Health care law continues to violate religious liberty

    Were you surprised at all by the Supreme Court’s ruling affirming the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act?
    I was surprised. When I found out about the decision, I was attending continuing education for bishops in North Carolina with the Catholic Leadership Institute. The focus of the continuing ed was the social media, so needless to say, a lot of the media people and journalists who were providing the training were interested in the outcome, and they were also somewhat surprised. That being said, this is an opportunity for us to put this issue into perspective. For decades, the bishops of the United States have advocated for reform that would make health care more accessible and more affordable. This reform plan has some benefits, but it also has some tremendous flaws. The reason it went to the Supreme Court was to find out whether or not it was constitutional, and the court has ruled it is constitutional under the broad taxing powers of Congress. We respect the decision, but we still maintain there are parts of the plan that are flawed, and we continue to object to that.
    What are the flaws?
    One is that the plan calls for the use of federal funds for elective abortions. This is in stark contrast to what the longstanding federal policy has been. We believe the government is using our tax dollars to support abortion. Secondly, the HHS mandate calls on us as Catholic institutions – especially universities, hospitals and individual employers – to offer health care policies that provide coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, sterilizations and artificial contraception. Those practices are against our conscience. We as individuals or as Catholic institutions should not have to provide that. The government also has given a rather strange definition of what religious ministry is – that it is confined to members of our own religion. The mission of Catholic Charities, hospitals and universities extends to many who are not Catholic. Third, the plan does not provide health care to the 11 million undocumented workers in the United States, who are often very poor. They won’t be helped by this at all.
    Where do the bishops go from here?
    We are willing as a bishops’ conference to work with the administration in making the conscience protections broader and more applicable. The current state of the law does not fulfill the promises of religious liberty enshrined in our Constitution and bestowed by God himself. While we respect the Supreme Court’s ruling on the law’s constitutionality, we are still back at square one. Nothing has changed with respect to the threats to religious freedom. The flawed nature of this law calls us to violate our conscience.
    How important are the legal challenges filed by dozens of Catholic entities on the issue of religious liberty?
    They are very important. The Supreme Court ruling had nothing to do with religious liberty. There are two litmus tests. The constitutionality litmus test has been decided. But the other litmus test deals with the HHS mandate, and our next step is making sure the 43 lawsuits filed by various Catholic dioceses and institutions go forward. We need to preserve our legal rights to religious freedom.
    Did the Archdiocese of New Orleans consider joining with other Catholic institutions in filing suit against the law?
    We did, but the bottom line is it’s not necessary – nor would it be warranted – for every diocese to file a lawsuit. Some people have asked me why the archdiocese did not become a plaintiff. The simple answer is that there are several dioceses that have filed suit, and we support them wholeheartedly. They represent a geographical diversity, which makes a strong statement throughout the United States. There are also many private Catholic institutions such as publishing companies and foundations – which are not associated directly with a diocese – that have filed suit. It would only clog the courts for each diocese to have filed a lawsuit. I am wholeheartedly supportive of the lawsuits that have been filed. We’re grateful to the Cleveland-based law firm, Jones Day, that has filed them for us, because they are doing this pro bono.
    What about the Supreme Court’s immigration ruling last week in the Arizona case?
    We’re very glad that the Supreme Court said that immigration law is a federal action and should not be taken up by the states. We’re also concerned about what will happen when law enforcement personnel stop people on suspicion of committing a crime. We hope these police stops will be done with integrity and won’t promote the practice of profiling. The bishops of the United States have said consistently that we believe in comprehensive immigration reform. We are now pleading with Congress to take seriously this opportunity to bring about just reform in immigration laws. This is well overdue, but no one wants to tackle this challenging issue. It’s time we fess up and see it as an issue of social justice on the part of the federal government. We have never said that the borders should just be open to everybody, but we are concerned that those who are already in the U.S. be treated justly and fairly. We’re also concerned about families that are divided and living in different countries. Some people live in daily fear that they will be deported. The government should have the wisdom to address these issues, but it will take political will.
    Questions for Archbishop Aymond may be sent to [email protected].