Obama administration offers new 'compromise' on HHS mandate [CWN]


#1

The Obama administration has announced a new policy that would allow religious employers to provide employees with health-care plans that do not include coverage for contraceptives.The ...

More...


#2

No dice......Cath. Church will reject ! They don't compromise with the devil.


#3

As a private employer who objects to the government forcing their secular agenda down my throat, I hope the bishops tell B.O. that this won't fly. The bishops can't do this because it's philosophically inconsistent, get a free pass for the Church "proper" while leaving the Church militant to fend for themselves.


#4

All with court cases against Katheline Sebelius, et.al.......either hang together, or divided they lose ...
Send it to the Catholic Supremes.....


#5

I honestly don't see any philosophical difference between this "compromise" and the last one.


#6

religiousliberties.org/hhsmandate.asp

Statement of Michael P. Warsaw, President and Chief Executive Officer of EWTN Global Catholic Network in response to Notice of Proposed Rulemaking by the US Government on the HHS Contraceptive Services Mandate Issued Friday, February 1, 2013:

"This morning the US Department of Health and Human Services issued a notice of proposed rulemaking on the government mandate that employee health plans must provide contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs as part of their coverage. On February 9, 2012, EWTN was the first organization to file a lawsuit challenging this mandate shortly after the original rules were promulgated by the government. That lawsuit is still pending in the US District Court in Birmingham, Alabama.

We have analyzed today's notice with our legal team from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and the initial conclusions are not promising. First, this is simply a notice of a proposed rule; it is not an actual rule that changes anything. Second, while the proposed rules might expand the mandate's religious exemption for some organizations affiliated directly with the Church, it does not appear that EWTN will qualify for this exemption. Third, the proposed rules have not dealt with the concerns of self-insured health plans like EWTN's. Today's notice from the government simply kicks this can further down the road.

Sadly, throughout this proposed rule, the government continues to make the erroneous assertion that contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs are health care. They are not.

We will continue to study this notice with our attorneys, but are highly doubtful it will provide EWTN with any relief from this immoral mandate. EWTN remains firmly committed to pressing forward with our case in the Federal Courts and will take all steps necessary to challenge this unjust mandate."


#7

[quote="_Abyssinia, post:6, topic:313408"]
religiousliberties.org/hhsmandate.asp

Statement of Michael P. Warsaw, President and Chief Executive Officer of EWTN Global Catholic Network in response to Notice of Proposed Rulemaking by the US Government on the HHS Contraceptive Services Mandate Issued Friday, February 1, 2013:

[/quote]

Right on, right on !!

Hold firm, the Gov. offer is meant to divide and conquer !


#8

[quote="Windmill, post:3, topic:313408"]
As a private employer who objects to the government forcing their secular agenda down my throat, I hope the bishops tell B.O. that this won't fly. The bishops can't do this because it's philosophically inconsistent, get a free pass for the Church "proper" while leaving the Church militant to fend for themselves.

[/quote]

The new policy, unveiled February 1, would apply only to nonprofit institutions with direct ties to a religious body. Private employers who have moral objections to subsidizing contraception would not be covered by the proposal. The Obama administration reasoned that this approach should satisfy the concerns of religious groups because they would not “have to contract, arrange, pay or refer for any contraceptive coverage to which they object on religious grounds.”

So, apparently, if you are a private employer, you don't get to exercise your religious liberty. :hmmm:

However, all employees would then also be enrolled in a separate policy, carried by a 3rd-party provider, that would cover contraceptives at no additional cost.

Would be enrolled? Does that mean without the option to opt out? So now the employee isn't allowed to exercise their religious liberty. No mention here about who has to pay for it.

Jon


#9

Just seeing the word "compromise" in the thread title gives me pause. This administration doesn't know the meaning of the word. I'll believe it when I see it.


#10

[quote="CWN_News, post:1, topic:313408"]
The Obama administration has announced a new policy that would allow religious employers to provide employees with health-care plans that do not include coverage for contraceptives.The ...

More...

[/quote]

Obama needs to stop acting like he's God. Since when did it become his job to tell any of us what we can and can not have in our healthcare. I am so sick of this guy. He does not have the right to dictate any of this. Our government needs to back down. Obama works for Satan. He is not a President for the people only for evil! The sadest day in the Catholic history was the day this man was elected President. Why Catholics elected him a second term is something I will never understand. He has never gotten this Catholic's vote!!


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.