A judge in North Dakota just ruled that the federal government cannot coerce thousands of Catholic employers nationwide to provide time off for abortion and IVF treatments for employees.
Citing the employers’ First Amendment right to freedom of religion, U.S. District Judge Daniel Traynor issued a preliminary injunction against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from enforcing recent federal regulations intended to protect pregnant workers.
Now, some 7,000 nationwide Catholic parishes and an additional 1,380 Catholic employers across the United States will no longer have to provide time off for abortion and fertility care – at least until a lawsuit from the Catholic Benefits Association (CBA) and the Catholic Diocese in Bismarck against the EEOC plays out in court.
Healthcare or Heresy?
“Regulatory overreach” is how the Catholic groups describe federal regulations requiring them to provide time off for women’s healthcare issues like obtaining an abortion or IVF treatments.
The CBA and the Catholic Diocese in Bismarck argue that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act – a 2022 law passed with bipartisan support – constitutes a First Amendment violation by forcing them to accommodate abortions and “immoral” fertility treatments “contrary to their Catholic faith.”
It’s not just abortions and fertility care being challenged, either. The plaintiffs also take issue with harassment regulations designed to protect transgender employees. The Catholic groups argued that being forced to “use false pronouns” and “[giving] employees of one sex access to private spaces reserved to those of the other sex” would be a violation of their religious beliefs.
Judge Traynor agreed. “It is a precarious time for people of religious faith in America. It has been described as a post-Christian age,” Traynor wrote in his judgment. “One indication of this dire assessment may be the repeated illegal and unconstitutional administrative actions against one of the founding principles of our country, the free exercise of religion.”
“[Forcing] members to choose between expressing sincerely held beliefs and compliance,” Traynor argued, would cause “irreparable” harm.
Free Speech Violation?
Attorneys for the federal government are challenging the injunction, saying that it is “highly speculative” because the scenario being challenged hasn’t even happened yet. No employees have actually sought care and been denied by their Catholic employer under these current conditions.
Nevertheless, the government says that they recognize there are potential faith-related concerns, and say that the EEOC will evaluate any potential objections on a case-by-case basis, and that a blanket exception to all Catholic employers should not be granted.
Pro-choice advocates agree, arguing that this is hardly a burden on Catholic employers, and certainly not a violation of their right to free speech. They point out that the regulations only say that employers must give time off for employees to seek an abortion, they’re not required to approve of it, let alone pay for it. Is giving unpaid time off, they argue, seriously a sincere violation of their Catholic faith?
For now, though, the injunction stands, and some 8,000+ Catholic employers are currently not required to abide by those regulations in the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. Time will tell if that holds.
What do you think? Do regulations allowing employees time off to seek abortions or fertility care really constitute a religious freedom violation for Catholic employers? Can it cause “irreparable” harm, as the judge put it? Or is this, as pro-choice advocates argue, yet another religious assault on women’s healthcare?
98 comments
-
Melinda Fulk
Actually, employers shouldn't be allowed to ask why you need time off for any thing medically related.
-
Daniel Gray
yes they can ask as they need to know how long you are going to be gone so they can make sure your job is covered and it does not cause the company any problems
-
Melinda Fulk
I'm going to double down here - Yes, they can ask why I am going to a doctor's appointment, but no, I do not need to tell them the reason. The only time they would need to worry about longer coverage than, say an afternoon or so, would be if I had a medical procedure that required me to miss more than the length of the appointment. For instance, my heart surgery, which required a minimum of 3 weeks recover, depending on your job.
-
Daniel Gray
Nope the ONLY way you can do that is with the family leave program. Most if not all businesses or companies will require you to bring in a doctors note showing that you actually went to the doctors office or they will dock your pay. That is standard procedure.I retired from one of the Big 3 and I can assure you that you had better have the reason for your doctors visit either before you go on on the doctors excuse that you present to your foreman when you come back and if you dont even the Union wont be able to help you as its clearly explained in the Union contract that you vote on.
Now take you. You said you went out for a heart surgery. I am glad you are doing well afterwords, BUT in saying that you WERE required to tell your employer why you were going to be gone for close to a month. If you had not the employer could have terminated you and there would not be a thing you could have done about it.
-
Patricia Ann Gross
Sorry Daniel. I'm not sure which century you are living in, but private health information cannot be disclosed to anybody, even in a doctor's note that acknowledges they were at an appointment and when it is safe/appropriate to return to work, without the patient's consent (HIPAA). This includes any diagnosis or treatments received. If an employer asks what you were at the doctor's for and you tell them, you can file a grievance under ADA with the EEOC if they deny you the appropriate time off outlined by the doctor (with or without pay) or sanction you in any way. Like others have said, the healthcare information that funnels through the group insurance provider, even though the employer pays part or all of the premium cannot be disclosed to the employer. Back in the late 1990s, I worked for a big company that self-paid medical costs and had an insurance company administer the claims (some larger companies found it cheaper to pay the medical bills than the premiums). Because they paid, they had the dollar amount of medical costs of each employee but did not have any diagnosis details or which family member it applied to. I'm not sure if there are any companies any more that choose to pay the medical costs rather than just the premiums any more. This was before HIPAA, and I was always uncomfortable that my yearly "benefits review report" from my company included the dollar amount of medical costs paid, especially when most of them were for my children, as I had one child that was chronically ill. I am hoping that HIPAA has made this practice impractical or illegal. Insurance companies can give a company a conglomerate of the medical costs for all the employees, but I doubt that it does it on an individual basis anymore.
