Catholic groups sue to overturn Obama’s contraception mandate
If you thought the Catholic Church and universities affiliated with it would quietly accept the Obama administration’s “compromise” for the contraception mandate, well, think again. From Fox News:
Some of the most influential Catholic institutions in the country filed suit in federal district court Monday against the so-called contraception mandate, in one of the biggest coordinated legal challenges to the rule to date.
Claiming their “fundamental rights hang in the balance,” a total of 43 plaintiffs filed a dozen separate lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the requirement. Among the organizations filing were the University of Notre Dame, the Archdiocese of New York and The Catholic University of America.
The groups are objecting to the requirement from the federal health care overhaul that employers provide access to contraceptive care. The Obama administration several months back softened its position on the mandate, but some religious organizations complained the administration did not go far enough to ensure the rule would not compel them to violate their religious beliefs.
That “softened” position by the administration is nothing but an accounting fiction in which Catholic employers are supposed to pretend that insurance companies will pay for the procedures to which they object from some kind of mystery revenues beyond the employers’ contributions. These are not a bunch of ultra-conservative organizations: Notre Dame had President Obama as its commencement speaker three years ago.
The lawsuits ensure that the church will continue to hammer away at this issue throughout the election season. It is big-time self-inflicted wound for the Obama team.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
217 comments Add your comment
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:04 pm
In most states, auto insurance isn’t mandatory, even for those who choose to drive on public roads–it is permissible to self insure. Auto insurance is only mandatory for those who choose to drive on public roads and are so lame that they can’t self-insure.
Joe Mama
May 21st, 2012
3:09 pm
Tiberius — “Nope. We don’t do deflection over here at the Adult Table, Joe Mama.”
You already did. I pointed out that you were incorrect on a point, and you decided to go the route of insulting me and behaving like a child instead of discussing the point in an adult manner.
“We stick to facts here”
Like this fact-free comment on your part. ““I do not believe the Vatican Bank is based in the U.S. kelly, so they are not in our government’s jurisdiction.”
ANY bank holding assets in the US or in US banks, or doing business with US citizens, regardless of the country of their domicile, is potentially subject to the jurisdiction of the US government. You are quite simply wrong on that point, Tiberius.
“unlike you over at the Children’s Table.”
I truly enjoy the refreshing, adult commentary here at Kyle’s; it’s so free of insults and juvenile behavior. (laughing)
Utopian Experiment #3 | j5mc
May 21st, 2012
3:12 pm
[...] guessing the real impetus is the ongoing farce over the Affordable Care Act, which mandates coverage of women’s healthcare for any employer that says they’re [...]
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:13 pm
What is and is not covered under Obozocare won’t matter in a couple of months anyway, after the Supreme Court announces that the Constitution does mean something after all, and that the federal government’s power is not without limits.
Aquagirl
May 21st, 2012
3:22 pm
All Americans (and Democrats of faith) owe these Catholic groups a huge debt for standing up for the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties.
Enforcing Catholic beliefs on non-Catholics not working in a church is a poor basis for claiming persecution. But then a lot of religious wingnuts are on that bandwagon nowadays….If they can’t control what other people do it’s somehow a violation of their religious rights.
The Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers
May 21st, 2012
3:25 pm
Tiberius – Banned from Bookman’s and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
2:12 pm
“So does that mean an employee of Jehovah’s Witnesses can be denied blood transfusions?”
Actually doctors can get a court order quickly and force the transfusion on a Witness anyway.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
3:25 pm
Aquagirl, if you don’t like their rules, you can either pay for the services yourself, or you can find other employment or higher education opportunities.
Its as simple as that.
Jefferson
May 21st, 2012
3:27 pm
Women will have their vote (in private in the booth)…
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:27 pm
Aquagirl, please link to the Catholic policy that prohibits, as a condition of employment, employees from using birth control, abortifacients, etc.
Didn’t think so.
