web analytics

Don’t Miss an Update! -Subscribe:

Follow AforFaith on Twitter


Religion Blogs - Blog Top Sites

Malware Free Guarantee


-Obama’s ‘Compromise’ on Contraceptives May Even be Worse

by Dr. D ~ February 10th, 2012

English: President Barack Obama discusses his ...

                                                (Image via Wikipedia)

President Obama announced today a ‘compromise’ to the uproar caused by an HHS mandate that religious allied employers provide for contraceptives, abortive pills, and sterilization as part of the health care for their employees.

The President merely put the burden on the Insurance companies instead, forcing them to pick up the additional cost for providing these services. Also the administration said that it would not ‘allow’ the insurance companies to increase their premiums to cover the additional costs.

This really didn’t change a thing as far as Catholics are concerned. They will still be forced to provide health insurance for their employees which offer services contrary to their religious beliefs and conscience. Here’s one response to the ‘compromise’ from U. of Notre Dame law professor Carter Snead:

Today’s rule still requires religious institutions (on pain of ruinous treasury fines) to purchase insurance that covers these same objectionable services.  It is irrelevant that the rule requires the insurance company (rather than the religious institution) to explain to employees that the policy purchased for them by their employer includes the 5-day after pill. For institutions that self-insure, the situation is even worse; they will be forced to contact their employees and pay for such services themselves.

It is no answer to suggest that the religious liberty of such employers is being accommodated because they are not “paying” for the objectionable services.  First, it is naïve to imagine that the services are truly cost-free and that these costs will not be passed along to the employers who purchase these plans.   More importantly, the simple fact is that under this policy the government is coercing religious institutions to purchase a product that includes services that they regard as gravely immoral.

Response: Actually I believe that this ‘compromise’ or ‘accommodation’ may even be worse than the original mandate. Not only is the Obama administration trumping religious liberty but also now forcing private insurance corporations and their stock holders to bear the costs of the additional services. Since most 401K  and retirement programs invest heavily in American insurance companies, it means that millions of us will be helping to pay for this program whether we morally accept it or not.

Health insurers are concerned about the precedence that Obama is setting here and every business in America should also be concerned since they might be next. 

This is what happens when you have a President that does not understand or respect the private sector of the economy. Is he really so naive that he believes the insurance companies will not find a way to pass on the expense of all of this to their customers? What is he going to do if some companies decide to go out of the health care business instead? Force them to keep on offering it regardless?

Is it even Constitutional for a President to place this burden on private enterprises through an executive order? I don’t know. One thing for sure, this President is constantly doing things that are borderline or even illegal and the main stream media in America doesn’t say a peep. President Obama recently made a ‘Recess Appointment’ when Congress was still officially in session and got away with it.

Remember also that he took over General Motors and Chrysler Corporation and flushed all of the creditors and investors giving equity to the unions and the government instead. It reminded me of what happens in a ‘banana republic’ in Latin America. We are a country of laws where usually the assets of bankrupt companies are adjudicated by judges. It set a dangerous precedence that may have encouraged Pres. Obama to now make decisions for the insurance business since the media had nothing but praise for what he did with the auto companies.

The original conflict over religious liberty has now escalated into a conflict that includes forcing private businesses to provide and pay for services whether they want to or not. The end result could also affect millions of investors including those of us with retirement accounts.              *Top

>>>Don't Miss an Update!**CLICK NOW**Get ANSWERS For The Faith by email<<<

3 Responses to -Obama’s ‘Compromise’ on Contraceptives May Even be Worse

  1. Brian

    The bottom-line problem, I submit, is that we have a president who believes he can, by executive order, seek to impose his will on religious Americans; then who, by the same power of executive order, not impose his will (well, not in the same, direct way) on religious Americans. Assuming Obama wins re-election in 2012, I predict that the alleged “compromise” which removed the contraceptive/abortion mandate from religious – affiliated institutions will be one of the first things to go.

    And, I further predict that one will see multiple similar mandates involving homosexual rights/homosexual marriage/and who knows what else, each of which will trample religious rights in favor of conformity with a leftist/secular world view.

    In short, if your constitutional rights are subject to presidential executive order, you have NO rights.


  2. Dr. D

    Brian, a shutter to think what we will be facing if Obama gets 4 more years without having to worry about another election. It is going to be an uphill battle to replace him with the media supporting him the way they do and running interference for him against all opposition. So many Americans have only a rosy distorted picture of what is really going on.

  3. -Evangelical Reaction to Obama's Supposed 'Compromise' | ANSWERS For The Faith

    […] ‘compromise’ has been quick, decisive, and quite negative among religious leaders. I posted my initial reactions yesterday and if nothing else I am even more critical of the Obama plan […]

Leave a Reply