-
Lesa Carol Walker
Unfortunately companies have ways to make you say. If they require you to file FMLA for your time off and you want to take advantage of that because otherwise they can fire you, you sign a consent for the medical provider to provide detailed information about your diagnosis and treatment. I am a provider who has had to fill these forms out and if they are not detailed they come back around. I am not sure exactly who sees this, but have always assumed it is HR. The patient has to sign a consent. The difficulty is some companies have policies that you have to do this paperwork for as little as 1or 2 days missed or your job is on the line.
-
Daniel Gray
sorry Pat, but I am living in this century
"While you do not have to specifically ask for FMLA leave, you do need to provide enough information so your employer is aware it may be covered by the FMLA. A simple statement that you are “sick” may not provide enough information."
" Can an employer ask me why I want time off? Employers can ask why an employee is asking for time off. In fact, that question is pretty common on a standard Time Off Request or when requesting an extended Leave of Absence."
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/how-to-talk-to-your-employer-about-leave
-
-
-
-
Melinda Fulk
I'm going to double down here - Yes, they can ask why I am going to a doctor's appointment, but no, I do not need to tell them the reason. The only time they would need to worry about longer coverage than, say an afternoon or so, would be if I had a medical procedure that required me to miss more than the length of the appointment. For instance, my heart surgery, which required a minimum of 3 weeks recover, depending on your job.
-
S. Tiffany Brendt
No. They may NOT ask. They may ask how much time the employee needs off, but not why. HIPPA violation. Violation of 1st, 4th, 9th, and even 14th Amendment rights. Women are NOT chattel. We are not owned by fathers, husbands, brothers, or the state. The 1st phrase in the 1st line of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America gives us all the right to be irreligious, or free from the religious precepts and tenets of faith of others.
-
Daniel Gray
yes they can ask
"While you do not have to specifically ask for FMLA leave, you do need to provide enough information so your employer is aware it may be covered by the FMLA. A simple statement that you are “sick” may not provide enough information."
" Can an employer ask me why I want time off? Employers can ask why an employee is asking for time off. In fact, that question is pretty common on a standard Time Off Request or when requesting an extended Leave of Absence."
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/how-to-talk-to-your-employer-about-leave
And what happens if the reason you went to see your doctor and it comes back that you cant return to your job? Sorry but they CAN ask and the US Government has already said they can.
-
-
Amber Fry
Yes, and the individual can tell them how long they need without disclosing why.
-
Daniel Gray
And in doing that they are notifying their employer, just like I said and others were claiming I was wrong.
-
-
-
-
Rev. BH
"A judge in North Dakota just ruled that the federal government cannot coerce thousands of Catholic employers nationwide to provide time off for abortion and IVF treatments for employees."
Coerce is the key word here. I tend to agree. The government should not coerce any religious group to do anything. But it would be nice for thoughtful employers to permit employees to tend to personal medical issues without repercussions. Do unto others as you would have done to you. Rings a bell, no?
-
Daniel Gray
No need for that, SCOTUS has already ruled in 6 different cases that states nor cities can require ANY business to violate their religious beliefs no matter if they think abortion is ok or not. If the business wants to offer it, then thats up to them but you CANNOT force them to offer it no matter who thinks so.
-
-
Matthew Mastrogiovanni
This makes me want to be a business owner and refuse to allow any time off for Christian holidays.
-
Russel A. Kester
A religious holiday and an abortion are not equal. Such hostility and seeking retribution for perceived injustices does not one any good.
-
Daniel Gray
You can do that. But then you also cannot allow any time off for any other religions holidays as if you do and refuse Christian holidays, its called discrimination and you can get sued out of existence. There recently was a mail deliverer who refused to work sundays and the postmaster of that branch terminated him. He filed a complaint with then NLRB and the USPS lost the case. So you need to be very careful in projecting your actions and make sure they are legal first
-
Daniel Gray
Go ahead, and then you are also going to have to refuse any other religious holiday or face a discrimination lawsuit that you cant win Matthew
-
-
Anisahoni
The Catholic Church is a fascist, misogynistic organization run by a bunch of pedophiles running around in long dresses. Rather than clean their own house of pedophile priests, they want to intrude into other peoples' medical decisions. They would rather see women die from sepsis after a miscarriage rather than receive an emergency abortion which used to be called a D&E and deny sick pay. I have survived the abuses of the church and Catholic education and have no respect for any of them including their dear leader the Pope.They need to mind their own darn business.
