The situation of Catholic Charities of Sacramento Inc. v. Superior Court was identical to this controversy (prior to the "obama compromise".)
Religious churches were not forced to buy contraception as part of their insurance plan, under Obama's original plan.
Organization not directly affiliated with Religious churches as part of the tax code but were still religious in nature (such as catholic charities, hospitals, etc) were required to have contraception for free as part of their insurance plan.
Religious churches were not forced to buy contraception as part of their insurance plan, under Obama's original plan.
Organization not directly affiliated with Religious churches as part of the tax code but were still religious in nature (such as catholic charities, hospitals, etc) were required to have contraception for free as part of their insurance plan.
It is hard to see how an organization operated by the church, or exclusively by its organs if not a part of it.
For example, the below linked group of hospitals: The Wikipedia article claims they changed their name just this year "to better reflect their ministry and the ending of their affiliation with the Catholic Church," but also notes its top executives all come from its seven co-sponors—all of which are orders of nuns. Calling that a mere private corporation that just coincidentally happens to be run exclusively by Catholic Church leaders badly misrepresents the situation. Not only is it impossible to get on the board of directors without being a nun, it is impossible to be one of the executives who SELECTS the board. If that is just a private corporation someone needs to call the EEOC on them.

Hopefully all this backslapping over Obama scoring a minor "victory" in alarming Americas religious voters (which is the vast majority of them) does not end with churches abandoning non-profit healthcare to preserve their religious convictions. That would hardly be a big triumph for US healthcare, and certainly not for the people to afford to purchase it out of pocket, supposedly the people who benefit most from Obamas healthcare "reform." Since we do not HAVE the public healthcare that would have avoided controversies like this one, that would be less a "triumph" than "disaster that kills millions."
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Democrats bailing on Obama - War against the Catholic Church heats up
09/02/2012 04:03:35 AM
- 1813 Views
This is not a war on Catholics, it is Obama being an idiot again.
09/02/2012 04:52:01 AM
- 845 Views
For someone who used to be a Con Law professor
10/02/2012 08:23:34 PM
- 727 Views
In general, I disagree with that view, but not in this particular case.
11/02/2012 02:02:42 AM
- 960 Views
Also, kudos for linking to a source, and a fairly non-partisan one as well.
09/02/2012 01:33:07 PM
- 918 Views
I am a non-partisan guy, so I only use unbiased sources!
*NM*
09/02/2012 04:02:50 PM
- 629 Views

Wanting both parties to be hit by a bus does not make one non-partisan.
09/02/2012 10:05:28 PM
- 799 Views

You lost all credibility in the first line of your post.
09/02/2012 04:49:23 PM
- 850 Views
You actually think any of us has 'credibility' anymore in regards to neutrality? *NM*
09/02/2012 06:46:13 PM
- 515 Views
It's one thing to have a bias.
09/02/2012 07:28:51 PM
- 891 Views
Wow, talk about making a supernova out of a couple hydrogen atoms.
09/02/2012 08:41:44 PM
- 703 Views
The Catholic Church wants to eliminate the birth control coverage requirement entirely.
10/02/2012 12:24:01 AM
- 1011 Views
Sounds like they just do not want Catholics directly financing; great argument for public healthcare
10/02/2012 02:27:36 AM
- 958 Views
I'm somewhat suprised that Obama blundered this badly.
10/02/2012 01:40:14 AM
- 1725 Views
Why? Have you not been paying attention?
10/02/2012 02:03:43 AM
- 2165 Views

