Well, he's done it again. Mike Clancy at the Arizona Republic has made a mockery of his profession, not to mention the truth, with another lame-ass article about the Catholic Church (specifically, the Church's reaction to the HHS mandate). Let's explore some of his more egregious falsehoods, shall we?
1. Why is Clancy unable to take five seconds to look up the definition of "abortion"?
...Olmsted ousted the hospital [St. Joseph's] from the Catholic family after a dispute about a medical procedure that Olmsted considered an abortion.
St. Joseph itself admitted that they "terminated an 11-week pregnancy". [Note the source of that link.] Abortion is defined as the termination of a pregnancy. Olmsted didn't "deem" it an abortion, St. Joe's itself and the DICTIONARY did! Is Clancy really that ignorant, or is he purposefully lying? I'm guessing the latter.
2. Where does the Catholic Church keep its time machine?
From the article:
The church has taught that birth control is 'intrinsically wrong' since 1968, around the time the pill came into widespread use.
See, according to Clancy, the Church first condemned contraception in 1968, and then Pope Paul VI travelled back in time, masqueraded as Pius XI, and wrote the encyclical Casti Connubii in 1930 that also reiterated the Church's teachings against contraception. And then, presumably, he went back in time again to 195 A.D. to write about it. Amazing, really, that the Church has the ability to time-travel that only Mike Clancy knows about.
3. Is Clancy aware of this fabulous new invention called "the Internet"? I wonder due to the lies from Clancy that are in these two paragraphs:
"According to Catholic News Service, bishops in nine of the nation's 195 dioceses are preparing letters to be read at Masses on Sunday encouraging churchgoers to lobby against the measure. Several others, including Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York and retired Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles, have written or spoken against the mandate.
Of the group that has gone public so far, Olmsted appears to be the only one who has said specifically that Catholics should defy the law, according to the Catholic news agency."
Thanks to the Internet, I found, rather quickly, that many more than nine bishops have written or spoken about this issue. (I suppose in Clancy's little world of pseudo-journalistic integrity, one questionable CNA article - with no URL to said article provided - suffices as adequate fact-checking.)
At last count? TWENTY-THREE. Obviously Mike Clancy is as terrible at math as he is with telling the truth, because last time I checked, 23 > 9.
Also from the link above, and contrary to Clancy's claim, Olmsted is NOT the only bishop "advocating civil disobedience":
"Archbishop Timothy Broglio of the Archdiocese for the Military Services in the United States said, "We cannot - we will not - comply with this unjust law". (Note: The letter here is based on a form letter sent out by the USCCB, so similar letters will be seen at other dioceses. It is rather strongly worded and the bishops sending it out are basically saying, "it speaks for me." In some dioceses I'm reading that the bishop wanted it stuffed into bulletins or shared at Masses. Those using variations of this form letter include Archbishop Schnurr of Cincinatti, and Bishop McFadden of Harrisburg, and Bishop Sample of Marquette and probably many more.)"
4. Here's clear evidence that Clancy hasn't bothered to so much as do the basic, bare-bones research on Catholicism.
The Roman Catholic Church is the only significant denomination opposed to contraception.
Hey, Mike! Ever hear of the Eastern Catholic Church? They're also opposed to contraception. How about the Orthodox Churches? They allow condoms in special circumstances but are generally opposed to abortifacient contraception and sterilization. Many Protestant denominations oppose abortifacient contraception as well.
But you know what? It doesn't matter, because this is an issue about religious liberty, not contraception. As Kaitlin at More Like Mary, More Like me wrote yesterday,
[H]ow on earth can the government force a religious organization to pay for something that they believe will send its employees to hell?
I'm outraged. And you should be too. Even if you think contraception is the best thing since sliced bread. Even if you cannot begin to understand the reasons for the Church's teachings.
Can't you show me and my faith a little respect? Can't you give us the freedom to live and worship as we wish? Can't you see that employees of Catholic organizations have the option to work someplace else if they want birth control paid for? No one is forcing them to stay.
It doesn't matter if you don't understand. It doesn't matter if you don't agree. It doesn't matter if you think we're crazy/total whackos/going to hell/hypocritical zealots. What matters is that the government is infringing on our religious liberty in a big, big way.
What makes you think your beliefs aren't next?
If the Republic's sports editor wrote that the Texas Rangers won the 2010 World Series, or that Derek Jeter played for the Red Sox, he'd be fired in a matter of days. But Clancy can repeatedly lie about his subject matter and get away with it. It must be nice for him to be so embarrassingly inept at his profession but still have that kind of job security. I bet the only way he'd get fired is if he started reporting the truth.