Obama gives Catholics one more year to change a fundamental belief

The audacity of a ruling of this type could only come from the Obama administration. 

The Catholic Church bans any artificial birth control.  Whether you agree with that or not, it is a fundamental belief of the Catholic religion.

The Obama administration has decided that all “qualified” insurance plans under Obamacare must include “free” artificial birth control, i.e., no deductibles and no copay, as of August, 2012.  Of course it isn’t “free”, you and your employer will be paying for this in the form of higher insurance premiums.  And, whether you like it or not, beginning this August, all insurance policies (group or individual) must provide free contraceptives.

An exemption has been given to the Catholic Church itself, but not to, for example, group insurance plans of Catholic run schools, Catholic run charities, or Catholic run hospitals.

Last Friday,

[o]fficials at the Department of Health and Human Services said that employers who don’t qualify for the [church] exemption but still have religious objections to the requirement will be allowed to delay implementing the rule until August 2013 to give them more time to adapt their policies. [emphasis supplied]

More time to “adapt their policies”?

Does anyone seriously believe that Catholic University, for example, will, by August 2013, decide that, regardless of the Catholic Church’s teachings, contraceptives are perfectly ok and will be covered for “free” under their group medical insurance policy?

The interesting thing here is that this ruling from the HHS comes less than two weeks after a unanimous opinion of the United States Supreme Court found that the federal government cannot tell a religious organization that it must do something that conflicts with that organization’s religious beliefs.

Doesn’t Obamacare already have enough Constitutional issues? 

Why this administration now wants to throw the 1st Amendment into the mix may forever remain a mystery.

 

Posted in , ,

SoundOffSister

The Sound Off Sister was an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, and special trial attorney for the Department of Justice, Criminal Division; a partner in the Florida law firm of Shutts & Bowen, and an adjunct professor at the University of Miami, School of Law. The Sound Off Sister offers frequent commentary concerning legislation making its way through Congress, including the health reform legislation passed in early 2010.

37 Comments

  1. Dimsdale on January 22, 2012 at 6:39 pm

    Yet another unilateral, unconstitutional decision by the ?bama administration?? Knock me over with a feather!
    ?
    Inching ever more towards a banana republic…



  2. Shock and Awe on January 22, 2012 at 7:29 pm

    Their is no appropriate words to describe the evil of this genocidal dictator.? We must end the murder of the unborn,? Hitler could only dream to do what the judges of Roe vs Wade did.? Kick him out!
    ?



  3. johnboy111 on January 22, 2012 at 9:59 pm

    vote newt?? or milktoast mitt??who can stand up and lead???



    • Lynn on January 23, 2012 at 8:08 am

      @ Johnboy111, I have to remain optimistic, it is part of MY Constitution.? Remember that only Congress should make the laws ( I know this has been sidestepped by you know who) but we do have leaders in Congress who stand up and lead every day. We just need to put more responsible leaders in the Senate. A new administration will be able to clean out HHS and hopefully cut the numbers in the dept. The President shouldn’t micromanage, as in the formerly worst President of the US, Jimmy Carter.



  4. ricbee on January 22, 2012 at 10:52 pm

    I’ve come to see that Catholics do a very lot for their communities. Many shelters & free kitchens here in Hartford are staffed & paid for by Catholic Charities. If they are forced out of those services many will suffer.



  5. Plainvillian on January 22, 2012 at 11:14 pm

    Can we hope that those Catholics who voted for Obama in 2008? will remember their faith in 2012?



  6. gillie28 on January 23, 2012 at 3:25 am

    So, let’s get this straight:? “Church” cannot interfere with anything remotely considered “Government” – God forbid that a creche be put on a town green, or the word “God” uttered in school, apart from usage as a cuss word;?but “Government” can dictate to “Church” the implementation of their?doctrines.?



  7. crystal4 on January 23, 2012 at 7:15 am

    Whaaat? The title of this article floored me.
    Who’s asking ANYONE to change ANY fundamental belief? If you follow the Catholic Church’s tenet of birth control being sinful, who’s making you buy it? (98% of Catholic’s use birth control).
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/14/us-most-catholic-women-us-use-birth-cont-idUSTRE73D4SZ20110414
    I’m thinking of millions that work for Catholic hospitals, schools. universities…if they don’t have the same coverage as others, isn’t that a violation of their religious freedom? (I thought everyone here was always screaming “the consitutioooon!!!.).
    ?
    ?
    ?