If I am not satisfied with Romney then my Plan B is to not vote.
10/02/2012 10:58:34 PM
- 2203 Views
How does that help anything? Except Romneys election chances, of course.
11/02/2012 01:08:22 AM
- 2014 Views
No everynametaken this is not unconsitutional according to the first ammendment
11/02/2012 12:14:29 AM
- 2014 Views
Obama doing this actually impresses me to no end.
10/02/2012 02:21:10 AM
- 2254 Views
He is already preparing to cave.
10/02/2012 02:42:32 AM
- 2241 Views
Why are you even replying to me? What you said has little meaning to what I said.
10/02/2012 03:33:27 AM
- 2035 Views
Aaaaand you can put your hat back on now: Obama has already caved.
10/02/2012 04:04:30 PM
- 2251 Views
Yup, the cave already happened.....you could have set your watch to this! *NM*
10/02/2012 05:00:02 PM
- 1707 Views
Actually, no, I could not; I expected it to take another week or two.
11/02/2012 01:27:31 AM
- 2131 Views
No, you don't have to buy it from insurers. You get it for free, just like everyone else will. *NM*
10/02/2012 09:55:53 PM
- 1855 Views
"The employees can then buy the coverage directly from an insurer."
11/02/2012 01:25:52 AM
- 2253 Views
Then that article is wrong.
11/02/2012 01:43:40 AM
- 2196 Views
Two days ago the White House said it would not back down from requiring school/hospital compliance.
11/02/2012 01:57:50 AM
- 2171 Views
So in summary... the article you posted was wrong.
11/02/2012 02:18:00 AM
- 1737 Views
To soon to tell, but if you think so feel free to demand a correction from them.
11/02/2012 03:12:40 AM
- 949 Views
Losing the exchanges is a pretty big loss
11/02/2012 03:30:15 AM
- 854 Views
So they refuse to cover it for the next two years, then do an about face in 2014.
11/02/2012 03:57:53 AM
- 1039 Views
If Aetna does not provide the free contraception as part of the compromise
11/02/2012 02:46:14 AM
- 727 Views
Yeah, I saw that; if Aetna does not do as Obama says by 2014 they lose out on free profits then.
11/02/2012 03:13:36 AM
- 794 Views
So Jehovah Witness employers should not have to pay for blood transfusions?
10/02/2012 03:57:47 AM
- 810 Views
Not if it conflicts with their religious beliefs.
10/02/2012 04:20:32 PM
- 996 Views
Money is not the same as speech!
10/02/2012 07:20:56 PM
- 712 Views
And actions are different from both—until others are expected to pay for ones actions.
11/02/2012 12:53:40 AM
- 981 Views
No it isn't Joel, empirically you are dead wrong
10/02/2012 11:24:19 PM
- 963 Views
I do not see how requiring private entities do it instead of the feds is "least restrictive way."
11/02/2012 12:53:22 AM
- 968 Views
Catholic Charities of Sacramento Inc. v. Superior Court
11/02/2012 01:21:46 AM
- 879 Views
"the Court found that it wasn't a religious organization, it was just a non-profit corporation."
11/02/2012 01:36:33 AM
- 742 Views
The situation was identical to the pre obama controversy
11/02/2012 02:42:57 AM
- 663 Views
The affiliation is the sticking point.
11/02/2012 03:41:33 AM
- 1041 Views
One last point
10/02/2012 11:35:25 PM
- 1046 Views
The federal government forcing private groups to facilitate without committing sin also infringes.
11/02/2012 01:03:30 AM
- 832 Views
You argument does not make sense
11/02/2012 01:26:57 AM
- 705 Views
It was an analogy, not an equivalency.
11/02/2012 01:48:14 AM
- 835 Views
Lets enhance your analogy making it closer to reality
11/02/2012 02:19:41 AM
- 939 Views
Why could I not buy it with my own money?
11/02/2012 03:46:33 AM
- 909 Views
Re: Why could I not buy it with my own money?
11/02/2012 04:17:17 AM
- 2132 Views
In other words, I could.
11/02/2012 04:21:05 AM
- 634 Views
You believe it can't help people since it is not single payer? *NM*
11/02/2012 04:31:13 AM
- 533 Views
Since you answered this in your other response I will just adress it there. *MN*
11/02/2012 05:59:37 AM
- 895 Views
Some more points
11/02/2012 02:30:27 AM
- 969 Views
Sex is not a necessity either.
11/02/2012 03:56:51 AM
- 916 Views
LMAO due to Obama's compromise (the word compromise should have a
in it )
11/02/2012 12:12:57 AM
- 949 Views

Obama just got two weeks of being portrayed as "anti-church" to the point even Dems complained.
11/02/2012 02:00:28 AM
- 877 Views
The polls disagree with you.
11/02/2012 02:32:59 AM
- 825 Views
It is an interesting article, but not for the polls.
11/02/2012 04:18:17 AM
- 872 Views
I wouldn't put too much into that poll anyway
11/02/2012 05:37:05 AM
- 994 Views
Frankly, I hope Obamacare DOES die, just not because of the public mandate.
11/02/2012 07:18:04 AM
- 872 Views
I haven't really heard about it outside of this post, so the negative exposure can't be too bad.
11/02/2012 05:56:58 PM
- 685 Views
There seems to be plenty of Hell raising over it, but you are in the States and I am not.
11/02/2012 07:55:51 PM
- 715 Views
I don't think it's quite the laughing matter you think it is
11/02/2012 12:31:23 PM
- 869 Views
Understood.
11/02/2012 07:51:14 PM
- 811 Views
mmm...
11/02/2012 08:20:26 PM
- 877 Views
The man talked about during the campaign was the one elected with a mandate.
12/02/2012 02:28:15 AM
- 1024 Views
I think Obama (for once) was far more clever you give him credit for...
15/02/2012 05:11:10 PM
- 1097 Views
Surrendering on liberal issues then blaming Republicans is not just Obamas strategy, but his POLICY.
15/02/2012 07:23:04 PM
- 932 Views