Let's talk about birth control pills...

Pope Francis’ appointed Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, Cardinal Sarah…of course he’s a man…don’t be unsettled by his gender-confusing name meaning “princess”…recently offered remarks at a National Catholic Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C.  The Cardinal delivered a message of woe and bad news, precisely what one might…not…expect from a representative of the gospel’s “good news.”  Ironically, Cardinal Cross-Namer / Princess / Sarah fears, among other things in the US, transgender people.  His list of fearful miseries is so long, I’m impressed he muscled courage to enter my country at all.  His message might be summarized as “gloom, despair and agony on thee.”

His remarks actually aligned with Pope Francis’ bleak outlook on families expressed in Amoris Laetitia, Chapter 2.  I won’t offer too many comments on that document because it truly will require an entire blog article devoted to the topic.  But in that document and Sarah’s comments, in addition to painting families as experiencing numerous miseries, both guys felt qualified to practice medicine without a license, a felony crime in my and many other states.  By that I mean both men disparage, belittle and mock women’s reproductive health.  Sarah outright demonized it and cited it as an example of Satan attacking families.

Paragraph 42 of Amoris Laetitia, “…the  decline  in  population,  due  to  a  mentality  against  having  children  and  promoted by the world politics of  reproductive health, creates not only a situation in which the relationship  between  generations  is  no  longer  ensured but also the danger that, over time, this decline  will  lead  to  economic  impoverishment  and a loss of  hope in the future.”

In this Year of Mercy, Pope Francis doesn't go as far as Sarah's equating it with outright evil.  Francis merely attributes reproductive health as the culprit for economic poverty and losing all hope.  Wow, that is one whopper statement and condemnation which unfortunately is not supported by facts.  The actual facts indicate poverty tends to align directly with cultures having limited or restricted access to birth control...such as those in Cardinal Sarah's beloved homeland continent of Africa, or Francis' homeland continent of South America.

In Cardinal Sarah’s remarks he positioned “…your beginning to accept contraception within healthcare programs” as an example of “demonic” attacks by Satan and overall general erosion of God in America.  How God, an omnipotent, omnipresent being, is eroded escapes me but Cardinal Sarah is quite convinced.

Maybe these guys have the same exemplary grasp of human female biology as the seminarian I mentioned in my last blog article who was convinced that birth control pills abort conceived babies instead of preventing conception. In the interest of educating the clergy, I will spend some time overviewing medical uses for the hormone therapy drugs commonly called “birth control pills.”  If you read this and feel your favorite church hierarchy member would benefit by the education, please forward it to him with my blessing.

O.K. Pope Francis, Cardinal Sarah and all other clergymen severely lacking understanding of female reproductive health, lend me your attention for a few moments.  Sisters of the Poor and other self-righteous religious organizations trying to prevent your employees from accessing these medications, please pay attention too.

First, the hormones in birth control pills are estrogen and progestin.  They are naturally found in the female body.  They are not the anti-Christ.  They are not evil.  They are not going to end civilization. 

The use of these hormones in some medications prevents ovaries from releasing an egg.  A consequence of no egg is there is nothing to fertilize.  However, there are many medical reasons to suppress ovulation. 

Second, surveys have found more than half of the women who use these medications do so for reasons unrelated to contraception.

Third, and this is especially in here for the likes of the Little Sisters of the Poor who sued the US government in an effort to block their employees from having insurance coverage for these medications, insurance covers drugs that are on the formulary.  They don’t give a crap for what reason the medication is prescribed.  If the drug isn’t on the formulary, it’s not covered – case closed.  So, my dear bishop who repeatedly says that women with the following conditions would have their medication covered, you are incorrect.  I can provide you with a copy of the letter my daughter who suffers one of these conditions received from Ascension Healthcare, her employer.  It plainly tells her that her evil (my editorial addition) medication is not covered.  As an aside, the “tsk, tsk, tsk, you bad girl” is actually only implied in the letter.

