IF MEN COULD BEAR CHILDREN

Every once in a while, a news item in the secular or religious press reminds me of a humorous comment my late sister Mary once made about the Catholic hierarchy’s rigid and single-minded obsession with birth control. A religious Sister of Mercy for almost 60 years, Mary quipped: “If men could have babies, abortion would be a Sacrament.”

Mary was pro-choice but certainly not in favor of abortion. Like most sensitive, caring, deeply spiritual persons, she saw abortion as a serious, complex moral issue. But like most women she was able to put it in the larger context of a deep concern for a seamless garment of life. On the other hand, judging from the church hierarchy’s laser focus on abortion to the virtual exclusion of all else, its concern for life seems to stop at the uterine wall.

What recently reminded me of Mary’s comment was last week’s hearing by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing on contraception and religious freedom. Or, as the Republican committee chairman Rep. Darrell Isa subtly labeled it: “Lines Crossed: Separation of Church and State. Has the Obama Administration Trampled on Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Conscience?”

As most have read by now, the first panel of five witnesses at the hearing included a Catholic bishop, a Jewish rabbi, a conservative Lutheran minister, and two other men from academia. But no women. Can you imagine? Sadly, yes we can.

If you have been following this issue in the media, there is generally a discernible difference between women and men pundits and politicians on the women’s reproductive health issue, as evidenced by a Feb. 8th Op Ed piece in the Wall Street Journal by Senators Jeanne Shaheen, Barbara Boxer, and Patty Murray. Women tend to view it as a much broader women’s preventive health care issue, having to do not only with unwanted pregnancies but also with breast exams and HIV screening, to cite just a few examples.

Unfortunately, the Obama Administration allowed itself to be blind-sided by the religious liberty argument, which took the focus off women’s health care. Even liberal Catholics like me were surprised that they didn’t see this coming as a legitimate issue, especially with a Catholic Vice President and Secretary of Health and Human Services advising the President. Fortunately, the President pivoted quickly and regained his balance, to the satisfaction of most liberal and moderate supporters and, I suspect, an overwhelming majority of women.

But, Republican presidential hopefuls and committee chairmen like Rep. Darrell Issa, won’t let go of the issue because they can smell blood in the water. Nor can the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops because that’s the only thread they have to hold onto. They lost the artificial contraception issue a long time ago among Catholics generally. Polls show that a majority of Catholics ignore the ban with an overwhelming majority of sexually active Catholics saying they use or have used artificial birth control.

Keep in mind, too, it was the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops who in their single focus on pelvic politics was willing to strangle health care reform in its crib over the possibility that the Affordable Care Act might result in an abortion somehow somewhere sometime on some far-distant planet. Only courageous women like Sister Carol Keehan, DC, president and chief executive officer of the Catholic Health Association of the United States (CHA), helped save the day then. She also came out in support of the compromise that the President recently announced. Clearly, there must be far more women like Sister Keehan in key leadership positions – in government, private industry, politics, and religion -- who can bring that broader perspective to discussions of women's health care.

Yet, the religious liberty issue -- largely a bogus issue at this juncture with the President’s willingness to compromise -- will not go away as a political football any time soon. Conservative Republicans and Catholics, an important Republican constituency in some key states, have vowed to repeal the Affordable Care Act and they see this as one of the few remaining ways to achieve that goal.

Which brings me back to my sister Mary’s larger point: if men could bear children and had to deal with the same complex, expensive reproductive health care issues that women do, we wouldn’t be having this latest political debate at all.

Gerald E. Lavey