Sunday, February 19, 2012

Nancy Goes Blind Over Religious Rights

It's Sunday, so I'll be mercifully brief today. On Thursday, the House Committee hearing on religious liberty involved two panels of religious experts, each panel comprised of people discussing why the Obamacare mandate for religious institutions to provide free birth control and abortifacients should be tossed out. Following the lead of committee member Carolyn Maloney (D-New York), San Fran Nan looked at the panels and asked "where are the women?"

At least she didn't sing "where have all the women gone, long time passing." But there is a small problem with the question. It seems Pelosi and Maloney share the same optometrist. Somehow they couldn't see that Dr. Allison Dabbs Garrett of Oklahoma Christian University and Laura Champion MD from Calvin College Health Services were both on the panels and both testified. Yessir, they are both bona fide women--ladies, even.

It's not too difficult to figure out that the Democrats want to make this issue about "women's rights," while the actual subject is religious freedom protected by the First Amendment. And by their measure, it would be mighty convenient to attack the panel as unfriendly to women by the lack of women testifying. Men are by biological imperative unable to understand or properly discuss women's rights.

Whined Pelosi: "Where are the women women on that panel? Imagine, they are having a panel on women's health and they don't have any women on the panel." That proves that Pelosi is at least partially-blind both literally and metaphorically. She couldn't see the two women panelists, and she couldn't see that the entire committee hearing was about religious freedom, not women's rights.

Never daunted, the botox queen went on to ask the queston: "What is it that men don't understand about women's health, that how central the issue of family planning is to that? Not just if you're having families (well if you're not, you don't need to plan), but if you need those kinds of prescription drugs for your general health, which was the testimony they would have heard this morning if they had allowed a woman on the panel (emphasis added)." Maybe she's deaf, too.

And if you didn't get the message yet, she said: "I think it's really curiouser and curioser that as we get further into this debate the Republican leadership of this Congress thinks it's appropriate to have a hearing on a subject of women's health and purposefully exclude women from the panel." Perhaps she actually did see the women, but has the leftist view that conservative religious women are not really female. Just like black conservatives are not authentically black. So they don't count.

All of the panelists, including the women, were asked if they would risk going to jail for refusing to follow the Obama mandate. Each answered in turn, "I would." But they aren't willing to go to jail over an issue of women's rights. They are willing to go to jail to defend their religious beliefs from government interference. They have a lot of history to go with their bravery, from the Christian martyrs of Rome to the American Founders who considered religious freedom so important that they wrote it into the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Of course it could just be that Pelosi is simply like the theater critic who leaves the show during the intermission and writes a review centering on the finale.

22 comments:

AndrewPrice said...

Lawhawk, You clearly have forgotten that only certain women are "women", just as only certain blacks are "blacks." If you're not part of the collective, then you just don't count. :(

LawHawkRFD said...

Andrew: That truism should be posted on the wall of every Democratic headquarters.

Tehachapi Tom said...

Hawk
Your point that the issue is Constitutional is exactly why Pelosi couldn't see it or the ladies. She does not and is not.

A miss wired computer is discarded she should be also.

LawHawkRFD said...

Tehachapi Tom: She's more like an entire short circuit.

CrisD said...

Pregnancy is not a disease. (and I am a chick)

tryanmax said...

They have a lot of history to go with their bravery,

Might you even say they have a lot of history on their side?

Individualist said...

OK

First I think we need a correction. Woman have no right to force anyone else to pay for their abortions or their contraception. Not forcing someone else to pay for these things in no way abrogates their rights. There is no women's health issue in the debate.

So given this it is not relevant how many women partake in the discussion since there is no issue of women's rights to be addressed.

There are plenty of people that have real healthcare concerns that end up in serious debt as the insurance companies level copays and deductions. To force insurance companies to pay for this, private or not, is in essence taking funding away from women who have breast cancer or people who are truely ill.

Beyond the religious debate there are serious questions about government forcing carriers to provide this with all insurance coverage to begin with. It is unethical of congress to even think they have the right to involve themselves in these decisions.

T-Rav said...

Or it could also be that Nancy's looking for any reason, however random and unrelated, to distract everyone from the actual issue at hand.

LawHawkRFD said...

Cris: That is something that the left has carried on long after everyone else had moved on to recognize that pregnancy is a wonder of nature.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: Yes, definitely. And it's the thing the left doesn't realize will ultimately defeat them.

LawHawkRFD said...

Indi: That's the left for you. There is absolutely no "right" being taken away from anyone. But the left believes that the government ought to pay for everything or at least force others to pay for it. So their argument is that women have both a right to birth control and a right to have everyone else, including those who have religious objections to it, pay for it.

LawHawkRFD said...

T-Rav: She's not smart enough to think that up on her own, but her handlers are, and it's surely part of the plan.

LawHawkRFD said...

Tehachapi Tom: That's no sillier than expecting others to pay for the "right" to a sex-change operation, and that's been on the table for years.

StanH said...

I wish that someone would turn around and say to Nancy, “…that’s about some dumb $hit Nancy.” This whole contraception donnybrook is stupid, and should be called such at every chance for a retort.

LawHawkRFD said...

Stan: To which Nancy would give her standard reply: "Are you serious?" There's nobody stupider than a stupid person who has been told she's brilliant.

tryanmax said...

The twisted thing is that, just because Nancy said there are no women on the panel, several times on news and radio today I have heard commentary to the effect of "No women, hmm. Isn't that strange?" In other words, Nancy says it, no need to fact check. Gaaaaah!

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: All I can describe this willful blindness as is "lockstep."

Joel Farnham said...

LawHawk,

She meant to say, "Where the brain dead drones I can manipulate and punish if I things don't go my way at?"

LawHawkRFD said...

Joel: It's still hard to believe that this idiot ever rose to Speaker of the House.

tryanmax said...

LawHawk, not all that rises is cream. We can thank our lucky stars that Ms. Nan did not congeal in that position.

LawHawkRFD said...

tryanmax: Isn't that the truth!

Individualist said...

Lawhawk and Tyranmax

No, it is the Ministry of Truth

completely different from the Truth

Post a Comment