iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Obama Birth Control: Religious Groups Exempted From Contraception Rule

Obama Birth Control Religious

Posted: 02/11/2012 2:36 pm

By David Gibson
Religion News Service

(RNS) Facing growing furor from religious groups, President Obama on Friday (Feb. 10) unveiled an "accommodation" in which health insurance companies, rather than religious institutions, will provide employees with contraception coverage.

The revised approach effectively removes all faith-based organizations -- not just houses of worship but also hospitals and universities -- from covering employees' contraception costs.

"Every woman should be in control of the decisions that affect her own health," Obama said in a midday address at the White House.

"Now, as we move to implement this rule, however, we've been mindful that there's another principle at stake here -- and that's the principle of religious liberty, an inalienable right that is enshrined in our Constitution," Obama said. "As a citizen and as a Christian, I cherish this right."

At issue was a mandate, part of Obama's 2009 health care overhaul, that employers provide free birth control coverage. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced the mandate Jan. 20.

Religious groups, particularly Catholics, fiercely objected, saying the federal government should not force institutions to violate the tenets of their faith. Women's advocates argued that employees should have access to birth control regardless of where they work.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which led the charge against the contraception mandate, said on Friday that it would study the revised rule.

"While there may be an openness to respond to some of our concerns, we reserve judgment on the details until we have them," said Cardinal-designate Timothy Dolan, president of USCCB.

"We hope to work with the administration to guarantee that Americans' consciences and our religious freedom are not harmed by these regulations."

Obama was under fierce pressure to forge a compromise. Conservatives labeled the mandate an abridgment of religious freedom, a rallying cry taken up by GOP presidential candidates, including front-runner Mitt Romney.

Under the new plan, a religiously affiliated institution would not be required to provide contraception coverage. Rather, the institution's insurance company would offer the coverage for free and without raising premiums.

Sister Carol Keehan, head of the Catholic Health Association, an umbrella group for more than 600 Catholic hospitals, said Friday she was "very pleased" with Obama's compromise, which she said "protects the religious liberty and conscience rights of Catholic institutions."

Keehan was a key supporter of the president's health care reform law -- against the wishes of the U.S. Catholic bishops -- but she had voiced strong criticism of the initial contraception regulations.

Keehan was joined by a range of progressive Catholic groups and leaders in praising the new rules. Many of them had been upset with the administration's initial decision on the mandate.

Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood, also welcomed Friday's decision.

"We believe the compliance mechanism does not compromise a woman's ability to access these critical birth control benefits," Richards said.

The furor over the contraception mandate appeared to catch the White House off guard, as it struggled to keep the focus on access to contraception, which is broadly used by American women, even Catholics.

Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski told CNN he thought Obama is "just kicking the can down the road."

"He's hasn't really addressed our concerns," Wenski said. "I think the only thing to do is...to take back the whole thing."

In recent days, as they sensed the political tide turning in their favor, several USCCB officials have indicated they wanted to go for more than just a broader exemption and wanted the entire contraception mandate eliminated.

That tack may have less appeal in light of the White House's new plan. But that may not stop Catholic conservatives from keeping up the pressure on Obama.

William Donohue, president of the conservative Catholic League, called the new policy a "ploy" and said Catholics "will only be impelled to revolt."

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins likewise called the proposal "paperwork gimmicks."

"This revised HHS mandate does nothing to change the fundamentally anti-religious, anti-conscience and anti-life contraceptive mandate," he said.

On the other side, some abortion rights supporters were also unhappy.

"This administration has shown that it will not stand with women when it comes to supporting access to, and easing the availability of, reproductive healthcare services," said Jon O'Brien, head of Catholics for Choice. "One wonders what has been gained by this 'accommodation.' It certainly isn't the support of Catholics."

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW HUFFPOST RELIGION

By David Gibson Religion News Service (RNS) Facing growing furor from religious groups, President Obama on Friday (Feb. 10) unveiled an "accommodation" in which health insurance companies, rather ...
By David Gibson Religion News Service (RNS) Facing growing furor from religious groups, President Obama on Friday (Feb. 10) unveiled an "accommodation" in which health insurance companies, rather ...
Filed by Jahnabi Barooah  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 502
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
  1 of 1  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
Cacey 04:57 PM on 02/13/2012
The Archbishop's criticism of the Presdent's accomodation "kicking the issue down the road" is indeed amusing given the historical stance of the Roman Catholic Church's kicking reality down the road. Was the world not flat? Did not the sun rotate around the earth? What good were innoculations against disease when we have leaches and bloodletting? And now, with one of the greatest if not the greatest  Read More...
10:52 PM on 11/29/2012
This literally changes nothing. Premiums will raise a bit due to a made up reason when the insurance is up for renewal each year. The birth control will still be paid for by these Catholic institutions, it will just be said to be paid for a different reason.
06:01 AM on 11/18/2012
Wonderful post! We are linking to this great post on our website. Keep up the good writing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gibranII
seeking peace through equality
06:36 PM on 02/16/2012
He has shown a willingness to compromise..now would the zealots on the right .do the same... I find it very wrong that faith based folks do not support the need for universal health care.. that is perhaps the biggest hypocrisy of these debates.,
jchandjd
4 degrees, 8 figures
02:46 PM on 02/16/2012
Religious organizations do not have the First Amendment right to freedom of practices under their religious beliefs without governmental interference. This is where the ban on bigomy comes from.

