Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Posted on 10/01/2007 1:21:03 PM PDT by processing please hold
(CBS/AP) The Supreme Court opened its new term Monday refusing to get involved in two church-state disputes - one over religious organizations paying for workers' birth-control health insurance benefits, the other over an evangelical group's plea to hold religious services at a public library.
The birth-control benefits dispute was triggered by a New York state law that forces religious-based social service agencies to subsidize contraceptives as part of prescription drug coverage they offer employees.
New York is one of 23 states that require employers offering prescription benefits to employees to cover birth control pills as well, the groups say. The state enacted the Women's Health and Wellness Act in 2002 to require health plans to cover contraception and other services aimed at women, including mammography, cervical cancer screenings and bone density exams.
Catholic Charities and other religious groups argued that New York's law violates their First Amendment right to practice their religion because it forces them to violate religious teachings that regard contraception as sinful.
"If the state can compel church entities to subsidize contraceptives in violation of their religious beliefs, it can compel them to subsidize abortions as well," the groups said in urging the court to take their case. "And if it can compel church entities to subsidize abortions, it can require hospitals owned by churches to provide them."
Other Catholic and Baptist organizations are part of the lawsuit. Seventh-Day Adventist and Orthodox Jewish groups signed onto a brief filed in support of Catholic Charities.
In the library case, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco had ruled that public libraries can block religious groups like the Faith Center Church Evangelistic Ministries from worshipping in public meeting rooms.
The Contra Costa library system in the San Francisco Bay area allows groups to use its facilities for educational, cultural and community-related programs.
"Although religious worship is an important institution in any community, we disagree that anything remotely community-related must therefore be granted access to the Antioch Library meeting room," the appeals court concluded in a 2-1 decision.
Allowing worship services would amount to having taxpayers subsidize religious exercises, argued the Contra Costa County, Calif., Library Board, which operated the facility in Antioch, Calif.
In the dispute over making religious organizations subsidize contraceptives, the court rejected a challenge to a similar law in California.
"A church ought to be able to run its affairs and organize relationships with its employees in a way that's consistent with moral values and teachings," said Kevin Baine, a partner at the Williams and Connolly law firm who represents the religious organizations.
The New York law contains an exemption for churches, seminaries and other institutions with a mainly religious mission that primarily serve followers of that religion. Catholic Charities and the other groups sought the exemption, but they hire and serve people of different faiths.
New York's highest court ruled last year that the groups had to comply with the law. The 6-0 decision by the state Court of Appeals hinged on the determination that the groups are essentially social service agencies, not churches.
According to Planned Parenthood, the other states with similar laws are: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and West Virginia.
The birth-control benefits case is Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Albany v. Dinallo, 06-1550. The library case is Faith Center Church v. Glover, 06-1633.
And the persecution of Christianity continues . . .
SSDD
This won't stop them from saying it. They've gone over the edge - mentally.
Hmmm....and what will the reaction be when the same law is forced upon Islam.....?
I'm looking into that now.
The solution seems to be to get rid of the wellness act all together. People are responsible for their own health care. Second, the church should find a private residence to hold worship service or fellowship. Tax dollars and churches don’t mix. They don’t pay for the library so they, as a church, don’t get to use it.
Persecution of christians???? That is quite a reach. Certainly there are plenty of christians who liked the outcome of that vote.
Lord have mercy.
Fags and phony global warming are welcome but Christians are not. What a world what a world.
How many justices have to agree to hear a case????
I would think there are four who would agree to hear those cases, but what do I know???
Isn’t there a Catholic majority in the SCOTUS? This is just stunning.
Agreed. It seems a bit of a stretch to say “If they won’t come to our Church to hear us, they might come to the library to hear us”. Having said that, however- if the church doesn’t get to use the library, neither should any other meeting-group.
So much for the Conservative Supreme court.
Aside from Scalia and Thomas and possibly Roberts and Alitto, its the same old liberal cant from the Ennead of Idiots.
Do American Christian citizens pay taxes? Where do Libraries get the money to be built and stocked?
Certainly there are plenty of christians who liked the outcome of that vote.
Why would they like it?
Sometimes the Court will refuse to hear a case because it is not "ripe." The issue might be better decided in a later case with differing circumstances.
Maybe they decided to defer to the states and their elected representatives, rather than micromanaging local policy by legislating from the bench.
That very comment crossed my mind too when I read the article.
Churches should stop providing insurance coverage.
Why do churches have employees anyway?
And, fifty years ago lots of Christians considered it to be a lack of faith in God to have health insurance. Ain’t that something to think about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.