Shell Game: Women’s Health at the Expense of Religious Freedom?

On Saturday, October 20^th, across the country, the Nationwide Rally for Religious Freedom (a.k.a. Stand Up for Religious Freedom) organized another round of rallies protesting Obamacare (a.k.a. the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) as an infringement on a religious institution’s right to practice its religion.

Per a recommendation by the Institute of Medicine, Obamacare requires employers, including religious institutions, to provide contraception services on their insurance plans. For churches and other houses of worship, the law provides an accommodation which requires the insurance company, rather than the employer, to pay for contraception (Sonfield). According to the Stand Up for Religious Freedom movement, this accommodation is just a “shell-game” whereby insurance companies will pay for such contraceptives with the money paid to them by religious institutions.

But if the accommodation is a shell game, so is the conviction that Obamacare represents an assault on religious freedom. The conflict over contraception is not a case of the government imposing some secular ideology on religion. Rather it is the offshoot of the involvement of religion in the secular economy. To fulfill its mission, religion has opted to take part in secular society through the establishment of hospitals, schools, churches, and other businesses. Through these businesses, religion pursues its mission of proselytizing, healing, serving those in need, and delivering its doctrine to the masses. Both secular society and religions benefit from these businesses, but these institutions are businesses. As such, they must follow applicable tax, finance, and employment laws and regulations. Despite an anti-contraceptive doctrine, religious institutions are bound to an economic reality that ties employment to health care and individual health care to the whole society.

Entirely exempting religious institutions would ignore the many societal and economic benefits of making contraception accessible, including minimizing the risk of unintended pregnancies, appropriately spacing pregnancies, timely pre-natal and infant care, and promoting women’s educational and financial success (Sonfield). All of these benefits have broader implications for American society as a whole.

If the shells are taken off the table, the legitimate issues are revealed: Women’s health and women’s impact on society and the economy. It is women who must shoulder the emotional and economic responsibilities of an unintended pregnancy, and, if they falter, society must pick up the slack. Despite these realities, religionists speak only of the value of the embryo, the sanctity of marriage, and the freedom of religion (Tollefsen). All the while, beneath these shells, lies the tangible life of the woman.

Sources

“About the Institute.” Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Institute of Medicine, n.d. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. http://www.iom.edu/About-IOM.aspx

“About President Obama’s HHS Mandate.” Stand Up for Religious Freedom. Stand Up for Religious Freedom, n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2012.  http://standupforreligiousfreedom.com/mandate/

Draper, Electa. “Catholic Church Defends Birth-Control Stance Amid Strong Opposition.” Denver Post. Denver Post, 20 May 2012. Web. 20 Oct. 2012. http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_20664414

“Health Care Law Gives Women Control Over Their Care, Offers Free Preventive Services to 47 Million Women.” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 31 Jul. 2012. Web. 21 Oct. 2012. http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2012pres/07/20120731a.html

Sonfield, Adam. “The Religious Exemption to Mandated Insurance Coverage of Contraception.” American Medical Association Journal of Ethics Virtual Mentor. American Medical Association, 14.2 (Feb. 2012). Web. 21 Oct. 2012. http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2012/02/pfor1-1202.html

Tollefsen, Christopher. “Contraception and Catholicism.” National Review Online. National Review, 16 Feb. 2012. Web. 20 Oct. 2012. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/291220/contraception-and-catholicism-christopher-tollefsen