    • SeeingRed on January 23, 2012 at 8:42 am

      The intent of the edict is obvious.? A miopic view of what the Administration is attempting and then?citing the ‘almost correct?98% of the time’ Reuters doesn’t further your argument.? Yes, I’m Catholic.? No, I don’t beleive that anyone on a Catholic health plan would be at a disadvantage.?



    • NH-Jim on January 23, 2012 at 1:35 pm

      “Adapt their policies”, is that not an edict?? This is just another form of incremental government control by taking small bites out of the US Constitution.? In this case, the separation of church and state is void.
      ?
      It does not matter how many Catholics use contraceptives or not, just as no one is to use the Lord’s name in vain but many still curse using God’s name.? Because humans are not perfect, the church has its rules and teaches its congregation to strive to be the most perfect that we can and, if we fail, we have forgiveness to ask for.
      ?
      The Reuters article is based on a survey by the National Survey on Family Growth under the DHHS.? It surveyed 13, 495 persons (7,356 women with only a 76% response rate).? 300,000,000+ population in USA: take it with a grain of salt, I say.



  8. Tim-in-Alabama on January 23, 2012 at 7:49 am

    The Fascists in the Democrat Party never were really going to allow anyone to opt out of their healthcare coup, and it’s Stalinist rules. I see their strategy for defending their religious bigotry is to make snotty comments about Catholics.



  9. JBS on January 23, 2012 at 11:30 am

    The ?bama Regime demonstrates through word and deed the difference between governing and ruling a country. Without a shred of doubt, ?bama believes that he can bring this country in line with his vision of social harmony simply by ordering it so. His rule by executive order, his flaunting of the Constitution, and his elitist mentality identify him as the most arrogant and dangerous president ever. His blatant disregard for the law (Fast and Furious, et al.) and now his spurning of the SCOTUS decision defining further the separation of church and state reveal him as ruling above the law and lacking all regard for individual rights and religious beliefs.
    ?bama currently has four of the nine SCOTUS justices sympathetic to the aims of his Regime. Unless he is turned out of office this November, he will undoubtedly have the opportunity to seat one or more justices. With a majority in the Supreme court, he will reshape established law to an unprecedented degree. Religious freedom will only be one of the causalities. Among other initiatives against the Constitution, ?bama and those aligned with his vision of the future, will seek to rescind the Second Amendment. (The rats!)
    Why does ?bama’s DHHS…



  10. Dimsdale on January 23, 2012 at 11:36 am

    So, they issue waivers for participation in ?bamacare for friends, but can’t exempt a church on constitutional ground of the separation of church and state, something they almost reflexively pull out when the situation is reversed?



    • crystal4 on January 23, 2012 at 1:26 pm

      Freedom of religion=don’t believe in contraception, don’t use it. (Just don’t impose your beliefs on me, Dimsdale.)
      Ya just don’t get it, tho, more contraception=less abortions



    • gillie28 on January 23, 2012 at 3:48 pm

      It’s not a question of whether or not one agrees with contraception (I think it’s necessary, personally but that’s not the issue).? It’s?a question of the government?imposing its will on ?a church school, hospital?or charity.? People aren’t forced to work for Catholic schools, hospitals, charities, etc?and have to be aware of the principles they espouse.? It they don’t agree, they can work elsewhere.????Don’t think it’s Dims who “just doesn’t get it.”



    • Dimsdale on January 23, 2012 at 9:49 pm

      What she said!



  11. Lynn on January 23, 2012 at 12:32 pm

    First Amendment reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” Who would have thought the HHS would usurp the authority of Congress, only a dimwit Democrat (with a hat tip to Tim in Alabama)



  12. crystal4 on January 23, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    Gillie, I get it. Catholic hospitals employ MD”s who prescribe birth control and those prescriptions can be filled in those Catholic hospital pharmacies…hmmm…is it a question of profit here or religious beliefs?



  13. sammy22 on January 23, 2012 at 6:48 pm

    I still believe that the title of the post is over the top! It’s baiting.



    • Dimsdale on January 24, 2012 at 10:21 am

      Perhaps the word “tenet” would have been more appropriate.? In any event, the act by Sebelius is in defiance of the Constitution.? Again.



