I also suggest that in the interest of compassion consideration might be given
to ectopic and anencephalic pregnancies.
Thanks.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Len" <campquest...@comcast.net>
To: "Marci Hamilton" <hamilto...@aol.com>
Cc: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 2:03:32 PM
Subject: Re: New Twist On Challenge to ACA Contraceptive Mandate
>> I assume they were serious and hope they were.
Some of both.
May I also suggest a compelling interest to provide coverage for late-term
theraputic abortion, for the purpose of saving the life of the mother? For
example: fetal death at 28 weeks, with no natural expulsion of the fetus,
resulting in sepsis and death of the mother when the fetus is not removed
surgically. Unfortunately, this is not a hypothetical -- my wife's mother died
this way.
Thanks
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marci Hamilton" <hamilto...@aol.com>
To: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>
Cc: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>,
"Len" <campquest...@comcast.net>
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 12:33:14 PM
Subject: Re: New Twist On Challenge to ACA Contraceptive Mandate
I assume they were serious and hope they were.
If you are a woman with unstoppable bleeding as part of your periods, or
excruciating cramps,
this is medication and treatment that is indeed compelling. If you cannot go
to work for 5 days every month because of the severity of your periods, there
is a compelling interest for the employer, employee, and the govt to make such
treatments available. If your religious beliefs preclude you from having a
family you cannot support, or if you carry a gene that could lead to
devastating illness and disability in your child, and your religious beliefs
counsel against pregnancy, there is also a compelling interest In all 3.
Apologies to those who are squeamish about what we are really talking about,
but the abstract quality of the legal discourse largely carried on by men needs
a reality check.
Marci
Marci A. Hamilton
Verkuil Chair in Public Law
Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School
Yeshiva University
@Marci_Hamilton
On Aug 15, 2013, at 11:53 AM, "Tracey, Timothy" < ttra...@avemarialaw.edu >
wrote:
I hope that neither you nor Eduardo are serious in your responses. The
government's interest in ensuring basic medical care and lifesaving measures is
significantly different than whatever interest the government has in forcing
religious organizations to supply coverage of contraception, sterilizations,
and abortion. The government obviously has a compelling interest in the former
but certainly not in the latter.
Timothy J. Tracey
Associate Professor of Law
Ave Maria School of Law
On August 15, 2013 at 11:42:29 AM, Len ( campquest...@comcast.net ) wrote:
<blockquote>
Next up, a lawsuit seeking on religious liberty grounds the ability to obtain a
health insurance policy from his employer that does not cover vaccinations or
other medications, or surgery, but only covers healing prayer.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eduardo Penalver" < penal...@uchicago.edu >
To: "Law & Religion issues for Law Academics" < religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu >
Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2013 11:06:49 AM
Subject: Re: New Twist On Challenge to ACA Contraceptive Mandate
Next up, a lawsuit demanding to be paid in currency that can't be used to buy
contraception.
Eduardo
From: "Friedman, Howard M." < howard.fried...@utoledo.edu >
Reply-To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics < religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 13:52:52 +0000
To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics < religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu >
Subject: New Twist On Challenge to ACA Contraceptive Mandate
In an interesting new lawsuit, a Missouri legislator (suing as an employee of
the state) seeks on religious liberty grounds the ability to obtain a health
insurance policy from his employer that does not cover contraception,
sterilization or abortifacients. He particularly objects to coverage of these
in his policy for his 3 daughters, age 12, 18 and 19. More on Religion Clause
blog--
http://religionclause.blogspot.com/2013/08/new-contraceptive-coverage-challenge.html
Howard Friedman _______________________________________________ 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.
_______________________________________________
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.
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission is the property of Ave Maria
School of Law and may contain confidential or privileged information. It is
intended only for the addressee(s) named above. If you receive this e-mail in
error, please do not read, copy or disseminate it in any manner. If you are
not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the
contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. Please reply to
the message immediately by informing the sender that the message was
misdirected. After replying, please erase it from your computer system. Your
assistance in correcting this error is appreciated. If you or your employer
does not consent to internet e-mail messages of this kind, please notify us
immediately. All reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses
are present in this e-mail. Our company cannot accept responsibility for any
loss or damage arising from the use of this e-mail or attachments. The views,
opinions, conclusions and other information expressed in this electronic mail
are not given or endorsed by AMSL unless otherwise indicated by an authorized
representative independent of this message.
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
_______________________________________________
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.
</blockquote>
_______________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
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.
