Last week, the Supreme Court heard arguments about a portion of Obamacare’s birth control mandate. (From what I can tell, the question revolved around whether the Little Sisters of the Poor are violating their religious beliefs by not providing coverage for contraceptives, or something like that).
It became obvious from their questions that some of the black-robed dudes just didn’t get it — not how insurance pays for birth control, not how women get birth control. And here’s a little more on why the alternatives mentioned simply won’t work.
And thanks, Cynical, for the link.
I don’t know why the media chooses to focus on Little Sisters of the Poor. Theirs is just one of seven cases consolidated into Zubik v. Burwell and they’re not the only Catholics involved.
Justice Alito, who created the Hobby Lobby accommodation at issue, (signing a letter asserting a claim of religious exemption), seemed particularly clueless as to how ObamaCare® works. Which seems rather odd since this should be the fourth time (?) the law has crossed his desk. I was a little surprised at Roberts’ response, since he secured the viability of the exchanges in NIFIB v. Sebelius. Justice Kennedy’s response was slightly troubling, (joining in with the “hijacking” characterization of the accommodation), but most observers I’ve read seem confident he’ll side with the government.
Sooner or later…probably later…everyone will arrive at a consensus that the only answer to the controversies presented to employers in the various ObamaCare® mandates is to end employer provided health insurance altogether. Not only would that save everyone, especially employers, a ton of money, but it would make the religious exemption much less complicated. No more burden than signing the IRS 501(c)(3) exemption form already in use by such organizations to escape federal taxation.
The only people who might actually lose out would be the lawyers who profit from all this activism. And lawyers being…well…lawyers…I doubt it would amount to much of an negative impact for very long.
The Little Sisters do seem to be the organization most quoted. Maybe because they’re the most visible? Did they make themselves that way? Or was the media drawn to them because they’re habited women religious? Dunno.
Priest for Life are habited…formally anyway. (Priests for Life v. Burwell)
I think it’s probably because they’re a bunch of little old ladies. Makes for a more sensational story: Nice little old ladies who take care of old people versus the Satanic Behemoth of secular government.
True. It’s harder to take a swing at them because they are, after all, human and decent folks, probably.
Leave a comment