If a single woman has casual sex just for fun, has she done something bad?

When I first heard the announcement from the Obama administration that the Catholic Church would be required to offer contraceptive coverage through its employee health care insurance, I thought it was a political mistake.  Although I supported the policy, there are important questions about government imposing obligations on a Church that were incompatible with Church beliefs.

In response to heavy criticism, even from liberal Catholics who ignore the Church’s position on birth control but don’t like the government dictating to the Church, Obama backtracked and compromised, imposing the burden on the insurance companies, not the Church.

Obama chief of staff Jack Lew speaking on Meet the Press Feb. 12 stated that “What the President announced on Friday (the compromise) was what was envisioned all along.”

Obama deliberately overreached, knowing perfectly well that he was going to retreat under fire.  He thus demonstrated a sensitivity to criticism and a willingness to compromise – something a Republican will not do.  He got the liberal Catholics back.  Example - Sister Carol Keehan head of the Catholic Health Organization said the compromise "has responded to the issues we identified that needed to be fixed."  He didn’t get the Bishops, but he wasn’t going to get them in the first place.

Without spending a dime or raising hot button issues like abortion, Obama has energized single women (a critical Democratic constituency) by dumping a turd into the Republican primary punch bowl.

From Rep. Darrell Issa’s (R – Calif) all male House panel discussion on contraception, to Rick Santorum’s opposition to birth control, to Foster Friess’ “hold a Bayer Aspirin between your knees” contraception, to Rush Limbaugh’s fevered blathering, the Republicans have dug themselves deeper into social issues and lost the initiative on the economy.

Conservative Christians (an important Republican primary vote) believe that sex is bad. Like the Taliban, they believe that women’s behaviour should be constrained by the scriptures as interpreted by the (all male) clergy.  In their minds, social problems (unwed, uneducated women condemned to poverty by avoidable pregnancy, children having children, increased abortions) that go with unwanted pregnancy can only be addressed by sexual abstinence.  They disapprove of improved sex education in the schools and broader availability of contraception (wretched and immoral intrusion by the government).

As the Republicans pander to that part of their base, an issue that started as religious freedom, then morphed into birth control and women’s health, has become the “War on Women”.

By the election, the question will have morphed again into “If a single woman has casual sex just for fun, has she done something bad?”  The Republican base will scream “Yes” and the Democrats will take the women’s vote by 20%.  That’s enough to win back the House.

This was not botched initiative followed by a forced retreat.  This was a brilliant, Machiavellian political manipulation.