Comments on The new "conscience" regulationsTypePad2011-08-01T17:17:04ZRick Garnetthttps://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/tag:typepad.com,2003:https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2011/08/the-new-conscience-regulations/comments/atom.xml/ipad 3 sleeve commented on 'The new "conscience" regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e201774432065c970d2012-08-18T02:08:41Z2012-08-18T02:08:41Zipad 3 sleevehttp://www.customdropshipping.com/personalized-category/personalized/ipad-3-sleeve-1669This is a really nice blog and it gives a great way to know the things which is necessary to...<p>This is a really nice blog and it gives a great way to know the things which is necessary to know. Wish your more amazing posts.</p>Nancy D. commented on 'The new "conscience" regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e201543438d831970c2011-08-03T13:04:19Z2011-08-03T13:04:19ZNancy D.Now we know for certain why the Health Care Plan was missing some of the details.<p>Now we know for certain why the Health Care Plan was missing some of the details.</p>Benjamin Baxter commented on 'The new "conscience" regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e20154343685fb970c2011-08-03T04:33:57Z2011-08-03T04:33:57ZBenjamin Baxterhttp://prodigalnomore.wordpress.com/Would nuns need contraceptive coverage? (I know, I know --- that's not how insurance works. Everyone pays into the same...<p>Would nuns need contraceptive coverage? (I know, I know --- that's not how insurance works. Everyone pays into the same pot, &c.)</p>despondent commented on 'The new "conscience" regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e201539061f626970b2011-08-02T23:42:35Z2011-08-02T23:42:35ZdespondentIt would be bad enough if the feds tried to limit it to institutions that hired only in-group, but extending...<p>It would be bad enough if the feds tried to limit it to institutions that hired only in-group, but extending factor (3) to require in-group clients shows that this can be nothing other than an intentional effort to leave no exemption, with a fig leaf only for the naive or the willfully blind.</p>
<p>So you could have a school or hospital run solely by nuns, a la 1950, and they still don't qualify because they serve others? </p>
<p>It seems to me that such a "customers" restriction itself raised two legal problems of consistency. Allowing such an exemption presupposes that some group can try to take advantage of it by structuring its institution to meet the criterion. But locking out all but co-religionists has two problems. First, most groups self-define their mission to serve all comers, so it presses them to change mission, which raises constitutional questions. Second, most (perhaps all) institutions face express statutory requirements to accept all comers, so they can not bar the doors to meet the standard.</p>
<p>The only way to comply would be accidental - no non-Catholics (or non-whatever) apply, even though doors are open.</p>
<p>That is absurd enough as to be a fraudulent offer of an exemption.</p>
<p>Further, that is likely so as to employees, too, unless Hosanna Tabor comes out in a maximalist way that surprises even Laycock. Without a right to hire only in-group, it's a bait-and-switch. Non-discrimination laws say you have to hire others, and this new "conscience" regulation says you can't claim it unless you cap the diversity.</p>
<p>This is anti-clericalism on the order of the Mexican Revolution and the French, and those who are still blind to it need to open up their eyes pronto.</p>Fr. J commented on 'The new "conscience" regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e2015434353702970c2011-08-02T23:31:32Z2011-08-02T23:31:32ZFr. JAt some point the Church will be pushed into being unable to offer insurance. At that time it will probably...<p>At some point the Church will be pushed into being unable to offer insurance. At that time it will probably be fines for not doing so. This is how religious liberty ends. </p>Benjamin Baxter commented on 'The new "conscience" regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e2014e8a4ed7f8970d2011-08-02T01:58:44Z2011-08-02T01:58:44ZBenjamin Baxterhttp://prodigalnomore.wordpress.com/Ugh. Is the goal to end faith-based charity? Surely charity depends on giving to people and not caring about who...<p>Ugh. Is the goal to end faith-based charity? Surely charity depends on giving to people and not caring about who they are or what they have done, and without regards to religious inculcation. </p>Denise commented on 'The new "conscience" regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e20154342e49f3970c2011-08-01T23:57:09Z2011-08-01T23:57:09ZDenisehttp://catholic-mom.blogspot.comIn a similar vein, Will HHS pick and choose what forms of family planning it will include in this mandated...<p>In a similar vein, Will HHS pick and choose what forms of family planning it will include in this mandated coverage? The recommendations mandate coverage for education and counseling for artificial contraception and sterilization. Will they also cover education and counseling for NFP? <a href="http://tiny.cc/pdcoa" rel="nofollow">http://tiny.cc/pdcoa</a></p>Matt Bowman commented on 'The new "conscience" regulations'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e201539059ae5e970b2011-08-01T20:19:59Z2011-08-01T20:19:59ZMatt BowmanRick--there is not really "still time to comment". At the end of the regulation it says it is imposing this...<p>Rick--there is not really "still time to comment". At the end of the regulation it says it is imposing this rule now as a final rule, and is choosing to not follow the APA requirement that rules not be made final until after a public comment period. The rule of law is not going to stand in the way of an all-powerful government bureaucracy intent on feeding abortifacients to college students (which is actually cited as the excuse). So maybe there will be a comment period, but it will be after the fact and even more pointless than objections usually are to this administration's abortion agenda.</p>