Christianity Today

Got a problem with religious freedom? Redefine religious.

Got a problem with religious freedom? Redefine religious.
The Supreme Court yesterday refused to hear an appeal by Catholic Charities of Sacramento in which the organization asked to be exempt from a law forcing non religious employers to include birth control in health benefits. The Charities said forcing them to pay for contraception would conflict with church teaching and would violate the First Amendment, which allows the free exercise of religious beliefs.

"If the state of California can coerce Catholic agencies to pay for contraceptives, it can force them to pay for abortions,'' said Charities attorney Kevin Baine.

In March, the California Supreme Court also ruled against Catholic Charities, saying the ministry was not a religious employer because most of its employees are not Catholic and its services—counseling, low-income housing, and immigration services—are secular.

After that ruling, Ned Dolejsi, executive director of the California Catholic Conference, said, "This case was never about contraceptives. … It was about our ability to practice our religion—providing food, clothing, and shelter to the neediest among us—as a religious organization which is part of the Catholic Church."

The California Catholic Charities and the California Catholic Conference have yet to comment on the decision. Planned Parenthood and the ACLU applauded it.

Pro-life groups worry that states will soon force religious organizations such as hospitals and schools to pay for abortions. "California is just one court case away from requiring employers, even churches, to cover abortions in their health-insurance policies," said Jan Carroll of the California Pro-Life ...

This article is currently available to CT subscribers only.

To continue reading:

or