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

The Secular Spectrum

Home
Nonreligious
Trump Admin’s Prioritization of Religion Over Health Care Access Will Leave People Without Care

Trump Admin’s Prioritization of Religion Over Health Care Access Will Leave People Without Care

Last updated on: June 20, 2019 at 11:06 am by Kate Harveston

Trump Admin’s Prioritization of Religion Over Health Care Access Will Leave People Without Care 2019-06-20T11:06:17-05:00 Kate Harveston

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.

The Trump Administration seems bent on prioritizing religious “freedoms” over human needs — including medical needs. On one hand, they’ve essentially declared themselves enemies of public health systems. On the other, they seem to want to bring the entire “free market” of the health care industry under Christianity’s banner of moral rule.

By that I mean, there’s another “Obama-era” idea on the chopping block. It involves discrimination protections for the LGBTQ+ community and access to health care. This is a humanistic and practical issue — not an ideological one. It’s about what happens when we prioritize dogma over human need.

So, What’s Going on with Religion and Health Care?

The Trump Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services have signaled that they wish to do away with protections included in the Health Care Rights Law. It’s also known as “Section 1557” of the Affordable Care Act. The Health Care Rights Law made it illegal to interfere with a person’s pursuit of medical care or coverage based on that person’s national origin, gender, age, race or disability.

In other words, a person who wishes to purchase health care services may not be turned away by a religious person who doesn’t “agree with” that would-be patient’s “lifestyle.”

The excuse the Administration is using to get away with it appears to involve their interpretation of the phrase “on the basis of sex.” To be more specific, the Administration wishes to test the theory that the original law’s use of the phrase “on the basis of sex” does not explicitly protect people from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.

Under the Obama Administration, it was understood that these rules extended to matters of gender identity — until 2016. That’s when a federal judge, buckling under lawsuits from religious groups, decided to break from his contemporaries and block that interpretation of the rules from taking effect.

Now, the Trump Administration has a chance of their own to “clarify” the law and remake it in their own image.

Religious Freedom and the Freedom to Discriminate

What’s at stake here, realistically?

According to Georgetown University’s Katie Keith, the Trump Administration is “Adding explicit religious exemptions and completely eliminating prior protections for LGBTQ people.”

The Health Care Rights Law protected patients of any health care institution which receives public funding, which means insurance companies, doctors and individual practitioners, and hospitals and emergency clinics. With these amended HHS rules, it will be legal for medical personnel and insurance companies to turn away transgender and other “non-conforming” persons and deny them the care they want or need, in accordance with the strictures of that doctor’s or health system’s sponsoring religion.

The Trump Administration may wish it to look like they’re only “clarifying” or “making consistent” the way concepts like “sex discrimination” are defined and enforced across government offices. But the timing is unmistakable. HHS made its announcement just days after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) signaled its belief that federally funded homeless shelters should be permitted to turn away transgender aid-seekers.

We already see stories all the time about Catholic hospitals, for example, refusing to tie a woman’s tubes even when her life is in peril, calling the procedure (and often the patient) “evil.” This kind of disregard for patient welfare, on the altar of religious conformity, is becoming more and more common under the Trump Administration. Doctors are saying these proposed changes represent a “conscience rule” that will make it far too easy for “religious objectors” in the health system to deny transgender individuals even the doctor-prescribed care and medications they’re due.

And that’s something a civilized nation cannot allow. Many of us know by now that a variety of conflicts do still exist in the insurance world, but at the end of the day, insurance companies are meant to work for families and patients, and can do that when the people in charge act ethically.

There’s no question that, as LGBTQ+ advocacy groups put it, the dignity of the human person, as a general concept, is under assault here. The single-mindedness, when it comes to using our institutions to remake this country in the image of Christian Conservative America, is utterly terrifying.

This Administration seems to move quickly when it wants something, but it’s still hopelessly behind the times in so many ways. The good news is, the Trump Administration can expect a flurry of lawsuits as they proceed with this. That federal judge in 2016 was one of the few to object to the Obama Administration’s interpretation of the HCR Law.

No matter what changes this administration wants to bring to the Affordable Care Act, they’re moving against popular opinion and legal precedent. Quite simply: People agree that our laws (to say nothing of our national values) provide for the protection and well-being of all people, including transgender people. To allow religion to interfere with that concept is inherently outrageous, and will not be tolerated by the people.

Church/State separation

Previous Post

April 18, 2019

Why Do We Question Vegetarianism When It's a Personal Choice but Not When It's Religiously-Motivated?

Next Post

July 13, 2019 Understanding Cultures of Unbelief for Religious

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Ableism Activism Addiction and Recovery Agnosticism Anti-intellectualism Arts Atheism Beauty Catholicism Charles Darwin Children China Christianity Church/State separation churchgoing communication compassionate humanism Creationism critical thinking Culture death disaster response doubt education Egypt Entertainment Environment ethics evolution Existence of God Exploration fear Foundation Beyond Belief Free speech God Health History Human rights humanism identity India Interfaith Islam labels Language LGBT Love Meaning Media Medicine Middle East misconceptions mixed belief marriage Moral argument Morality Myths Near-Death Experience Nonreligious parenting Parody Persecution complex Philosophy Poetry Politics prayer Psychology Rationality Religion religious atheists Religious privilege Republican Party Satire Schools science secular parenting Spirituality The Unpigeonholeables Uncategorized United Kingdom Wonder

Select a Month March 2021 August 2020 March 2020 January 2020 September 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 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 June 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

How many days are in a week?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Ten Twelve Seven Five