Author Topic: A Central Deception in the Obama Administration’s Case Against the Little Sisters of the Poor  (Read 239 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,534
    • Boiling Frogs
A Central Deception in the Obama Administration’s Case Against the Little Sisters of the Poor
By David French
For NRO's The Corner
January 3, 2014 3:15 PM

A key theme of the Obama administration’s 37-page response to the Little Sisters of the Poor’s request for an injunction against the HHS abortion-pill Mandate, boils down to this: It’s just a form. The case isn’t about liberty; it’s about paperwork.

Here’s their argument in a nutshell: The law merely requires the Little Sisters of the Poor to certify their religious objection to the third-party administrator of their self-insurance plan. Ordinarily, this certification would then require the third-party administrator to provide “free” abortifacients to the Little Sisters’ employees, but since the third-party administrator is exempt from this requirement (because they’re administering a “church plan”) and says it won’t provide the abortion pills, then this case is about nothing at all — nothing but a requirement that the Little Sisters fill out a piece of paper to get their government benefit.

Here’s the government’s brief:

Quote
Applicants cannot establish that it is indisputably clear that such a RFRA claim would succeed. Indeed, that reading of RFRA, if accepted, would seemingly invalidate any scheme in which an individual or entity with religious objections is required to complete a certification of entitlement to an opt-out in order to secure the opt-out. That cannot be correct.


But here’s the problem: The certification is not an “opt out,” it’s a document that actually empowers a third party to provide free abortion pills. In that way, it’s more like a voucher than an opt-out. Imagine if the government said to a religious employer, “We’re not going to require you to pay for abortions, but we will require you to provide employees with a document that entitles them to a free abortion at the Planned Parenthood clinic down the street.” Would anyone think for a moment that respected religious liberty? Yet that’s the essence of the government “accommodation” here.

The Little Sisters object to providing an abortion/contraception voucher — a voucher that could be redeemed for free abortifacients at the discretion of a third-party administrator.

So, no, this is not an argument about a form. After all, religious entities (including the Little Sisters of the Poor) fill out forms without objection all the time. It’s about power — whether the Obama administration can force a Catholic charity to empower a third-party to provide free medical services that indisputably and gravely violate the deeply-held religious principles of nuns who are doing good works for the “least of these.”
« Last Edit: January 03, 2014, 04:44:19 PM by Luis Gonzalez »
“[Euthanasia] is what any State medical service has sooner or later got to face. If you are going to be kept alive in institutions run by and paid for by the State, you must accept the State’s right to economize when necessary …” The Ministry of Fear by Graham Green (New York: Penguin Books [1943] 2005, p. 165).

Offline Cincinnatus

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,514
(Did I see this on here or elsewhere?)

All you have to do is burn a little incense at a statue of the Emperor and acknowledge him as a god. You don't have to mean it and it's such a small gesture. What's the harm?
We shall never be abandoned by Heaven while we act worthy of its aid ~~ Samuel Adams

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,534
    • Boiling Frogs
So, Obama's argument here is that the "accommodation" offered to the Sisters is not a violation of their religious freedoms since all they have to do is sign a form that will exempt them from providing  abortifacients and abortions through their insurance plan. The Sisters however are forced to find an insurer "who will cover sterilization, contraceptive and abortion-inducing drugs and devices, and will provide related counseling and education to promote those things", the signed form triggering the start of that coverage.

In essence, Obamacare forces these nuns to shop for insurance coverage that covers what they consider as mortal sin, and become a middle man for that sin. 
“[Euthanasia] is what any State medical service has sooner or later got to face. If you are going to be kept alive in institutions run by and paid for by the State, you must accept the State’s right to economize when necessary …” The Ministry of Fear by Graham Green (New York: Penguin Books [1943] 2005, p. 165).

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,836
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Why would nuns even need abortions or birth control? The glare is usually enough to prevent impure thoughts.

That's as stupid as requiring men's insurance to cover maternity and mammograms.

Oh. Wait ....
The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,534
    • Boiling Frogs
Why would nuns even need abortions or birth control? The glare is usually enough to prevent impure thoughts.

That's as stupid as requiring men's insurance to cover maternity and mammograms.

Oh. Wait ....

I get it.

It's for their employees.
“[Euthanasia] is what any State medical service has sooner or later got to face. If you are going to be kept alive in institutions run by and paid for by the State, you must accept the State’s right to economize when necessary …” The Ministry of Fear by Graham Green (New York: Penguin Books [1943] 2005, p. 165).


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf