HHS mandate redefines religion, say Christian legal experts
Tags
Related Posts
About the author
While much of the objection to the Supreme Court’s ruling to uphold Obamacare on Thursday included talk about the loss of individual liberty, Christian and conservative legal groups point out that religious freedom is still in jeopardy as well.
The court’s ruling did not address the religious liberty issue regarding the constitutionality of the “HHS mandate,” that requires religious employers to pay for contraception, abortifacients and sterilization despite holding religious objections.
“The HHS mandate is the first exception to our national commitment to protect religious conscience in the abortion context – a tradition that has been bipartisan for forty years,” explained Kim Colby, senior counsel for the Christian Legal Society’s Center for Law and Religious Freedom.
By adopting, in the HHS mandate, an extremely narrow definition of “religious employer,” the Obama administration has unilaterally and unacceptably redefined religion, the Christian Legal Society argued Thursday.
“In the administration’s view, religious institutions are only protected if they are entirely inwardly focused. Religious institutions that provide assistance to all persons, regardless of religion or creed, are penalized,” the legal group continued. “Churches and charities that ease government’s burden by providing food, shelter, education, and health care for society’s most vulnerable lose their conscience rights because they are too inclusive.”
Colby insisted, “It is wrong for the government to penalize religious groups because they help persons regardless of their religious traditions.” [More]
SOURCE
Christian Post
Leave a Comment
Photo Archive
-
May 21, 2013 1:32
Church Whistle-Blowers Join Forces on Abuse
-
May 20, 2013 5:17
Maine Catholic church closing its doors
-
May 20, 2013 5:14
Muslim leaders in US facing challenges inside and outside the faith
-
May 17, 2013 5:43
Archbishop clarifies remarks about Cuomo
-
May 17, 2013 5:40
Fr. Gary Meier goes public with clergy experience
-
May 17, 2013 5:37
Predator priests paid to pray for unsuspecting families
-
May 16, 2013 1:56
Cleanup of Bridgeport, Conn., diocese begins in earnest
-
May 16, 2013 1:38
Archbishop Presses Cuomo Over Abortion
-
May 16, 2013 1:26
Deal reached in Catholic lawsuit
-
May 16, 2013 1:13
N.Y. matriarch moves closer to sainthood
23 Comments
There is one step you can take right now to help that cause: spread the word! Please ask five of your friends to join the movement by texting the word FREEDOM (or LIBERTAD for Spanish) to 377377. And please share this message on Facebook and Twitter
If the church doesnt’ want interference with the way they run their hospitals, they should not take govenment money
Tony — this is (for at least the third time now) a misstatement of the facts. The fact is that ANY employer (who has enough employees) will be required to fund contraception and sterilization even if they take NO federal money. Again, please read this and understand this and do your own research if you don’t believe me before misstating the facts again and again.
Jim, you maybe correct, but what happens if an employer gets an employee who has a Hevesy menstral cycle and is given a prescription for a med that is usually used as contaceptuon
Tony — although I don’t know for sure, it is likely that a Catholic employer would willing pay for medication in this circumstance. Regardless, violation of the first amendment right to the free practice of religion is much more important than any specific circumstance such as this.
I just heard a discussion of this, Tony, on Relevant Radio. Medication prescribed to help alleviate a medical condition (e.g., heavy menstral cycle) is acceptable; whereas the same medication prescribed for birth control isn’t.
Ok as long as its covered
Tony-this is not a misstatement of facts. Contraception, sterilization, and abortion are legal choices to be made by individuals. Churches are trying to promote their doctrines and have government money. You can’t have it both ways.
Christian religionists are fast losing their credibility in the marketplace by in effect holding non-Christians and non-believers to the same standards as all other Christians, except for themselves.
The HHS mandate may not be the most perfect solution, but it sure is preferable to letting Catholic Christians run the show!
Florian — that is a 180 on the truth. The Catholic Church IN NO WAY is “holding non-Christians and non-believers to the same standards as all other Christians” — the Catholic Church is NOT insisting that all employers (Catholic or otherwise) not be required to fund contraception and sterilization. All the Church is doing is asking that it not be compelled to violate its conscience and fund contraception and sterilization. Your posts potentially mislead others; and they do not reflect positively on you, as they reveal either your ignorance or your purposeful misstatement of the facts.
Florian is familiar with your arguments, as well as Catholic church employment practices which seriously infringe on the consciences and the privacy of non-Catholic employees by insisting that they follow Catholic teaching on sex and marriage, etc. And many Catholic employers follow the lead of the Catholic church. Even with six Catholics on SCOTUS, we’re still some distance from a Cathocracy, but Florian is not the only one to note the trend.
Florian — absolutely ridiculous what you say. You may be “familiar with (my) arguments”, but they are not arguments at all — they are facts. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH REQUIRES NO ONE TO FOLLOW THEIR DOCTRINE.
If they deny coverage of artificial birth control to a non-Catholic employee, that does not infringe that person’s right
– they can purchase birth control out of their own money
(a novel concept to liberals –
– actually working yourself to get what you want,
instead of asking another to buy it for you).
All the Catholic employer says is that we will not pay for your birth control;
they do not say you cannot get birth control if you purchase them yourself.
With regard to insistence that employees follow Catholic teachings on other matters, like being a lesbian teaching in a Catholic school:
the Church is a private organization, and they can determine who it is they want to work for them. This is identical to any other employer: if you can’t support the mission of the employer, you cannot work for that employer. With regard to six Catholics on SCOTUS: what a joke. Ruth Bader Ginsburg (if she is one of the six nominal Catholics to whom you are referring) might as well be an atheist; and the other leftist judges are about as Catholic as John Kerry, Joe Biden, Kathleen Sebelius, Nancy Pelosi, or Ted Kennedy: they are Catholic in name only. They make a mockery of the Catholic Church, and ALL OF THEM SHOULD BE EXCOMMUNICATED. After their excommunication, you may have one or two Catholics on SCOTUS.
My conscience is regularly violated in being forced to pay taxes for government programs that I oppose (e.g., foreign wars fought only for power and economic reasons; a Medicaid system that is corrupt, wasteful and bankrupting the Country; political pork projects; local government programs that pay thugs to turn in their guns, to name a few).
Florian — that is a 180 on the truth. The Catholic Church IN NO WAY is “holding non-Christians and non-believers to the same standards as all other Christians” — the Catholic Church is NOT insisting that all employers (Catholic or otherwise) not be required to fund cxntracxption and sterilization. All the Church is doing is asking that it not be compelled to violate its conscience and fund cxntracxption and sterilization. Your posts potentially mislead others; and they do not reflect positively on you, as they reveal either your ignorance or your purposeful misstatement of the facts.