Notre Dame Professor: White House Announcement- 'Inadequate'


National Review

Go to this article

Want to understand the Catholic faith?

ABSTRACTNotre Dame Professor: White House Announcement Today Is ‘Inadequate’ - By Kathryn Jean Lopez - The Corner - National Review Online Get FREE NRO Newsletters   Log In   |   Register Follow Us Everywhere         April 16 Issue  Subscribe to NR  Renew  April 16 Issue   |   Subscribe   |   Renew Home The Corner The Agenda Campaign Spot The Home Front Right Field Bench Memos The Feed Media Blog Critical Condition Larry Kudlow David Calling Exchequer Phi Beta Cons Planet Gore UK Between the Covers Radio Derb Tweet Tracker NR / Digital Subscribe: NR Subscribe: NR / Digital Give: NR / Digital NR Renewals & Changes Shop! Donate Media Kit Contact Close To: Your Email: Your Name: Subject: Zubrin: Carbon Emissions Are Good Derbyshire: March Diary Costa: The Ron Johnson Factor Hanson: Iran’s Win, Win, Win Bomb Habeeb: Too Young to Die Sowell: Argument from Disparity Charen: Violence and Family Breakdown Fonte: Saving Sovereignty Prager: They Don’t Know Us Lowry: Meltdown with Keith Olbermann Pipes: It’s Not Road Rage, It’s Terrorism O'Sullivan: The Significant ‘Little War’ Lopez: Desperately Seeking Women Ponnuru: The Culture Warrior Geraghty: Senate 2012 Outlook Fund: Penny Anti Interview: Ringing a Bell for Liberty Barone: The Constitution’s Comeback Sowell: The Death of Mrs. G Murdock: Socialist Hong Kong? New on NRO . . . The Corner The one and only. About This Blog Archive E-Mail RSS Send Print   |  Text   Notre Dame Professor: White House Announcement Today Is ‘Inadequate’ By  Kathryn Jean Lopez February 10, 2012 12:27 P.M. Comments 15 Carter Snead, law professor, e-mails: President Obama’s proposed adjustments to the new Health & Human Services rule requiring Catholic institutions, including the University of Notre Dame, to provide health care plans covering contraception, sterilization and abortifacient drugs continue to violate religious liberty, according to O. Carter Snead, professor of law at the University of Notre Dame. Today’s ‘compromise accommodation’ is nothing of the sort.  The original uproar across the ideological spectrum was in reaction to the administration’s requirement that virtually all religious employers cover abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization in violation of their strongly held beliefs.  Today’s rule still requires religious institutions (on pain of ruinous treasury fines) to purchase insurance that covers these same objectionable services.  It is irrelevant that the rule requires the insurance company (rather than the religious institution) to explain to employees that the policy purchased for them by their employer includes the 5-day after pill. For institutions that self-insure, the situation is even worse; they will be forced to contact their employees and pay for such services themselves. It is no answer to suggest that the religious liberty of such employers is being accommodated because they are not “paying” for the objectionable services.  First, it is naïve to imagine that the services are truly cost-free and that these costs will not be passed along to the employers who purchase these plans.   More importantly, the simple fact is that under this policy the government is coercing religious institutions to purchase a product that includes services that they regard as gravely immoral.  We should ask ourselves why President Obama has sustained the narrow exemption for churches, religious orders, and auxiliaries? This is tantamount to the admis sion that this policy, just like the previous one, runs afoul of religious liberty. Snead was general counsel of the presidential Council on Bioethics and will be director of the Center for Ethics and Culture at Notre Dame later this year. Editor’s Note : The title of this post has been amended since initial posting. New on The Corner. . . Walsh: Glass Ceiling, Glass Jaw Comments (0) Costa: Gingrich Blasts Obama's 'Distortion' Comments (0) Levin: Obama’s America Comments (6) Advertisement Log In to Post a Comment COMMENTS   15 EXPAND     Gregory of Yardale    02/10/12 12:34 The news coverage on this seems to indicate that the mandate only applies to female contraception. Isn't that discriminatory against men? Reply to this comment Link Report Abuse   CharlesWayne    02/10/12 12:36 Won't just ONE major news organization point out the tragedy that the President of the United States, Barack Obama, apparently believes that if you get insurance to pay for something, it's free? It explains so much of Obama's economic policy -- "you buy insurance, and then nothing costs anything!!!!" How naive, stupid, or just a plain liar does Obama have to be to say with a straight face that the person who pays for an ins.......