-
Daniel Gray
first you need to be VERY careful as you can be sued for slander and libel if you continue. Second nobody is forcing the employees to work there, they did it of their own free will. Third they have no legal requirement to give you anything more then pay for the 40 hours you work...No medical care or anything else. You want it then you buy it. And I see you intentionally ignore the "little Sisters of the Poor" who ran a retirement home and the employees like you tried to force them to pay for abortions and such. It went all the way to the US Supreme Court and SCOTUS ruled that they did not have to do any such thing. So it seems the Highest court in the land says you are wrong.
And if you want them to pay for your abortions, then sadly for you it IS their business to know what they are paying for. so pull your head out of your dark and stinky and take a breath of fresh clean air for once.
-
Ruth P Doughty
People use the word slander way to much. When it’s out into writing it’s Libel not slander, but also, it’s nothing if the allegations are true 🙄 Proving harm from slander or libel is incredibly difficult and most lawyers won’t waste their time even trying. The few that do take on those cases charge by the hour because they know that’s the only money they’ll earn from the case.
-
Daniel Gray
Not really. When you have SCOTUS saying that you cant do this and you then go on and blab to everyone who asks that you did it and the reason why...under US law that IS classified as slander and libel as all the postmaster was doing is trying to harm this persons reputation. Found out real quick that the law takes a very dim view on this and the former yes I said former postmaster there was given two options, retire or be demoted and moved to another department. He took the smart way out and retired.
-
-
-
-
Nicholas J Page
It's got nothing to do with an employer why you need time off.Book the appointment and then tell your employer if you wish But I bet couples won't
-
Daniel Gray
And if you are gone for more then a few days, the employer can safely and legally assume that you quit. as they dont know why you are gone. Imagine following your advice and then coming back to find you were terminated as you never told your employer. Thats a lawsuit that you may try and file but wont win.
-
S. Tiffany Brendt
Yes. They would likely win. ALL the employee has to do is call in sick, and say she's going to see the doctor. Her employer would be violating HIPPA laws and her rights under the 1st, and 4th, Amendments. The 1st gives her the right NOT to have someone else's religious beliefs shoved down her throat, and the 4th gives her the right to privacy.
-
Daniel Gray
and what you forget is the doctor will put the reason for the visit on the medical excuse so no sorry they would not win if they didnt tell the employer.
When I was in the Army and went to sick call, I had to tell the sgt on duty why. and this was and is standard required and has been for over 30 years.
When I got out of the military and went back to work for Chrysler STILL had to do the same thing. The local UAW headquarters filed a claim for this being company policy and the NLRB ruled that companies DO have the right to know if you are going to take time off work and how long you are going to be gone so the company can cover your work.
So I guess you are now saying the NLRB (federal Government) as well as the third largest car maker in the US are all wrong because you say so?
Tell you waht. Go tell your boss you are going to take time off and not give them a reason, and be sure to let us know when you get back where you are working then as you sure wont be working the same job
"While you do not have to specifically ask for FMLA leave, you do need to provide enough information so your employer is aware it may be covered by the FMLA. A simple statement that you are “sick” may not provide enough information."
" Can an employer ask me why I want time off? Employers can ask why an employee is asking for time off. In fact, that question is pretty common on a standard Time Off Request or when requesting an extended Leave of Absence."
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/how-to-talk-to-your-employer-about-leave
Thank you for showing your ignorance about medical leave.
-
-
Amber Fry
Again, you can require the time off for medical without disclosing what that procedure is. If a boss needs a note from a doctor then that doctor can actually make a note saying 'medical leave needed' and how long would be needed without disclosing why exactly.
-
Daniel Gray
Again NO YOU CANNOT
"While you do not have to specifically ask for FMLA leave, you do need to provide enough information so your employer is aware it may be covered by the FMLA. A simple statement that you are “sick” may not provide enough information."
" Can an employer ask me why I want time off? Employers can ask why an employee is asking for time off. In fact, that question is pretty common on a standard Time Off Request or when requesting an extended Leave of Absence."
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/how-to-talk-to-your-employer-about-leave
-
-
-
-
John P Maher
THEY CAN"TEVEN RUN THEIR OWN LIVES, I"LL BE DAMNED if THEY RUN MINE !
-
Rev. Dr. Father JJ
What is going to happen in this kkkristofascist environment is that churches, religions and religious organizations are going to become immune to all government oversight and answer only to their clerics, something that's seen today in afghanistan. And from there it's only a matter of time before they institute morality police here.
It starts by making employees sign loyalty pledges to the religion. Then loyalty pledges from whomever they serve. Then they will dictate for whom the congregation can vote and eventually who can run for political office. We're already at the threshold of those ideas.
A line needs to be drawn and quickly and make it clear that religion has no part in public life, no part nor say in government nor control over anyone's bodies (other than those that willingly give up control to their church).
It's not the gay agenda, it's not the LGBTQ+, it's not immigrants, it's not democrats or atheists or wiccans or jews that is going to be the end of american democracy, the end of freedom and free speech. It's going to be RELIGION and the regressive far right. And cathoholics should be equally afraid because all those schism religions will band together and ban you folks as well...for starters.
