Second Contraception Lawsuit Dismissed

For the second time in as many days a federal court dismissed a lawsuit brought by religiously-affiliated colleges challenging the Obama administration’s rule requiring insurance plans cover contraception.

This suit, brought by Belmont Abbey College was simply “too speculative” said the district court. It’s a good outcome, but one that can’t bring too much comfort. For starters, as the ACLU notes, the plaintiff is not one to simply go away quietly.

This isnít the first time that Belmont Abbey College has thumbed its nose at federal laws designed to stop discrimination against women in health care. †In 2009, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission concluded that the College was discriminating against its employees based on their gender because it withheld coverage for prescription birth control, which only women use, while providing insurance coverage for other prescription drugs. †But as far as we know, the college is still resisting the EEOCís decision and has yet to come into compliance. †So it came as no surprise when it challenged the administrationís contraception rule, despite the fact that the rule is on solid legal footing, while the collegeís claims are bogus.

See a pattern?

These are not good-faith claims of religious objection. They are cynical attempts at remaining in control and relevant. The veracity with which these men pursue an agenda of stripping women of their rights, and the pleasure they clearly take in it, is downright disturbing. Good thing they’re on the wrong side of history.

Related Stories:

Lawsuit Challenging Contraception Mandate Dismissed

House Go After Contraception Coverage. Again.

House Republicans Might Shut Down Government Over Contraception

Photo from walknboston via flickr.


Thomas P.
Thomas P5 years ago

To all those religious flamethrowers that believe that God's intended primary purpose for sex was to procreate, I would ask...really? Have you ever heard of animals that reproduce asexually? Didn't God make those creatures too? Might it be because He wanted for us to be happy and sex is a part of that, whether it was to procreate or not? I'd be careful about assuming God's primary purpose in doing/having done anything. If you see Him someday, perhaps you can ask Him. Until then, try not to assume too much.

Duane B.
.5 years ago

Thank you for sharing.

Mary H.
Mary H.5 years ago

What is the matter with you people? The Catholic church has been against birth control since forever. When you consider that men have to support the babies for 20 years, I hardly think it's anti-women. This isn't hate. They just believe that God created sex for procreation, and that it shouldn't be separated from its primary purpose.

Note, too, that they are not denying women anything but their pocketbooks. Women can still get bc.

You're saying that $100/mo or less is more important than religious freedom.

Why don't you respect others' religious beliefs?

Rin S.
Rin S5 years ago

So much misogyny in our modern society. So sad.

Bartley Deason
Bartley Deason5 years ago

Steve R.
Do you ever read what you write BEFORE you post it?

Bartley Deason
Bartley Deason5 years ago

John M.
Do yourself a big favor. Go have some sex!!!!!

Lauren B.

This fit about what insurance covers is really none of any employer's business. Provide access to health insurance and respect employees privacy!

Christine C.
Chandra C5 years ago


Abbe A.
Azaima A5 years ago


Deirdre G.
Deirdre G5 years ago

what I want to know is, what are the chances that mens viagra is covered???