Birth Control Mandate: Is this taking the Religous Liberty Exception too far?

[paperview]

The DOJ responded tpoday to Sonia Sotomayor's Injunction issued on New Years Eve.

Nuns' Objection To Health Care Law Is Unwarranted, Justice Dept. Says : The Two-Way : NPR

That emanated from this:

Sonia Sotomayor halts contraceptive rule for Denver center - Jennifer Haberkorn - POLITICO.com

The matter in this case boils down to filling out a short form form. Just filing an automatic waiver.

That's it.

Catholic Employers Claim That Filling Out an Obamacare Form Violates Their Religious Freedom

"Late on New Year's Eve, Justice Sonia Sotomayor granted a small number of religiously affiliated groups a temporary injunction from a provision in the Affordable Care Act that allows them not to cover contraception in their health care plans if they fill out a form that states that they want an exemption from the law for religious reasons.

Go ahead and read that sentence again.

These Catholic non-profits that wanted an exemption from covering their employees' contraception needs—and got an exemption from covering their employees' contraception needs—are now fighting the provision (that exempts them from covering their employees' contraception needs) simply because they don't want to have to fill out a form that states that they are exempt.

Why? Because their employees need that form in order to get birth control directly from their insurers (which they need to do because their employers—these Catholic non-profits—are exempt, as they want to be)."

Justice Sotomayor grants temporary injunction to Catholic groups who say filling out an Obamacare form about contraception violates their religious freedom.

Yes, filling out a form. Nothing more.

Their religious sensibilities are insulted by merely stating on paper they have religious objections.

Now, you may agree that religious organizations should not be forced to contribute to a health plan that makes them pay for Birth Control - and I do too,

but do you think the mere act of filing out a form is taking the Religious Liberty exception just a bit too far?

Does religious liberty extend to the right to not have to fill out paperwork?

 

[paperview]

The DOJ's response says that "Applicants claim a right to extraordinary relief.":

"Basically, the Justice Department is making the case that all the nursing home the nuns operate has to do is:

"Self-certify that they are non-profit organizations that hold themselves out as religious and have religious objections to providing coverage for contraceptive services, and then provide a copy of their self-certification to the third-party administrator of their self-insured group health plan. At that point, the employer-applicants will have satisfied all their obligations under the contraceptive coverage provision."



What's more, Justice argues that "this case involves a church plan that is exempt from regulation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

Employer-applicants' third-party administrator therefore will be under no legal obligation to provide the coverage after applicants certify that they object to providing it."


Those who support the nuns' case, though, argue that just the act of signing such a self-certification is tantamount to issuing a "permission slip" for the use of contraceptives, and violates the Catholic orders' rights."

Nuns' Objection To Health Care Law Is Unwarranted, Justice Dept. Says : The Two-Way : NPR

So before people think the Nuns, or their "church plan" insurer have to provide BC, they do not have to. They are exempt.

It just seems bizarre to me filing out a one-page form is such an onerous and sinful act, all unto itself.

 

[Moonglow]

A waste of money on litigation the Catholics could be using to help the poor.

 

[paperview]

A waste of money on litigation the Catholics could be using to help the poor.

I believe they have a right to object - and the government accommodated them -- I just can't understand why they have pushed it to the point of

Nope. Not gonna file the paperwork to say we object.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Filling simple paper work neither is onerous nor a violation of the 1st Amendment

 

[Vox]

No, it is taking government intervention into individual life too far.
Contraception has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare. It is a lifestyle option, not a healthcare option.

And it is an extremely discriminatory mandate - not only on religious grounds, but it is a perfect example of gender discrimination. If it should be covered for women, why shouldn't it be covered for men?

 

[Vox]

A waste of money on litigation the Catholics could be using to help the poor.

why won't you create your own religion where the poor take the place of god?
the hypocrisy of the militantly atheist left is just hilarious.

Catholic faith is NOT centered around helping the poor. It is a secondary and even a tertiary problem. Neither is it a centerpiece for any religion, for that matter - and it should not be.