I say this over and over but I am serious every time I say it, this radical, far right, neo-nazi, white supremacist, kkkristofascist drive to convert the United States into a theocracy governed by the same kind of people that now govern afghanistan nigh approaches. It's not a joke. It's on the horizon and the people that are behind it, that are in favor of it, are right here, in the forum, in this discussion.
-
Russel A. Kester
JJ, it isn't Christians who require loyalty oaths at Harvard and in schools across the US, it's the progressive left. You cite a legitimate concern, but you identify the wrong crowd.
-
Rev. Dr. Father JJ
lol what are you talking about?
loyalty oaths at harvard? and other schools? you may be confusing that with loyalty oaths to the regressive far right and their cheeto leader, who demands loyalty oaths
but I get your point, you're anti-liberal and demonize them as well as immigrants. it's a regressive gopper kkkris chn nationalist view point
-
Russel A. Kester
No, it's actually documented that professors must sign a loyal oath to progressive ideas of DEI at Harvard.
-
Rev. Dr. Father JJ
nice try, it was removed in june because professors refused to sign it
now what about loyalty oaths to churches and to dear leader? Project 2025....it's all in there
-
Russel A. Kester
So, you acknowledge that it was in fact in place because something cannot be removed which has never in place. Second, you state that it was just removed in June, but failed to say how long it had been in place and the effect it had on the education Harvard offered which no longer presented students with the breadth of education for which they paid.
Yes, church members state their agreement with the doctrines of the church. How is that relevant?
-
Rev. Dr. Father JJ
so what is your point? people propose stupid things everyday, this was one of them and it was corrected. just like science, mistakes are made and then rectified, unlike your magical cloud clown goD and religion which is considered perfect, lol.
anyway, go back upstream to the big comment I made as that's the one that's relevant. it includes you in there as you are clearly one of those that want a theocracy, at least according to all your comments here
-
S. Tiffany Brendt
Do you even understand what DEI is? The ex potus doesn't. It stands for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, and if you have a problem with any of those, than I have to ask, are you a racist, bigot, and/or misogynist? If your answer is no to all three, than you shouldn't have a problem with DEI.
-
Russel A. Kester
Tiffany, the problem with DEI is that it is none of things the labels proclaim. Those labels are merely marketing ploys. DEI honestly states would be Discrimination, Exclusion, and Indoctrination. That is the simple truthful. Some people just refuse to see the truth. So, yes, I do understand what DEI is because I've looked at how it's actually practiced in the real world. But I'm left wondering if you really understand what DEI is.
-
Michael Hunt
You clearly don't understand what DEI is if you believe that right wing propaganda you just spouted.
-
Daniel Gray
Maybe he does not, but I know that DEI programs are being dropped from companies faster then lava bombs after an eruption. IN fact almost EVERY ONE of the companies from Target to Walmart to Microsoft to Amazon and even more, have all stopped funding the Human Rights Campaign and now they cant even afford to pay the rent on their building as companies are more concerned with their workers and stock holders and making a profit so they can stay in business then what this fake DEI wants.
-
-
-
Patricia Ann Gross
Russel, how is signing an oath to support DEI (a progressive concept) the same as signing a loyalty pledge to the Catholic Church? When a local chapter of Catholic Charities needed a new Executive Director, I was unable to apply, because one of the requirements of the jobs was to pledge loyalty to the Catholic Church and be an active member in a local Catholic congregation. I can support DEI, even if I was Muslim, Pagan, or Wiccan.
-
Russel A. Kester
Patricia, as I mentioned in a comment above, DEI is not what the labels suggest; merely marketing to hide that it is in fact far from those things. Even now major corporations have realized this and are firing their DEI directors and dumping the programs. The Catholic charities is a religious program and can discriminate based on its religious beliefs. However, universities that receive public funding should not. Not everything that glitters is gold.
-
Michael Hunt
Huh, funny how the companies cutting those programs all seem to be conservative donors as well. It's almost as though there's an ideological reason, not a business reason, to cut these programs... Why are you against programs that promote a work force that's just as unique and diverse as the world we live in?
-
Daniel Gray
so you are saying that Amazon and Microsoft and Apple are conservative? Please tell me what you are drinking.
-
Michael Howard Schrader
Last time I checked, Harvard was private.
-
Russel A. Kester
Harvard is a private university, but it gets Federal monies. Per Google AI, [f]ederal funding, which accounted for approximately 67% of total sponsored revenue in fiscal year 2021, increased 1% to $625 million. The federal government should rescind all of this money.
