Religious Right: Hypocritical or Politically Motivated

If Birth Control Users are anti-religion, then why are religious people using it?

Much has been made mention of the fact that 98% of Catholic women, who are sexually active and between the age of 15-45; have used birth control at one time or another. After many erroneous articles pointing to the fact that politifact and the White House had given miss information, it was proven that in fact, politifact was correct; forcing others to retract or update their articles. However, the fact remains.

While the figures and facts are true, the original questions stands. Why the outcry? During election time every religious sect is trying to amend and create laws to control a woman's ability to use birth control and make decisions pertaining to her own person.

Many religious individuals use methods of birth control because they know that they can't afford to raise twenty children and that be "fruitful and multiply" doesn't exactly fit in when you are paying a mortgage, insurance, vehicle payments, etc. So, why raise such a stink?

It Must Be Election Time

While the religious sector of Americans are usually trying to sway how we should live; they are fairly quiet about it, that is until election time. Then they get behind their party, their candidate and shout from the roof tops to sway the vote; all the while getting tax breaks and violating separation of church and state by using that little known clause as "freedom of speech" to side step the law.


Why attack the woman?

It seems that whenever a law about birth control comes into play, it goes after the woman and her decisions. As they say, it takes two to tango, so why not go after the male partner. If government wants to control a women's rights in contraception, should they not do the same for a man; after all, it's a man who uses a condom or has a vasectomy. Two male forms of birth control.Why don't the religious right argue for laws that would do away with condoms or outlaw a vasectomy, after all, there are many potential swimmers in the pool that could create life and are being eradicated to prevent births.

Catholics in seven states have filed lawsuits against the Obama administrations new birth control regulations, be it organizations or individuals alone. All in the name of "religious freedom".

The regulation called for charities, hospitals and universities with religious affiliations, but NOT CHURCHES to provide birth control coverage to female employees, just like other providers do for the average female in the working force who purchases insurance. After much political pressure from these groups, the President compromised on the regulation and instead shifted the burden on to the insurance companies. Now, an employee can request it and it has to be provided "for free", although everyone knows that nothing in the world is free. Rates for everyone will have to go up to compensate for the costs.

Virginia went one step further, trying to make it illegal to have an abortion and when that didn't pass, they decided to try to pass a law that would require a women to have a vaginal ultrasound before they could have one. These are they same individuals that complain about the airport security invading their privacy and yet they have no problem invading the privacy of a woman.

HOW DO YOU SEE IT?

  • HYPOCRITICAL
  • POLITICALLY MOTIVATED
See results without voting

Hypothetically: The Relgious Right Wins

For the sake of argument, let us say that the Religious Right wins and all contraception and abortions are outlawed. Who will take all those unwanted children that are brought in to this world? Who will feed and clothe them? Who will care for them when they are sick and provide medical care for them? Who will put a roof over their heads?

The number of unwanted children in America is astounding. These are the same children that end up in orphanages, juvenile detention halls and even prisons. Where were the Religious Right? Why weren't they there meeting their needs?

It's easy to preach to others what they should do, it's harder to live by the same rules. It leads us to believe in the saying, "Do as I say, not as I do." So, instead of throwing stones at glass houses, these highly "moral" individuals should look within themselves and take care of their needs. If everyone stayed out of everyones moral or religious business, we'd need less government regulation and less tax spending.

More by this Author


Comments 10 comments

elijahtruth profile image

elijahtruth 4 years ago from texas

Not sure of your name, is it Abe? Hub contacted me saying that I would be interested in your page, it is interesting in parts, I like the fact that you like researching, I myself am a Word researcher, bringing about the finished mystery of God! Revelation 10:7, for great research go to http://www.adamandeveseedgatheringministry.com and http://adamandeveinaction.blogspot.com/ and http://thehistorianbookstore.blogspot.com/ as well as the hub link to our hub is listed with the many links of facts/truth on each website. Respect r.p.berry/Elijah paul Moses


noturningback profile image

noturningback 4 years ago from Edgewater, MD. USA

Hello Abecedarian, perhaps I might be labeled "religious right" and then again maybe not.

I do know that I am against abortions as a whole (of course there may be an exception) what I am equally against though is your stance on birth control needing to be provided by CHURCHES. Life, as described in the Bible is not only a precious gift to us, as in a birth, but also not ours to randomly take without consequence. Asking a church to provide birth control instead of preaching value of life and abstinence, is like asking a vegan to eat meat, it goes against all they believe in.

I don't care much for politics, but I do care about those kids you mentioned and as a father of one daughter (I lost three due to miscarriages) I would love the opportunity to help raise another, but redtape due to some needed government regs. and then more unnecessary regs. causes much expense just to adopt period. What I have found I can do is to help take care of the children of broken homes and thereby instill values into them, that may help teach young boys and girls the benefits of abstinence, until such a time when they may be mature enough to be responsible for the life of another.


HSchneider 4 years ago from Parsippany, New Jersey

Excellent Hub, Abecedarian. The Far Right call themselves small government conservatives but have no problem expanding governmental power to dictate to women. I understand the opposition to abortion by religious groups. But opposing birth control is ridiculous. You are absolutely on point. These people cry about birth control but refuse to lift a finger to help the children that result from these ludicrous policies. Isn't this the 21st century? They should adapt this policy to modern times.


Jillian Barclay profile image

Jillian Barclay 4 years ago from California, USA

Excellent job, Abecedarian!