Here’s a quick list of non birth control reasons to prescribe estrogen and/or progestin http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/features/other-reasons-to-take-the-pill

1. 10% of women suffer menorrhagia (heavy bleeding) leading to severe anemia in cases such as mine.  Since the guys reading don’t have menstrual periods, let me describe what I mean by “heavy bleeding.”  Think of soaking to the point of overflowing multiple large sanitary pads in an hour.  In some cases, that’s actually multiple Depends adult diaper garments soaked in an hour.  Now go re-read the first part of this paragraph.  10% of women, that’s one in every ten women of menstruating age suffer this.  These medications dramatically reduce menstrual bleeding.  This is not prescribing medication for some sad little hangnail but for a debilitating condition.
2. 90% of women suffer painful to debilitating menstrual cramps.  Yes, you read that correctly, 90% - nine out of ten women.  The degree to which they experience pain varies but for many women, the pain is debilitating. When the pain is debilitating, these medications often provide great relief.
3. 60% of women who suffer migraines do so associated with the hormonal swing of their menstrual cycle.  This is also debilitating.  In smoothing out the hormonal fluctuations, these medications can be tremendously helpful  controlling the condition.
4. 10-15% of women suffer Endometriosis.  This is where the endometrium (uterine lining) grows in places other than the uterus.  It damages reproductive organs and scars sometimes to the point of causing infertility.  It can be excruciatingly painful.  For example, a young lady very close to me used to vomit every day, not every day of her period, EVERY DAY OF HER LIFE from the pain.  Have you ever experienced such pain on a daily basis?  Can you really be so cruel as to expect women to live in that kind of pain without relief when medication is readily available to treat it?  By the way, this same young woman, before hormone therapy, used to bleed rectally, from her breasts, from her nose and even once from the pores of her hands.  This bizarre bleeding is perhaps not always debilitating but it does make socializing difficult.  By the way, women with endometriosis take “birth control pills” so that they can conceive children in addition to relieving debilitating pain.
5. These medications treat polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), a hormone imbalance that causes irregular periods, ovarian cysts (which can be extremely painful), and infertility.  Women with PCOS also take “birth control pills” so that they might be able to conceive.
6. These medications dramatically reduce risks for some kinds of cancers – ones for which there are not yet good screening tests
7. Sometimes these medications are prescribed for severe hormone imbalance associated with pre-menstrual syndrome.

I try to live by a few mottos: a) Assume positive intent and b) seek first to understand.  By this I mean I try to assume that people generally do things with a good intention in mind.  And when something seems awry, before drawing conclusions, I try to understand by gathering the facts, talking to people directly involved, and consulting experts.  Why, in the case of hormone therapy, do hierarchy members and religious zealots instead a) assume negative intent and b) ignore facts and/or never bother trying to understand them?

Keep in mind, any medication is a tool and tools can be applied for positive or negative outcomes.  For example, a person can use a hammer to bludgeon someone but a person can also use it to build a home for a homeless person.  Don't condemn the tool outright.  After all, most women using birth control pills are doing it for controlling a medical condition - a positive thing even in the eyes of the clergy.  So, the default view should be with its most common usage...controlling medical conditions.  Instead the hierarchy dismisses the tool as "evil" due to associating the tool only with what it perceives are negative applications of the tool.  Should I await your lobbying for outlawing hammers, too?

In the interest of living by my motto, I assume that Pope Francis and Cardinal Sarah have good intentions and I have tried multiple times to engage in dialogue to understand why the hierarchy comes to such strange conclusions about women without speaking to them.  And so, any clergyman who would like to discuss this topic in sincerity, please contact me.  My daughter who is a doctor is happy to sit with us to discuss female reproductive health.  This is not a pawn topic in world politics as Francis suggests in Amoris Laetitia.  It is something that impacts women every day.  They suffer physical pain beyond some people's imagination and it is wrong to heap psychological pain upon that with fact-free religious edicts trumpeted from high atop Mt. Morality, a land primarily inhabited by single men.

