Obama Rejects Exemption for Religious Hospitals

[Dauric]

Catholic church still hates updated contraception rule. In other news, water wet.

The more interesting part of that article is the last half that details how the witness-list for the hearing by the House Oversight Committee, chaired by Darrell Issa (R, Ca.) was stacked solely with male religious organizers, and through the use of a highly mobile goalpost blocked the Democrats from having any witnesses before the committee.

I also loved how the representative of the Catholic church brushed off the statements of the Catholic Health Association which had been more favorable to the policy. The ones that actually function in the healthcare industry apparently are supposed to have less say than the Catholic hierarchy, but then again that's the way the Catholic hierarchy works.

[Belial]

If you give the pope a cookie...

[lucrezaborgia]

Dear Darrell Issa,

The solution to the economy isn't inside my vagina or any other woman's vagina. Stop politicking and do your job you ass!

Insincerely,

LB

[Angua]

I wasn't sure if I should bump this thread or make a new one.

Whitehouse unveils contraception opt-out.

Though someone this seems to be that if the organisation doesn't want to give it, they have to let the woman get it directly from the insurer?

I guess we'll watch this space to see if there are still objections.

[Xeio]

I was wondering when this came up on the NPR feed, so basically the plan from last year is just in writing now?

[Tyndmyr]

Dear Darrell Issa,

The solution to the economy isn't inside the volcano or any other woman's vagina. Stop politicking and do your job you ass!

Insincerely,

LB

Am amused at the implication that the solution could indeed be in her vagina.

[BlackSails]

How about "if you are going to call yourself a hospital, you have to provide appropriate medical care"

[Heisenberg]

I was wondering when this came up on the NPR feed, so basically the plan from last year is just in writing now?

The NPR story I heard explained that there were still some gaps that have now been filled to everyone's satisfaction.

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

I don't think this has satisfied everyone. The changes they made exempt religious nonprofits, but it doesn't cover for-profit organizations with religious owners, or (possibly) some non-profits that are to some extent religious but don't qualify under the proposed rules. And some religious nonprofits think that the proposed rules would still involve them too directly in paying for contraceptives. And, for that matter, there are plenty of liberal groups that think that there shouldn't be this exemption, or even any exemption at all.

^ The above is essentially a tl;dr of this.

[Heisenberg]

I meant that it's a patch on the original framework. Obviously not everyone is satisfied with the criteria for exemption, but those haven't changed, only the how has changed, and it's really just been expanded to accommodate special cases of very large non-profits who do not utilize an insurer.

[Xeio]

http://n.pr/WTIY2A

You know, just in case it wasn't obvious the Catholic bishops weren't going to agree.