Skip to main content

View Diary: Federal judge smacks down challenge to Obama administration's birth control insurance coverage rule (92 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I read the opinion. (5+ / 0-)

    Thank you so much for posting this.  I read this brilliant and rational opinion by this Missouri judge.  It gives me hope as an attorney and as a secular progressive thinker.  It will help me articulate and defend my position to my Catholic friends who claim the ACA is coercive and Obama is the worst form of Nazi for imposing it upon them.

    Reproductive services ARE legitimate women's health issues (according to DHHS) and employers aren't burdened any more by providing a full health care plan than they are by paying employees cash--which could get used for the same services anyway if their doctor says they need it, or if the person wants it.  

    Catholicism's rejection of reproductive services (but apparent acceptance of all other health care procedures) does not really make them any different than Christian Scientists who would deny ALL healthcare and leave it all in God's hands.  The Religious Freedom Act is not a sword with which to impose their beliefs on others who do not share their beliefs.   It is a shield to protect them from being forced to do something against their religion.  

    So are they being forced to pay for contraception--which is against their religion?  Not directly--not even close to directly.  They are being forced to pay for the employee benefit of HEALTHCARE INSURANCE, which our representatives decided is best administered through employers (just like taxes are).   Just because that insurance might actually cover penis-vagina-uterus health too (when someone's DOCTOR says they need it), doesn't make the ACA coercive.   It means Catholics can still avoid contraception if they want, but if they employ someone non-Catholic, they can't deny that person a significant portion of actual legitimate healthcare services.  

    So will Catholics now pay more for health insurance than they want to?  Sure.  Join the club of people who have a beef with where some of their tax money goes.   (Mine are payments to oil companies, giving to religious charities, and deductions for millionaires' dancing horses.)   Still can't live with it?   Just stick to being a church then, stop employing the secular and claim your exemption.  You open your lunch counter to some, you better open it to all.

    •  Or another sect (0+ / 0-)

      Which doesn't believe in blood transfusions.

    •  My understanding is that it actually (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Saves the insurance companies money to provide free contraceptive care, which reduces the number of births and their potential complications.  Government health plans in Europe, many of which are in highly religious Catholic dominated countries, have long provided free contraceptive coverage without controversy.  

      We just have manufactured controversies designed to keep people flustered so they won't notice the real Republican agenda to force the 99% into serfdom.  

      We're ALL better off when we're ALL better off!

      by susanWAstate on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 05:01:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (134)
  • Community (62)
  • 2016 (52)
  • Environment (41)
  • Elections (38)
  • Media (36)
  • Republicans (36)
  • Hillary Clinton (32)
  • Barack Obama (30)
  • Jeb Bush (30)
  • Iraq (29)
  • Law (29)
  • Culture (28)
  • Climate Change (27)
  • Civil Rights (26)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (26)
  • Labor (21)
  • Economy (21)
  • LGBT (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site