Though the Supreme Court tends to handle these types of matters in piecemeal fashion, in this or some similar case, they must eventually decide: Is it okay to force people of faith to abandon their earnestly-held religious beliefs to participate in the marketplace? Previous Next. View Larger Image. The HHS latest spin on the Mandate is as unconstitutional as all previous offerings. Posted by Nate Kellum. Related Posts.
Thus, Catholic hospitals, charities, universities, and Catholic law schools, like Ave Maria School of Law, would not be exempted from the mandate because they employ and serve non-Catholics, 4 and thus they would be forced to provide coverage for morally objectionable products and services for all of their employees. In fact, it has been contended that Jesus Christ himself and His Apostles would not be exempted from the mandate as they ministered to people of many religious traditions.
Why would such a narrow definition of a religious organization be adopted? The purpose is to relegate religious expression and influence to the confines of houses of worship, separating religion and its influence from the broader culture.
In other words, the government has no objection to people of faith gathering together on Sundays and engaging in quaint rituals and singing hymns, provided that their beliefs and convictions do not spill over into the public square and have any influence in the marketplace of ideas. This impoverished conception of religion is wholly at odds with the American experience, and it amounts to putting the judicially imposed doctrine of "separation of church and state" 5 on steroids.
This reductionist view of religion comports with the rhetoric we hear so often from the left, including President Obama and others in his Administration, when they increasingly refer to freedom of worship rather than freedom of religion.
Before proceeding further, I should explain what is meant by the term mandate in the context of the HHS mandate. The HHS mandate is not a law; that is, it is not legislation that is passed by Congress and signed by the President.
Nor is it a policy statement or guideline that merely encourages rather than compels compliance. Many hoped this controversy could be resolved if the health care law was repealed by Congress or overturned by the Supreme Court. I recently joined nearly eighty of my House colleagues from both parties in signing a soon-to-be filed amicus brief in support of forty-three Catholic institutions challenging the contraceptive and abortifacient mandate in court.
This bill would repeal the HHS mandate and has garnered broad, bipartisan support with more than cosponsors in the House. As the legal and legislative process moves forward, I will continue to work to repeal this onerous and unconstitutional mandate. I will also continue to advocate for more consumer choice in the health care market to provide consumers coverage consistent with their needs and beliefs. America was founded on the idea of religious liberty, and we must preserve this freedom for all Americans.
0コメント