Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Santorum: Contracepting* the Women’s Vote

Who could have imagined that contraception** would become a hot topic in the presidential election of 2012?

Abortion, gay marriage, embryonic stem-cell research. We expected these. Each is an unsettled societal issue of consequence, on which public debate continues to rage. But something so widely accepted as contraception? Something whose use by adults carries no stigma and generates no protest? Something that pertains, literally, to the intimacy of the bedroom? Something on which women (married and unmarried) rely to avoid becoming pregnant when they are not prepared to have their first child or their second, third, or fourth child?

How did this happen? How could an uncontroversial private decision made every day by couples across the country turn the Republican presidential primary into a laughingstock? The answer is Rick Santorum. He is the common denominator in the Obama re-election campaign’s latest tactic to capture the women’s vote and portray Republicans as anti-women, sexually-intrusive, hyper-religious reactionaries. Consider the following steps from the Obama playbook:

STEP 1.  Republicans should have sounded the alarm at the presidential debate in Manchester, NH, on January 7, 2012. That’s when, seemingly out of nowhere, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos launched into a lengthy line of questioning about contraception. His immediate target was Mitt Romney, but Stephanopoulos began by citing Santorum’s position that, under the Tenth Amendment, the states have the right to ban contraception. (For the record, Santorum says he doesn’t recommend such a ban.) Romney deftly dodged the moderator’s barrage of hypotheticals, scoring the sanest line of the night, to rousing applause: “Contraception, it’s working just fine. Just leave it alone!”

Here we were at St. Anselm College, a Catholic liberal arts institution (cf. Step 2). Millions were watching on TV and tweeting online. In this setting, Stephanopoulos deliberately chose to make contraceptionand whether the states can ban it—a vivid episode in the GOP presidential debate. If his goal was to trap Romney, he failed. But if his goal was to make women of childbearing age fear that Republicans (like Santorum) might sacrifice them on the altar of states’ rights, mission accomplished.

STEP 2.  Next came the bombshell announcement by HHS Secretary, Kathleen Sibelius, on January 20, 2012. Under Obamacare’s final regulations, employer-sponsored health plans—including those offered by Catholic institutions to their employees—must cover “contraceptive services” for women. The U.S. Catholic bishops failed to secure the broad exemption they had sought for months. In a sheer political calculation, Obama decided he had more to gain than to lose by bucking the Catholic hierarchy and fighting for all women’s access to contraception through their health insurance plans.

Of course this is a brazen assault by the Obama administration on Catholic teaching and Catholic institutions. Of course it is an attack by the federal government on freedom of religion. Since 1968, when the Papal encyclical Humanae Vitae was issued, the official position of the Catholic Church has been against all forms of contraception on moral grounds. For this reason, expect Obama to back away from the standoff he has created, but only after he achieves its real goal: To convince women voters, including Catholic women, that he stands in solidarity with them against an oppressive, all-male, celibate religious hierarchy (cf. Step 3).

Santorum, a devout Catholic of orthodox beliefs, publicly espouses his Church’s teaching against contraception. Given his high profile as a GOP presidential candidate, he has become the face of anti-contraception to women.

STEP 3.  As Santorum has risen in recent polls, the media, his rivals, and the Obama team have begun to scrutinize his remarks about contraception. There’s much to dissect and use against him. Suffice it to say that Santorum’s personal views tend to reflect the medieval anthropology, philosophy, and theology of women and sexuality on which the Papal teaching against contraception is based. Women instinctively recognize this worldview and, by and large, reject it.

As a politician, Santorum often seems unwilling or unable to differentiate his personal religious/moral beliefs from the requirements of the common good in a pluralistic society. Can he even acknowledge that Catholicism’s adamant opposition to contraception has resulted in widespread dissent, doubt, and disaffection among the Catholic faithful for more than 40 years? These Catholic voters—mainly women and married couples—have, in good conscience and in massive numbers, declined to follow the hierarchy’s teaching concerning their intimate sexual relations and their responsible decisions about when to become pregnant.

If Santorum is so out of step with the majority of Catholic women, how can he possibly persuade women of other religions or no religion to support him?

Areté
20 February 2012
_______________________________________
*Contra = against, opposite to; [in]ceptus = beginning, undertaking (with apologies to Latin scholars).
**American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language. 4th edition. 2000.
contraception (n.) “Intentional prevention of conception or impregnation through the use of various devices, agents, drugs, sexual practices, or surgical procedures.”

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Additionally, to Step 3, the more Saintorum rises in the polls the less talk there is about the HHS Mandate!

Well written, good observation! I think the whole contraception thing was a ploy to lower Romney in the polls and eventually lead to an Obama/Santorum election in Nov.

The sad part is that the Saintorum followers tend to think St.orum is superior to Romney based on the polls that are actually being fed by DEMS/Unions! I honestly dont know how St.orum himself and his followers cant see hes the weak link and being used for an Obama win!

Terrye said...

He can overlook the views of his own constituents when it comes to an issue like Right To Work..which actually has something to do with his job as a Senator, but he has no problem ignoring their views on a personal issue like this.

Anonymous said...

Another great post, Arete.

-Martha

Anonymous said...

The last sentence is a telling one. If Santorum has a hard time selling his views to women who agree with him much of the time, how is he going to come across with women who don't? He won't "come across;" they will reject him completely.

I read an article about this where one Catholic woman talked about how most women spend about 5 years or less of their lives trying to get pregnant and 30 years trying not to. She is correct. Even women who have many children often use birth control to space their children and allow their bodies to recover from the demands of pregnancy. To have all forms of contraception lumped into a statement that contraception is only a tool for people to use sexual license is not going to go over well. The internet's first use is pornography, so let's ban the internet. Same difference.

I was stunned when Mitt was asked the contraception question by George Stephanopoulis. George is doing the "good" work to get Obama reelected. Of course, Mitt didn't bite, but Santorum has fallen for this hook, line, and sinker. As my brothers would say, "He's a sucker." He can't seem to stop talking about these issues that really turn women away from him.

AZ

Anonymous said...

No. Republicans have become perverts too, and can't credibly defend the non-contraceptive philosophy. "There's your trouble", as the song says!

Dr. Pedulla
pedullad@aol.com