Catholic Bishops Lose a Big Battle Over Contraception
Catholic Bishops Lose a Big Battle Over Contraception
Who Needs Faith-Based Programs?
by BooMan
Mon Mar 26th, 2012 at 06:34:40 PM EST
If you were a sex slave who had recently been rescued, do you think you might want access to the full plethora of women's reproductive health care, including (potentially) abortion services and information about contraception? Well, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops didn't think so. And since the USCCB had a huge contract with the federal government to help victims of human trafficking that meant the official federal policy was being conflated with the teachings of the Catholic Church. The ACLU sued and just won their case in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The judge is a Clinton-appointee. If this case were to hold up under appeal, it would probably end the rationale for continuing George W. Bush's Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Which would be fine by me.
Basically, the judge said the government can't subcontract to a religious group if that religious group is going to use the money to impose its religious beliefs on others. The Obama administration had already terminated the USCCB's contract. Now they look justified.
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2012/3/26/183440/401
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/03/catholic-bishops-lose-another-contraception-fight
Common sense from Massachusetts
But on Friday, a federal judge in Massachusetts essentially validated the Obama administration's position, ruling in favor of the ACLU in the lawsuit over the contract. Even though the bishops no longer have the contract, they had joined with the ACLU in asking the judge to rule in the case to settle the constitutional issues. US District Judge Richard Stearns explained why the bishops were in the wrong. He wrote:
To insist that the government respect the separation of church and state is not to discriminate against religion; indeed, it promotes a respect for religion by refusing to single out any creed for official favor at the expense of all others....This case is about the limits of the government's ability to delegate to a religious institution the right to use taxpayer money to impose its beliefs on others (who may or may not share them).
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2012/03/common-sense-from-massachusetts.html
