The first amendment demands: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…”
In the recent BBC article Boehner Calls for Law to Stop US Contraception Rule we have to question:
Is the requirement for contraceptive insurance coverage in “church-linked” institutions intruding upon their First Amendment Rights?
I personally find myself in a quandary. On one hand I don’t believe that the government has the right to tell a church or any private institution how to run their business, above the basics anyway. On the other hand, if the institution is in fact a public (or a government funded non profit) how can the government not regulate them?
There are those, who -unlike myself- have formed very strong opinions on said rule. Some are emphatically in agreement with the “White House’s” rule, saying the church "can't impose its religious views on people and whether they can have healthcare" (Wisconsin Representative Gwen Moore). While others argue aggressively against it saying "This attack by the federal government on religious freedom must not stand and will not stand" (Speaker John Boehner).
Get ready, it’s another game of political tug of war! This article is interesting to read, if not simply because of the reactions it has caused. As for which side is right in this argument, that is up to the reader… I just know that when situations like these arise I must simply agree with a wise friend of mine and say “at least the issue has been brought to light and it is actually being discussed.”