So, creating the Church of Pauperes Cultus can be your next business
project, Moonglow
l'll ke 10% of profits for providing the idea

 

[Esmeralda]

A waste of money on litigation the Catholics could be using to help the poor.

Exactly. They are making this a political issue and wasting money and energy on it when they could be doing what they should be doing, which is focus on those in need, not in doing everything they can to prevent women from getting birth control. Absolutely shameful.

 

[paperview]

No, it is taking government intervention into individual life too far.
Contraception has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare. It is a lifestyle option, not a healthcare option.
...

I see you didn't even bother to read the OP.

The organization does NOT have to provide BC coverage. They are exempt.

Their objection is to filling out a short form claiming they are exempt.

 

[Vox]

No, it is taking government intervention into individual life too far.
Contraception has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare. It is a lifestyle option, not a healthcare option.
...

I see you didn't even bother to read the OP.

The organization does NOT have to provide BC coverage. They are exempt.

Their objection is to filling out a short form claiming they are exempt.

Good. Their objection is valid as it is the same as providing the coverage.

But since you are a militant ignorant atheist you won't understnd it.

 

[Esmeralda]

A waste of money on litigation the Catholics could be using to help the poor.

why won't you create your own religion where the poor take the place of god? I'
the hypocrisy of the militantly atheist left is just hilarious.

Catholic faith is NOT centered around helping the poor. It is a secondary and even a tertiary problem. Neither is it a centerpiece for any religion, for that matter - and it should not be.

So, creating the Church of Pauperes Cultus can be your next business
project, Moonglow
l'll ke 10% of profits for providing the idea

Helping those in need is indeed an essential tenet of Christianity. Absolutely. Anyone who says differently is off his rocker.

 

[paperview]

No, it is taking government intervention into individual life too far.
Contraception has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare. It is a lifestyle option, not a healthcare option.
...

I see you didn't even bother to read the OP.

The organization does NOT have to provide BC coverage. They are exempt.

Their objection is to filling out a short form claiming they are exempt.

Good. Their objection is valid as it is the same as providing the coverage.

But since you are a militant ignorant atheist you won't understnd it.

I see, saying you object on religious grounds is the same as providing BC.

That makes sense



You second sentence is pathetic and false.

 

[Esmeralda]

No, it is taking government intervention into individual life too far.
Contraception has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare. It is a lifestyle option, not a healthcare option.

And it is an extremely discriminatory mandate - not only on religious grounds, but it is a perfect example of gender discrimination. If it should be covered for women, why shouldn't it be covered for men?

Contraception has EVERYTHING to do with health care. Pregnancy is a health care issue. Getting pregnant has a massive effect on the body. Pregnancy is not a 'lifestyle choice' it is a physical condition that affects the entire body of a woman in the present and in the future. It is a condition that requires a great deal of health care, and preventing a pregnancy is part of that health care issue. Anyone who objects to a woman preventing an pregnancy is living in the Stone Age. What kind of monsters want to force women to have babies they don't want?

 

[Vox]

A waste of money on litigation the Catholics could be using to help the poor.

why won't you create your own religion where the poor take the place of god? I'
the hypocrisy of the militantly atheist left is just hilarious.

Catholic faith is NOT centered around helping the poor. It is a secondary and even a tertiary problem. Neither is it a centerpiece for any religion, for that matter - and it should not be.

So, creating the Church of Pauperes Cultus can be your next business
project, Moonglow
l'll ke 10% of profits for providing the idea

Helping those in need is indeed an essential tenet of Christianity. Absolutely. Anyone who says differently is off his rocker.

Your ignorance of Christianity is glaringly obvious.

Poor are the tertiary problem and they are not the only ones.

Pauperus cultists can help the poor themselves instead of delegating that to the others.

But you don't want to help the poor from your OWN money, do you?

the leftards and their lying hypocrisy

 

[Esmeralda]

I see you didn't even bother to read the OP.

The organization does NOT have to provide BC coverage. They are exempt.

Their objection is to filling out a short form claiming they are exempt.

