Bishops ponder appeal on ruling

As The Evangelist went to press this week, Catholic officials were still debating whether to appeal at the federal level a decision by a New York court that forces Catholic organizations to provide contraception coverage in employee health plans.

"Our attorneys are still considering the best way to proceed. An appeal is certainly possible," stated Dennis Poust, director of communications for the New York State Catholic Conference.

The Conference advocates for the state's bishops on public policy issues.

Mandate upheld

The Court of Appeals, New York's highest court, ruled Oct. 19 that the Women's Health and Wellness Act is constitutional. The 2003 state law requires coverage of many services that the Church supports, including mammograms, bone density tests and screenings for cervical cancer.

Catholic Charities -- the largest religious employer of the Albany Diocese -- and nine other religious organizations, including non-Catholics, asked for an exemption only to the part of the law that mandates coverage of birth control.

The religious employers argued that forced contraception coverage violates their beliefs in the sanctity of life and their First Amendment right to free exercise of their religion.

Decision hit

The Appeals Court countered that the law does not force religious organizations to provide prescription drug coverage to employees, only to include contraceptive coverage if they have prescription drug plans.

Richard Barnes, Catholic Conference executive director, called that distinction "naive to the realities of modern employment practices and healthcare costs, as well as inconsistent with the Legislature's stated intent of increasing access to health care."

Since the law was passed, Catholic officials have repeatedly pointed out that they are being forced to choose between dropping prescription drug coverage entirely or violating their morals to pay for contraception.

Defining religion

Since only seminaries, parish rectories and diocesan chanceries are exempt from the law, Catholic employers have also pointed out that the state is essentially deciding what constitutes "religion."

Catholic Charities and other organizations have been deemed non-religious employers because they employ and serve people of all faiths.

"This case is not about the right of New Yorkers to use contraception. It is about religious liberty," Mr. Barnes stated. "The state has unconstitutionally defined religion to purposely exclude the Church's charitable ministries. In effect, the state has declared Catholic schools, hospitals and charitable agencies to be secular."

What's next?

Moreover, state lawmakers can now pass other laws "offensive to religious practice," Mr. Barnes charged. For example, legislation has been proposed that would require Catholic employers to pay for employees' abortions.

"We are very disappointed with the Court of Appeals decision and firmly believe that it is in error," Mr. Barnes said. "Any religious organization must have the right in American society to uphold its own teachings, even if those teachings are unpopular or counter-cultural."

The U.S. Supreme Court has already refused to hear a California case in which Catholic Charities there challenged a nearly identical law, so Catholic officials in the state are debating whether to take their case to a higher court.

In the meantime, said Mr. Barnes, they are protesting the "chilling effect on religious freedom" the Appeals Court decision has created.

(10/26/06)