Posted 11:27 pm Saturday, January 28, 2012
Religious Liberties Must Remain Sacred
Is this the Obama administration’s idea of respecting religious freedoms?
Knowing full well many religious groups oppose artificial birth control, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said she’d give those groups a year to get used to the idea — and then they’d be forced to offer it — for free — as part of their health insurance packages.
“Most church-affiliated organizations will be required to offer their workers coverage of birth control as part of their health plans, the Obama administration announced Friday, but they can get more time than other employers to comply,” the Washington Post reported last week. “The decision came as a bitter disappointment to organizations ranging from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to the National Association of Evangelicals, which had lobbied hard for a broad exemption for employers that oppose birth control on religious grounds.”
Knowing full well many religious groups oppose artificial birth control, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said she’d give those groups a year to get used to the idea — and then they’d be forced to offer it — for free — as part of their health insurance packages.
“Most church-affiliated organizations will be required to offer their workers coverage of birth control as part of their health plans, the Obama administration announced Friday, but they can get more time than other employers to comply,” the Washington Post reported last week. “The decision came as a bitter disappointment to organizations ranging from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops to the National Association of Evangelicals, which had lobbied hard for a broad exemption for employers that oppose birth control on religious grounds.”
It’s an egregious violation, but let’s be clear what’s being violated here. The First Amendment not only includes the “establishment clause,” which says the government can’t adopt a state religion (or promote one religion over another), but also a “free exercise” clause. We hear less about that one, but it’s the real issue here. The government cannot make any law “impeding the free exercise of religion.”
And yet that’s exactly what it has done.
“This is nothing less than a direct attack on religion and First Amendment rights,” one Catholic hospital administrator told the Post.
Secretary Sebelius, herself a Catholic, calls the year-long delay a “compromise.”
And yet that’s exactly what it has done.
“This is nothing less than a direct attack on religion and First Amendment rights,” one Catholic hospital administrator told the Post.
Secretary Sebelius, herself a Catholic, calls the year-long delay a “compromise.”
“This strikes a balance between respecting religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services,” she said in a statement.
Catholic groups disagree.
“In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences,” said Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. “The Obama administration has now drawn an unprecedented line in the sand.”
Archbishop Dolan’s not alone; in December, more than 60 non-Catholic religious leaders wrote to Obama asking for a religious exception to the law.
Catholic groups disagree.
“In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences,” said Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. “The Obama administration has now drawn an unprecedented line in the sand.”
Archbishop Dolan’s not alone; in December, more than 60 non-Catholic religious leaders wrote to Obama asking for a religious exception to the law.
“The faith-based organizations and religious traditions represented by the undersigned leaders do not all share the same convictions about the moral acceptability of the mandated services,” the leaders wrote. “But we are all deeply concerned about the narrow exemption, including proposals made to expand it while still leaving unprotected many faith-based organizations.”
The groups cited the Constitution.
“We believe that the federal government is obligated by the First Amendment to accommodate the religious convictions of faith-based organizations of all kinds, Catholic and non-Catholic,” the letter read. “We respectfully ask that your administration, should it maintain the current contraceptives mandate, devise an exemption for religious employers that accurately defines such employers and exempts them from being required to offer to their employees (and students, if they are among America’s many religious colleges and universities) health services to which they have deep religious objections.”
There’s simply no excuse for the Obama administration to ignore these pleas. Exemptions from portions of the law have already been granted to Obama supporters including unions, the AARP, employers such as McDonald’s, and (making up a full 20 percent of the waivers granted) firms and organizations located within Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s congressional district.
When entire states, such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s Nevada, early-voting New Hampshire, and bluer-than-blue Maine get waivers, why not religious groups?
The groups cited the Constitution.
“We believe that the federal government is obligated by the First Amendment to accommodate the religious convictions of faith-based organizations of all kinds, Catholic and non-Catholic,” the letter read. “We respectfully ask that your administration, should it maintain the current contraceptives mandate, devise an exemption for religious employers that accurately defines such employers and exempts them from being required to offer to their employees (and students, if they are among America’s many religious colleges and universities) health services to which they have deep religious objections.”
There’s simply no excuse for the Obama administration to ignore these pleas. Exemptions from portions of the law have already been granted to Obama supporters including unions, the AARP, employers such as McDonald’s, and (making up a full 20 percent of the waivers granted) firms and organizations located within Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s congressional district.
When entire states, such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s Nevada, early-voting New Hampshire, and bluer-than-blue Maine get waivers, why not religious groups?