Reflections on the Pope's visit to the U.S.

My last night in China, I stayed up well past bedtime to watch Pope Francis address the U.S. Congress.  I noted both what he said and what he didn’t say.  He explicitly called for a global end to the death penalty and arms sales.  He explicitly called for welcoming immigrants, tending the environment and caring for the poor.  He explicitly spoke of the perils of child abuse.  He never uttered the words, “abortion,” “birth control,” “Obamacare,” “Planned Parenthood,” or “gay marriage.” 

I had to settle for reading the transcript of his homily to U.S. bishops in D.C. in which he congratulated and thanked the bishops for their actions around the clergy sex abuse scandals without offering any encouragement to abuse survivors.  Yet, most abuse survivors and many lay people find the bishops’ individual and collective actions on this topic to span between cowardly and dastardly…not even close to the “courageous” description ascribed by Francis.

It seemed the connection between Francis’ child abuse comments to Congress and the lifelong wounds arising from clergy-inflicted child sexual abuse eluded Francis.  In declaring the bishops’ response “courageous” and speaking of the issue as though concluded while so many abuse survivors still constantly battle abuse ramifications, Francis displayed appalling insensitivity.  He evaded institutional responsibility to walk in healing restitution with survivors every day, every step of their lives.

While reading that homily I was also struck by Francis’ seeming assumption that the bishops and clergy are penultimate experts on and purveyors of gospel messages – and that they just tirelessly need to be gentle until the (clueless, sad, miserable) sheep finally catch on to their wonderful messages.  This, would bring about healing in the church, he seemed to say.  That and the clergy abuse comments made me wonder about Francis’ institutional self-awareness. 

Lots of laypeople have a stronger understanding of gospel messages than the bishops, and better and more joyfully imitate Jesus than them.  Many very faith-filled people cannot bring themselves to follow the bishops because they find the bishops worshipping a god too weak to call women to priesthood, too weak to allow re-examination of human sexuality teachings based upon millennia-old flawed science, too weak to require admission and correction of the church’s collective institutional sins, and in general too weak to allow rethinking anything about which the hierarchy have declared themselves to be “absolutely correct.”  Actually, it seems sometimes they mistake themselves for God and worship themselves and their utterances – and this many people mightily and rightly reject.  Consequently, many people do not follow the bishops – not because these people reject the gospel - but because they think the bishops do.  

A very powerful example rests in this week's gospel reading (Mark 9:38-40), which denudes the bishops' Canon Law demonizing women priests.  "John said to him, 'Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name, and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us.' Jesus replied, 'Do not prevent him. There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me. For whoever is not against us is for us.'"  That gospel passage makes it impossible to denounce people of either gender who work to spread God's love.  If the bishops do, they merely repeat the apostles' mistakes from centuries ago.

The combination of my international travel during Francis’ U.S. visit, just generally not allowing the pope to occupy idol status in my life, and his remarks starting to sound highly repetitious account for me oscillating between watching or listening live and relying upon catching clips or reading transcripts of his remarks and homilies.  Therefore, I know I’ve not heard every word he’s said.

However, what I did read was him telling the bishops to dialogue and not fear dialogue.  He repeated this theme when speaking to Congress.  I also heard him say at Independence Hall, “…it is imperative that the followers of the various religions join their voices in calling for peace, tolerance and respect for the dignity and rights of others.”  

Therefore, Francis, following your instructions I must join the many voices – those of the majority of Catholics, many of whom could only reconcile their consciences by leaving the flock – calling for the end to Catholic church injustices. 

In the name of ending church injustices against clergy abuse survivors, I call for removal of every bishop who harbored abusive priests.  I call for Canon Law to classify such bishops as committing a grave delict.  I call for your regular dialogue with abuse survivors - towards curing insensitivity.  I insist monies hidden to avoid paying restitution be recovered and distributed to survivors to aid in their healing process.