-
Patricia Ann Gross
Forgive me if I misunderstood you, but you are the one that was equating the "loyalty oaths to a church" with the DEI pledges at Harvard being a "leftist" thing (so it is obviously evil). I think you lost your train of thought as bad as I did.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
S. Tiffany Brendt
Denying an employee time off for IVF, IUI, or abortive healthcare is a violation of that employee's 1st Amendment rights. Why does every religious and political group that seeks to end our abortion rights skip right over the 1st phrase in the 1st line of the 1st Amendment, which states, "Congress shall make NO LAW respecting an establishment of religion..."? The SCOTUS decided 4 times in my lifetime that that phrase gives everyone the right to be "irreligious," meaning that we have the right to be free FROM religion. We have the right to be free from having someone else's religious beliefs shoved down our throats. The concepts of being against abortion, fertility treatments, and birth control are relgious precepts and tenets of faith. By giving an employee time off to seek reproductive health care, the staff of catholic, or other religious organizations, are not themselves being forced to have IVF, IUI, or an abortion. In fact, HIPA laws are being violated by even asking why the employee needs time off, as well as violating of her 4th Amendment rights. By the way, I'm going to law school, and I'm in my late 60s. Why? So I can get Dodds overturned. The SCOTUS, in its infinite wisdom, has totally ignored the 9th Amendment, as well as the 1st, 4th and 14th. The 9th states, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, SHALL NOT be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Well 49 1/2 years is long enough to prove that abortion is a right retained by the people. A couple of my professors and I will be working on a friend of the court brief. We've raised funds to file...I don't know about you, but I've about had it with this iteration of SCOTUS. It's time to expand the Court, AND put in retroactive term limits. Awomen. Amen.
-
Minister Butterworth
If you got such a big issue with it, why work there?
-
Shelly O'Gee
Wow butterworth... miss the point much? 😂
-
Minister Butterworth
I'm right on. The first amendment should have nothing to do with it. It's simple, if you want to kill your child, that's between you and God. But if that's what you're about, why do you want to work for people who are against that. The problem is that everyone wants money and to get their 15 minutes. You say don't force your religion on us. STOP trying to force your Godlessness and depravity on those of us who do answer to a higher power. Hilarious.
-
-
-
Daniel Gray
No its not
"While you do not have to specifically ask for FMLA leave, you do need to provide enough information so your employer is aware it may be covered by the FMLA. A simple statement that you are “sick” may not provide enough information."
" Can an employer ask me why I want time off? Employers can ask why an employee is asking for time off. In fact, that question is pretty common on a standard Time Off Request or when requesting an extended Leave of Absence."
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/how-to-talk-to-your-employer-about-leave
-
-
Walter J. Holbrook
The true hypocrites of the gospel
-
ServantOfJudgement
There was a time I had the idea that Americans could cover the rift that divides us. I thought logic, reason, compassion and empathy would prevail over our differences. I set out to understand what we all call the "left", understand their perspective, place myself in their position as much as I had the understanding and wisdom to do. I thought I could reciprocate the same so what we all call the "right" might be better understood by a willing audience. I don't want to use the word compromise, I'd rather use the word mesh. I'd hoped a meshing would be possible. It is not.
There are very few on the left and very few on the right that are willing to empathize beyond that of their own delusional imagination. I've had one, perhaps two civil discussions with members here where no insults were thrown and no assumptions were made. Where genuine curiosity and the desire to understand prevailed over textbook assumptions and media propaganda. Not where ground was given up but rather shared between the two.
I'm of the sort that doesn't like to turn the other cheek more than once or twice even though my lord commands it. I'm sure he'll settle up with me for my defiance, in fact I'm counting on it. All other interactions for the most part were fueled by assumptions, probably on my part as well even though I make a continual effort to not be as such unless I'm feeling frisky, then I poke the bear for fun. We are at the end of the day human are we not?
I'm thankful to have heard the opinions and feelings of people I don't encounter that often. Christians who are gay, hardcore atheists both conservative and liberal, satanists, witches, transgenders and all the they-thems who have shared their thoughts. I feel im a better man for it.
On the topic of this article, the right demands entry into our privacy via the womb and the mind while the left demands entry into our privacy via the needle and the mind. Both have already prevailed. The wicked will do what they will and the good will let them. This is history.
One day soon, we'll all long for the days we could discuss things like this, when we're all refugees in our own land. The bible lists many personality types we all fit into. I'm what it calls a watchman on the wall. That's my type. When I go to a football game, enter a store or get on an airplane I see people before they see me. I see the air Marshal looking at me and he sees me looking at him. I keep my wife safe, I keep my kids safe. I'm a watchman on the wall.
Hear this if you will or don't if it pleases you. Judgement is now, the fat lady is singing, the hammer is falling. Whatever religion you are, whatever profession you exercise, whatever creed you uphold, form a plan before the world forms one for you, it's not going to be very nice, especially to the nice.
Some friendly advice to all. When reading someone's message, try not to read it with your voice, tone or attitude. Try reading it with a voice you've never heard before.
-
Russel A. Kester
That was a nice post. It can be difficult not to see things through our own lenses. Sometimes I asked basically the same question several different ways before I'm able to understand where the other person is coming from.