Good. Their objection is valid as it is the same as providing the coverage.

But since you are a militant ignorant atheist you won't understnd it.

I see, saying you object on religious grounds is the same as providing BC.

That makes sense



You second sentence is pathetic and false.

The militancy and ignorance are on his part, not on yours.

 

[Esmeralda]

why won't you create your own religion where the poor take the place of god? I'
the hypocrisy of the militantly atheist left is just hilarious.

Catholic faith is NOT centered around helping the poor. It is a secondary and even a tertiary problem. Neither is it a centerpiece for any religion, for that matter - and it should not be.

So, creating the Church of Pauperes Cultus can be your next business
project, Moonglow
l'll ke 10% of profits for providing the idea

Helping those in need is indeed an essential tenet of Christianity. Absolutely. Anyone who says differently is off his rocker.

Your ignorance of Christianity is glaringly obvious.

Poor are the tertiary problem and they are not the only ones.

Pauperus cultists can help the poor themselves instead of delegating that to the others.

But you don't want to help the poor from your OWN money, don't you?

the leftards and their lying hypocrisy

You have a focus on ORGANIZED religion and what such institutions do. You have a total lack of understanding of what Christ stood for.

 

[Vox]

No, it is taking government intervention into individual life too far.
Contraception has absolutely nothing to do with healthcare. It is a lifestyle option, not a healthcare option.

And it is an extremely discriminatory mandate - not only on religious grounds, but it is a perfect example of gender discrimination. If it should be covered for women, why shouldn't it be covered for men?

Contraception has EVERYTHING to do with health care. Pregnancy is a health care issue. Getting pregnant has a massive effect on the body. Pregnancy is not a 'lifestyle choice' it is a physical condition that affects the entire body of a woman in the present and in the future. It is a condition that requires a great deal of health care, and preventing a pregnancy is part of that health care issue. Anyone who objects to a woman preventing an pregnancy is living in the Stone Age. What kind of monsters want to force women to have babies they don't want?

It has NOTHING to do with health care.

Pregnancy is a NORMAL state and is avoidable if the woman choses to.

It is a lifestyle option and as any other lifestyle options should be covered by the women themselves.

As it is done everywhere else - starting with the single payer systems

 

[Vox]

Helping those in need is indeed an essential tenet of Christianity. Absolutely. Anyone who says differently is off his rocker.

Your ignorance of Christianity is glaringly obvious.

Poor are the tertiary problem and they are not the only ones.

Pauperus cultists can help the poor themselves instead of delegating that to the others.

But you don't want to help the poor from your OWN money, don't you?

the leftards and their lying hypocrisy

You have a focus on ORGANIZED religion and what such institutions do. You have a total lack of understanding of what Christ stood for.

a militant atheist in her hypocritical stance of "knowledge" what Christ stood for

for promiscuous sex with anything moving and the taxpayer to pay for the abortions the day before deliviery - that is what Christ stood for per militant atheis feminists

 

[Moonglow]

A waste of money on litigation the Catholics could be using to help the poor.

why won't you create your own religion where the poor take the place of god?
the hypocrisy of the militantly atheist left is just hilarious.

Catholic faith is NOT centered around helping the poor. It is a secondary and even a tertiary problem. Neither is it a centerpiece for any religion, for that matter - and it should not be.

So, creating the Church of Pauperes Cultus can be your next business
project, Moonglow
l'll ke 10% of profits for providing the idea

I am not atheist but you may indulge your fantasies all you like.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Exactly. They are making this a political issue and wasting money and energy on it when they could be doing what they should be doing, which is focus on those in need, not in doing everything they can to prevent women from getting birth control. Absolutely shameful.

Obama and the ACA are violating the 1st Amendment. There is no provision for Congress to violate the religious freedom of the Catholic Church, which Obamacare is doing.

The farce that the Church is exempt - if they fill out a form that makes them not exempt - is absurd.

This is simple - IF you want birth control and abortion - don't work for the Catholics. BUT Lord Obama and the dims want to FORCE their views on the Catholics.