Twitter icon

Facebook icon

About this site
About us
Our beliefs
Is this your first visit?
Contact us
External links

Recommended books

Visitors' essays
Our forum
New essays
Other features
Buy a CD of this site
Vital notes

World religions
Christian def'n
 Shared beliefs
 Handling change
 Bible topics
 Bible inerrancy
 Bible harmony
 Interpret the Bible
 Beliefs & creeds
 Da Vinci code
 Revelation 666
Other religions
Cults and NRMs
Comparing Religions

Non-theistic beliefs

About all religions
Main topics
Basic information
Gods & Goddesses
Handling change
Doubt & security
Confusing terms
End of the World?
True religion?
Seasonal events
Science vs. Religion
More information

Morality & ethics
Absolute truth

Attaining peace
Religious tolerance
Religious freedom
Religious hatred
Religious conflict
Religious violence

"Hot" topics
Very hot topics
Ten Commandments
Abortion access
Assisted suicide
Death penalty

Same-sex marriage

Human rights
Gays in the military
Sex & gender
Stem cells
Other topics

Laws and news
Religious laws
Religious news



Religious Tolerance logo

In a religious freedom/liberty conflict among religious
employers, employees, and students, who wins?

2011: Bill in Congress to terminate the
HHS mandate. Catholic bishops and
pro-life groups oppose the mandate.
2012-JUL: Wheaton v. Burwell case.

horizontal rule

This topic is continued from the previous essay

horizontal rule

horizontal rule

Sponsored link

horizontal rule

2011-MAR: Bill introduced in Congress to terminate upcoming HHS mandate:

The Respect for Rights of Conscience Act of 2011 was introduced with 223 cosponsors on 2011-MAR-17. A companion bill was introduced in the Senate: S.1467. It was referred to congressional subcommittee and did not progress. 3 A similar bill H.R. 940 was introduced in 2013-MAR-04, referred to the House Subcommittee on Health, where it also did not progress. 4

Overlooked in the USCCB statement is that if couples' access to emergency contraceptiion is reduced, then the inevitable result woull be drastic rise in the number of unwanted pregnancies of which a large percentage would be terminated either by surgical abortions or the RU-486 abortion pill. According to the Church's teachings, abortions are such a serious sin that they are prohibited even when the a late-term pregnancy goes terribly wrong, and the only two options are:

  • to do nothing and allow both mother and fetus to die, or

  • to perform an abortion and at least save the mother's life.

But, ironically, the Church opposes the use of contraceptives to avoid the need for abortions.

horizontal rule

2012-JUN-18: Two pro-life groups, Susan B. Anthony List and Charlotte Lozier Institute oppose HHS Mandate:

President Marjorie Dannenfelser of the Susan B. Anthony List and president Chuck Donovan of the Charlotte Lozier Institute sent a joint comment to the federal Health & Human Services criticizing the HHS Mandate because of its negative impact on groups with non-religious objections. They asked that emergency contraception [EC] be deleted from the mandate because they believe it can induce abortions. Alternately, they want the Mandate to be amended to release employers and school administrators who have ethical and moral objections to EC from having to fund insurance plans that provide EC.

They said:

"Not only does the Administration’s so called 'accommodation' for religious entities not go far enough to protect religious liberty, it does not address the conscience protections needed by non-religious groups actively working to uphold the right to life. In order to maintain the moral coherence of our missions, we refuse to purchase insurance or otherwise participate in any insurance plan that includes coverage for interventions or procedures that destroy or otherwise imperil innocent human beings.  The idea that we, or our insurers, are not really paying for these procedures because of the ‘cost-savings’ of abortifacients is repugnant in the first place." 5

horizontal rule

Sponsored link:

horizontal rule

2011-AUG-01: U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement opposing the HHS mandate:

Their statement was titled: "USCCB: HHS Mandate for contraceptive and abortifacient drugs violates conscience rights." 1 The "abortifacient drugs" refer to emergency contraception pills (EC, ECP). The Catholic Bishops in the U.S. accept the widespread beliefs among religious conservatives that EC pills can cause abortions. This is not a belief generally shared by the medical community and religious liberals. 2

Their statement quoted Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo, Archbishop of Galveston-Houston and chairman of the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities. He said:

"... under the new rule our institutions would be free to act in accord with Catholic teaching on life and procreation only if they were to stop hiring and serving non-Catholics. Could the federal government possibly intend to pressure Catholic institutions to cease providing health care, education and charitable services to the general public? Health care reform should expand access to basic health care for all, not undermine that goal.”

""The Administration’s failure to create a meaningful conscience exemption to the preventive services mandate underscores the need for Congress to approve the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act [2011], That bill (H.R. 1179), introduced by Reps. Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) and Dan Boren (D-OK), would prevent mandates under the new health reform law from undermining rights of conscience. ..."

"Catholics are not alone in conscientiously objecting to this mandate. The drugs that Americans would be forced to subsidize under the new rule include Ella, which was approved by the FDA as an 'emergency contraceptive' but can act like the abortion drug RU-486. It can abort an established pregnancy weeks after conception. The pro-life majority of Americans – Catholics and others – would be outraged to learn that their premiums must be used for this purpose. ..."

