Biden administration continues to poke finger in the eye of people of faith

 

Biden administration seeks to remove moral objection exemption from Obamacare contraceptives mandate

By Peter Pinedo

Washington D.C., Jan 30, 2023 / 17:15 pm

The Biden administration Monday announced a proposal to eliminate employers’ ability to object to the Obamacare contraceptives mandate on moral grounds.

This change only proposes rescinding the moral objection exemption, not the religious exemption. The 2020 Supreme Court case Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania guaranteed that religious employers objecting to contraceptives on religious grounds would not be forced to provide birth control in contradiction to their beliefs.

The Health and Human Services (HHS) Department estimated that the proposed rule change would impact more than 100 employers and 125,000 employees, CNN reported.

While retaining the religious exemption policy, the Biden administration proposal would create a new way for employees of religiously objecting employers to obtain contraception with no out-of-pocket costs. 

The Biden administration's proposal states that workers of employers with religious objections will be able to obtain contraception “without any involvement on the part of an objecting entity.” Under the proposal, an insurance provider providing free birth control services would be “reimbursed for its costs by entering into an arrangement with an issuer on a Federally-facilitated Exchange or State Exchange on the Federal platform.”

The pathway to obtain free contraception also will be available to students at universities with religious objections, the proposal states.

Under the Trump administration, the Obamacare policy was amended to allow employers with religious or moral objections to contraception to opt out of offering it in their insurance policies without penalty.

The Biden administration's change won't take effect until the completion of a 60-day public comment period, which is set to begin Feb. 2 once the proposal is filed in the Federal Register.

Kristi Hamrick, chief media and policy strategist for the pro-life group Students for Life of America, told CNA that the proposal was part of “a vicious cycle with life-and-death implications” and that the Biden administration is “ignoring Constitutional rights of conscience that should be protected.”

“Students for Life of America does not take a position against birth control per se,” she said. “We oppose forcing people to buy or fund drugs and devices against their beliefs, such as nuns, and we oppose forcing people to pretend that abortifacients mislabeled as contraception should also be paid for.”

The rule proposal comes as the Biden administration has vowed to expand access to both birth control and abortion in the wake of the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, which overturned nationwide legalized abortion, freeing states to regulation abortion as they see fit. On Monday, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services tweeted that it “is committed to protecting & expanding access to reproductive health care, including abortion & contraception.”

Victory in Supreme Court for Life and those Little Sisters of the Poor

littlesistersofthepoor.org

US Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Little Sisters of the Poor

US Bishops Laud Decision

July 08, 2020 17:36ZENIT StaffJustice and Peace

WhatsApp Facebook Messenger Facebook Twitter Share

Share this Entry

The Little Sisters of the Poor recently went to the Supreme Court of the United States again to defend their community against attempts to force Catholic religious to cooperate with immoral activities, and again, the Supreme Court has recognized their right to religious freedom. By a vote of 7-2, the Court ruled in favor of the Little Sisters.

Archbishop Thomas G. Wenski of Miami, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) Committee for Religious Liberty, and Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City in Kansas, chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities, have issued a statement addressing the case:

“This is a saga that did not need to occur. Contraception is not health care, and the government should never have mandated that employers provide it in the first place. Yet even after it had, there were multiple opportunities for government officials to do the right thing and exempt conscientious objectors. Time after time, administrators and attorneys refused to respect the rights of the Little Sisters of the Poor, and the Catholic faith they exemplify, to operate in accordance with the truth about sex and the human person. Even after the federal government expanded religious exemptions to the HHS contraceptive mandate, Pennsylvania and other states chose to continue this attack on conscience.

“The Little Sisters of the Poor is an international congregation that is committed to building a culture of life. They care for the elderly poor. They uphold human dignity. They follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and his Church. The government has no right to force a religious order to cooperate with evil. We welcome the Supreme Court’s decision. We hope it brings a close to this episode of government discrimination against people of faith. Yet, considering the efforts we have seen to force compliance with this mandate, we must continue to be vigilant for religious freedom.”

