Obama Response to the Church Totally Unacceptable

Editor’s Note:  Catholic Exchange is happy to announce that Sheila Liaugminas has agreed to blog at Catholic Exchange.  In fact, she’s in the blogger queue already.  The following indicates the tremendous contribution she will be making to our online community.

Misinformation abounds in the media about President Obama’s alleged ”accommodation” for religious liberty in his administration’s hardline HHS mandate.

Let’s have some clarity. Three responses, for now.

First, Liberty Counsel, a group in solidarity with Catholics because everyone’s fundamental conscience rights are at stake in this.

Obama’s “new directive” only underscores the problem that he has the power to issue a directive, without any legislative oversight, that directly conflicts with freedom of religion and the right of conscience.

He stated, “If a woman’s employer is a charity or a hospital that has a religious objection to providing contraceptive services as part of their health plan, the insurance company, not the hospital, not the charity, will be required to reach out and offer the woman contraceptive care free of charge, without co-pays and without hassles. The result will be that religious organizations won’t have to pay for these services and no religious institution will have to provide these services directly.” (Emphasis added)

Obama’s speech reveals his fundamental misunderstanding of the First Amendment. Forcing an insurance company to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients is only an accounting gimmick, which he acknowledges would still require religious organizations to fund contraceptives and abortifacients indirectly. Someone has to pay for this funding, and that burden will fall upon all employers, including religious organizations. Moreover, religious institutions that are self-insured, such as Liberty University, the world’s largest Christian school, are still required to pay directly for these items.

Laundering a Catholic or Christian organization’s money through the insurance company to pay for abortifacients does not suddenly correct the moral sin inflicted by Obama. ObamaCare is a direct attack on the moral and religious beliefs of our nation. The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty representing three organizations in lawsuits against the Obama administration.

Facing a political firestorm, President Obama today announced his intent to make changes to a controversial rule that would require religious institutions, in violation of their conscience, to pay for contraception, sterilization, and abortifacient drugs. But this “compromise” is an exercise in obfuscation, not a good faith effort to solve the problem. Thousands of churches, religious organizations, businesses, individuals, and others will still be forced to violate their religious beliefs.

For example, the fake compromise will not help the Becket Fund’s clients Belmont Abbey College in North Carolina, Colorado Christian University, and Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN), a Catholic media organization. They will still be forced to pay for insurance that provides contraceptive coverage. The White House’s claim that “the insurance companies will pay for it” is silly. For-profit insurance companies aren’t going to donate contraceptives and abortion drugs to employees; the employer will pay for it one way or the other. More fundamentally, the Becket Fund’s clients still face the same chilling dilemma they did yesterday: choosing between helping their employees buy immoral abortion drugs or paying huge fines.

“This is a false ‘compromise’ designed to protect the President’s re-election chances, not to protect the right of conscience,” says Hannah Smith, Senior Legal Counsel for The Becket Fund. “No one should be fooled by what amounts to an accounting gimmick. Religious employers will still have to violate their religious convictions or pay heavy annual fines to the IRS.”

According to a White House “fact sheet,” some religious employers will no longer be required to provide insurance coverage for contraception, sterilization, and abortion-causing drugs; coverage for those services will instead be provided for free directly by insurance companies. This does not protect anyone’s conscience. First, the problem is helping employees get abortion drugs, not the cost of providing those drugs. Since providing insurance benefits would still help employees get insurance, religious employers still have to choose between providing health benefits that help employees get abortion drugs, and paying annual fines. Second, thousands of religious organizations self insure, meaning that they will be forced to pay directly for these services in violation of their religious beliefs. Third, it is unclear which religious organizations are permitted to claim the new exemption, and whether it will extend to for-profit organizations, individuals, or non-denominational organizations.

“It is especially telling that the details of this fake ‘compromise’ will likely not be announced until after the election,” said Smith. “Religious freedom is not a political football to be kicked around in an election-year.

And yet it is. Which is unacceptable to thinking people.