"HHS says the intent of its ‘preventive services’ mandate is to help ‘stop health problems before they start. But pregnancy is not a disease, and children are not a 'health problem' – they are the next generation of Americans." 1

horizontal rule

2012: Wheaton v. Burwell lawsuit filed against the HHS mandate:

On 2012-JUL-16, Wheaton College in Illinois joined the Catholic University of America in a lawsuit against the Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. This is the usual federal court where lawsuites are filed that challenge federal laws and regulations.

Wheaton College President Dr. Philip Graham Ryken said that the college decided to initiate the lawsuit after the U.S. Supreme Court decided in 2012-JUN that the Affordable Care Act was constitutional. Although Wheaton College has no objection to married couples using birth control pills, they are unwilling to provide emergency contraceptives because of their belief that EC can induce abortion. This is a belief that is generally accepted by religious conservatives and some members of Christian mainline denominations. Religious liberals, secularists, and the medical community generally believe that emergency contraception (EC) is a true contraceptive and only delays ovulation and/or prevents conception; it cannot cause an abortion. 2

According to Monifa Thomas, the medical and government health care reporter for the Chicago Sun Times, this was a very unusual event:

"The alliance marks the first time that Catholics and evangelicals have worked together to oppose a regulation in court." 6

Wheaton College was represented by The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. The Fund reported that dozens of lawsuits have been filed to date to challenge the HHS mandate.

Thomas writes that HHS:

"... spokesman Keith Maley said the administration is developing additional accommodations in response to concerns raised by religious organizations that do not want to pay for, refer for, or provide contraception.

'We will consider the comments and suggestions received from interested stakeholders before finalizing and implementing policies that respect religious liberty while ensuring millions of women have access to recommended preventive services without cost-sharing,' Maley said.

The policy already ensures that if a woman works for a religious employer with objections to providing contraceptive services as part of its health plan, the religious employer will not be required to provide, pay for or refer for contraception coverage, but her insurance company will be required to directly offer her contraceptive care free of charge.

That, however, is considered a 'shell game' by many religious organizations." 2

horizontal rule

This topic continues in the next essay

horizontal rule

How you may have arrived here:

Home > Morality > Health care > Contraceptive conflict > here

Home > Religious freedom > Freedom to oppress > Contraceptive conflict > here

Home > Important essays > Religious freedom > Freedom to oppress > Contraceptive conflict > here

Home > Religious information > Religious freedom > Freedom to oppress > Contraceptive conflict > here

Home > Human rights > Religious freedom > Freedom to oppress > Contraceptive conflict > here

 Home > Sex > Catholic church > Contraceptive conflict > here

 Home > "Hot" topics > Sex > Catholic church > Contraceptive conflict > here

Home > Christianity > Christian groups > Sorting groups > Denominations > Catholics > Sex > Contraceptive conflict >here

 Home > Christianity > Christian history, belief... > Beliefs > Sex > Catholic church > Contraceptive conflict > here

or Home > Religious Information > Basic data > Sex > Catholic church > Contraceptive conflict > here

References used:

The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.

  1. "USCCB: HHS Mandate for Contraceptive and Abortifacient Drugs Violates Conscience Rights," United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2011-AUG-01, at:
  2. Answers to frequently asked questions about how emergency contraception works," Princeton University, 2014-MAR-13, at:
  3. Bill Summary & Status. H.R. 1179, Library of Congress, last updated on 2011-MAR-28, at:
  4. Bill Summary & Status. H.R. 940, Library of Congress, last updated on 2014-MAR-12, at:
  5. Steven Erlelt, "Obama Admin Told to Rescind Pro-Abortion HHS Mandate,", 2012-JUN-18, at:
  6. Monifa Thomas, "Wheaton College joins suit opposing contraception mandate," Chicago Sun Times, 2012-JUL-18, at:
  7. "HHS Mandate Information Central," The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, as read on 2012-JUL-25, at:
  8. Thomas Peters, "51 Catholic (+16 Religious) Institutions Opposing Obama/HHS Mandate," Catholic Vote, at:
  9. "The HHS Mandate goes into effect," Fox News, 2012-AUG-01. at:

horizontal rule

Copyright © 2012 to 2014 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance 
Originally written: 2012-JUL-08
Latest update: 2014-JUL-15
Author: B.A. Robinson

line.gif (538 bytes)
Sponsored link

Go to the previous page, or return to the "Who wins the religious freedom battle?" menu, or choose:


Go to home page  We would really appreciate your help

E-mail us about errors, etc.  Purchase a CD of this web site

FreeFind search, lists of new essays...  Having problems printing our essays?

Twitter link

Facebook icon

Google Page Translator:

This page translator works on Firefox,
Opera, Chrome, and Safari browsers only

After translating, click on the "show
original" button at the top of this
page to restore page to English.

Sponsored links