There is a political fracas brewing this week about a rule announced by the Obama administration that requires most employers to offer free contraceptive services in their employees\u2019 health plans. What\u2019s so controversial about that? No one is required to use contraceptives under this rule. It just says that the services have to be made available. <\/p>\n
The problem, as you probably know, is that the Roman Catholic church opposes the use of contraceptives and Catholic institutions employ a lot of people. As the rule was announced originally, actual churches would have been exempt from the mandate, but Catholic universities, hospitals and charities would not have been exempt. Under the original rule, they would have had to pay for contraceptive services, despite their religious objections. <\/p>\n
American Catholic bishops were furious about this. They said that the rule went too far. They said that it violated the religious freedoms of people who are opposed to birth control. Why should they have to pay for something that they oppose?<\/p>\n
Eventually, the Obama administration sought to minimize the damage caused by the uproar. They changed the rule so that religious organizations that object to birth control would not have to pay for contraceptives. Instead, the cost burden in such cases has been transferred to insurance companies. Employees who want birth control can get it and religious institutions that are opposed to birth control don\u2019t have to pay for it. That should solve the problem, right?<\/p>\n
Apparently not. Some people, and not all of them Roman Catholics, want to keep the controversy going\u2014a few for religious reasons, but most of them to score political points. (If you hadn\u2019t noticed, it\u2019s an election year.) The new claim is that no employer who objects to contraception for religious reasons should be required to offer birth control to their employees, even if they don\u2019t have to pay for it, even if their employees do not share their religious beliefs. Now who\u2019s going too far? Now who\u2019s infringing on religious freedoms?<\/p>\n