The USCCB filed amicus curiae briefs supporting these religious institutions. The briefs can be found here:
http://www.usccb.org/about/general-counsel/amicus-briefs/upload/19-431-and-19-454_Amici-Brief.pdf 

http://www.usccb.org/about/general-counsel/amicus-briefs/upload/2019-11-04-LSP-SPPH-v-COP-SONJ.pdf

What do we say to our kids and others when President's speak evil; it happened today and has happened before

By this hour of the evening we all have probably heard the latest dust up in the Presidency of Donald Trump.  Embroiled in negotiations about the border wall and DACA, concerning the so-called dreamers the President decided to use the lovely term sh*thole in describing the nations of and people from Haiti, El Salvador and Africa.  The President was decrying the fact that we(I guess he means America) do not need more people from these places but should have more folks from Norway.  Man, our President is his own worst enemy.  Make no mistake, his language and his sentiments are not American and even more importantly for me, are not Christ-like.  The Catholic Church is unapologetically opposed to almost everything the President is trying to do about immigration and refugees.  Now he is not charged with running a church but running the nation, his motivation is probably not as evil as it sounds.  Still, calling names, slandering a people and their nations are not very Presidential, let alone very Christian.

And social media erupted in typical fashion, if you dislike Trump, he is evil personified, if you like Trump, well, what the heck did he do wrong anyway.  One social media post inspired me to venture into this hullabaloo and it came from a Deacon  He commented, what can parents tell their children when evil passes the lips of our President?  So I thought about that and I reflected to and remembered the times I had to do just that.

Again, let the record be clear, President Trump let pure evil pass his lips today.  It is evil to slander people and call names like sh*thole.  It is also evil to imply that people are less than other people based on nationality and/or skin color.  But I remember talking to my children when evil passed the lips of a President.  It was hard to tell my children that yes the President did just really say that abortion is ok, that babies are not really babies in the womb if mommy wants to abort them.  I remember having to try and explain the evil of late-term abortion or partial birth abortion as endorsed through the lips of Presidents.  I remember an incident explaining the President's evil proclamation that we should all get behind and support Planned Parenthood because they do good things.  Those particular Presidents would then demonstrate even more evil when they would go mute when confronted with the abortion realities of Planned Parenthood. I would later have to explain that the evil from our Presidents endorsing men laying with and marrying men and women doing same with women is wrong.  When Presidents used their lips to spew evil in many attempts to redefine families and marriage, yes, what does a parent say when a President speaks evil.  Why daddy is the President attacking the Little Sisters of the Poor, or the Catholic Church or Christianity?  Is that not evil.

I think I've made my point, evil did pass the lips of a President today and he is wrong for what he said and how he said it.  But evil, which directly opposes God's will for His people, has passed the lips of Presidents before, often and often!  We can't pick and choose.  I'm gutsy enough to call todays debacle of words evil and wrong; but I stand up too and I hope you did too, when these other evils passed the lips of a President.

A visit from the Little Sisters of the Poor

Today we had a visit from the Little Sisters of the Poor.  These nuns do incredible work with the poor and aged and have a beautiful ministry from their base over in Mobile Alabama.

I have fond memories of the Little Sisters as they had a home and ministry in the Algiers neighborhood of New Orleans where I lived for the first 20 years of my life.

Hopefully, our parish was very generous, as we usually are!

Here is a link to their website to learn more about the Little Sisters and perhaps, in your charity, a small donation perhaps?

http://www.littlesistersofthepoormobile.org/

Big win for Little Sisters against the evil of the Obama administration's war against nuns

Breaking: Supreme Court sends Little Sisters' case back to lower court

 

Little Sisters of the Poor at the Denver, Colorado house. Credit: El Pueblo Catolico/James Baca.

