On Friday, October 12, Life Legal Defense Foundation, along with Bioethics Defense Fund, filed their second friend of the court brief in support of a case challenging the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services mandate requiring employers to provide contraceptives and sterilization “services” to their employees, despite conscientious objections to doing so.
The brief was filed on behalf of the organization “Women Speak for Themselves,” in the case of Wheaton College and Belmont Abbey College v. Sebelius, et al., which is on appeal from the United States District Court, District of Columbia.
The District Court rejected the plaintiff’s arguments that the Mandate violated their First Amendment Freedom of Religion by requiring them to violate their sincerely held beliefs in the sanctity of human life. This appeal followed.
The HHS mandate purports to promote health but in promulgating the rule, the government ignored substantial evidence that hormonal contraceptives pose serious health risks to women.
“Before forcing employers to violate their religious convictions and pay for drugs which end human lives, the Government has to show the Mandate furthers a compelling public interest. Our brief demonstrates how far the Government is from having met its burden of proof,” states Catherine Short, LLDF’s Legal Director.
The brief points to substantial evidence that hormonal contraceptives, rather than promoting the health and well-being of women and children, pose serious health risks.
Some of the health hazards listed for this type of drug include higher risk of heart attack, stroke and cardiovascular complications, greater susceptibility to sexually transmitted infections, higher risk of breast cancer, cervical cancer, and liver tumors.
Read the entire brief here.
Sebelius and her confreresses should be banished to some zoo in the middle of some run down city.
Excellent. Women’s health and gender equality cannot be even minimally served by passing out contraceptives and providing abortions. The deception and disrespect implicit in the HHS package unfortunately does not dismay women who have been conditioned to accept this simplistic formula and they continue to rush headlong to their own peril. One would hope that women AND men would read and consider the risks of chemical contraceptives and, out of real respect and true affection, would decide to practice self discipline. In our age of indulgence, that hope might cause a torrent of laughter and derision, but we can certainly convey this important information to the women in our lives whom we love and care about. If only this brief could be thoughtfully read at Catholic girls’ schools, but I am afraid that it would be entirely scorned at my very feminist alma mater. Despite their insistent allegations that they represent the open mind, radical feminists refuse to admit any evidence that does not pass their rigid agenda test, and such foolish, ignorant and slavish behaviour does not seem to demonstrate equality of intellect or freedom of spirit. I cannot help but think of Melissa Gates. Pray for the formation of the young minds and consciences entrusted to our own Catholic schools!
Very well put, Maria. It is amazing that a carcinogenic (the pill has been declared to be that by the WHO) should be promoted as something conducive to women’s health. It’s even more amazing when one considers that natural family planning is just as effective as contraceptives, without the side affects and without the cost that so bothers the feminists, though, horror of horrors, it requires a little self-discipline. And more amazing still is that a president (and HHS secretary) who forces employers – even churches – to provide such poisonous substances is seen as “caring” for women.
Does the use of contraceptives increase or decrease the population of our country???
If it decreases our population –is that good for the future of our country???
YES, contaception does decrease the population of our country. ABORTION does too. That is why the immigrants were needed to fill the gap.
Of course population decrease is not good for the future of this country. But that should be no surprise. Obamacare with its ruses collaborates with the population controllers in a contrary objective – specifically to eliminate the prospect of any future for this country whatsoever. That’s where things like open borders, excessive taxes, international central banking, attacks on the constitution, etc., to name only a very few examples, come into play. The international political plan for the future is socialist world government and U.S. resources are being expended to simultaneously finance the transition while leaving the country financially broken and dependent upon the same new system which its resources are being used to create. The lack of a U.S. population sufficient to sustain a productive and independent workforce is part of the formula.
Larry from RI, you wrote, “If it decreases our population –is that good for the future of our country??? Is that a rhetorical question? Well, at the risk of misunderstanding your point, I’ll give you an answer. No!!! It is horrible for our country!
