Victory: Priests for Life wins exemption from HHS mandate

[ProVobis]

Actually, the whole reason we have employer-provided health insurance as a benefit in the first place, was to get around GOVERNMENT wage controls during WWII. So when the government interferes in the marketplace, other solutions will be found and look at what we’ve been stuck with ever since - every time you change jobs, you lose your health care benefits. Also the rise in health care costs was brought on by Teddy Kennedy’s creation of HMOs and PPOs.

This is true. A lot of benefits (holidays, vacations, sick days, profit plans, etc.) have come around in the same way but health insurance is something companies have put in an excessive amount of time and money where a non-employer-based group insurance (by a local hospital, village, etc.) would have sufficed. Every company isn’t in the business of health but now it’s been forced into that position. I find that alone is problematic.

 

[Robert_Sock]

As Saint Paul states: “In all things, God works for the good!” In HUMILITY, everything will work itself out.

 

[Suudy]

Seems to me this is only a sign that an employer has to have deep enough pockets to take Uncle Sam to court and get him to back down. What about smaller organizations? Do they have the thousands (tens of thousands?) necessary to gain the same exemption?

 

[Lucky7]

HHS mandate shows the mainstream media bias. Barely any of the victories against the mandate are covered, any victories in favour of the Obama admin are covered. Search for yourself

I can not find a mainstream media report on this. I’m surprised that even Fox news hasn’t done anything with this.

 

[JimG]

It doesn’t sound to me as though Priests for Life was actually granted a waiver. Rather the HHS simply “entered into a stipulation that it would not enforce the HHS mandate against Priests for Life pending a revision in the rules that would protect religious liberty.”

The HHS has numerous suits pending, and even though the objectionable rule is now final as stated in the Federal Register, the government is still desperately looking for a way to save the mandate. In the process, it tells courts that it will revise the rule (when?). It hasn’t given up on the objectionable mandate. It’s just promising not to enforce it against particular parties who sue them.

The HHS could have prevented all this by simply dropping the mandate. Contraception, sterilization, abortifacient pills, are not medical necessities requiring no co-pay upfront coverage. But the Planned Parenthood / pro-abortion lobbies are wagging the dog in this case, insisting that Obamacare mandate these coverages.

 

[livingwordunity]

Where is it written that anyone is entitled to a job with an employer of his choice?
If an employee does not like the benefits provided by any employer, he is always free to seek employment from someone who does.
You are falling into Obamadama’s propaganda trap that has interpreted the First Amendment to be “Freedom of Worship” instead of how it is written in plain English: “Freedom of Religion, etc.” Big bloody difference!!!

 

[Megan7]

patheos.com/blogs/deaconsbench/2012/12/victory-priests-for-life-wins-exemption-from-hhs-mandate/

 

[abraham]

It is also a gross overstepping of bounds for an employer to dictate to an employee which aspects of health insurance they utilize.

Contraception and abortion are not health care, because they damage a bodily function rather than healing one. Therefore, coverage for such activities is not “health insurance”.