Abecedarian profile image

Abecedarian 4 years ago from These United States, Texas Author

@ no turning back, while the bible is a good book, it is a guide--left to interpretation for each individual. As inidividuals it is still up to us to make our own decisions without having groups or governments making laws to control us. As for my stance, I never in any part of this article mention that the church should provide birth control. As, a Catholic, I understand the churches stance, but as an individual I also have a right to my own beliefs. The Church in the new policies is not forced to provide birth control. The organizations that have religious affiliations don't or should I say, "shouldn't" just hire religious/church members, because if they did, this could be construde as descrimination by athiests, etc. I too have suffered a loss of a child and have adopted children as well as biological children and still believe that a woman--not the government or religious organizations have the right to tell them what to do. If they want to hold a woman accountable, then hold the man as well. Unless of course, maybe the church feels that a man should have more rights and freedoms than a woman.

@HScnieder and Jillian Barclay--thanks.


noturningback profile image

noturningback 4 years ago from Edgewater, MD. USA

@ Abecedarian, you said "Many religious individuals use methods of birth control because they know that they can't afford to raise twenty children and that be "fruitful and multiply" doesn't exactly fit in when you are paying a mortgage, insurance, vehicle payments, etc. So, why raise such a stink?"

The Bible is not a guide and It even tells us so (You can't add to it or subtract from it)Deuteronomy 4:2

The Bible is the inspired word of God and though there are parts that need to be interpreted by each of us, in the need to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling, Philippians 2:12

The word of God, from the Bible, states two directives about about sexual relations between a man and a woman, one is they should be married and two is that union is designed for the purposes of helping each other as partners and for pro-creation.

As I noted earlier, the Bible states that sexual relations outside of marriage are not appropriate, hence the need is stated in the Bible for abstinence.

1 Corinthians 6:12-20 and chapter 7

The woman at the well whom Jesus spoke to was unmarried yet she had had previously 5 husbands, Jesus knew this was wrong and so did she, He just called her on it.

John 4 (Implied that this is wrong and since the days of Abraham, look at King David and Bathsheeba)Now a man who behaves this same way is no less guilty of committing sin than is a woman.

With all I have shown here now, it doesn't matter what the government suggests or even makes law, God's commands have and always will trump any other law that tries to supercede His own.

I worship God and not government, I have a relationship with the LORD, as His child, in the same manner that I have a relationship with my child. The Catholic (universal) church led to the canonization of the current 66 books in the King James version among others.

I stand corrected on CHURCHES, you indeed did not specifically mention them, you only mentioned: Catholic woman, every religious sect, Catholics, charities (which could be church related) and universities with religious affiliations (This is where our pastors and priests study.)

The goverment compromise that wants the insurance companies to pay the deferred costs will only have those same insurance company pass those costs on to the end user, which is the previously mentioned groups and those groups are the church.

The church I belong to is not just a building and being a Christian is not just wering a cross or showing up to church, it requires us to take a stand for our beliefs as based on what is written in that Bible and morespecifically through the new covenant brought through Christ. Seriously, when you go to church next time, take along my comment as it is written and present it to your priest or an elder if they disagree, then I would question if they are listening to the word of God as it is intended for our benefit so that any who believes in Him, might have eternal life.


Abecedarian profile image

Abecedarian 4 years ago from These United States, Texas Author

@No turning back. Wow, long reply with lots of quotes. It's obvious your faith is strong, so very good for you. Yes, I believe in God, but I also believe that the bible was "not" written by God. A man made translation.

A little light hearted humor in the seriousness of this comment: History is remembered in the eyes of the writer and the pen in his hand, not always exact or accurate.

And yes, the church is not just a building, but the bible also says that God is everywhere, turn over a stone and I am there. Worhsip does not have to be done in a building or even in a large- expansive or expensive building like you see all those televangelists in. Jesus was a poor carpenter and it's a pathetic joke to see these billion dollar churches, while the poor can't even get a meal to eat or a roof over their heads.


noturningback profile image

noturningback 4 years ago from Edgewater, MD. USA

Abecedarian, what a shame. To believe that the Bible was written by men only, means you are susceptible to a man's influence over your life even when you may forfeit something more precious than what this life has to offer. I'm not sure I could do that, because as a Christian Jesus said “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it." Matthew 16:24-25 (NIV 1984)

So we come to an impasse perhaps about the Bible. But about Jesus, we either follow Christ and His teachings and believe He is the Son of God or we don't, but then we can't be a Christian then can we?

We must give up our lives of immorality, we must lose that life in order to save it, it is written as being said by Christ and so I will heed His call to do so.

I am very pleased to know you have done for another, in an act of compassion, help support a child who without your support may not have had the priviledges of which you can afford them.


wba108@yahoo.com profile image

wba108@yahoo.com 4 years ago from upstate, NY

As with virtually all societies and major religions those in powerful tend to expliot those with less power. In christianity, women have been exploited in that while carrying the majority of the work load in christian ministry they been denied significant places of authority in the church.

With all its faults Christianity on a whole has advanced the rights of women more than any other major religion. In islam, hinduism, and buddhism my understanding is that women are afforded less status than in Christianity.


Sooner28 4 years ago

@Abecedarian,

You summed it up best here saying, "For the sake of argument, let us say that the Religious Right wins and all contraception and abortions are outlawed. Who will take all those unwanted children that are brought in to this world? Who will feed and clothe them? Who will care for them when they are sick and provide medical care for them? Who will put a roof over their heads?"

Putting aside the issue of sentience that most pro-lifers ignore, the pro-lifers who vote Republican also are voting against giving those kids education, health care, and clean air. Many on the right now want to private public education, and roll back Medicaid. Some positions are beyond absurd. Good hub.

Submit a Comment
New comments are not being accepted on this article at this time.
Click to Rate This Article
working