Health Law’s Contraceptive Coverage Isn’t Burden on Religion, Court Rules

[trotsky]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/15/us/federal-court-upholds-health-laws-contraceptive-coverage.html

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court Tuesday handed the Obama administration another victory in its effort to guarantee coverage of contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act, rejecting a challenge by the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Roman Catholic nuns.

The United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, in Denver, found that the nuns could opt out of a requirement to provide contraceptive coverage under an “accommodation” devised by the administration. The rule does not impose a “substantial burden” on the nuns’ free exercise of religion, the court said.

Four other federal appeals courts — in the District of Columbia, Philadelphia, Chicago and New Orleans — have issued similar decisions upholding the accommodation, which is intended to address the concerns of nonprofit religious organizations that object to providing contraceptive coverage for women enrolled in their health plans.

In the decision on Tuesday, Judge Scott M. Matheson Jr. called opting out of contraceptive coverage a routine administrative task, “as easy as obtaining a parade permit, filing a simple tax form or registering to vote.”

While it's still unfortunate they can opt out and deny employees health care, it's a victory worth celebrating and perhaps a sign that the horrid Hobby Lobby decision can be revisited.

[Warpy]

1. Hissy fits about covering it are a burden on women, an unconscionable one.

Churches are still free to send women who aren't constantly pregnant to whatever hell they're trying to convince people exists. They're not free to push their hateful dogma into civil law.

Contraception is basic to our health and lives.

The Hobby Lobby decision needs to be overturned. Religious conscience applies to individuals who use it to govern their own lives. It doesn't apply to corporations that want to cheat women out of the benefits they've taken pay cuts to get.

[trotsky]

4. And if contraception is against your religious beliefs,

then don't use it! Not too tricky here folks!

[Kber]

2. There's a Trojan horse here that is worth noting

This decision actually takes us a tiny step closer towards separating employment and health insurance.

It opens a way for a segment of the population to access limited insurance that is totally separate from what their employers offer ( or don't offer).

It may be the camels nose under the tent that may point away towards decoupling health care access from employers whims.

Ironically, Hobby Lobby may end up weakening, rather that strengthening, employers' control over their employees.

[trotsky]

3. You're right, that could indeed follow.

Talk about silver linings!

[AtheistCrusader]

6. That would friggin' rule. Undo some damage from WW2.

Take us a step closer to, or at least making the market compatible with a single payer system.

[Lordquinton]

5. If they are offering services like health care

they should not be allowed to dictate what goes on between you and your doctor. Insurance companies are already violating that, we should not be handing that power to anyone else.

Maybe if people respected doctor/patient privilege the same way they respect priests?