Ayn Rant
May 21st, 2012
3:31 pm
The Catholic bishops are making fools of themselves by calling attention to a nonsensical, outdated tenet of Vatican dogma. There is no Scriptural basis for the opposition to contraceptives, or for restricting the choice of those who disagree, or for ignoring the religious freedom of workers in Catholic-associated institutions engaged in secular activities.
The claim that the Catholics bishops might be forced to “pay” for medical insurance coverage for contraceptives is false. The revenue of Catholics hospitals comes from government and private medical insurance payments; the revenue of Catholics schools comes from tuition. The institutions pay employee wages and benefits from their revenue. The bishops pay absolutely nothing in the way of wages and benefits for the employees of Catholic hospitals and schools.
The “issue” is nothing more than a lot of political claptrap raised by Republican politicians opposed to health care for those who cannot pay for it out-of-pocket. Any health care plan that does not cover contraceptives and medically-advisable abortions is incomplete and inappropriate for working Americans.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:34 pm
Any health care plan that does not cover contraceptives and medically-advisable abortions is incomplete and inappropriate for working Americans.
———————–
I’m so glad we have Obozo and the libtards to tell us what kind of health insurance we are going to be required to purchase.
Nazis.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
3:37 pm
“The claim that the Catholics bishops might be forced to “pay” for medical insurance coverage for contraceptives is false.”
And yet no one is making that claim, Ayn Rant.
Stop making things up to try to deflect from the issue at hand.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:38 pm
For all their rhetoric about freedom, choice, and privacy, the Democrat party sure does like to tell folks what to do.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
3:38 pm
“The “issue” is nothing more than a lot of political claptrap raised by Republican politicians opposed to health care for those who cannot pay for it out-of-pocket.”
And yet the institutions suing are not associated with the Republican Party in any way . . .
Go figure.
Joe Mama
May 21st, 2012
3:42 pm
Ayn Rant — “The claim that the Catholics bishops might be forced to “pay” for medical insurance coverage for contraceptives is false.”
Tiberius, this page — “And yet no one is making that claim, Ayn Rant. Stop making things up to try to deflect from the issue at hand.”
Tiberius, previous page — “If the Church is providing the money for the insurance (and they are), the Church gets to decide what that insurance will cover. If they are forced to provide that in which they do not believe, the Church’s 1st Amendment Constitutional rights are being violated.”
Hmm.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
3:45 pm
Joe Mama, please do not respond to my posts any longer. I will not be engaging in childish games of wordsmithing and deflection with mental deficients who argue for the sake of arguing (rather than with facts) such as you.
Illegal Alien
May 21st, 2012
3:46 pm
Outlaw all abortions now!
I have stock in a coat hanger company.
Jack
May 21st, 2012
3:56 pm
Obama will lose the next election with the help of his advisors: he’d lose it anyway, but they’re making sure of it.
td
May 21st, 2012
3:59 pm
Aquagirl
May 21st, 2012
3:22 pm
“Enforcing Catholic beliefs on non-Catholics not working in a church is a poor basis for claiming persecution.”
Look at what we would not have now if it was not for the religious institutions setting up all these schools and hospitals. People know when they go to work for these places that they are administered by the church and since they are a private entity can set up any rules they wish (just like companies can require you to not smoke or turn over your Face book account as a term of employment). The worker or student has a choice of not attending or working for these places if they are not willing to follow their rules.
Joe Mama
May 21st, 2012
3:59 pm
Tiberius — “Joe Mama, please do not respond to my posts any longer.”
I don’t often post here, so if you find my posts so troubling, then scroll right on past them, Tiberius.
“I will not be engaging in childish games of wordsmithing and deflection with mental deficients who argue for the sake of arguing (rather than with facts) such as you.”
