Update on American HHS birth control mandate controversy: March, 2013

A judge of the St. Louis Federal District Court struck down parts of a Missouri law  ensuring freedom of conscience for those objecting to paying for contraceptive coverage and abortion drugs in their health plans. [St. Louis Review]  To date, 10 amicus curiae briefs have been filed by Americans United for Life in support of lawsuits against the U.S. federal government regulation that requires objecting business owners to provide health insurance coverage for contraceptives, embryocides, and surgical sterilization. [AUL news release]   The chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) Committee on Pro-Life Activities,has asked members of the U.S. House of Representatives to support the Health Care Conscience Rights Act of 2013.H.R. 940, which includes provisions to prevent objecting businesses or individuals from being forced to provide  health insurance coverage for contraceptives, embryocides, and surgical sterilization. [USCCB news release]  Attorneys General of 13 states (Ohio, Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas and West Virginia) have written to the federal government asking that the proposed exemptions for objectors to the regulation be broadened to include private employers. [Columbus Dispatch].  More than 147,000 people and groups have made formal comments about the proposed regulation, 30 times more than the comments made on the next most-commented-upon rule. [The Hill]  Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate, which is controlled by the Democratic Party, voted down a measure that would have stopped funding for enforcment of the regulation.

 

 

Freedom of conscience in Philippines impacted by Reproductive Health Act

The Philippines Department of Health has signed the  Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of Republic Act 10354, otherwise known as the “Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Law of 2012” (RPRH Act of 2012).   The regulations have not yet been posted on the Department’s website. [DOH News Release]

The regulations will have an immediate impact on the exercise of freedom of conscience by health care workers.  According to news reports, those who are privately employed must complete an affidavit setting out what they object to and why, and must post a prominent notice of what “reproductive health services” they will not provide.  Government health care workers will apparently be forced to use some kind of civil service process to obtain approval for the exercise of freedom of conscience.

DOH Assistant Secretary Dr. Madeleine Valera stated that the law would be applied “liberally,” by which she appears to have meant that freedom of conscience will be restricted as much as possible so that purported “human rights” would be protected. [Sun Star]

Update on American HHS birth control mandate controversy

On 14 December, Tom Monaghan, the founder of Domino’s Pizza, filed a lawsuit against the HHS regulation [Associated Press].  Five days later, a federal appeals court reinstated lawsuits filed by Wheaton College and Belmont Abbey that had been dismissed by a lower court.  The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals also ordered the Obama administration to report every sixty days on its progress in redrafting the regulation to accommodate employers with religious objections to providing insurance for birth control.[Life News]  News of the Wheaton and Belmont decisions came too late for inclusion in a column in the  New England Journal of Medicine, which outlined the litigation and the issues.The federal Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court ruling that Hobby Lobby must comply with the mandate because it does not impose a “substantial burden” on the exercise of freedom of religion by the company’s owner. [The Hill]  In contrast, O’Brien Industrial Holdings of Missouri was granted an injunction by an appeals court that prohibits the federal government from enforcing the regulation.  The decision overturns a lower court ruling [The Foundry, 3 December].  A similar injunction was granted to the Griesedieck family‘s American Pulverizer Company in Minnesota [National Review] Commenting that there is no “trust us changes are coming” clause in the U.S. Constitution, a federal judge in New York upheld the right of the Catholic Archdiocese of New York to proceed with its lawsuit against the mandate. [Becket Fund, 6 December]    Meanwhile, the Little Sisters of the Poor, a Catholic religious order that provides nursing care to the elderly poor in 30 American cities, is considering the possiblity of leaving the United States if the current regulation stands. [LifeSite News]

Irish Archbishops challenged on claims of conscience about abortion

Archbishops are absolutely wrong about conscience

The Irish Times
27 December, 2012

Desmond M. Clarke

OPINION: Catholic bishops who attribute an absolute value to conscience are trying to force others to accept their position on abortion.

The Catholic archbishops of Armagh, Dublin, Cashel and Emly, and Tuam released a public statement on December 18th that included this general principle: “No one has the right to force or coerce someone to act against their conscience. Respect for this right is the very foundation of a free, civilised and democratic society.”

I do not think they believe that. Nor do I.

Conscience could mean many things but it is usually understood as referring to the judgment of an individual about significant moral and religious matters. Unfortunately it is possible for someone to decide in “their conscience” that politically-motivated murder is acceptable in some circumstances, and the archbishops presumably do not mean the conscience of a murderer obliges a democratic state not to interfere in their behaviour, no matter how well-intentioned it may be. . . [Read on]

Irish archbishops appeal to freedom of conscience in abortion politics

The Irish parliament will begin hearings in January on legalization of abortion, and the Irish government promises to have a bill before the Dáil Éireann by Easter.  The new law will permit abortion in order to save the life of a mother, including those who threaten to commit suicide if they are denied the procedure [Global News].  In response to the announcement, and reports that Prime Minister Enda Kenny might force objecting members of his party to vote for the bill, Ireland’s four Catholic archbishops have protested the proposed changes, and insisted that the government must respect lawmakers’ freedom of conscience.

. . .on a decision of such fundamental moral importance every public representative is entitled to complete respect for the freedom of conscience. No one has the right to force or coerce someone to act against their conscience. Respect for this right is the very foundation of a free, civilised and democratic society. [Zenit]