Those Serious Defense Spending Cuts »« CPAC Yanks American Atheists’ Booth

WND’s Dishonest Spin on Nun Lawsuit

The Worldnetdaily has its usual dishonest spin on the lawsuit filed by a group of nuns. And it’s a “Worldnetdaily exclusive,” which appears to mean nothing. Lots of other news outlets are writing about the same case. If it’s an “exclusive” then so is every story.

A brief filed with the U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in a case brought by Catholic nuns against the government’s Obamacare rules and regulations asserts the White House can’t tell the religious-order members what to believe.

The case challenges the abortifacient mandate in Obamacare, which requires employers to provide employees with abortion-inducing drugs. The nuns, the Little Sisters of the Poor, who run homes for the elderly in Denver and in other locations, are not included in the religious employer exemption created by the government.

The brief explains that a loophole for organizations such as the Little Sisters that would have the abortifacients distributed by a third party on their behalf is inadequate.

Their faith prohibits them “from participating in the government’s program to distribute, subsidize, and promote the use of contraceptives, sterilization, or abortion-inducing drugs and devices.”

The government has persistently demanded that the Little Sisters “give up” their faith, the brief charges.
“The government has fought all the way to the Supreme Court, and continues to fight in this court, to force the Little Sisters to execute and deliver its mandatory contraceptive coverage form. … If the Little Sisters refuse, the government promises to impose severe financial penalties,” the brief notes.

All of which is a lie. The Little Sisters do not have to provide any contraception at all in their insurance coverage, much less “give up their faith.” And no one is telling them what they can and can’t believe. They are explicitly exempted from having to provide contraception. All they have to do is fill out a form saying they want an exemption and it is theirs. At that point, the insurance company will provide a separate rider for their employees who want one. Their entire case is based on a ridiculous lie.

Comments

  1. Chris J says

    Jon Stewert had the best line about this whole thing.

    “Wait, you don’t want to sign the form, because that piece of paper enables your employees to then get contraception? Because you do realize every week you already give them paper issued by the government that allows them to get contraception, right? It’s called money.”

  2. jd142 says

    I have the solution. Amend the ACA so that if a company doesn’t want to sign the request for a waiver, all an employee has to do is prove that the company does not want to sign the waiver. One way to prove that would be if the company sued the government to be exempt from the waiver. A classic bureaucratic catch-22.

    I think it would be hilarious if an insurance company would come forward and accept a court challenge to the waiver in lieu of the actual waiver.

  3. says

    Not being masochistic enough to go to the Whirled Nuts site, I haven’t seen the “exclusive” bit. Perhaps it’s just a question of comma placement:

    More like this:

    “Whirled Nuts Daily fact, EXCLUSIVE!”

    or like this:

    “Whirled Nuts Daily, fact EXCLUSIVE!”

  4. Randomfactor says

    The problem is there’s no cost to the nuns for refusing to sign.

    So yank their nonprofit status over it. They’d use their own blood to fill the paperwork out.

  5. raven says

    the abortifacients

    The new lie of religious freaks. Oral contraceptive pills and the Morning after pill cause abortions. They don’t.

    What causes abortions is unplanned and unwanted pregnancies. We’ve known for decades how to lower the abortion rate. Comprehensive sex ed and wide availability of effective birth control.

    In places that do this, like the Netherlands, the abortion rate is half the US.

  6. zmidponk says

    Things like this just shows that the real problem isn’t folk being forced to not follow their religious beliefs, it’s that they object to not being allowed to enforce their religious beliefs on others. After all, what they’re being asked to do is proclaim what their religious beliefs actually are, which, normally, they have no problem with. However, as soon as doing this allows other people to not follow their beliefs, it’s suddenly a big problem.

  7. says

    At that point, the insurance company will provide a separate rider for their employees who want one.

    And that is the real nut at the center of the chocolate bar. It’s not so much that they don’t want to provide contraceptive coverage to their employees. They already have that option. What they want is to be able to prevent their employees from getting that coverage at all. Freedom of religion has become the freedom to dictate to others what they can do in their private lives.

  8. Ichthyic says

    Their entire case is based on a ridiculous lie.

    and yet… here we are, likely seeing this case go all the way to SCOTUS.

    so, what are all the previous judges’ excuses for allowing this travesty to go forward? it should have been dismissed outright, immediately.

    oh, that’s right… I forgot the xian privilege.

  9. freehand says

    raven: What causes abortions is unplanned and unwanted pregnancies. We’ve known for decades how to lower the abortion rate. Comprehensive sex ed and wide availability of effective birth control.
    .
    But then how would we punish the sluts? I don’t get it.
    .
    Also, if we don’t control the little darlins’ sexual behavior, who will?

Leave a Reply