Where are the women? If only there was a dollar for every time this question is asked in regards to opposition of the U. S. government rule that Catholic institutions supply free contraceptives, abortifacients and sterilization. If that were the case, we probably wouldn’t have to worry about where the money to pay for contraceptives is coming from. But anyway, here’s the answer to the question, once and for all: the women are out there opposing the mandate – but not because it’s a women’s issue–because it’s a freedom issue.
There certainly has been a neglect of women who have spoken out in opposition to the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), but those who have come together to speak out against the mandate want to set the record straight. This opposition isn’t about women’s health or the Catholic Church; it’s about freedom of conscience and the need to stop government overreach as it attempts to coerce employers into forgetting about freedom of conscience.
Jennifer Marshall of the Heritage Foundation calls this mandate a “fine on faith.” She recently hosted a panel discussion of women who are speaking out. The mandate, she says, “has attacked religious freedom and it has not compromised. Despite talk of compromise, the final anti-conscience mandate was published in the Federal Register on February 15 with no change – absolutely no change – from the original version.”
It’s a matter that she says, “should be taken seriously… [Obamacare] is an ominous sign of what’s to come once the 2,000-page law is fully implemented… Obamacare has handed the moral compass to bureaucrats.”
According to Maggie Karner, Director, Lutheran Church Missouri-Synod Life and Health Ministries, “We’re here to oppose the government’s attempt to mandate, to control our choices… We’re here to talk about religious freedom, and I don’t really give a rip what gender is talking about religious freedom, as long as someone is talking about it.”
Karner explained that the groups and religious institutions being attacked by the mandate are vast – and not just Catholic – and they are groups that reach out to everyone. These are groups, she says, “that believe in the responsibility to bring care and healing to a broken society… It’s not charity. We call it mercy… it’s not what we do, it’s who we are,” Karner said. “Here’s the key thing, there are no adequate conscience protections in this mandate for mercy… it effectively levies a fine on our faith.”
But Karner even went on to say that America’s compassionate organizations do have some street credit when it comes to providing healthcare due to their “vested interest in society.” According to her, their services become increasingly difficult and will eventually cease to exist, if the government strips them of their liberties.
“This debate isn’t about contraception,” she said. “This debate is about us being forced to pay for products and services that are contrary to our religious beliefs. We can’t be expected to check out faith at the door.”
Lori Windham of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, added to this when she explained the costly implications of the mandate. She explained that the Becket Fund has sued the Obama Administration four times over the mandate on behalf of four different religious organizations. Windham said that each of the organizations the Fund represents will be affected in unique ways. According to Windham, one of the organizations, Eternal World Television Network (EWTN) “is looking at fines of $620,000 per year beginning in 2014 because they’ve asked that their policies conform with the faith they are practicing and preaching.”
She added that Colorado Christian University is looking at similar fines of $500,000 per year. It’s frightening, she says, because many people will be affected by this – employees, students, teachers, and people who depend on the organizations. These organizations, she explained, will be “fined out of existence.”
Windham explained that the Obama Administration’s first response to the Becket Fund did not attempt to explain the constitutionality of the mandate. “That’s because we believe they can’t,” Windham said. “It violates our right to free exercise. It violates federal law, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, among other rights.”
There are countless reasons why Windham and members at the Becket Fund believe the mandate will be struck down before the Supreme Court, “It hurts religious organizations. It hurts the people they serve. It’s unconstitutional.”
Hadley Heath of the Independent Women’s Forum added to the argument by saying that opposition to the HHS mandate is not a left or right issue, “In truth, it’s an American issue,” Heath said. “The new health rule simply expands government too far. This will be destructive for our constitutional design for government, for individual choice in the marketplace, and for the marketplace of ideas… Obamacare is anti-constitution, anti-choice, and anti-competition.” She said it leaves no choice for the people and urged people to understand where this mandate is coming from – not from doctors or elected officials but un-elected bureaucrats. “This does not fit the constitutional design for law making.”
Heath added that if the government sets the tone for what individuals and companies must take part in when it comes to their health, there is a total lack of respect for the individual, not to mention the Constitution. It also affects competition in the market, “To centralize and limit the healthcare marketplace is essentially monopolization,” she said.
Pia de Solenni of Diotima Consulting, LLC explained that this mandate is about freedom. Just as each of the women on the panel explained that if the government is willing to go this far, they questioned how much further it will try to control the lives of Americans in the future.
Solenni explained that the mandate questions whether individuals have the right to make decisions for themselves. This ability to decide and this religious freedom is being violated. Religious freedom, she says, “is something that is deeply human.”
Perhaps one of the most telling parts of the panel was the presence of Representative Ann Marie Buerkle (R-NY). Rep. Burkle, who once served as a nurse and lawyer, had insight about the problems that the HHS mandate is causing.
She said that recent coverage of the mandate may cause people to think a conservative woman in Congress doesn’t care about women’s health. But Burkle set the record straight, “I care deeply about women’s health.” She explained that the mandate, however, is not about women’s health. The mandate, she says, is about conscience. “This issue is a First Amendment right.” She called the mandate an “erosion of freedom.”
“The very essence of the healthcare law is that the government is going to tell you what it will be,” Burkle said in regards to individual freedoms. “Little by little our freedom will be eroded.”
Burkle added that we are at a crossroads of what she calls two very different visions of America–one run by the government and the other run by the people. She urged for people to stand up for their freedom. “The government’s job is to protect rights, not grant rights,” Burkle said.
The women who spoke out were effective and articulate. They urged all Americans to stand up against the mandate in support of their individual freedoms. “Every citizen has a right to get involved,” Solenni said. “Let your voices be heard,” added Burkle.
For more information go to: http://www.becketfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Unacceptable-2-29-1pm.pdf
Jocelyn Grecko is an intern at the American Journalism Center, a training program run by Accuracy in Media and Accuracy in Academia. Jocelyn has spent the past four years in the nation’s capital as a Media Studies undergraduate student at The Catholic University of America. She will graduate in May 2012.
If you would like to comment on this article, e-mail mal.kline@academia.org