In 1878, the Supreme Court was first called to interpret the extent of the Free Exercise Clause in Reynolds v. United States, as related to the prosecution of polygamy under federal law. The Supreme Court upheld Reynolds' conviction for bigamy, deciding that to do otherwise would provide constitutional protection for a gamut of religious beliefs, including those as extreme as human sacrifice. The Court said (at page 162): "Congress cannot pass a law for the government of the Territory which shall prohibit the free exercise of religion. The first amendment to the Constitution expressly forbids such legislation." Of federal territorial laws, the Court said: "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may with practices."

The President's position is not one from Congress, and is therefore allowed.
01:26 PM on 02/16/2012
At cost, the church has the ability to operate at cost or lower costs, however a new tax code would boggle the financial structure, I'm guessing and calculating all the re configuring and figuring of accounts and bank statements and deposits, and the people that are dependent on those deposits, and hospitals for their lively hood, the small economies in developing countries, that depend upon the church to operate at cost in their small economies, plus risky investments are the tendency in cases when handed a lot of doe and farther more, note it is just the tendency, and I am just speculating...
01:07 PM on 02/16/2012
I don't understand, why they can't (can/may) go out and buy a condom, unless there are more complicated issues I don't know about, are aware of, or understand, there fore as it were before (tax code) and a physician involved I would approach the issues along the mind of what the patient needs, because the doctor is there and involved. As a precautionary measure make it available to patients, via insurance programs that operate not solely in america but as sister programs and whatever it reminds us of we can discuss.
12:01 PM on 02/16/2012
Completely misleading headline.
photo
Aikaterina
A Greek-American living in California
09:48 AM on 02/16/2012
The Catholic Church hierarchy does not want to violate the "tenets of their faith" I wonder if and where pedophilia (committed by priests) falls within that category. Too bad the bishops, cardinals and popes who all knew about the crimes-abuses against their parishioners' children weren't as concerned, vocal, and openly horrified as they pretend to be over the issue of contraception.
10:56 PM on 11/29/2012
There are corrupt individuals within every faith. Islam is a great, loving religion, for example, but has extremist terrorists as well. There have been corrupt Jews, there have been corrupt Pagans, there have been corrupt ANYTHING. The Catholic church is and always has been against pedophilia, and just because a few HUMAN, FLAWED priests committed crimes and sin does not undermine Christianity. God is NOT human and is completely NOT flawed. He is the only perfect being out there, so using a human as an excuse to hate Christianity is incredibly flawed and makes zero sense.
11:56 PM on 02/15/2012
This article is a bit misleading. The accommodation has been met positively by groups including catholic institutions, catholic charities, and the likes planned parenthood. It is a brilliant accommodation because it provides women with paid access to contraception while allowing the administration to draw the GOP into their favorite cultural erogenous zone, women's reproductive health. As this talk is a losing issue for the GOP it is a winning issue for the DEMS, sane people, and women of course.

As for the Bishops who picked this fight in the first place, the Bishop who would be thrilled if NO woman used birth control, they refer to birth control as women treating pregnancy as an illness, they can pound sand.

After all, with over 90% of catholic women in the USA using birth control, why should we listen to the bishop when the members of their own church don't listen to them, thank god.

Women won with this decision and the administration won. Principal and political advantage.

Well done Mr. President, well done.
11:05 PM on 02/15/2012
I personally believe that all women should have the right to contraceptives at their choice. HOWEVER, I also believe that the federal government does NOT have the right to tell a church what to do if that law violates the tenets of that faith. We are not talking about a religion that has just sprung up over night, Christianity and it's tenets are very old. The same would apply to gay marriage and abortion.

The government does not have the right to tell a church they have to marry a gay couple or have to support a hospital that will perform abortions, those are direct violations of the tenets of that faith and are clearly outlined for all to see, this should not be a surprise. So I personally feel that the compromise is near perfect, it still allows women the freedom to contraceptives at their choice while maintaining the religious freedoms.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
JoeLosFeliz
Paid posters: unethical, no credibility
11:56 PM on 02/15/2012
So, churches have the right to do anything they want to if it part of their professed beliefs? What about polygamy? What about Heaven's Gate, The Branch Davidians and the Order of the Solar Temple and their incredibly destructive beliefs?