Tiberius, I’ve dinged you on two factual errors today, one of which might reasonably be termed a lie. I can understand why you’d be upset about that, but if anyone here’s being “childish” and engaging in “wordsmithing” and “deflection,” it’s you. And as far as mental deficiency goes, I’ll go up against you any time you like. OTOH, if you’d like some polite, adult discussion — and that’s assuming you’re even capable of it, which I doubt given your propensity to stoop to insults — then I’d be pleased to join and oblige you. However, I’m not going to post to please you and I doubt that you will post to please me.
You are quite simply wrong on the point about banking. And when you berated Ayn Rant, saying “yet no one is making that claim,” I pointed out that *you yourself* made that precise claim — the very one you claimed no one was making — on the previous page.
As was pointed out on a previous thread today, “a hit dog hollers.” And you are *certainly* hollering now.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:01 pm
All Catholics that don’t or have never used contraceptives please raise their hands.
See, this topic is a moot issue for the majority of Catholic voters.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
4:02 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
3:01 pm
All Americans (and Democrats of faith) owe these Catholic groups a huge debt for standing up for the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties.
*************************************************************************************
What DO the Catholic groups OWE the children who ARE and WERE molested by these
HYPOCRITES?
Are children PROTECTED BY the First Amendment’s protection of religious liberties?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
May 21st, 2012
4:03 pm
What part of “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” does obozo not understand?
Is there no Kenyan translation available for the 1st Amendment?
Could not one of the nearby dummycrats assist your little tard with his interpretations?
Keep your sewage to yourselves, liberals.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
4:04 pm
@Jack
May 21st, 2012
3:56 pm
Obama will lose the next election with the help of his advisors: he’d lose it anyway, but they’re making sure of it.
**************************************************************
OBAMA is going to WIN the next election with the HELP OF SENIORS, WOMEN, HISPANICS, GAYS AND AFRICAN AMERICANS.
“They’re making sure of it.”
heeheeheeheeheeheeheeheehee
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:07 pm
What part of “this law doesn’t force Catholics to take contraceptives” do you not understand?
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
4:14 pm
@I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin…
May 21st, 2012
4:03 pm
What part of “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” does obozo not understand?
Is there no Kenyan translation available for the 1st Amendment?
Could not one of the nearby dummycrats assist your little tard with his interpretations?
Keep your sewage to yourselves, liberals.
***************************************************************************
IS THERE A PEDOPHILIA TRANSLATION FOR CATHOLIC HYPOCRITES
available for the 1st Amendment?
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
May 21st, 2012
4:14 pm
I figured that one out on my own Junior, but thanks anyway.
What it does is force Catholics to promote contraception.
Need I explain?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
4:15 pm
“What part of “this law doesn’t force Catholics to take contraceptives” do you not understand?”
What part of “this law forces Catholic institutions to pay for contraceptives which they are religiously opposed to” do you NOT understand, Junior?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:16 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LA25LcbWbHc
Randall Flagg = Obozo
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
4:16 pm
What the courts will decide is anybody’s guess. The Catholic bishops should explain how allowing the women they employ to have the same rights as women anywhere else prohibits the church to exercise their religion (1st Amendment).
But if Kyle and the Republicans believe that this is a “self-inflicted wound” for Obama’s team, he and they may be very much disappointed, as many women might see it as a defense of their rights by Obama.
td
May 21st, 2012
4:17 pm
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:01 pm
Totally wrong question. The question is does the government have the right to dictate to a religious organization that they must purchase something that is against their religious tenets? This is the same lines as the current question before the court and the governments right to force a citizen to purchase a product. The difference is the government in this case will also have to bypass the 1st amendment as well as the commerce clause.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:23 pm
Remember back when, if you wanted a rubber or a birth control pill, you went out and got it?
Now look at the moochers demanding someone else pay for their incidental expenses.
You Democrats are such pathetic losers.
President Romney will turn this country around from the path of destruction you have put us on.
JDW
May 21st, 2012
4:24 pm
@Tiberius…”The Constitution is that limiting authority as regards religious freedom.”
