That is the claim made in an amicus brief filed on October 12, 2012, by the conservative women’s group Women Speak For Themselves against the HHS “Preventive Services” Mandate. The brief offers a “unique perspective and analysis,” according to a federal judge.
WSFT attorney Dorinda Bordlee explained that the brief is the first of several amicus (friend of the court) briefs which will be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in the case of Wheaton College and Belmont Abbey College v Sebelius et al.
The brief outlines the serious increased health risks ignored by the government. “The law requires the government to prove that its burden on the College’s religious objection furthers a compelling interest,” Bordlee explained. “The WSFT brief makes the simple point that the HHS Mandate does not prevent what it claims to prevent, and may well in many instances increase the risk of disease rather than decreasing it.”
According to WSFT co-founders Helen Alvaré and Kim Daniels, the brief details the federal government’s failure to build a medical case for the mandate, and its failure to acknowledge the serious side effects and risk factors for women associated with it. The Mandate, they charge, is both unconstitutional and just bad public policy.
Women Speak For Themselves was founded in response to the Democrats’ political catchphrase “war on women” which asserted that Republican Party initiatives restricted women’s rights, especially with regard to “reproductive freedom.” WSFT is an alliance of women in defense of religious freedom and a more thoughtful and complete vision of women’s freedom. To date, more than 36,000 women have signed “Don’t Claim to Speak for All Women,” an open letter from the group to President Obama, Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, and Congress.
For more information on the group, and to see a press release regarding the amicus brief as well as the full brief, visit the WSFT website.