“Fisking” is a term some people won’t be all that aware of. It’s a bloggers’ term that basically means to conduct a point-by-point rebuttal of what someone else has said or written. It’s named after British journalist and columnist Robert Fisk.
Catholic bishops probably aren’t the first people one would think of as proponents of the method, and I suppose it was likely the staff of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops that did this job, but they have fisked comments from the Obama White House and its views on the contraceptive mandate in its health care legislation. The USCCB pulls no punches in the preamble to their rebuttal (emphasis mine).
The Obama administration, to justify its widely criticized mandate for contraception and sterilization coverage in private health plans, has posted a set of false and misleading claims on the White House blog (“Health Reform, Preventive Services, and Religious Institutions,” February 1).
That’s pretty clear, isn’t it 
This issue is becoming a major one in the United States, as I’ve already blogged about in recent days. The Republican presidential hopefuls have made it a big issue as they fight for the right to take on President Obama in November — a man they say is forcing Catholic employers and institutions their violate their religious conscience.
Head along to the bishops’ website to read the full response, but I include a couple of gems here.
Claim: “Contraception is used by most women: According to a study by the Guttmacher Institute, most women, including 98 percent of Catholic women, have used contraception.”
Response: This is irrelevant, and it is presented in a misleading way. If a survey found that 98% of people had lied, cheated on their taxes, or had sex outside of marriage, would the government claim it can force everyone to do so?
[...]
Claim: “Contraception coverage reduces costs: While the monthly cost of contraception for women ranges from $30 to $50, insurers and experts agree that savings more than offset the cost.The National Business Group on Health estimated that it would cost employers 15 to 17 percent more not to provide contraceptive coverage than to provide such coverage, after accounting for both the direct medical costs of potentially unintended and unhealthy pregnancy and indirect costs such as employee absence and reduced productivity.”
Response: The government is violating our religious freedom to save money?If the claim is true it is hard to say there is a need for a mandate: Secular insurers and employers who don’t object will want to purchase the coverage to save money, and those who object can leave it alone.
Have a read. It’s a good synopsis of the reasons the Catholic bishops are pretty grumpy at the moment.
