Opt out option expected for religious insurers who oppose contraceptives
February 1st, 2013
07:31 AM ET
10 years ago

Opt out option expected for religious insurers who oppose contraceptives

Washington (CNN) - Religiously affiliated organizations will be able to opt out of providing their employees with insurance coverage for contraceptives under updates to an Obama administration mandate that the Department of Health and Human Services is expected to unveil on Friday, according to two sources.

In March, after an uproar among religious institutions that didn't want to pay for contraceptives, the Obama administration offered several policy suggestions that would require the administrator of the insurance policy, not the religious institution or the insurer, to pay for contraception coverage and invited comment on those proposals.


Filed under: President Obama • Religion
soundoff (6 Responses)
  1. jkane sfl the gop national disgrace party will be swept out like the trash they are in2014 ?

    Religion should butt out of government altogether ,nobody needs their 5th century advise !!!!

    February 1, 2013 08:04 am at 8:04 am |
  2. Rudy NYC

    Groups and individuals should not be allowed to do this. This sets a bad precedent. If the group is a non-profit church, then they can conduct their business according to their personal values. But, if a group is running a for-profit business, then they are subject to the same laws as everyone else, no religious exclusions or preferences permitted, as per the US Constitution.

    The worst part about it this is where do you draw the line? What happens when some owner of a company claims that he believes in faith healing, and that he should be forced to offer medical insurance at all? It's inevitable that someone will try to make that claim, and because of the can of worms being opened now that person will succeed in denying coverage to all employees.

    February 1, 2013 08:50 am at 8:50 am |
  3. karl watts

    Are we going to let businesses that are owned by Jehoavh's Witnesses opt out of coverage for blood tranfussions or Christian Scientists opt out of coverage all together?

    February 1, 2013 08:51 am at 8:51 am |
  4. S.B. Stein E.B. NJ

    The employees of these groups should get something to help plan for their future and having kids or not is a part of that. You can't expect them to not have sex because we are sexual beings. Also to expect them to raise whatever children they have that they may not want isn't reasonable as well. If they are bible readers, G-d did expect us to have children but not be unreasonable as to the number we have. I hope these people understand that planning needs to be done with all things.

    February 1, 2013 08:53 am at 8:53 am |
  5. plain&simple

    Religious freedoms recognized ....that's important! Yet anyone working for that organization is recognized as free to receive the same benefits as anyone who doesn't! Sounds reasonable and rational....just like most of this leaders policy.

    February 1, 2013 08:59 am at 8:59 am |
  6. Wake up People!

    I'm not sure if I have this correct. But are they saying if a woman works for a Christian organization and is on the pill, for whatever reason, they don't have to cover it?? Wouldn't that be discrimination against the employee though? I'll be the first to admit, I'm confused by this. As long as the employee pays their premiums they should be covered.

    February 1, 2013 09:14 am at 9:14 am |