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.
Your contention that most Christian leaders are money grubbing hypocrites is ludicrous.
I guess we'll have to wait for their first test case to come to the hospital demanding an abortion before his feet are put to the fire and see which way he jumps.
There is a simple solution to this. Eliminate prescription coverage until this law is repealed and let them know why.
Actions have consequences. Make New York the scapre goat AS WELL THEY SHOULED BE!
It cuts two ways.
Catholic charities and hospitals grew in the big cities over the years because there were lots of ethnic Catholics in those cities, lots of vibrant parishes, and lots of poor Catholics needing help.
Now in most cases the parishes have shrunk, Catholic ethnics have moved to the suburbs, black Protestants and others have moved in, parish revenues are down, and the people they are helping are mostly not Catholics. The Church is willing to help needy non-Catholics, which it also does with its parochial schools, but there comes a point where the system is at risk of breaking down.
So if you look at the bottom line, which Egan has certainly been forced to do, closing parishes and balancing budgets, then you may conclude that it would be more practical to close a few hospitals and let the city pay for taking care of the poor and sick, especially if they are going to take that kind of attitude and bite the hand that helps to feed them.
The cult of Islam will be exempt because they use the cultural minority concept to back their superficial claims.
Yes. See 44, which I wrote before seeing your post.
I think it’s the only moral course of action open to them, other than defying the law.
Interesting...
I've had enough of charlatan preachers and pedophile priest stories to last me a life time. Politicians who say they are religious and follow the word of God then support abortion. I've seen enough of organized religion to go my own way when it comes to worshiping God.
Billy Graham is the only preacher to me that I would listen too. He lives humbly. Like a man of God is supposed to.
You think I'm ludicrous- I hope I can get to sleep tonight knowing you think that about me.
The USSC doesn’t seem to want to take on any hot potato cases, like church or the 2nd.
1st Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
OK, here is how it friggin' works: Congress can not tell you and me what Church to attend or what religion to believe in. Congress is the only entity with the power to establish a religion and they would do so by passing a law. And may I remind folks that they are forbidden from doing so. There is no threat to the establishment of a religion because Congress is not passing laws telling us which religion to believe in). A prayer in school does not establish a religion. A manger scene on public property does not establish a religion. And neither does the Ten Commandments on public property. No more then the Menorah does. Now, pass a law that says you can not pray in school and you just limited the free exercise thereof. Pass a law that says you can not put a manger scene on public property and you just limited the free exercise thereof.
Now, you and I have been given inalienable rights. These are God given rights. No man or Government has the authority to take them away. If folks don't like that then they can live under man given rights and we will see how long they last.
Now, I believe the Socialist/Commies want to remove God from public view. Why? Well, as an American, I pray to my God and we solve my problems together. Remove God and people will begin to forget about God and they will pray to the Government to take care of them from the cradle to the grave.
Why do these people have to stand on my last nerve?
then you may conclude that it would be more practical to close a few hospitals and let the city pay for taking care of the poor and sick, especially if they are going to take that kind of attitude and bite the hand that helps to feed them.
I agree.
It's like states demanding and making it harder for folks to smoke by eternally trying to add more and more taxes on a pack of cigarettes causing many to stop smoking than they bitch about the tobacco revenue they're losing. Biting the hand that feeds them as well.
Yes it is.
I'm only going to use part of your comment if I may?
If they WILL protect us. I come around to the presidential powers to protect the American citizen. We can see that we aren't being protected by our government by the invasion from the south. There's no will to protect us against the murdering, raping, child raping illegal aliens who destroy American lives and families daily.
Sorry to go on about borders but it was just an example of what our government is supposed to do compared to what they are doing.
Hope that helped. Sorry for the thread drift :)
No need to be sorry, I drifted myself. :)
Two very important subjects in our country.
I agree with it in it's entirety.
want to bet that moslems ARE allowed to use that library...
No, 'cause I bet they are too.
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.