Men in Black

[paft.livejournal.com]

Here is a picture from today's House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing about the Obama administration's birth control mandate:



The first row are the allowed witnesses.

All those people a couple rows behind them? Well... those witnesses just don't fit in.

That's why most of the Democratic women on the committee walked out of the room.

Just now, Oklahoma GOP representative Jim Lankford implied that these men in black were being "berated" by the committee. In fact, they've mostly been getting strokes just short of full-body massages from most of the remaining committee members. This hearing is such a transparent and over-the-top, right wing extremist attack on the administration (one Representative invoked those dastardly laws against smoking in public buildings as a sign of the slippery slope the administration has set up) that clips from it should be used by Democrats in the upcoming election.

I cannot imagine any reasonable and honest person watching this hearing and not being appalled.


Partially crossposted from Thoughtcrimes

*

Comments

[paft.livejournal.com]

How does the existence of the y chromosome drive the decision to have an all male panel talking about an issue that mainly impacts women?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

It mainly impacts religious people.

[allisnow.livejournal.com]

C'mon, Jeff, obviously this is the ONLY way for women to get birth control. These men just want women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

You say like its a flip exaggeration, but really, it isn't (http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2012/02/16/santorum-mega-backer-on-contraception-girls-just-put-aspirin-between-the-legs/?tsp=1).

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Do you mean to say that the poor female employees who would benefit from birth control coverage are not religious?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Whether they are or not is also not entirely relevant to the discussion. If you go to work at a Catholic or Catholic-run institution, one would expect that your work-related situation would be Catholic in nature, which would include your benefits.

I'm sure many of them would benefit from birth control coverage. That does not mean it's right to force their employer to provide it against their religious doctrine.

[crazyprotein.livejournal.com]

nobody's going to shove the pills down the throats

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Yet that's functionally what the rule does to those who has the religious objection to it.

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

It's funny that institutions of a foreign government like the Vatican are allowed to exist on such a wide scale outside their borders.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

In that the Vatican City is its own nation for diplomatic purposes does not really make the religion itself a "foreign" entity.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Catholic schools and hospitals are regulated by state standards of education and health. Why should it be any surprise that those organizations also come under federal insurance standards? Also, I do not see Catholics refusing to pay state taxes over the death penalty.

Also, how does Catholic religious doctrine now suddenly apply to employees who had previously been free of religious requirements?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Catholic schools and hospitals are regulated by state standards of education and health. Why should it be any surprise that those organizations also come under federal insurance standards

No one's saying it's a surprise, but rather that the federal standards - standards lacking actual outlined government power, mind you - do not adequately address the religious issue in play.

Also, how does Catholic religious doctrine now suddenly apply to employees who had previously been free of religious requirements?

It's not about the employees.

[allisnow.livejournal.com]

I would say the issue impacts everyone being told to do something that goes against their religious convictions, y-chromosome or not.

[paft.livejournal.com]

That doesn't explain why the panel was all male.

[allisnow.livejournal.com]

1) Maybe because as far as I know there aren't quota laws for Congressional panels?

Or, if that doesn't work for you...

2) Don't know, don't care.

[paft.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm sure you don't.

[xtremeroswellia.livejournal.com]

1. Because men rule the country and want to have complete power over women, period.

2. Pretty much how I feel about people's religious "rights" being "violated." :)