This so-called “accommodation” changes nothing of moral substance and fails to remove the assault on religious liberty and the rights of conscience which gave rise to the controversy. It is certainly no compromise. The reason for the original bipartisan uproar was the administration’s insistence that religious employers, be they institutions or individuals, provide insurance that covered services they regard as gravely immoral and unjust. Under the new rule, the government still coerces religious institutions and individuals to purchase insurance policies that include the very same services.

It is no answer to respond that the religious employers are not “paying” for this aspect of the insurance coverage. For one thing, it is unrealistic to suggest that insurance companies will not pass the costs of these additional services on to the purchasers. More importantly, abortion-drugs, sterilizations, and contraceptives are a necessary feature of the policy purchased by the religious institution or believing individual. They will only be made available to those who are insured under such policy, by virtue of the terms of the policy.

It is morally obtuse for the administration to suggest (as it does) that this is a meaningful accommodation of religious liberty because the insurance company will be the one to inform the employee that she is entitled to the embryo-destroying “five day after pill” pursuant to the insurance contract purchased by the religious employer. It does not matter who explains the terms of the policy purchased by the religiously affiliated or observant employer. What matters is what services the policy covers. To call it “morally obtuse” is both intellectually restrained and academically polite.

The simple fact is that the Obama administration is compelling religious people and institutions who are employers to purchase a health insurance contract that provides abortion-inducing drugs, contraception, and sterilization. This is a grave violation of religious freedom and cannot stand. It is an insult to the intelligence of Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox Christians, Jews, Muslims, and other people of faith and conscience to imagine that they will accept an assault on their religious liberty if only it is covered up by a cheap accounting trick. That transparency Obama promised when he ran for president is actually being delivered, whether he likes it or not.

Pages: 1 2

Sheila Liaugminas

By

Sheila Gribben Liaugminas, of Chicago, is a member of the Voices editorial board, and was host of The Right Questions on Relevant Radio and Issues and Answers news show. She and her husband have two sons, one a seminarian and the other a college student. Follow updates on this story (and contact Sheila) at www.inforumblog.com.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • Anonymous

    I always understood “health-care” as being primarily the treatment and cure of diseases. So since when did pregnancy become a disease? or abortion a right (rite)?
    “Religious liberty has been granted to churches and to individuals not by the State but by the hand of God,” Bishop Lori pointed out. “It is the first of our freedoms in the Bill of Rights and at the heart of all the other freedoms.”

  • Fred

    Check your facts before you write.  There was NO ACCOMODATION.
    The Federal Register shows that the rule proposed in August 2011 was finalized WITHOUT CHANGE.
    Obama simply lied about accomodation, and you swallowed his statement hook, line and sinker.

  • The Brooklyn Warrior

     One of the effects of mortal sin is the darkening of our reason and you don’t have to be Catholic to commit a mortal sin. Get it.

  • Joe DeVet

    The title “Father of Lies” has already been assigned, by someone close to us all!

    I nominate Obama for the title “Son of Lies.”  The truth is not in him.

  • John Jamison

    If this is all true, then why did the bishops accept it? Are they dropping the ball by not fighting for my rights as a catholic employer not to have  to obey my conscience? It seems like they are only seeing this from how it affects them directly and those directly tied to the church. I thought that the parishioners were the base of the church. If they don’t fight hard for us, they’re SO-CALLED flock, they soon will have nothing left to fight for. Obama hit you hard and then backed off a little and you caved. The true fight is the religious rights of the base of the church YOUR PARISHIONERS! If the people working for me don’t like the fact that I don’t offer birth control, then they can use their freedom and find another job, like people in this country have been doing since the end of slavery! If Obama is right and insurance is cheaper with birth control, then they should theoretically  find a stronger higher paying competitor fairly easily. You know the whole birth control insurance is cheaper idea is a lie because if it wasn’t then the rates would have been cheaper before this whole debacle took place. You don’t think someone ran those numbers? THE BISHOPS ARE DROPPING THE BALL AND NEED TO ACT TO OUST OBAMA AND THE ANTI RELIGIOUS FREEDOM GROUPS IN THE ELECTION THIS FALL OR THEY WON’T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THEIR POSITION BECAUSE IT WILL CEASE TO EXIST!

MENU