By Matt Hadro

Washington D.C., May 16, 2016 / 08:53 am (CNA).- In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court sent the Little Sisters of the Poor HHS mandate case back to the lower courts on Monday, in light of new developments in the case.
“We are very encouraged by the Court’s decision, which is an important win for the Little Sisters. The Court has recognized that the government changed its position,” said Mark Rienzi, senior counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and lead attorney for the Little Sisters of the Poor.
“It is crucial that the Justices unanimously ordered the government not to impose these fines and indicated that the government doesn’t need any notice to figure out what should now be obvious – the Little Sisters respectfully object,” he continued.
Religious charities including the Little Sisters of the Poor had sued the federal government saying that they were being coerced, under threat of heavy fines, to violate their consciences. They said that despite revisions, the Obama administration’s federal contraception mandate requires them to cooperate in actions they believe to be immoral.
The mandate began as part of the Affordable Care Act, which required coverage for preventative care in employee health plans. The Department of Health and Human Services, in its regulations released after the law was passed, interpreted this to require employer coverage for contraceptives, sterilizations, and drugs that can cause abortions.
Churches and their immediate affiliates, like schools and parish groups, were exempt from the mandate but religious non-profits, charities, and universities were not. Some large corporations were exempt from the mandate because their health plans that existed before the health care law were “grandfathered” into its regulations.
Heavy fines are the punishment for not complying with the mandate. Many religious institutions objected to complying with the mandate, saying they were being forced to violate their consciences by providing coverage for practices they believed were immoral. They were being coerced to cooperate in such acts, they said.
After the mandate was issued, the government offered an “accommodation” to objecting parties – they could notify the government of their religious objection, and it would then direct their insurer to provide the mandated coverage free-of-charge. The government argued that contraception can be offered without cost because it reduces later costs associated with births and provides “tremendous health benefits” to women.
The Little Sisters and other charities said this “accommodation” still required them to violate their consciences, because they were effectively acting as “gatekeepers” for the contraception coverage. They also voiced concern that because it was still part of their health plan, they would ultimately end up paying for the coverage they found immoral.
A total of more than 300 plaintiffs have sued to challenge the mandate. In the case currently before the court, Zubik v. Burwell, the Little Sisters are joined by other plaintiffs including the Archdiocese of Washington, Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh, the pro-life group Priests for Life, and several Christian colleges and universities.
The Supreme Court, in a rare move in the middle of a case, had ordered both parties to come up with alternative solutions, if possible, of guaranteeing both contraceptive coverage for employees and religious freedom protections for the non-profits.
“Following oral argument, the Court requested supplemental briefing from the parties addressing ‘whether contraceptive coverage could be provided to petitioners’ employees, through petitioners’ insurance companies, without any such notice from petitioners’,” the court’s statement read.
“Both petitioners and the Government now confirm that such an option is feasible.”
The Little Sisters and other plaintiffs, in their brief, outlined an acceptable alternative: when setting up their health plan with their insurer, they would express their wish for a health plan without coverage for the contraceptives, sterilizations and abortion-causing drugs. The insurer would take note and offer employees “cost-free contraception coverage” on the side and outside the health plan.
For their part, “the Government has confirmed that the challenged procedures ‘for employers with insured plans could be modified to operate in the manner posited in the Court’s order while still ensuring that the affected women receive contraceptive coverage seamlessly, together with the rest of their health coverage,” the statement read.
Because of the new developments in the case, the court then sent the group cases back to their respective federal courts – the Third, Fifth, Tenth, and D.C. Circuit Courts of Appeals.
“Given the gravity of the dispute and the substantial clarification and refinement in the positions of the parties, the parties on remand should be afforded an opportunity to arrive at an approach going forward that accommodates petitioners’ religious exercise while at the same time ensuring that women covered by petitioners’ health plans “receive full and equal health coverage, including contraceptive coverage,” the court stated.
The Supreme Court did not say if the government’s mandate and “accommodation” violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Under that federal law passed in 1993, if the government action “substantially burdens” a person’s free exercise of religion, the government must establish that it has a “compelling interest” for the action and that it is using the “least-restrictive means” of furthering that interest.
“In particular, the Court does not decide whether petitioners’ religious exercise has been substantially burdened, whether the Government has a compelling interest, or whether the current regulations are the least restrictive means of serving that interest,” the court stated, leaving that decision for the lower courts.

In this Holy Week, today is the day the Little Sisters of the Poor go before the Supreme Court

Everything you need to know about the case, the unbelievable and unfair burden placed on these nuns who only devote themselves to prayer and work for the elderly; God Bless and Pray For the Little Sisters of the Poor:



http://www.nationalreview.com/article/433051/little-sisters-poor-supreme-court

Indeed, the Little Sisters of the Poor were in the House!

