Bad News from FDA, Good News from Supreme Court

The past two days brought both bad news for women and their unborn children, but hope for the Little Sisters of the Poor religious freedom case.

FDA’s abortion pill expansion targets babies up to 10 weeks into pregnancy

A hopeful sign? New development in the Little Sisters’ court case

Advertisements

Little Sisters of the Poor v. Obamacare at the Supreme Court

Little_Sisters_1_outside_of_SCOTUS_March_23_2016_Credit_Addie_Mena_CNAToday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for Zubik v. Burwell, a case testing the constitutionality of the Obamacare mandate that requires employers to offer health insurance that includes contraceptives, sterility treatment, and drugs considered abortifacients.

The employers who brought the suit include the Little Sisters of the Poor, Bishop David Zubik of Pittsburgh, the Archdiocese of Washington, and several Christian colleges — all religious nonprofits. Churches and parish schools are exempt from the mandate.

The Obama administration had offered these nonprofits an “accommodation.” If they signed a form stating their objection, the government would require their insurers to provide the services free of charge so the nonprofits wouldn’t be paying for it themselves.

The plaintiffs, however, refused the accommodation on the grounds that no matter who was technically paying, by having to sign the form they were still being forced to cooperate in seriously immoral actions.

As Sr. Loraine Marie Maguire, Mother Provincial of the Little Sisters of the Poor, said: “I can’t sign a piece of paper that makes somebody else do what I cannot do myself. It’s my conscience, you know.”

Nonprofits affected include the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, dioceses, Catholic universities, and hundred of hospitals and charities, such as the Little Sister of the Poor.

The ruling is expected to come down in June.

For more news about what happened at the Supreme Court see “Supreme Court Justices: Will the Government ‘Hijack’ Little Sisters’ Health Plan?”

“Anti-Discrimination” Means RTL Must Hire Abortion Advocates??

Late on April 30, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.J. Res. 43, a resolution to overturn the “Reproductive Health Nondiscrimination Amendment Act (RHNDA), a local law passed by the District of Columbia’s city council.

The National Right to Life Committee strongly supported the resolution to stop the RHNDA Act. The vote was 228-192.

Unfortunately, the Senate chose not to vote on the resolution, so the RHNDA took effect over the weekend in D.C.

Under RHNDA, prolife Washington, DC,-based employers (like the National Right to Life Committee) could be forced to hire people who advocate for abortion because not to do so would be “discrimination.”

Under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, Congress has the right to review and overturn laws created by the city council.

Rep. Nita Lowy, who represents Rockland County in the House of Representatives, voted to uphold the RHNDA Act.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), announced candidate for the presidency in 2016, released a statement urging his colleages in the Senate to strike down the RHNDA, and a spokesperson for Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky), also a candidate, wrote in an email to CQ Roll Call on Monday that “Sen. Paul has always been strongly opposed to the government usurping the constitutional rights of American citizens, and will continue to fight to preserve our nation’s religious freedom.”

Thomas More Law Center Program on Sunday

Tom Lynch, of the Thomas More Law Center, will be speaking on “Defending the Sanctity of Human Life” and other important topics on Sunday, Oct. 28. Please come and learn how the Law Center fights for laws protecting unborn human life, free speech rights of prolife demonstrators and sidewalk counselors, and the rights of conscience for medical professionals. Tom is the son of Betty Lynch of Nanuet.