In the name of ending church injustices against women, I call for the de-classification of women’s ordination as a grave delict.  I insist you actively dialogue on women’s ordination, birth control, and all church human sexuality teachings that are based upon false science.  I call for cessation of the church grooming girls to fill gender stereotyped roles.   

Also, in the name of ending injustices against women caused by extreme religious fundamentalism, I call for the U.S. bishops to stop blocking female Catholic institution employees’ access to menstrual cycle regulating medications.  These tools which have helped countless women conceive, which have helped countless women avoid chronic excruciating pain, which have prevented countless hysterectomies; which have saved countless women’s lives must not be demonized nor should those who use them.

Still in the name of ending injustices against women, I insist that the U.S. bishops stop this bullying tactic towards controlling women’s bodies – the one braying this nonsensical “religious liberty” slogan.  The bishops must stop portraying themselves as persecuted American Christians - because they just aren’t.  One-third of this country’s federal legislators are Catholic; the Secretary of State is Catholic; multiple Speakers of the House have been Catholic; the vice-president is Catholic; two-thirds of the Supreme Court is Catholic, and the worldwide leader of the Catholic Church addressed the U.S. Congress!  Furthermore, the worldwide Catholic leader is enjoying celebrity status, meeting with the President, having parades thrown in his honor, costing taxpayers millions of dollars to host, and receiving almost non-stop and overwhelmingly positive press coverage!  What does “religious tolerance” look like if not this?  Must the bishops have full tyrannical control before they stop claiming “religious persecution?”

Well, I again find myself staying up past my bedtime but this time partially inspired by the pope’s visit and partially attributable to jetlag.  I hope Pope Francis has enjoyed visiting my country – very free from any persecution.  I thank him for consistently repeating messages advocating for the environment, peace, immigrants and the poor.  And, I hope he recovers faster from his jetlag than I am from mine.

However, I anxiously await him following his own advice to end religion-based injustices, especially against clergy abuse survivors and women.  He can begin by having regular dialogues with abuse survivors and women.  He can reinstate people excommunicated for supporting women’s ordination and redistribute hidden funds to abuse survivors.  He can re-establish the ordination of women as deacons and discuss ordaining women priests.  He can drop the absolute ban on birth control.  He can announce a concerted effort re-working Catholic teachings on human sexuality that rest upon foundations of false science.  Finally, he can remove bishops who harbored abusive clergy and in their places appoint bishops who show true courage engaging in sincere, meaningful dialogue versus sanctioning those with whom they disagree. 

The Church’s glaring, painful wounds, which in turn contribute to global ills, will not heal without fostering dialogue and recognizing rights within the organization.  Loving people requires knowing them.  Knowing them requires talking to them.  Knowing and loving them precludes denying them rights. None of these can occur from a rigid hierarchical perch but can only emerge from a position of humility and equality. 

The role of Catholics in the U.S.'s recent financial brinksmanship

It is unusual for me to have two articles back-to-back in the same day but I’m getting ready to travel for several weeks in the U.S., Asia and Europe including my upcoming visit to the Vatican.  I am unsure when I will have time to write again until perhaps the end of November though I might have the privilege to meet some readers in person at the Call to Action conference November 1-3.  Regardless of the rigors of my upcoming travel schedule, there is another topic of great importance I think worthy of pondering.

This past week, the United States Congress put much of the world through unwarranted angst about my country’s willingness (not ability) to pay its financial obligations.  Globally, markets and businesses sat in great anxiety anticipating whether the U.S. legislature would “do the right thing” so that it could be a good global citizen repaying its debts.  Economists predicted the U.S. defaulting upon its financial obligations would make the 2008 bank crisis pale in comparison to the global economic impact it would wrought.  This would have been felt especially by people already on society's financial margins but also likely would have thrown many more people into that category by manufacturing more unemployment and poverty.

How did U.S. Catholics play in all this?