My Favorite Scenes from the President’s State of the Union Address

By Kathy Schiffer|2016-01-13T06:22:22+00:00January 13th, 2016|Politics & Culture|

Well, this tops the list! Two Sisters, Sr. Veit & Sr. Marguire from the Little Sisters of the Poor, who are enmeshed in a Supreme Court challenge of the Obama Administration’s HHS Mandate, were in the gallery to hear President Obama’s final State of the Union address.
The Sisters, who operate 30 nursing homes throughout the United States, are challenging the clause in the Affordable Care Act which requires group insurance plans to offer contraceptive coverage to their employees at no additional cost–even though that coverage is in direct violation of their religious beliefs. The Sisters were the guests of House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis).

Guess who is going to the State of the Union? The Little Sisters of the Poor!!

The nuns who are challenging Obamacare will attend the State of the Union

 

 

 

 

By Mike DeBonis January 11 

Pope Francis met with Little Sisters of the Poor on Sept. 23. (Courtesy of The Little Sisters of the Poor)

Two members of the order of Catholic nuns waging a court battle against President Obama’s signature health-care reform law will attend his final State of the Union address Tuesday as guests of House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis).
The Little Sisters of Poor are challenging the health law’s requirement that group insurance plans offer contraceptive coverage at no additional cost. The order runs 30 nursing homes in the United States, and while it has invoked a “conscience clause” in the health law meant to accommodate religious objections, its female employees would remain eligible for free birth control from a third party under a workaround devised by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. That workaround is on hold pending the outcome of the litigation.
The nuns are challenging the conscience-clause workaround, and they have the backing of leaders ranging from Ryan to Pope Francis, who met with the sisters during his September trip to Washington. The Supreme Court announced in December it would take up the sisters’ case this year.
[At the Supreme Court, ‘Little Sisters of the Poor’ has a ring to it]
Ryan, who is Catholic, announced Monday that Sister Loraine Marie Maguire, the order’s mother provincial, and Sister Constance Veit will sit in the Speaker’s Box during Tuesday’s address. “The Little Sisters of the Poor care for the most vulnerable among us, and they should be free to practice their faith without the threat of government interference or intimidation,” he said in a statement. “The Sisters’ stand in defense of religious liberty – one of our most fundamental rights – is nothing short of courageous, and it’s my privilege to support their cause.”
The sisters are the most sharply political guests that will be seated in the Speaker’s Box on Tuesday. Ryan has also invited a young constituent – 4-year-old Logan Barritt of Milton, Wis. – who, with the help of his parents, used $1.90 from his piggy bank to seed more than $1,300 in donations to fund care packages for military members overseas.
Ryan is also seeking to highlight his anti-poverty agenda just a few days after hosting a poverty-themed presidential candidates forum in South Carolina, inviting several figures involved in faith-based and nonprofit programs for the poor.

They include, according to a list furnished by Ryan’s office, the Rev. Melvin Hargrove, president of Racine Unified School District and the founder of Zoe Outreach Ministries; Bishop Shirley Holloway, founder of House of Help City of Hope in Washington; Pastor Omar Jahwar, founder of Vision Regeneration, a gang intervention group in Dallas; Antong Lucky, founder of We Make Real Music, another Dallas-based gang intervention group; and Joanna Wynn, founder of Walkin’ In My Shoes of Kenosha, Wis. Ryan’s office helped Wynn secure federal disability benefits more than a decade ago and now leads an organization “dedicated to helping young people break the cycle of poverty.”
Also attending at Ryan’s invitation is Robert Woodson, founder and president of the Center for Neighborhood Enterprise, a MacArthur “genius” grant winner who has long been celebrated by conservative thinkers for his advocacy for community-based solutions to poverty.
Correction: This article has been changed to state that the Little Sisters of the Poor manages 30 nursing homes inside the United States instead of around the world. Also, the order’s employees are not currently eligible for free contraception due to a court order that will remain in place until the pending litigation is resolved.