-
Patricia Ann Gross
SOJ, I totally agree with you, but I know there is a continuum that exists between what the fringe "far right" and "far left" believe, and the ones that are getting all of the "air time" are those in the extreme of both sides. For example, like Russel said, I try to understand where each side is coming from before I make up my mind one way or another, but rarely does my feelings fall on either extreme. I would never have had an abortion myself, but appreciate the rights of others who do not believe the same way I do. I see nothing inherently wrong with IVF, and do not consider a zygote/fetus that has no ability to survive outside the womb the same way and with the same rights as a fetus beyond viability. Partial birth abortions have always been a myth, and those that may have happened were when either the mother or the child's life was in danger or already lost, or due to some trauma/assault. All is not lost. There are plenty of us that sit in the middle whose voices are being drowned out by the fringes.
-
-
Evone Payton Banks (Minister non denominational)
Personally as someone whose been redicude by a lot of religious personal opinions. A judge has to seperate personal beliefs from the job description
-
John P Maher
THE JUDGE IS " PREDJUDICE " 100 % and should be PURGED FROM THE BENCH or DOES HE ALSO HAVE IMMUNITY FOR BEING A TOTAL A HOLE LIKE tRUMP ???
-
Kenneth Flanagan
So what this judge is saying that these employers' 1A rights are more important than their employees' INALIENABLE rights?
-
Rev Ned
All churches are businesses. They sell the hope of eternal life. I’m surprised that the Catholic Church is against IVF, it’s bad for business. The more babies, the more kids groomed in Sunday school, the more adults putting money in the collection plate. The Shakers business model believes in total separation of the sexes, i.e. no kids. There’s only two left.
-
Lesa Carol Walker
Even more concerning to me is when a Catholic healthcare system takes over the local healthcare system in places where there isn't a lot of choice. They do not have to offer birth control services to their clients using their ethical and religous directives. There was a good story about this on NPR a while back. Some areas leave folks with little to no choice of choosing a provider outside the catholic system and everything goes away: pills, IUDs, vasectomies, anything to do with birth control.
I would not choose to work in a Catholic system myself due to this restriction. HOwever, I do not see why I would have to disclose to my emloyer what I was going to the doctor for if I was stuck working for them.
-
Russel A. Kester
The judge ruled rightly. And the federal government is the entity that has overstepped. Is any of this actually a burden on women? Of course not. No woman need to tell her employer that she's going to go get an abortion. She can just request time off to visit her doctor for medical reasons (employers may not ask why but may request a note from the doctor), or take vacation time of necessary, and commit her sin. No need to announce her intentions. It's another case of the wacky left making issues where none need be made.
-
Elizabeth Jane Erbe Wilcox
Russel, nice try but you’re a penis-owner and have no idea if this is a burden on a woman. Get over yourself.
-
Russel A. Kester
Elizabeth, one does not need a vagina in order to understand this article and respond accordingly. Get over yourself.
-
-
Amber Fry
And not allowing it would be a violation of both religious freedom AND denying health care.It is an issue. Yes, women would be burdened. You really don't think health care denied is a burden? It also isn't just the "wacky left" who is affected here. Everyone is affected, regardless of religious or political affiliation, even men who want to start a family as well as those who don't.
-
Daniel Gray
where Amber is the law that requires an employer to pay for your health care? I have looked in every state and federal registry and cannot find it anywhere, so if you are going to require your myth your employer has to pay for your health care (especially since you are claiming that it violates her right or his right somehow) then you need to who the law that requires the employer to pay for same. Oh and BTW the Little Sisters of the poor case https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/19-431, clearly stated that at no time does an employer have to fund an abortion and again in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. 682 (2014) and again in Zubik v. Burwell, 578 U.S. __ (2017) and in ALL of these cases it was 7-2 with only Sortamayor and Ginseberg saying they should So do you understand how wrong you really are?
-
-
-
Tareq Asfour
America become communistic ?
-
ServantOfJudgement
A while back, yes.
-
Rev. BH
Communism: "a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs."
Ain't seeing this, SOJ.
-
Daniel Gray
and one more thing, say your grandparents bought a home and paid 35K for it. Now due to all of the cost of things going up, the home is now worth between 350 and 500K Our female candidate has already stated that she wants an "unearned income" tax. Meaning that even though the house was bought and paid off and your grandparents live on a fixed income...they would have to come up with 25% of that unearned income on the house which means somewhere they have to now get 115,000K to give to the government. If they live on a fixed income, where does she think they are going to come up with that kind of money?
And before you say different, just remember that Social Security had a 1% tax on people making over 35K back in the 40's that would be equal to 95K today. and it was only on them. Now take a look as your social security tax is now between 12 and 15% of your yearly income. AND its on everyone. Once the camel gets their nose in the tent, how long before the whole animal is inside?
