Obama Looking For Way To Get Women Free Abortifacients

This is something that has them Highly Concerned

(NY Times) The Obama administration, reeling from back-to-back blows from the Supreme Court this week, is weighing options that would provide contraceptive coverage to thousands of women who are about to lose it or never had it because of their employers’ religious objections.

The administration must move fast. Legal and health care experts expect a rush to court involving scores of employers seeking to take advantage of the two decisions, one involving Hobby Lobby Stores, which affects for-profit businesses, and the other on Wheaton College that concerns religiously affiliated nonprofit groups. About 100 cases are pending.

One proposal the White House is studying would put companies’ insurers or health plan administrators on the spot for contraceptive coverage, with details of reimbursement to be worked out later.

Another would give the administration itself a larger role in offering cost-free coverage to women who cannot get it through their employers, although the option for a new government entitlement appears unrealistic for financial and political reasons.

The White House is under such pressure that no one has been able to work out details of how the alternatives would be financed or administered.

Details schmetails, Obama has free abortifacients to provide to his base, religious beliefs be damned! The lawsuits so far have all been about covering abortifacients, not standard contraception, a point that the Times finally gets around to within their discussion of the Supreme Court’s female justices having a tizzy over the Wheaton decision.

The Obama administration says the cost of providing contraceptives will be offset by savings that result from greater use of birth control, “fewer unplanned pregnancies” and improvement in women’s health. But, Mr. Condeluci said, “It may be years before the savings are realized.”

It’s a cute talking point, but it doesn’t address the fundamental protection laid out in the 1st Amendment about government restricting the free practice of religion. Again, this debate boils down to Constitutionalists vs moochers.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Also see...

Related Articles

1

Obama Cites A Strategic Logic For Avoidance In Using Islamic Labels Or Something

FacebookTwitterEmail It’s probably more like “strategic patience”, which is a phrase for a policy position more akin to “meh”. Like

2

Changing Demographics Threaten Republican Texas

FacebookTwitterEmail Yes, demographics talk will dominate the political discourse — and it should worry us. : Immigration, as an issue, and

14

Where is the Missing Media Outrage Over President Obama?

FacebookTwitterEmail I was reminded today, during the Bush presidency, there was a daily tracking of both the deaths of US

Share This

Share this post with your friends!