Pope Francis gives tangible support to the Little Sisters of the Poor

Francis Secretly Met With Little Sisters of the Poor

Pope's visit "a sign of support" for nuns in a legal fight against Obama admin's HSS mandate

Kirsten Andersen

September 23, 2015September 23, 2015

Donald Vish with permission

Share

 

A Vatican spokesman revealed late Wednesday evening that Pope Francis earlier met privately with members of the Little Sisters of the Poor, the group of religious sisters at the center of a high-profile legal battle over the Obamacare birth control mandate which is expected to reach the Supreme Court.
Fr. Frederico Lombardi, spokesman for the Holy See, told reporters at a Washington, D.C. press conference that Francis met with the nuns as “a sign of his support” for them in their lawsuit against the Obama administration.  The sisters are seeking exemption from Obamacare’s birth control mandate, which requires employers to facilitate the provision of full, copay-free coverage for contraceptives, sterilization and the so-called “morning-after pill” for their female employees – all of which the Catholic Church considers immoral.
The meeting, which was not on the pope’s publicly-released schedule of events, was held just hours after the pontiff met with President Obama at the White House. Father Lombardi did not say where, but he noted that the Little Sisters have a convent near the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, where Pope Francis celebrated a late afternoon Mass. It is likely that he visited the order just after celebrating the liturgy.
In their public remarks at the White House, Obama spoke at length about religious freedom overseas. But Pope Francis highlighted his concerns about religious freedom right here in the U.S., where the government and the Christian faithful, including the Little Sisters, have clashed over issues like same-sex “marriage” and employer-funded birth control.

10th US Court of Appeals = evil; with support of Obama administration they continue to relentlessly attack the Little Sisters of the Poor

Court rules against Little Sisters of the Poor

Ruling to force nuns to violate faith or pay massive IRS penalties

Photo by Bernard Grant/Denver CatholicLittle Sisters of the Poor attend oral arguments in their case against the HHS mandate in December. The court ruled July 14 that the nuns must comply with the mandate.

By Denver Catholic

July 14, 2015

Today, in a departure from the U.S. Supreme Court’s protection of the Little Sisters of the Poor last year, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Little Sisters must comply with the government’s contraceptive mandate.
The federal Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate forces religious ministries to violate their faith or pay massive IRS penalties.
Sister Loraine Marie Maguire, Mother Provincial of the Little Sisters of the Poor, stated, “As Little Sisters of the Poor, we simply cannot choose between our care for the elderly poor and our faith. And we should not have to make that choice, because it violates our nation’s commitment to ensuring that people from diverse faiths can freely follow God’s calling in their lives.”
The Little Sisters have served the neediest in society across the world with dignity for more than 175 years.
“All we ask is to be able to continue our religious vocation free from government intrusion,” she said.
Attorneys from The Becket Fund for Religious Freedom presented the nuns’ case in a lawsuit challenging the mandate, a part of the Affordable Care Act also known as Obamacare. The nuns argued the government is forcing them to act against their religious beliefs because of its requirement to provide free contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs to employees, or pay steep fines.

The Little Sisters care for the elderly poor. Denver Catholic File Photo

Churches are exempt from the mandate, but charitable organizations like the Little Sisters are not.
Mother Patricia Mary Metzgar, l.s.p., who oversees the Little Sisters’ Mullen Home for the Aged in Denver, has attended some of the court hearings with other nuns. The Little Sisters of Denver employ about 67 full-time employees.
Mark Rienzi, senior attorney of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and lead attorney for the Little Sisters, reacted to the ruling saying he was disappointed.
“After losing repeatedly at the Supreme Court, the government continues its unrelenting pursuit of the Little Sisters of the Poor,” he said in a statement. “It is a national embarrassment that the world’s most powerful government insists that, instead of providing contraceptives through its own existing exchanges and programs, it must crush the Little Sisters’ faith and force them to participate. Untold millions of people have managed to get contraceptives without involving nuns, and there is no reason the government cannot run its programs without hijacking the Little Sisters and their health plan.”
Rienzi is expected to appear on Fox News’ “The Kelly File” July 14 to discuss the court ruling.