-
Rev. Dr. Father JJ
you're talking about capital gains, not sure if it involves gampy but even so, it's paid if the house is sold, maybe. inheritance the house is appraised at whatever it's valued at at the time of appraisal.
what this has to do with the blog is anyone's guess
-
Daniel Gray
No I am saying the same thing as Harris has said, its called unresolved taxes and Harris has repeatedly stated that she will get this enacted one way or another. Dont believe me? Ok then listen to it directly from the horses mouth so to speak
https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/4859946-vice-president-kamala-harris-tax/
-
-
S. Tiffany Brendt
That doesn't apply to gram and gramps living in their now very valuable home. If they sell, they get to put the proceeds aside for a period of time before it's considered income. If they turn it around, and buy another home, the gain is NOT taxed. If they are over 59 1/2, they can use the gains for retirement. Our eminently qualified, former U.S. Senator, former CA AG, former DA, former ADA, former middle class child, living in a single parent household (Madam VP Harris's parents were divorced, and were both Dr.s) is not to be dismissed as a female candidate. She is the Democratic Party's nominee for POTUS. As a middle class woman who has shattered a couple of glass ceilings, she is not about to put the middle class in jeopardy.
-
Daniel Gray
sorry but it does. Just go to the link I placed above on the Hill and listen to it from Harris's own mouth.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Minister Butterworth
You know their beliefs in advance. It's not hidden or difficult to understand. If it's a problem for you, get a job elsewhere. Employers rights should be first. No Employers, no work. Don't come to work for me and try to change my ways. That is ridiculous. I think most of this is just a lot of drama intended to get money and attention.
-
Michael Anthony Mongelli
The Supreme Court, during the end of the 19th Century ,ruled that business and corporations had the same rights as individuals threw a wrench into the U.S. Constitution. It's a tough fight to win.
-
Daniel Gray
So you are now saying that only specific tax payers have the right to voice their opinions? Ok then using your logic, tell me by what right that illegals who broke the law by coming here, are doing driving and Voting in state and local elections. They have no right to do either but they are doing it.
-
-
Ari Joseph Bertine
It's a self-solving problem. If people find any of this harsh, damaging, intrusive, or otherwise intolerable, that's a good sign that maybe they shouldn't be Catholics and absolutely they shouldn't work for these people.
But what if you have no choice, it's the only work you can get and you need it to survive? Well...run for your life. Better to live on charity for a while than be under the thumb of someone that doesn't believe in basic kindness and wants to control people that way. That's a dangerous employer.
-
Reverend Andrew
So if I am an non Catholic employers Does that mean I don't have to give Catholic s off for there things or as they say Holidays ?
-
Bridget Kielas-Fecyk
Nope. Because then they can scream religious discrimination. It's not, unfortunately, a 2-way street. They get to discriminate against people using their religion as their reason, but at the same time, no one is allowed to deny them anything they believe their religion permits.
-
-
Bridget Kielas-Fecyk
I've noticed how many MEN, especially religious ones, are interested in controlling women's bodies. Whether or not she can have an abortion, whether or not she can have IVF treatments, whether or not she can have a hysterectomy, etc. Just like they are also trying to control whether or not women are even allowed to TRAVEL if they become pregnant.
In Texas, though so far the courts have shot them down, multiple counties are trying to make it ILLEGAL for the women to travel across county lines if they are pregnant, are suspected of being pregnant, or may become pregnant. Basically "caging" them.
-
Michael Howard Schrader
And over time, Texas will have a serious gender imbalance issue as women flee. We will have a new version of the "Underground Railroad" for women, as they will be nothing more than breeders.
-
Miriam Gates
I seriously doubt it. That threat is always shouted but has never happened. 🤦♀️ Really women fleeing….please
-
-
-
Miriam Gates
It’s a job, it’s a choice to work there. They DO NOT hide their beliefs period. It’s their right to conduct business and employee rules as they believe. You don’t work at a job knowing and complaining about said rules. Their beliefs have been established for hundreds of years. Find another job.
-
Lesa Carol Walker
There are some rural areas where the local health systems have been taken over by a Catholic system, leaving nurses and healthcare workers without another choice within 200 miles. Would you drive 200 miles to work every day?
-
-
Michael Joseph Cheney
Abortion is murder, plain and simple.You are taking the life of a conscious living being. Even at three months, a fetus will back away from an amnio.Thesis needle that the mother wanted inserted, because the child wants nothing to do with it. A mother murdering her own child is far worse. than a serial killer because it's her own flesh and blood. A true mother would murder a hundred to save her own. Abortion is sacrifice on the altar of irresponsibility and is completely Satanic. This is a compassionate and respectful comment because it's okay to call out murder as an evil thing Many people today are too cowardly to point their finger and say "what the hell are you thinking?" And thus evil grows and propagates. If you've lost the ability to recognize and call out evil and filth for what it is, then you are condoning filth and evil.
-
JPrime
That’s all well and fine. If you think abortion is murder, then don’t have one. However, if I find myself pregnant, knowing that I have taken all precautions and I am unwilling to carry, then I will make MY choice. YOUR beliefs should not be a part of anyone else’s HEALTHCARE decision.
-
The catholic church is WAYYY too involved in people’s reproductive health care. If I were catholic, I wouldn’t say why I needed the time off. It’s still legal to keep your business private, isn’t it?