That only applies if you are regulating the religion. Say as in hiring practices. The root of this regulation is a product, insurance. It has no religion to impinge.
It’s just like cable TV. The church buys cable TV but they don’t strip the objectionable content out for them. Yet the government regulates cable and mandates that local channels be carried even though the church doesn’t like some of the content and by paying the cable bill “funds” that content.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:26 pm
Sorry, JDW, but your analogy is faulty.
No one is forced to purchase cable TV.
Illegal Alien
May 21st, 2012
4:27 pm
Does freedom of religion allow Catholic priests to engage in pedophilia?
They must believe in since they have tried so hard to hide it from the rest of us non religious types.
Catholics Are Hypocrites. Where Is The Outrage Against Pedophile Catholic Priests?
May 21st, 2012
4:29 pm
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:23 pm
Remember back when, if you wanted a rubber or a birth control pill, you went out and got it?
Now look at the moochers demanding someone else pay for their incidental expenses.
You Democrats are such pathetic losers.
President Romney will turn this country around from the path of destruction you have put us on.
********************************************************************************
MITT-ROB-ME is headed for the PATH OF DESTRUCTION in NOVEMBER.
I bet you $10,000.
JDW
May 21st, 2012
4:31 pm
LBB…”In most states, auto insurance isn’t mandatory”
More Republican math I see…47 states have mandatory auto insurance requirments. 3 states make owing insurance optional.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_auto_insurance#Compulsory_states
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:32 pm
How many states allow individuals to self-insure, JDW?
Try reading the post next time so you don’t end up looking like such a tool.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:35 pm
Catholic Priests pay income taxes.
So, does the Catholic Church support and promote executions?
Do they support or promote divorce?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
4:35 pm
JDW, the church can also choose to not buy cable TV, just as the church can choose to no longer fund health care for it’s workers and students.
As some are doing right now.
However, the church has taken the position that it is better to be able to fund health care of their choosing, rather than deciding to stop funding it entirely, which is the end result of this suit.
Tell me, which is better? Funding health care of their choosing, or letting their employees and students fend for themselves?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
4:36 pm
More deflection from Junior.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:39 pm
Wasn’t this about the Catholic Church being forced to pay for something they don’t agree to?
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:40 pm
The Catholic Church doesn’t pay income taxes, so we’re not sure what you’re talking about, Junior.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:41 pm
Catholic Priests pay income taxes.
RIF
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
4:45 pm
Catholic priests, then, like all citizens, are free to elect representatives who will enact policies they prefer, such as ending capital punishment.
In any case, the Catholic Church isn’t funding capital punishment.
td
May 21st, 2012
4:47 pm
MarkV
May 21st, 2012
4:16 pm
“The Catholic bishops should explain how allowing the women they employ to have the same rights as women anywhere else prohibits the church to exercise their religion (1st Amendment)”
I gave you credit for being smarter then the above post. That is a political talking point and has nothing to do with the Constitution and the 1st Amendment. The 1st Amendment is clear and the SCOTUS will say this law is unconstitutional. The Obama administration knows it but wanted the political argument because they did not want to talk about their record and wanted this pretend “war on women”.
iggy
May 21st, 2012
4:48 pm
fb close $34.01…LOL.
Junior Samples
May 21st, 2012
4:57 pm
Yes… everyone is free to elect representatives who will enact policies they prefer.
But can you bring a lawsuit to court saying that as a organization, we won’t pay for that, but willingly do so as an individual?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
May 21st, 2012
5:03 pm
“But can you bring a lawsuit to court saying that as a organization, we won’t pay for that, but willingly do so as an individual?”
The Church is not an individual.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Unexpectedly Revised Downward)
May 21st, 2012
5:10 pm
“But can you bring a lawsuit to court saying that as a organization, we won’t pay for that”
——————-
Kyle wouldn’t have a subject for this post if you couldn’t.