According to the National Organization for Women, the Little Sisters of the Poor are one of the “Dirty 100” — plaintiffs who have filed for an exception to Obamacare’s contraception mandate [UPDATE: More about the “Dirty 100” here]. Watch the short amateur video above, if you can stomach it, showing these sleazy Christianists at work. Read this excerpt from the Little Sisters’ website, explaining the kind of work these filthy, filthy Catholic nuns do:

The Little Sisters of the Poor are an international congregation of Roman Catholic women religious founded in 1839 by Saint Jeanne Jugan. Together with a diverse network of collaborators, we serve the elderly poor in over 30 countries around the world.

Continuing the work of Saint Jeanne Jugan, our MISSION is to offer the neediest elderly of every race and religion a home where they will be welcomed as Christ, cared for as family and accompanied with dignity until God calls them to himself.

Our VISION is to contribute to the Culture of Life by nurturing communities where each person is valued, the solidarity of the human family and the wisdom of age are celebrated, and the compassionate love of Christ is shared with all.

Here is a bit about the life and work of St. Jeanne Jugan, who was plainly the second coming of Torquemada:

In the winter of 1839, Jugan encountered Anne Chauvin, an elderly woman who was blind, partially paralyzed, and had no one to care for her. Jugan carried her home to her apartment and took her in from that day forward, letting the woman have her bed while she slept in the attic. She soon took in two more old women in need of help, and by 1841 she had rented a room to provide housing for a dozen elderly people. The following year, she acquired an unused convent building that could house 40 of them. From this act of charity, with the approval of her colleagues, Jeanne then focused her attention upon the mission of assisting abandoned elderly women, and from this beginning arose a religious congregation called The Little Sisters of the Poor. Jugan wrote a simple Rule of Life for this new community of women, and they went door-to-door daily requesting food, clothing and money for the women in their care. This became Jugan’s life work, and she performed this mission for the next four decades.

During the 1840s, many other young women joined Jugan in her mission of service to the elderly poor. By begging in the streets, the foundress was able to establish four more homes for their beneficiaries by the end of the decade.

These are the kind of people that NOW calls “dirty.” It tells you something about contemporary American liberalism — as opposed to the kind of liberalism that was normative in this country prior to 1968 — that its followers care more about sexual freedom than caring for the elderly poor, and respecting the religious liberty of women (!) who have given their entire lives to that task.

If Dorothy Day were alive today, I suppose NOW would denounce her as dirty too.

Ross Douthat writes today about another of the Dirty 100, a business that’s one of the companies “that still have a sense of business as a moral calling, which can be held up as examples to shame the bottom-liners.” More Douthat:

One such company was hailed last year by the left-wing policy website Demos “for thumbing its nose at the conventional wisdom that success in the retail industry” requires paying “bargain-basement wages.” A retail chain with nearly 600 stores and 13,000 workers, this business sets its lowest full-time wage at $15 an hour, and raised wages steadily through the stagnant postrecession years. (Its do-gooder policies also include donating 10 percent of its profits to charity and giving all employees Sunday off.) And the chain is thriving commercially — offering, as Demos put it, a clear example of how “doing good for workers can also mean doing good for business.”

He’s talking about Hobby Lobby. Douthat points out that if liberals refuse to live with pluralism, and give religious people room to exist in the public square, the culture war is going to grind on and on and on:

If liberals so desire, this division could lead to constant conflict, in which just about every project conservative believers undertake is gradually threatened with regulation enforcing liberal norms. The health coverage offered by religious employers; the activity of religious groups on college campuses; the treatments offered by religious hospitals; the subject matter taught in religious schools … the battlegrounds are legion.

Read his entire column.

I wish somebody would ask President Obama if he shares NOW’s opinion of the “dirty” Little Sisters of the Poor. I wish somebody would ask President Obama if he shares NOW’s opinion that all the Catholic dioceses that have filed for exemptions are “dirty”?

Is this really where liberalism wants to go? Seriously? Does advancing the Sexual Revolution require crushing those nuns, and others who share their convictions?

 UPDATE: For our president, yes it does. It is useful to have this clarity: