Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Catholic News

Home

Home
Catholic
Religion News
HHS mandate changes protect only ‘a few more ministries’

HHS mandate changes protect only ‘a few more ministries’

Last updated on: February 5, 2013 at 11:06 am by CNA Daily News

HHS mandate changes protect only ‘a few more ministries’ 2013-02-05T11:06:00+00:00 CNA Daily News

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Washington D.C., Feb 5, 2013 / 04:06 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Legal analysts warned that the government’s new proposals on the HHS mandate do little to expand religious freedom protections for employers that object to it.

“This unilateral redefinition of religious freedom undermines the sanctity of religious freedom for all people,” said legal expert Brian Walsh, “even those who are not affected and have no objection to these products and services.”

Walsh, the executive director of the American Religious Freedom program at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, spoke with CNA on Feb. 4 about the latest development regarding the federal contraception mandate.

“The idea that the administration can unilaterally make these decisions should be concerning for all people of faith,” he said.

On Feb. 1, the Obama administration announced its intent to modify the federal contraception mandate, which requires employers to offer health insurance coverage of contraception – including some drugs that can cause early abortions – and sterilization.

Religious organizations and businesses owners who have conscientious objections to these requirements have contested the requirement. More than 40 lawsuits are currently challenging the mandate on the grounds of religious freedom.

The Obama administration said that it would simplify the terms under which an objecting employer may qualify for a religious exemption, dropping requirements that such groups exist to inculcate religious beliefs and both hire and serve primarily members of their own faiths.

Religious groups do not qualify for the exemption are instead offered an “accommodation” under which their employees will be offered a parallel health insurance plan that covers the objectionable products and procedures.

The government argues that this contraception coverage can be offered for free because it decreases childbirths and provides women with health benefits that lower their overall health care costs.

However, the administration’s announcement has drawn criticism for failing to address the religious liberty concerns surrounding the mandate.

The Alliance Defending Freedom – which is handling several religious freedom lawsuits challenging the regulation – explained that the “new exemption is simpler than before but continues to cover only a sliver of religious organizations.”

This is because the exemption still relies upon a section of tax code that categorizes churches, their conventions, auxiliaries and religious orders, the group explained in a Feb. 1 blog post.

“Still not covered by the new exemption” the blog post explained, “are virtually all non-church religious nonprofit organizations,” including aid organizations, hospitals, schools, independent food pantries and religious publishers.

Walsh agreed what while “a few more ministries” are now exempt, “the mandate itself is just as objectionable and offensive as it was when it was issued a year ago.”

For those groups that fall under the accommodation, he said, the government has proposed “nothing more than an accounting gimmick,” which many religious employers still consider morally unacceptable.

He also observed that non-religious employers that object to providing the contraceptive coverage are offered no relief under the mandate.

“I think what’s most deeply disturbing,” Walsh said of the revision, “is that after a year of internal deliberation, the administration still believes that it has the power, on its own, to redefine American religious freedom and restrict protections of those freedoms in a way the federal government has never before considered.”

Rep. Chris Smith (R- N.J.), who co-chairs the bipartisan Congressional Pro-Life Caucus in the House, also spoke out against the announcement.

“The so-called new policy is the discredited old policy, dressed up to look like something else,” he said in a Feb. 1 statement.

“The mandate remains a serious violation of religious freedom,” he said. “Only the most naïve or gullible would accept this as a change in policy.”

Smith explained that the proposed changes are “neither an ‘accommodation’ nor a compromise,” as they offer “no relief for small businesses run by people of faith.”

In addition, he said, the new proposal offers no real option for charities, hospitals or schools that wish to provide insurance that “does not violate their moral or religious beliefs.”

Organizations that cannot in good conscience accept the terms of the “accommodation” could face “ruinous fines,” Smith observed, and if these organizations are forced to shut down, it would harm the most vulnerable members of society, whom they serve.

Previous Post

February 5, 2013

Catholics, Reformed Christian groups acknowledge baptisms

Next Post

February 5, 2013 Archbishop hopes St. Peter art show will spark longing for God

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Americas Asia - Pacific Europe Middle East - Africa Uncategorized US Vatican

Select a Month November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is the Christian principle about judging by appearances?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Do not judge by outward appearance See clothes first Judge quickly Copy others' opinions