Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Rick Moran

Bio

August 23, 2014 - 8:56 am

The thrust of these “workarounds” and “fixes” is that the administration is trying to give devout people an “out” on contraception coverage, ostensibly to assuage their consciences.

Isn’t that insulting? You would think that objections to paying for contraception for employees is a black and white issue — either you do (no matter who pays for it), and violate your beliefs or you don’t and keep faith with God.

But these guys don’t get it. Is it because many on the left are used to compromising with their own moral precepts — that they can rationalize away moral dilemmas by finding their own “out” to satisfy their consciences?

MSNBC:

The Obama administration has issued a new set of rules to provide contraceptive access to women whose employers object to their insurance plans covering birth control, which is required under the Affordable Care Act.

The new policies are intended to fill gaps left by two Supreme Court moves: The landmark Hobby Lobby decision saying contraceptive coverage violated the religious liberty of a for-profit corporation, and a preliminary order in Wheaton College v. Burwell. With today’s regulations, employees of for-profit corporations like Hobby Lobby will be able to access an “accommodation” where the insurer directly provides the cost-free coverage with no financial involvement by the employer. That accommodation was originally limited to religiously-affiliated nonprofits like Little Sisters of the Poor; houses of worship are fully exempt.

For nonprofits like Wheaton College that object to even that accommodation – which involves them signing a form to their insurer – the Obama administration has created a new accommodation to the accommodation. (Yes, it gets complicated.)

“The rules, which are in response to recent court decisions, balance our commitment to helping ensure women have continued access to coverage for preventive services important to their health, with the Administration’s goal of respecting religious beliefs,” Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell said.

For the non-profits that object to the form – arguing that signing it triggers the very birth control coverage they oppose – the new rule allows those employers to write to HHS directly, instead of filling out the form. The Supreme Court first suggested the letter-writing option, and so far the litigants have accepted it. But there was some dispute among legal scholars before about whether the letter would result in actual coverage for the women who worked at those companies. The new rule clarifies that it does.

HHS is also seeking comment on exactly how to structure its accommodation for for-profit companies like Hobby Lobby, which is only one of 193 corporations that have sued for an exemption from covering contraception.

The more the administration tries to satisfy those who don’t want to compromise their religious beliefs, the more they appear out of touch with the main issue; religious freedom. While we should “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s,” when such collisions take place between the state and religion, it would seem logical that the 1st Amendment trumps any effort to force people to violate their beliefs.

It’s a self-evident position for the Godly. And since the exemption touches only a tiny number of all insureds, you would hope the administration would stop fighting and start accommodating.

As long as Hobby Lobby and others continue to win in court, the administration is tilting at windmills trying find a “solution” for the insoluble.

Rick Moran is PJ Media's Chicago editor and Blog editor at The American Thinker. He is also host of the"RINO Hour of Power" on Blog Talk Radio. His own blog is Right Wing Nut House.
All Comments   (18)
All Comments   (18)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
part time jobs
my buddy's step-aunt makes $60 an hour on the laptop . She has been fired for 6 months but last month her pay was $12599 just working on the laptop for a few hours. look at this now ,,,, www.fox71.com
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
>>... balance our commitment to helping ensure women have continued access to coverage for preventive services important to their health,

Is it just me or is their language getting really, really squirrely?
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
Totalitarian Democrats trying to buy votes and score political points with an irresponsible subculture of society.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
Contraceptive mandate is a crap sandwich.

Administration and HHS accommodations = They didn't like crap when we served it on white bread, so we switched it to rye bread. Then they took us to court over it and it turned out that the court doesn't like crap, either. This time, we redesigned the whole sandwich, and we're serving them crap on toasted brioche with a nice aioli. We think they'll like it!
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
"helping ensure women have continued access to coverage for preventive services important to their health"

How deliberately MSNBC parses their words in support of this administration. Note that now it is "access to coverage" instead of access to birth control. Access to these abortifacients probably costs about $5-10 per month. But unless someone else pays, I guess it is not "coverage".
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
Those 'preventive services' are not helping the health of the baby.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
What baby? Birth control is about preventing pregnancy.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
No; this is about "ending" not preventing pregnancy.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
Again, what baby? Preventing implantation of a fertilized egg is the same as killing a baby.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
access to birth control. Access to these abortifacients SNIP

They're not the same.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
They should read the Hobby Lobby Case; not all "preventative" services were objected to. I misunderstood you. I see we agree.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
Oh, okay.

My first post here--and, IIRC, the first post on this thread--was about the need to stop allowing the Left to define the terms of this debate.

3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
This should not have been reported.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
Or perhaps the People Against the NDAA's publicity campaign is developing traction in the news and social media cycles.

Birth control squirrels to the fore!
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
It is not contraception per se to which Hobby Lobby objected, but abortifacients. Why continue to allow the Left to obscure the facts?
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yes, everyone has just accepted the narrative, including most of the conservative media. Religious objections to supplying abortifacients has become religious objections to contraceptives. Period, full stop.

As usual, the facts that don't fit the narrative be damned.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
Writers and members here don't have to accept the lie.
3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
Some of them do, because their worldview on this subject is essentially the same as the Democrat's.

They are anti-God and pro-free-sex far more than they are anti-big-government and pro-liberty.

3 weeks ago
3 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All

One Trackback to “White House Issues New Contraceptive ‘Fix’ for Religious Companies”