In 2010, the Catholic bishops totally supported ObaminableCare in the fight leading up to its very regrettable approval, and then the Administration turned right around and double-crossed the Church, stabbed them right in the back, trying to use the power of government to force Catholic institutions to pay for artificial contraception and abortifacients, in violation of Church doctrine and morality.
You just can’t trust those people. But now, the Church has won a big victory. From Sister Toldjah:
December 20, 2012 at 10:38 am
Victory is sweet:
WASHINGTON A three-judge U.S. District Court panel has sided with Belmont Abbey College in its case against the Obama administration over the requirement in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act that employers must provide free contraceptives in employee insurance plans.
In a decision announced Tuesday, the judges ordered administration officials to rewrite the law, so it will not force religious institutions to offer contraceptives.
Belmont Abbey College, a Roman Catholic institution in Gaston County, had sued the Obama administration over the health care mandate. College officials said it would require the school to act in a manner contradictory to church teachings.
More at the link.
This was the second recent ruling against the Obama Administration on the subject.
December 7, 2012 | 12:22 pm | Modified: December 9, 2012 at 4:50 pm
Judge Brian Cogan mocked the “accommodation” on religion liberty outlined by President Obama in regards to his health care law’s contraception mandate while ruling against a Justice Department motion to dismiss the Archdiocese of New York’s lawsuit against the regulation.
“There is no, ‘Trust us, changes are coming’ clause in the Constitution,” Cogan wrote in his ruling against DOJ. “To the contrary, the Bill of Rights itself, and the First Amendment in particular, reflect a degree of skepticism towards governmental self-restraint and self-correction.”
Cogan was referring Obama’s promise to accommodate the concerns of religiously-affiliated institutions that would have to provide free contraception.
“Under the rule, women will still have access to free preventive care that includes contraceptive services -– no matter where they work,” Obama said in February 2011. “So that core principle remains. But if a woman’s employer is a charity or a hospital that has a religious objection to providing contraceptive services as part of their health plan, the insurance company -– not the hospital, not the charity -– will be required to reach out and offer the woman contraceptive care free of charge, without co-pays and without hassles.”
As Cogan noted, though, the rule has not formally been changed. Religious groups also question the sufficiency of the accommodation outlined by the president.
All the Obama Administration had to do was not try to force people with moral or religious objections to comply, and there would never have been a problem. There is nothing which would prevent an employer from specifying that his health insurance coverage would include contraception, and your Editor can see why a lot of companies would want that in there: pregnancy costs companies time, productivity and money. But the practically Maoist social engineers under Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius are not the type inclined to allow freedom of choice in anything other than abortion; all others must comply with what they believe is For Our Own Good.
With the re-election of President Obama, there is no chance that the wholly misnamed Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will be repealed. But at least this will make it slightly less objectionable.