Some fights are for the wrong thing. The Obama administration decided years ago that fighting for the Defense of Marriage Act was wrong, that the law was wrong. They knew that when the law was examined it would be found to have no basis in fact, just in religious dogma, and that made it unconstitutional.
Some fights are not worth the time and effort. Fighting dozens of lawsuits from churches and individuals over the provision in the Affordable Care Act that requires health insurance policies to include contraceptives without co-pay is just not worth the effort. Those entities who feel strongly about contraception would simply not offer health insurance.
Religion-affiliated schools and non-profits can now opt-out of the contraceptive requirement. For self-insurers, a third-party will independently contact all who are insured and offer them no-cost contraceptives. The third-party will be compensated with lower participation fees in the insurance exchanges. For those that have health insurance with a provider, the provider will pay for the contraceptives with no charge to the employer. The insurance companies, hopefully, will understand that the contraceptives cost them less than pregnancies or acute illness would.
That’s not enough, apparently. Kyle Duncan of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which has filed many of the lawsuits issued a statement saying that the opt-out is not enough to satisfy their clients, “Today’s proposed rule does nothing to protect the religious liberty of millions of Americans.” Really? The whole crux of this battle has been the fact that these colleges, universities, hospitals and non-profits hire people and teach people who are not members of their religion, and denying them this aspect of preventative medicine violates the religious freedom of the employees and students.
The new rule would allow women to make their own choices based on their own beliefs or medical needs. Any opposition to these rules amounts to nothing more than the opponents demanding the right to impose their beliefs on all women who are employed by them.
There really is only one solution to this problem. Women need to protest with their absence. If women stop applying for admission to schools that oppose contraceptive coverage, if women who work for institutes that oppose contraceptive coverage apply for and take other jobs, if women stop applying to work in these facilities, that is the only way these organizations will understand that their freedom of religion is preceded in our Constitution by our freedom from imposed religion.