Sorry paula, the employer you work for has a vested interest in this since most of them will be using company paid health care for it, so no you will have to tell them why you want it and for how long. Dont like it then I guess you wont be working for anyone now will you
Partly correct. However you do not have to disclose what medical procedures you are having. That is a HIPPA violation. Even the insurance company the employer contracts with cannot tell the employer what procedures the employee had.
You are correct there. The church, nor the workplaces, are allowed to force you to disclose why you need time off. All you need tell them is that it is for medical reasons. Daniel Gray is very much incorrect because, though you are using work insurance, the insurance company also cannot disclose why you went in. Be it for abortion procedure, or for IVF. Or for any other procedure. You only have to disclose what procedure(s) you had if it will directly impact your ability to work safely.
wrong
"While you do not have to specifically ask for FMLA leave, you do need to provide enough information so your employer is aware it may be covered by the FMLA. A simple statement that you are “sick” may not provide enough information."
" Can an employer ask me why I want time off? Employers can ask why an employee is asking for time off. In fact, that question is pretty common on a standard Time Off Request or when requesting an extended Leave of Absence."
https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fmla/how-to-talk-to-your-employer-about-leave
You are the one that is incorrect. Churches, because they are not considered "normal" employers, being tax-exempt religious groups, can force you to disclose it. They can also fire you for having IVF. They can also fire you for having an abortion or a miscarriage. The site only deals with regular workplaces, not churches.
Nope sorry Bridget, according to the US Department of labor, I am 100% accurate. And according to the "Little Sisters of the poor" decision by the US Supreme Court, you CANNOT be forced to violate your religion. meaning if you can show that abortions or SSM or items like this are against your religion, ANY business can fire you for doing same. I guess you seemingly ignored the Chic-Fil-A decision where their right to fire you for attempting to violate the owners religious beliefs and then try and force you to do it anyway, the person lost. I can introduce you to a friends Trans Son who was refused a Chick-Fill-A store of their own because of this. They tried to sue and the NLRB told them they had no case as they signed the employment contract so they knew what was expected of them. Or the Coffee House in Seattle that was run by a very nice gay couple, right up till their employees started making demands and actually demanded that the couple GIVE the workers the business, and the couple rightly told them to go pound sand and closed the business putting them all out of a job.
Business are the property of the OWNERS and as such the OWNERS make the decisions not the workers. If you dont like that idea then find another job
You're right, you cannot be forced to do something against your religion. However, REGULAR workplaces cannot fire a person for having IVF, an abortion, or a miscarriage due to labor laws. They also cannot fire a person for being trans. They can refuse to hire a person for such, BUT they cannot use that as their reasoning.
You are wrong on this issue. I happen to know these rules QUITE well.
As for being a franchisee, that's different than working as an employer and the parent company can refuse on pretty much any grounds as long as they are not openly being discriminatory in their refusal. However, being a franchisee to a company by forcing the issue in the courts is frowned upon since your company would be beholden to the parent company and, therefore, would hurt your business.
The WORKERS to make the decisions because if the owners have NO workers, they have no business. Unless, of course, you're trying to imply a business owner can do ALL of the work themselves? You do know how many places have gone under because all of their workers told them what to do with themselves and quit to find other jobs?
People don't quit bad jobs, they quit bad bosses, most of the time. And it's not easy to "just replace them".
I'm afraid you're not accurate at all.
Um yes they can. Since abortion carries medical risks, while they dont have to tell you why they STILL have to tell the employers how long they are going to be gone as you cant just leave this open ended. After a bit usually about a week to 10 days, if you have not come back to work or notified your employers of same, then they can safely and legally consider you have quit and hire someone else to take your place. Same goes for IVF. And personally I dont care what you think as this came directly from the US Department of Labor and was passed into law by the US Congress.
So please in the future when you make such statements, just say upfront that this is your opinion
This is not my opinion, this is fact and it is law. Maybe they can in your state given the anti-abortion laws but in states without restrictions they cannot due to the anti-discrimination laws.
Now, they cannot FORCE an employee to reveal their medical information, i.e. "why they are leaving work for medical leave", but also, in states that are not "At Will", a workplace cannot discriminate against a woman and fire her for having an abortion or having IVF.
And yes, abortions and IVF, do have medical consequences, but guess what? Pregnancy is 10,000 times dangerous than both of those put together and yet workplaces are not allowed to fire women for being pregnant either. Though some RELIGIOUS groups force women to sign "chastity contracts" due to their strict rules regarding their religion with the workplace, but that is the exception rather than the rule.
With the US Dept. of Labor, I know the statutes you're referring to and you're 100% wrong as to what they are saying. A workplace CANNOT fire a person for having a medical procedure done, period. Even in At Will states they cannot due to the Discrimination Laws. However, they can fire / remove an employee for any other reason in At-Will states especially.
No its your OPINION bridget as I have already shown you by Supreme Court decisions as well as other court decisions as well as proof from the US Department of Labor and even the Family leave act that you are completely wrong.
So tell ya what. Hows about you just up and leave your job giving your employer no notice as to when you are going to return and then tell us how you lost that job within a two week period.