  14. Lynn on January 23, 2012 at 6:57 pm

    Pretty sure Catholic doctors or hospitals will NOT prescribe artificial birth control. They may or may not suggest rhythm method.? IMHO they should not have to give up their beliefs for anyone especially this administration. As you can see, profit is NOT part of the equation. Women are free to go to other hospitals if they want artificial contraception.



    • crystal4 on January 24, 2012 at 5:49 am

      Sorry, Lynn, they do..do you think the physicians check with the bishops before writing a prescription to see if it’s OK? They also administer Plan B to rape victims (in CT).



    • Lynn on January 24, 2012 at 7:39 am

      I don’t care what some do. Doctors of strong Catholic faith and Hospitals where those doctors work do not believe in artificial contraception and will not (of their own free will ) prescribe them. If HHS decides to tie them down and put them in cuffs they may bow to the pressure.? It was a terrible decision in CT, but then again, I do not expect our illustrious General Assembly or Courts to follow the Constitution.? I am not Catholic but admire those who have such strong faith, as I do anyone with strong faith of any religion.



  15. crystal4 on January 24, 2012 at 7:49 am

    I was just correcting your statement: “Pretty sure Catholic doctors or hospitals will NOT prescribe artificial birth control.”



    • Lynn on January 24, 2012 at 4:27 pm

      Still don’t see that what I said was wrong. I did not say All Catholic ….



    • Lynn on January 24, 2012 at 4:39 pm

      Of course Sammy that would be acceptable, but this is about Catholic hospitals, Catholic schools etc, being made to cover artificail contraceptions in their group insurance policy.? WHY? They don’t believe in them? and what do you say to the bolded part of HHS, “to give them more time adapt their policies” It should just exempt them from forcing them to pay for this in the policies. If Congress can exempt Unions, Wal-Mart, Government employees and all the other groups exemptions for the entire mandate of the one-size fits all policies. What’s the beef with this little exemption for religious beliefs?



    • Lynn on January 24, 2012 at 4:41 pm

      Besides you suggested that this was to make a profit which is so over the top, I had to reply. The reply below was to Sammy’s and your post below, don’t know how I did that.



  16. Anne-EH on January 24, 2012 at 10:38 am

    This is simply an attack on Amendment #1, freedom of religion. This should be a warning shot to any non-Catholic that thinks that it is only going to be the Catholic Church in the USA that is under attack. This is an attack on faith in general.



  17. Anne-EH on January 24, 2012 at 10:40 am

    Watched in bits and pieces the pro-life march vigil on Sunday night at the National Shrine in Washington D.C. the day before the March for Life and it was overflowing at that mass by Catholics concerned for life issues.



  18. sammy22 on January 24, 2012 at 12:11 pm

    Is it possible that Catholic doctors who are against artificial contraception would simply decline to write prescriptions for same? Would that not be their choice (of their own free will)?



    • crystal4 on January 24, 2012 at 4:14 pm

      Sammy, you always seen to sift thru the craziness and come up with a logical response!
      🙂



    • Dimsdale on January 25, 2012 at 11:32 am

      The issue, as gillie notes below, is not about the individual doctors, it is about the Catholic Hospitals being forced to go against their religious tenets and provide the coverage.? In addition to their free will, they are protected by the First Amendment.? Or used to be, anyway.



    • Dimsdale on January 25, 2012 at 11:33 am

      Can’t patients simply go to a secular hospital of their own free will and get their contraceptives?



  19. gillie28 on January 25, 2012 at 6:58 am

    Ah, Sammy, the problem is that the Dept of Health is MANDATING it, otherwise that would be a solution (and one which, according to Crystal, is currently being used?in the opposite way).? And we all know that means activists will go in and demand the prescription, then sue if it’s not given.



    • Dimsdale on January 25, 2012 at 11:33 am

      Slide the extra large drool buckets under the chins of the lawyers!? 😉



    • Lynn on January 25, 2012 at 2:11 pm

      Ooooh, Gross! What a picture



articleimg_white_house_01

The website's content and articles were migrated to a new framework in October 2023. You may see [shortcodes in brackets] that do not make any sense. Please ignore that stuff. We may fix it at some point, but we do not have the time now.

You'll also note comments migrated over may have misplaced question marks and missing spaces. All comments were migrated, but trackbacks may not show.

The site is not broken.