“Global fertility rates are half what they were in 1972. To merely maintain its population, a nation’s fertility rate must be at least 2.1 children per woman. Unfortunately, every developed country is currently at or below this level. While the average fertility rate of the U.S. is 2.06, the current rate in Europe is a dismal 1.5.” (quote from Philip Longman of the New America Foundation)
We know that not all women of childbearing age are able to bear children of their own, therefore, some generous folk need to step up and lovingly raise large families. We as a society, should applaud and encourage couples having large families instead of marginalizing them as is currently in vogue.
And Richard is correct. The U.S. is only currently maintaing her fertility rate as a result of immigrants, legal and illegal, not to mention vacationers from other countries, birthing their children here.
Countries such as Russia, Japan and Australia are currently offering money to woman who are willing to have more children. They understand the economic and social disaster that abortion and contraception are causing their nations. If they continue along their current path their people will one day cease to be!
Of course, the government still refuses to tell us about what the pill is doing to our water supply and what is happening to the various species of wildlife that lives in or near the water, nor will they tell us about the health risks to man from this water, such as more men getting breast cancer, children in school with all of these new problems that have come down to us since the pill was put on the market. When man fools with Nature, he is fooling with God and God will win no matter what. +JMJ+
Thank God the Church is challenging Obama on this one, even if 90% of American Catholics contracept. The Church has every right to run their store the way they see fit, even if that means protesting something like birth control whose use in the US Catholic population is virtually unanimous (and those that use Natural Family Planning have the most children). Lord knows what issue is next on the Obama agenda. Cardinal Dolan should be vigilent.
Incidentally, birth control is beneficial to families trying to limit their family size for licit reasons. (Even the Vatican supports that notion, they disagree only with the means of accomplishing it.) The alternative is having families with 6,8,10, even 12 children, or more, which will overstress parents and children alike. No one I know has repeated the indiscriminant breeding of the Baby Boom parents. The days of children bursting out of the windows of the Catholic home are gone forever. LIke all of the world’s nations, the birth rate falls as the economy develops. Look at the USA, Europe, even Brazil.
The birth rate falls as the economy “develops”???? Are you kidding?Have you checked the state of the economy lately? It is precisely the lack of young people which results in the phenomena of such things as “aging population,” a euphemism for low birth rate and a phony excuse for the collapse of social security and the economy in general. Natural family planning is allowed where there are “grave reasons” for limiting family size. Not trusting the providence of God to provide is not a “grave” reason. The sampling of people that your personally know who do not have large families is a skewed sampling – especially after you admit that 90% of Catholics contracept. You consider only the mainstream – those with a contraceptive mentality who are compromised in their ability to discern God’s providence because they reject it ab initio. In my Traditional Latin Mass parish, there are literally dozens of large families with the numbers of children you refer to and they get along fine financially. Large families do not “overstress” their members (as you admit, you don’t know any) – to the contrary, their love conquers all. Distortions and uninformed opinions like yours just smack of typical population control propaganda. You sound like Ted Turner.
The birth rate and the number of people globally are not the same thing. The birth rate may be decreasing but the population is increasing.
goodcause, your claim is false. You claim, “Incidentally, birth control is beneficial to families trying to limit their family size for licit reasons. (Even the Vatican supports that notion, they disagree only with the means of accomplishing it.)” The Church (which goodcause calls the Vatican) does not differ only on the means of population limiting sex. The utilitarian would see it this way, but the eternitist would say that this view is deficient and misleading. goodcause likens the intention of the Church to the intention of contraceptionistas, but this is a false comparison. The Church is saying that sex must be open to creation of a human being. But goodcause says otherwise, perhaps due to not understanding or perhaps due to intentional deception. Perhaps goodcause can air it out.
It is also manifest that for males, condoms and chemical/mechanical forms of birth control have made sex the goal of an encounter in many instances, and enlarged the importance of sex in any relationship. This clear violation of the Natural Law sets up an imbalance in priorities and, for want of better words, enables the flesh to conquer the spirit, rather than the other way around.