The Catholic Church wasn't forced to get health care in the marketplace to which these rules apply.

What church has been or would be forced to perform a gay marriage? The legality of marriage is a civil issue (hence the "legal" part of it). No church is ever forced by the state to marry people. If a couple of Satanists went to a Catholic church and wanted to get married in the church, the church could refuse and not suffer any legal consequences.

It amazes me that we are still even having the conversation about contraception. What year is this? How is this relevant to the discourse we need to be having about the real issues that will affect us and our children for decades to come (i.e. the economy, environment, etc.).
12:51 AM on 02/16/2012
I would argue that polygamy should be legal on religious grounds and with regards to heaven's gate and any other religion that wants to committ suicide go ahead. That is their right to do so. The government should not have the right to tell people what they can and can not do in the name of their faith as long as that faith does not violate that person's own civil rights against their knowledge. The key to the last statement is against their knowledge, so the people working for these churchs are AWARE of these policies and are making an informed decision to work there.

THe gay marriage comment was just illustrate a point that has been contentious, you don't need to get your panties in a twist relax..

Last, your point on talking about more important issues, your the one posting on a board discussing this topic, if you don't want to discuss it don't post here. Go post on a board that is discussing a topic you deem more important.
12:06 AM on 02/16/2012
Of course the government has the right to direct churches to do all sorts.

We are a nation of laws and as much as religious freedom must be protected, we must be protected from the phobias, and bigotry of religion. The doors swings both ways.

If you are a church and you decide to run a hospital and take federal funds (not to mention the tax considerations) then you must follow the workers rights laws just like every other business.

A woman's right to determine her reproductive health should be paramount.

The homophobic, slightly misogynistic church can suck it!

With all due respect of course.
12:54 AM on 02/16/2012
I have to disagree with you there. Obviously you have the right to your opinion but we may have to agree to disagree. I do not believe that the government has the right to tell a church how to run it's affairs as long as those affairs don't directly impinge on the civil rights of any person without their knowledge and consent. A person working in a church is fully aware of the policy of that church and if she chooses to work there under full consent then she must take the consiquences of that choice. If she does not like it then get a different job.
jchandjd
4 degrees, 8 figures
03:07 PM on 02/15/2012
It seems to me that people against the law about drafting soldiers have been opposed to that action by the government on moral and religious grounds for decades. Why do the Catholics think they have any right beyond anyone else to an exemption to the law? It might be find if they were not going to employ anyone, but they CHOSE to become an employer, and thus MUST be subject to the same sets of business rules as everyone else!
11:01 PM on 02/15/2012
No, the point of religious freedom is that the government does not have the right to tell a religion what to do, especially if that violates the tenets of that faith.
jchandjd
4 degrees, 8 figures
10:28 AM on 02/16/2012
Sorry but that is incorrect. That is not what the law says nor the Constitution. Under your premise satanists could sacrifice virgins under the tenets of their faith and the government should be powerless to dictate otherwise. That seems fairly unwarranted. The Constitution states that the government shall not involve itself in the "establihsment" of religion. This means they will not form a state religion to force citizens to follow. Religious freedom only reaches to the realm of religious belief and NOT religious practice. Thus, those deciding to step out of the "religion" business in to the practice of medicine must obey the same laws as any other businesses doing the same thing.
jchandjd
4 degrees, 8 figures
03:02 PM on 02/15/2012
The dinner bell is ringing in hell and the names of the catholic bishops are finely engraved on the place cards at the table.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:01 PM on 02/15/2012
The Catholic church and its institutions receive 2.9 billion dollars in taxpayers money per year, 62% of their budget. As a taxpayer I do not want one dollar of my taxpayer money going to support ANY catholic institutions. Where is the pressure on the white house for THIS?
SabeWhat
If you lie to win you lose, always, eventually.
02:53 PM on 02/15/2012
Controlling reproduction is the Man's right. Contraception interferes with that right. Contraception gives control of reproduction to the female. Not one sperm should ever have its life go to waste - every sperm dump must be seeking an egg to fertilize whether the woman wants it or not.

In a nutshell - this is what this is all about.
SabeWhat
If you lie to win you lose, always, eventually.
02:46 PM on 02/15/2012
Catholic charities receive $2.9BB tax free annually from the Federal Government.
What is the net worth, WW, of the Catholic Church?
What other money does the Catholic Business Arm receive from the Federal Government Annually?

How much is received by the following annually from the Federal Government?
- Protestant Charities?
- Jewish Charities?
- Muslin Charities?
- Jehovah Witness Charities?
- Buddhist Charities?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:02 PM on 02/15/2012
Where is the petition to sign that we do not want to pay a single taxpayer dollar to the catholic church?