DC Court Tells Catholic Groups: Submit to HHS Mandate or Pay Massive Fines

The National Catholic Register ^ | 5/22/15 | Peter Jesserer Smith

[HiTech RedNeck]

Even the Catholic position comes from a highly pro-life construal of the classic Judeo-Christian scriptures. They shouldn’t be penalized by a sane government for obeying them.

[exnavy]

Yes, you are correct. God is the true arbiter of justice, He will have the final say.

[Salvation]

Sounds like this is headed for the Supreme Court!

[Alberta's Child]

Before they take that step, religious organizations should simply fire all of their “civilian” employees.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Heretofore the USSC has been fairly friendly to such claims, but if modern trends continue it may not always be. Enforcing the ramifications of “gay marriage” will harden its heart.

[RnMomof7]

Meanwhile Muslims may be exempted from Obama care ..

[PGR88]

I pray that it will be done - peacefully if that is an option.

IMHO, what supports the progressive left and their social engineering schemes are unbacked, printed, Federal Reserve money and its fake interest rates. It has allowed $18 Trillion in government debt (and rising daily), which funds every scheme from Obamacare to ACORN. Access to fake money allows even conservative politicians to avoid making difficult choices - and the state rolls on.

Maybe we can get rid of it without a Civil War. I don't know.

[HiTech RedNeck]

That is the most sensible move. Let it be a church ministry staffed with church Catholics (and analogous moves be made by evangelical ministries).

[sphinx]

“We concluded that the regulation challenged in this case does not, as a matter of law or fact, give plaintiffs’ conduct the contraception-facilitating effect of which they complain,” stated the majority ruling, written by Judge Nina Pillard, in denying relief from the mandate under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

The plaintiffs have to pay for it. I guess that is not enough of a nexus to convince some judges that there is a nexus.

I know, I know: under the Obama accommodation, it is true that the plaintiffs don't have to pay for an insurance policy containing contraceptives as a stated benefit. Instead they have to pay exactly the same price for a policy which is silent on contraceptive benefits, with said benefits, as a matter of law, being provided "free" by the insurance company. I guess you have to go to an elite law school to perceive a difference.

[9thLife]

Paging His Emminence Cardinal Dola, who cut the deal with his Obamaness and then sold it to the flock.

[9thLife]

N. DolaN.

[Sacajaweau]

Why is mandatory contraception participation a part of healthcare to start with? But your own damn contraceptives.

[gingerbread]

Oh, all those civilians will know immediately that they are out of a job, when these religious institutions shut their doors. That means all religious schools, hospitals, and everything else that is religious. Then let these “FOOLS” in the DC government tell their people what they’ll do to replace all of the ones they have shut down.

[ought-six]

No, you’re not a slow learner. You are like a lot of us: It’s very sobering to admit that so many of our fellow citizens are hostile to the dream that was the United States, and that they are in fact traitors. So, we try not to believe it.

[Mrs. Don-o]

bfl

[dila813]

These lower courts keep ignoring the rulings of the Supreme Court on these issues.

If I was a Supreme, I would be pissed off.

If an issue has already been decided, if there something the Court can do to rule on a case without hearing it?

[Fithal the Wise]

So difficult to understand:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

[Rashputin]

Technically, it's a regulation with the force of law in order to implement the law that was passed. That lets Congress can shrug its shoulders, say that's never what they intended, and pretend they didn't in fact pass a law that violates the First Amendment.

It's all a matter of what the meaning of "is" is and since it's just about sex, don't worry about it.

Besides, after teaching that contraception was a sin for over four hundred years all the non-Catholic "Christian" churches changed their mind, said that God changed His mind, and now don't really care anyway.

Look at the huge demonstrations and protests against this. That tells you all you really need to know about how much US "Christians" (Catholic and non-Catholic alike) actually care about the First Amendment protection for freedom of religion. US "Christians" care about economics, not about Christianity. They'll roll over and play dead whenever the USSC says they should. As long as the "invisible hand" is free to keep fisting the middle class it's all good.

JMHo

[JoeFromSidney]

In 1914 the Catholic Bishops as a corporate body demanded socialized medicine. Now they and we have it. They don't like it, but unfortunately it's the Catholics in the pews, not the Bishop in the Chancery, who will bear the brunt of it. I find it doesn't really help to say, "We told you so."

[Jeff Chandler]

Now they and we have it.

Indeed. They readily lay the yoke of statism upon the shoulders of the peons while demanding exemption for themselves.