Religion
Related: About this forumOpt out option expected for religious insurers who oppose contraceptives
By Dan Merica, CNN
updated 6:33 AM EST, Fri February 1, 2013
Washington (CNN) -- Religiously affiliated organizations will be able to opt out of providing their employees with insurance coverage for contraceptives under updates to an Obama administration mandate that the Department of Health and Human Services is expected to unveil on Friday, according to two sources.
In March, after an uproar among religious institutions that didn't want to pay for contraceptives, the Obama administration offered several policy suggestions that would require the administrator of the insurance policy, not the religious institution or the insurer, to pay for contraception coverage and invited comment on those proposals.
The administration is expected to detail how it will handle two of the more controversial situations, said a source familiar with Friday's announcement.
"Religiously affiliated organizations will be given the option of exempting themselves from the requirement of providing their employees with contraceptive access or service that they are morally opposed to," said the source.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/31/politics/religion-contraceptive-insurance/index.html
cbayer
(146,218 posts)The will still maintain that they are paying for it one way or another and that won't be acceptable, imo.
eomer
(3,845 posts)Apparently the cost to let women control their reproduction is less than the extra maternity benefits that result from depriving them of the tools for that control.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)We shall see.
rug
(82,333 posts)cbayer
(146,218 posts)Ron Obvious
(6,261 posts)I don't think this is reasonable at all. Contraceptives are health care, and it's not the place of the employers to have a say in this.
This would open up the door for e.g. an organisation run by Jehovahs to refuse to pay for blood transfusions or a Christian Science-run business to pay for no healthcare whatsoever and so on.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)going to inhibit implementation in significant ways.
Without a compromise, we could be looking at contraceptive coverage being denied to everyone.
At least with this compromise, all women will have access.
Catholic institutions have refused to provide things such as abortions forever. It hasn't led to what you describe with JH's or Christian Scientists.
Adsos Letter
(19,459 posts)SOURCE:
Americans United for Separation of Church and State
Press Release
Feb 1, 2013
The Obama administrations proposed rule on access to birth control for employees at religious institutions appears to preserve women's access to contraception while bending over backward to address religious objections to the prior rules, according to Americans United for Separation of Church and State.
Birth control is a fact of modern life, said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. This proposed rule acknowledges that reality while going out of its way to accommodate religious groups. This should more than satisfy religiously affiliated institutions that have objected to the birth control mandate."
The rule strikes a balance between guaranteeing access for birth control consistent with a woman's conscience and the objection of some religious providers," Lynn continued. It aims to ensure that Americans can get access to the birth control they need and want yet shields religiously affiliated institutions from paying for it directly or indirectly.
https://www.au.org/media/press-releases/americans-united-issues-statement-on-obama-contraceptive-rule
He concludes by noting that "the proposed accommodation goes beyond what the Constitution requires," and that further comment will come after the details are worked out.
rug
(82,333 posts)Watch the churches withdrw their lawsuits and AU, the FFRF and ACLU file their own.
Adsos Letter
(19,459 posts)It sounds like AU is supporting this. Why would they sue?
rug
(82,333 posts)I was just reading some articles criticizing it as sacrficing reproductive health care for workers to religious interests. I'll just keep quiet for a while.
If I went silent after every time I misunderstood something they would be referring to me as the modern day Calvin Coolidge.