Marci, Would you object if the government created an exemption package that did three things.
It exempted the religious employer from a regulation requiring employers to pay for health insurance that covered blood transfusions. It provided insurance coverage for employees working for exempt religious employers at the government’s expense so that no employee lost any insurance coverage as a result of the exemption. It determined whether and to what extent the religious employer saved money as a result of the exemption from the health insurance coverage mandate and directed the employer to contribute that amount to a separate fund used by the government to further public purposes that are consistent with the employer’s faith – say providing food to hungry children. Alan From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [mailto:religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of hamilto...@aol.com Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2012 6:03 PM To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu Subject: Re: Court Rejects Religious Liberty Challenges To ACA Mandate Mark-- Should it matter whether we are talking about blood transfusions or abortion? If Catholic institutions can win in the ACA cases on abortion, then Jehovahs Witnesses should be able to not pay for coverage for blood transfusions for their employees. There is no persuasive distinction between the two that I've heard yet, but no one has made the foray beyond abortion/contraception on the list yet other than my earlier suggestion. Marci Marci A. Hamilton Paul R. Verkuil Chair in Public Law Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Yeshiva University 55 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10003 (212) 790-0215 hamilto...@aol.com<mailto:hamilto...@aol.com>
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
