[AuH2ORepublican]

“The administration is allowing religious nonprofits to offer coverage that does not include contraception. In such a case, a third-party issuer will handle all business related to providing birth-control coverage for women, according to a source familiar with the changes who spoke only on condition of anonymity.”

---

Not good enough, not by a longshot. Use of a third party still forces the religious group to provide coverage for contraception and abortifacients. And even if this “third party” ploy did not violate the religious freedom of religious groups, limiting the exemption to “religious nonprofits” would force religious employers who are not “religious nonprofits” (such as companies owned by practicing Christians or Orthodox Jews) to provide direct contraceptive and abortifacient coverage even when such coverage violates their deeply held religious beliefs.

Obama is desperate because he’s afraid that the entire “birth-control mandate” will be struck down on First Amendment grounds. We can’t let him adopt some half-assed effort at a “compromise” that will result in “free” abortions for millions of women paid for by all of us.

[JCBreckenridge]

Well said, sir. Well said. I ain’t gonna pay for SFA.

[Wisconsinlady]

Obama is desperate because he’s afraid that the entire “birth-control mandate” will be struck down on First Amendment grounds. We can’t let him adopt some half-assed effort at a “compromise” that will result in “free” abortions for millions of women paid for by all of us.

Correct. This ruling does not help Hobby Lobby and their lawsiut. Why should an organization or company be able to “opt-out” (not really) but an owner of a business as a “person” does not have the same right?