(Via Cake Wreks)
From the Headlines:
Bill O’Reilly: A woman can’t be leader of the free world because of a ‘gender deficiency’
Maine Republican regrets saying men should rape women if abortion is legal
A Republican lawmaker plans to introduce legislation today that would prohibit Planned Parenthood and other clinics that provide abortion services from receiving any public funding.Here's how Metcalfe described the legislation:
State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-Cranberry, will sponsor the Whole Woman's Health Funding Priority Act, a bill that would mirror legislation passed in nine other states.
According to my proposed legislation public entities would receive the highest priority for receiving such funds, followed by non-public hospitals and federally qualified health centers, rural health clinics and, last, nonpublic health providers that have their primary purpose the provision of primary health care. Additionally, the legislation will prohibit the Department of Health from entering into any contract with or providing grants to any entity that performs non-federally qualified abortions. Under the legislation, the Attorney General will be granted jurisdiction to enforce the proposal's provisions.The important sentence is the one that begins "Additionally..."
The department may not enter into a contract with or make a grant to any entity that performs non-federally qualified abortions or maintains or operates a facility where non-federally qualified abortions are performed."Federally qualified abortions" are those allowed by the Hyde Amendment (ie those pregnancies caused by rape or incest or those pregnancies that would endanger the life of the mother).
This state or any political subdivision of this state may not enter into a contract with or make a grant to any person that performs nonfederally qualified abortions or maintains or operates a facility where nonfederally qualified abortions are performed for the provision of family planning services.So when the Huffington Post writes:
Metcalfe's bill, the Whole Woman’s Health Funding Priority Act, would put health care providers that offer abortion services at the bottom of the priority list for state funding. The anti-abortion activist group Susan B. Anthony List and the Alliance Defense Fund co-wrote the bill, which closely resembles the one Arizona lawmakers used to defund Planned Parenthood earlier this year.They're really not kidding.
Lance: To Daryl Metcalfe. The Cranberry Republican should have his head examined for introducing a bill that would redirect taxpayer dollars from Planned Parenthood. Mr. Metcalfe says the move would cut off taxpayer money that now "support(s) abortionists." Never mind that 95 percent of Planned Parenthood's services don't involve abortions. How many women will suffer because of Metcalfe's misguided legislation?Indeed.
Governor Jan Brewer signed House Bill 2625 into law Friday. The legislation authorizes religiously-affiliated employers to deny contraceptive services from their employees' health insurance plans.You'll note that the proponents' argument doesn't actually address whether the bill violates a woman's right to privacy. Patience, my friends.
Despite opponents saying the bill would violate a woman's right to privacy, proponents say it will apply exclusively to those entities whose religious beliefs are central to their operating principles, and for whom providing coverage for contraception could pose a moral conflict or religious objection.
Governor Jan Brewer today signed into law HB 2625, legislation that authorizes religiously-affiliated employers to exempt contraceptive services from their employees’ health insurance plans. The new law will apply exclusively to those entities whose religious beliefs are central to their operating principles, and for whom providing coverage for contraception could pose a moral conflict or religious objection.See? It's about freedom! There's nothing about any "violation of privacy" in there! It's just protecting the rights of any "religiously affiliated employer" to hold true to their beliefs!
“In its final form, this bill is about nothing more than preserving the religious freedom to which we are all Constitutionally-entitled,” said Governor Brewer. “Mandating that a religious institution provide a service in direct contradiction with its faith would represent an obvious encroachment upon the 1st Amendment.”
Currently, state law allows a narrow scope of nonprofit, faith-based institutions to opt out of contraceptive coverage, provided that the institution primarily employs and serves individuals who share the religious tenets of the institution.
Notwithstanding subsection y of this section, a religiously affiliated employer may require that the corporation provide a contract without coverage for specific items or services required under subsection Y of this section because providing or paying for coverage of the specific items or services is contrary to the religious beliefs of the religiously affiliated employer offering the plan. If a religiously affiliated employer objects to providing coverage for specific items or services required under subsection Y of this section, a written affidavit shall be filed with the corporation stating the objection. On receipt of the affidavit, the corporation shall issue to the religiously affiliated employer a contract that excludes coverage for specific items or services required under subsection Y of this section. The corporation shall retain the affidavit for the duration of the contract and any renewals of the contract. This subsection shall not exclude coverage for prescription contraceptive methods ordered by a health care provider with prescriptive authority for medical indications other than for contraceptive, abortifacient, abortion or sterilization purposes. A religiously affiliated employer offering the plan may state religious beliefs in its affidavit and may require the subscriber to first pay for the prescription and then submit a claim to the hospital service corporation, medical service corporation or hospital, medical, dental and optometric service corporation along with evidence that the prescription is not for a purpose covered by the objection. A hospital service corporation, medical service corporation or hospital, medical, dental and optometric service corporation may charge an administrative fee for handling these claims.So the law allows for insurers to cover contraceptives, as long as they're not used for contraceptive purposes. And it's up to a woman who may be suffering from, say, polycystic ovary syndrome to prove that she's not a slut who's using the pill to keep from getting pregnant. And even then, she may be charged "an administrative fee" for providing such proof.
AA. Subsection Z of this section does not authorize a religiously affiliated employer to obtain an employee's protected health information or to violate the health insurance portability and accountability act of 1996 (P.L. 104‑191; 110 Stat. 1936) or any federal regulations adopted pursuant to that act. [emphasis added.]
Subsequent decisions have consistently held that the right of free exercise does not relieve an individual of the obligation to comply with a "valid and neutral law of general applicability on the ground that the law proscribes (or prescribes) conduct that his religion prescribes (or proscribes).But I guess that all changes when it comes to controlling the vaginas.
Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible."Blood libel"?!?