“Congress has never passed legislation with the specific purpose of reducing Americans’ religious freedom. It should not consider doing so now.”
This was the message a broad interfaith coalition of religious leaders sent to Congress on July 1, after the Supreme Court issued its decision in the Hobby Lobby case. Members of the Green family, who own the chain of hobby and craft stores, won their case. The Supreme Court ruled that the administration could not force them to violate their faith and provide employer coverage for drugs and devices that they see as attacking a human being at his or her earliest stage of development.
These religious leaders, who represent over 100 million Americans, knew there might be a backlash from members of Congress whose own “reproductive rights” agenda is more important to them than the religious freedom of anyone who believes otherwise.
Events soon proved they were right to be concerned. A week after the faith leaders pleaded with Congress to maintain our religious freedom, Colorado Sen. Mark Udall joined with Washington state Sen. Patty Murray to introduce legislation to take it away.
Supporters call this bill the “Protect Women’s Health From Corporate Interference Act” (S. 2578). They say it will reverse the Hobby Lobby decision, so for-profit corporations cannot withhold contraceptive coverage from their female employees on religious grounds.
In reality, the bill is much more sweeping. It states that when the federal government, by law or regulation, decides to mandate any item in health plans nationwide, no one will have a right to object that it violates their religious freedom. The government’s mandate will override “any other provision of federal law” that stands in the way — whether that law protects for-profit employers or non-profit charitable organizations (e.g., the Little Sisters of the Poor), insurers, employees, or individual women purchasing a health plan for their families on our state health exchange.
Just as contraceptives have been mandated as a “preventive service” to avert unintended pregnancies, coverage for all abortions — including late-term abortions — could be mandated to avoid unwanted live births. In short, any federal law protecting conscience rights on abortion would be null and void, not just for “corporations” but for everyone involved.
For the Green family and for many other believers, this dispute was already about abortion. The Greens objected to only four of the 20 birth control methods the Obama administration has mandated, because they believe these methods can take the life of a new human being after fertilization. In their eyes, and in the teaching of the Catholic Church, taking human life at that early stage is an abortion.
Sen. Udall has publicly declared that he, too, believes some drugs marketed as “contraceptives” really act after fertilization. In fact, he approved a recent campaign ad declaring that a law protecting human life after fertilization would “ban birth control.” It is not my intent here to comment on how accurate his claim is. It can be very difficult to determine how some birth control methods really work. What I find troubling is that Sen. Udall himself firmly believes that the drugs and devices work this way — that they cause what many religious believers recognize as an abortion — and he still apparently thinks government should be able to force these citizens to act against their beliefs about respecting life.
Here in Denver we are blessed to have a wonderful home for the elderly run by the Little Sisters of the Poor. Anyone who has taken the time to witness the work of these extraordinary women knows that they simply want to serve with love. They have filed a lawsuit against the HHS mandate because their faith calls them to love and respect human life at every stage, from conception to natural death. And yet Sens. Udall and Murray seem to be saying, “There is no room for women like you.”
In July, the Senate narrowly failed to achieve the 60 votes needed to take up Sen. Udall’s bill. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid invoked a procedural rule to ensure that it can be brought up again. In the meantime, I hope Sen. Udall and others who voted for this extreme legislation will realize how radically it departs from our nation’s traditions on respect for the conscientious beliefs of all Americans. We need more respect for religious freedom in our nation, not less.
Samuel J. Aquila is archbishop of the Catholic diocese of Denver.
