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 while you’re processing please hold this!
Then they have no other option left to them but to close their doors. If they are a Catholic hospital in the truest sense of the word, it's all they can do.
There was no need to go that far.
I can sympathize with them on their thinking. That is how I would have approached it. So I would have lost as well.
Obviously their argument was not convincing,
I would love to read their argument.
There was no need to go there. In essence they poisoned their own well.
Sorry to hear that. Now they have no redress? They'll have to fight it on a state level when it presents itself?
Blah, blah, blah.
Shame, shame, shame.
The bureaucracy is just eliminating the competition. If Christian charity goes by the wayside, that’s just more customers for corrupt politicians to “serve” (i.e., fleece the taxpayers).
I'm crushed. You've wounded my inner child.
I image they would have to come up with a few billion. Americans are very generous to charities.
It’s not your inner child I’m concerned about. It’s truth.
Thanks. I only have one nerve left and people just gotta stand on it.
I don't know. I suspect that this was a pre-emptive lawsuit. In other words the Catholic Charities sued to prevent the law from being implemented and then appealed when they lost on the pre-emptive grounds. What the Catholic Charities should do at this point is to violate the law and continue to refuse to provide Birth Control benefits and see if the courts can then enforce this provision. What are the penalties for refusal to conform to this law? Are they administrative or criminal?
The hospitals should simply state flatly that they are not going to provide these benefits and then see what develops. I suspect that rather than allow the Catholic Hospitals to close down and move to New Jersey, the legislature will fix this little problem. Additionally if the government tried to come down on the Churches, then the power of the people might just be made manifest.
The courts have made their ruling. Now let them enforce it.
Amen. Catholic Charities should immediately shut down their charitable services and let the aetheistic state of New York take over their work.
Or if they wanted to be charitable and still serve the poor, they should stop providing “health insurance” to their employees and just pay them what they were paying the insurance companies.
Amen. Catholic Charities should immediately shut down their charitable services and let the aetheistic state of New York take over their work.
Or if they wanted to be charitable and still serve the poor, they should stop providing “health insurance” to their employees and just pay them what they were paying the insurance companies.
Exactly. It's one thing to decline to hear a case. It's another thing to allow a Church to be charged for practicing their beliefs.
Let's see them go there.
What about public tax dollars funding the production of a poster ridiculing the Last Supper?
I wholeheartedly agree with that. Balls to the wall time so to speak. Pardon my french. Time to push the envelope to see exactly what course the courts will take. Will they enforce it or look for a face saving out.
What are the penalties for refusal to conform to this law? Are they administrative or criminal?
Administrative? Dismiss those who refuse to follow the courts order or send a few to jail to get a feel of which way this thing will go. To see if others in the position of being fired or jailed relent and do as they are told. It will be very interesting to see if Catholicism stands it's moral ground or acquiescences.
Additionally if the government tried to come down on the Churches, then the power of the people might just be made manifest.
Agreed.
The courts have made their ruling. Now let them enforce it.
The courts have made their ruling. Now let them enforce it.
Needed to be said again.
Wrong, liberals don't like government staying out of anyone's business.
As someone else said, if churches, as a group, can't use the library (which I also agree with) then neither can any other tax-exempt organization.
Government liberals have taken issues which have been the pervue of the church, the moral issues of poverty and abortion, and made them political. Conversely they have taken political issues, global warming, environmentalism, etc. and made them "moral imperatives".
Many say keep the church out of politics, I say keep politics out of the church.
Welcome to FR
Where the heck is that money tree my pop was always talking about? Is the phrase fiscal conservative dead in the halls of our government?
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.