Blunt’s proposal doesn’t just apply to religious employers and birth control. Instead, it would allow any insurer or employer, religiously affiliated or otherwise, to opt out of providing any health care services required by federal law—everything from maternity care to screening for diabetes. Employers wouldn’t have to cite religious reasons for their decision; they could just say the treatment goes against their moral convictions. That exception could include almost anything—an employer could theoretically claim a “moral objection” to the cost of providing a given benefit.

19 notes

  1. neonbender reblogged this from heller
  2. hopabroom reblogged this from shotinsarajevo
  3. justacockeyedoptimist reblogged this from shotinsarajevo
  4. shotinsarajevo reblogged this from nickdouglas
  5. 19o1 reblogged this from nickdouglas
  6. turnabout reblogged this from ericmortensen and added:
    I can’t believe the health insurance industry would stand for each company picking and choosing coverage elements a la...
  7. jessk reblogged this from ericmortensen
  8. rachelfershleiser said: “moral”
  9. jacobjoaquin reblogged this from ericmortensen
  10. ericmortensen reblogged this from nickdouglas
  11. heller reblogged this from nickdouglas
  12. nickdouglas posted this