The U.S. Senate has 100 members and 28 of them are Catholic.  429 members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted on the debt ceiling this past week and of them, 135 or 31% are Catholic.  I commend the 24 Catholic U.S. Senators and 101 Catholic U.S. Representatives who supported the moral decision of paying this country’s financial obligations.  They include my own Representative, Mr. David Camp of Michigan.

I am sorry to report that there were any Catholics who voted that the U.S. renege on its financial commitments to the world and likely manufacture additional global unemployment, economic instability and poverty.  However, there were 4 such Catholic Senators and 34 such Catholic Representatives.  They are:

U.S. Senators voting for the U.S. NOT to honor its financial obligations:

James Risch of Idaho

Marco Rubio of Florida

Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania

David Vitter of Louisianna

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives voting for the U.S. NOT to honor its financial obligations:

Kerry Bentivolio of Michigan

Kevin Brady of Texas

Steve Chabot of Ohio

Chris Collins of New York

Ron DeSantis of Florida

Sean Duffy of Wisconsin

Renee Ellmers of North Carolina

Chuck Fleischmann of Tennessee

Virginia Foxx of North Carolina

Phil Gingrey of Georgia

Paul Gosar of Arizona

Andy Harris of Maryland

Tim Huelskamp of Kansas

Walter Jones of North Carolina

Steve King of Iowa

Bob Latta of Ohio

Blaine Luetkemeyer of Missouri

Thomas Marino of Pennsylvannia

Michael McCaul of Texas

Mick Mulvaney of South Carolina

Steven Palazzo of Mississippi

Trey Radel of Florida

Tom Reed of New York

Jim Renacci of Ohio

Todd Rokita of Indiana

Tom Rooney of Florida

Keith Rothfus of Pennsylvania

Ed Royce of California

Paul Ryan of Wisconsin

Steve Scalise of Louisianna

David Schweikert of Arizona

Ann Wagner of Missouri

Brad Wenstrup of Ohio

Ted Yoho of Florida

You might ask what could have possibly motivated any Catholic to vote to throw the entire world into severe financial turmoil.  The answer might lie in a letter sent from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) to members of Congress.  In this letter, the bishops position as a non-negotiable matter in the debt-ceiling discussions their desire that Catholics in the healthcare profession be able to impose their religious beliefs upon others, allowing people like doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and hospital workers to deny things of patients such as filling a prescription for Sprintec – a medication which solves many female reproductive health issues but which also is a contraceptive. 

Specifically in the letter dated September 26, 2013 Cardinal Sean O’Malley and Archbishop William Lori wrote on behalf of the entire U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops the following statement, “We have already urged you to enact the Health Care Conscience Rights Act (H.R. 940/S. 1204). As Congress considers a Continuing Resolution and debt ceiling bill in the days to come, we reaffirm the vital importance of incorporating the policy of this bill into such “must-pass” legislation.”

You see, my dear friends around the world, the U.S. Catholic bishops, led by a U.S. Cardinal hand-selected by Pope Francis to be in his special gang of eight advisors, wanted the entire world to suffer additional poverty and unrest unless they could have their way continuing their crusade against women, women’s rights and women’s health.  Quite simply the bishops said the U.S. should not honor its financial commitments to the world unless Congress makes it more difficult for women to obtain certain medical services and medications.

What is the proper response to the bishops and members of the U.S. Congress who were willing to do this?  I urge you, no matter where in the world you live, to communicate your opinions on the morality of their stance and decisions to these politicians – both the ordained and elected ones.  It might be worth expressing to Pope Francis any concerns you have about his judgment in selecting as a top advisor Cardinal Sean O’Malley – a ringleader in trying to bring about global financial devastation unless he got his way.

As a side note, Catholic hospitals in the U.S. are a growing force as they acquire formerly secular hospitals.  They operate by a set of USCCB directives which already deny numerous types of care based on claiming a moral high ground.  What is the proper response to this trend also?