Victory against the HHS Mandate: Way to Go Little Sisters! 10

Meet the Little Sisters of the Poor

Are they not religious enough for a religious exemption from the government’s HHS Mandate? President Obama and his administration don’t think so, but fortunately, the Supreme Court does — at least for now. Thank God!

AP photo

AP photo

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued an injunction upholding Justice Sotomayor’s order on Dec. 31, which exempted Little Sisters of the Poor and the Christian Brothers from the mandatory contraception requirements of the Affordable Care Act (CNS Story). In its three sentence statement, the Court announced:

“If the employer applicants inform the secretary of Health and Human Services in writing that they are nonprofit organizations that hold themselves out as religious and have religious objections to providing coverage for contraceptive services, the respondents are enjoined from enforcing against the applicants the challenged provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and related regulations pending final disposition of the appeal by the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. To meet the condition for injunction pending appeal, applicants need not use the form prescribed by the Government and need not send copies to third-party administrators. The Court issues this order based on all of the circumstances of the case, and this order should not be construed as an expression of the Court’s views on the merits.”

That means the President needs to let the courts do their job, i.e., to uphold the law, not enforce his ridiculous orders.

It would be simply brutish for the President to continue pursuing his will to force the Little Sisters to comply with the HHS Mandate. His best move would be to stop now, not issue any more statements, and move on to more important matters, relevant to governing our country.


  1. Such an obvious abuse of power, I’m so glad that so far the courts have concurred. But there’s so much more to be done here.
    God bless the LIttle Sisters!!!!

    • It really is a breath of fresh air, in this case, to see our government working the way it is supposed to. Were it not for these checks and balances, what would stop this administration from rule by sheer force? So I also have to say, way to go SCOTUS! And God bless the Little Sisters of the Poor!

      Thanks for your comment, Tanngl.

  2. I think the secular approach was to expand particulars to give consumers a maximum of basic overages for total population and not to offend religious. I think it was an attempt to include maximum of procedures for people . For example at 65 everyone gets medicare and everything for which it provides and say if a person does not care to avail of flu shot, he does not have to use it but should groups against flu shots demand medicare not include flu shots ? The insurance companies would give the smallest list of coverages they could get away with but the law insists they provide more coverages at same price which protects the consumer. I think the Obamacare planners did not mean to stir religious controversy but sought uniformity to limit exceptions and bureaucracy. I do not think they intended a war on religion. I don’t think I’ll be getting a mammogram anytime but is that a war against men if it is included in coverage?

    • I think you are absolutely right, Carl, to see it that way. For the reasons you mention, I never was against universal healthcare coverage. Hence, why the so-called “war on religion”? It does seem like quite a stretch, when you think about it.

      The problem for me has to do with this. In his address at Notre Dame University, when he received his honorary doctorate, Obama made some promises. He said, regarding his plans for affordable healthcare, there would be religious exemption for covering things like abortion and contraception — not his exact words, I’m paraphrasing. The important thing here is that he implied to Catholics that there was nothing to worry about, that we should not object to his plan, and that this would all be simple and easy.

      Well it has been anything but simple and easy, and we have yet to see him make good on his promise. In fact, we have only seen the opposite. This particular case is a case in point.

      Immediately after Justice Sotomayor granted the Little Sisters of the poor temporary exemption from paying into funds that would cover contraception and abortifacient drugs, the President’s team goes on the attack. Why? Why not just stop there? I’m sure several reasons could be given if we want to apologize for them, but my point is, that there never should have been any reason to apologize in the first place. Instead of letting the legal process run its due process, the administration has to show its force and strong-arm the Supreme Court and a convent of nuns into compliance with its demands. They did not have to do that.

      That is why I think that the President needs to quit while he is ahead, now, let the judicial process move on, and he needs to move on to more important business. Then maybe we can say he has lived up to his promise, at least in this case, otherwise, I’m just not seeing it.

  3. You have a very sensible take on the matter. On the other hand with all the PC nonsense it is natural that Christians feel as though they are persecuted for being the “normal” people in Christ not the Hollywood Agenda. In Miami the free clinics are even more crowded since Obamacare. See if you can pull up Miami Herald 1/26/14 “Despite Obamacare, patients flock to free health clinics”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s