor granted to the Little Sisters of the poor -- indicating that her actions served to correct a decision that was an outlier among the lower courts. But Stiehm declares that this is some sort of gender treason – and an imposition of religion, because Sotomayor, like the nuns in the case, happens to be Catholic!

Do you doubt that last statement? Read on!

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.

Wow – a bald assertion that Sotomayor ruled because of her religion and not because the ruling was good law. Evidence? There is none given. Just Stiehm’s claim that the Supreme Court is extreme because there are too many damn Catholics on it.

But it gets better (or should that be worse?).

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?
Of course, Stiehm neglects to mention that the rule in question also requires that the Sisters authorize their insurer to provide contraception coverage to the nuns and their lay employees. In other words, that lenient little paper makes them cooperate in providing services they believe to be immoral – in other words, to escape the requirement to do something immoral they must do something else immoral. It’s sort of like the ancient Romans saying that the simple, lenient laws of the Empire only requires them to burn a little incense before the image of the emperor – what could be easier?
Sotomayor's blow brings us to confront an uncomfortable reality. More than WASPS, Methodists, Jews, Quakers or Baptists, Catholics often try to impose their beliefs on you, me, public discourse and institutions. Especially if "you" are female. This is not true of all Catholics – just look at House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi. But right now, the climate is so cold when it comes to defending our settled legal ground that Sotomayor's stay is tantamount to selling out the sisterhood. And sisterhood is not as powerful as it used to be, ladies. 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.
Got that? We can’t know what she was thinking, but because of her religion we can assume that Sotomayor was just being a good Catholic – and being a good Catholic means you are a bad American. Never mind that she can’t show that the five eeeeevilllll Catholic men on the Supreme Court make the rulings they do because of their religion – they are Catholic, therefore it must be presumed that they are doing so. She even claims that Jefferson shared her anti-Catholic bigotry – again without a shred of proof. Frankly, I’m surprised that Stiehm isn’t insisting that the only way to honor the First Amendment – she isn’t more than a step away from doing so, given her logic that being a faithful Catholic makes one incapable of operating within the parameters of the First Amendment.

By the way, about that "Vatican hegemony" hegemony argument -- we have heard it used in the past, most recently in the election of 1960 when secularist and Protestant bigots argued that a Catholic president would inevitably end up taking orders from the Pope and the destruction of the Constitutional order of things. America rejected such hate a half century ago, and we should be horrified to see it resurface today on the website of a supposedly respectable news source. What next? Arguments for segregation due to the racial inferiority of blacks or blatantly anti-Semitic arguments about Jews? Has the American Left really backslidden so?


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.

Wow. Just wow.

Apparently the author now argues that women whose religious beliefs and practices don't extend to the celebration of the latter-day Left's Sacrament of Abortion are just trouble-making tools of men -- especially " meddlesome American Roman Catholic Archbishops". Never mind that those archbishops are also American citizens who have every right to participate in the political and legal process. Forgive me if I find myself remembering this historical artifact of nineteenth century yellow-press anti-Catholicism.


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. President Clinton had it exactly right in his formulation: abortion should be safe, legal and rare.

Got that -- "no such thing as Catholic justice". Isn't that strikingly similar to the arguments put forward to a certain group that claimed to be made up of patriotic Americans back during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries? It sure looks that way to me.



Stiem's concluding paragraph, amazingly enough, doesn't deal with the Catholic Church -- instead she rants about Rush Limbaugh and a cast of thousands of men leading a campaign to strip women of their human rights. Never mind that Stiehm herself is supporting the trampling of one of the most fundamental rights that we all have, the right to live out our religious beliefs free of government efforts to coerce us into violating them through "simple" actions compelled by "lenient" laws and policies. How long until Stiehm and her ilk seek to put religious believers -- especially Catholics -- in the back of the proverbial bus?

|| Greg, 08:18 PM || Permalink || Comments (0) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Trackback Information for Anti-Catholic Rhetoric At USNews.Com

TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Anti-Catholic Rhetoric At USNews.Com'.

Comments on Anti-Catholic Rhetoric At USNews.Com

Post a comment

Remember personal info?




Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards
Winner - 2014 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2013 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2012 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2011 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2010 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Winner - 2009 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Posts by Category

Announcements (posts: 13)
Blogging (posts: 187)
Border Issues & Immigration (posts: 421)
deferred (posts: 4)
Education (posts: 685)
Entertainment & Sports (posts: 483)
Guns & Gun Control (posts: 65)
History (posts: 329)
Humor (posts: 88)
Israel/Middle East (posts: 44)
Medical News (posts: 54)
Military (posts: 273)
News (posts: 1570)
Paid Advertising (posts: 234)
Personal (posts: 108)
Politics (posts: 5261)
Race & Racism (posts: 281)
Religion (posts: 819)
Terrorism (posts: 884)
Texas GOP Platform Reform Project (posts: 4)
The Courts (posts: 310)
Watcher's Council (posts: 482)
World Affairs (posts: 345)


January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
December 0000



Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Powered By

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

Administrative Stuff

Email Me
Syndicate this site (XML)

Advertising Disclosure


About Me

NAME: Greg
AGE: 50-ish
SEX: Male
OCCUPATION: Social Studies Teacher
LOCATION: Seabrook, TX
DISCLAIMER: All posts reflect my views alone, and not the view of my wife, my dogs, my employer, or anyone else. All comments reflect the view of the commenter, and permitting a comment to remain on this site in no way indicates my support for the ideas expressed in the comment.

Search This Site

Support This Site

Recent Entries

Who Is Regan Theiler And Why Was She Allowed To Spend Public Funds On A Sole Source Contract For Her Part-Time Employer?
Not My Idea Of A Stimulating Evening
About Trump's Liberty University Speech
Do Not Place The Secessionist "Texas Independence" Measure On The 2016 Republican Primary Ballot
Conservatives Vs. Liberal On Those Engaged In Violent Political Activity
Tom Mechler Makes His Case Against Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Jared Woodfill Makes His Case For Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Questions About Moving The 2016 RPT Convention
Reject The Call To Move 2016 Republican Party Of Texas Convention
It Is Too Bad That Political Parties Cannot Reject Voters Who Seek To Join, Stop Would-Be Candidates Who Want To Run


Watchers Council
  • Ask Marion
  • Bookworm Room
  • The Colossus of Rhodey
  • The Glittering Eye
  • GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD
  • The Independent Sentinel
  • JoshuaPundit
  • Liberty's Spirit
  • New Zeal
  • Nice Deb
  • The Noisy Room
  • The Razor
  • Rhymes With Right
  • The Right Planet
  • Simply Jews
  • Virginia Right!
  • Watcher Of Weasels

  • Political & Religious Blogs