Democratic Senator: ‘Right To Insurance’ More Important Than Religious Liberty
I’ve noted before that I am highly skeptical of the religious liberty arguments being put forward by some opponents of the Obama Administration’s contraception coverage policy as applied to institutions run by churches and other religious organizations. That said, this statement by California’s Barbara Boxer is absolutely ridiculous:
Senator Boxer warned yesterday that if the HHS contraception mandate was repealed it would set a dangerous precedence of religious rights trumping the right to be insured.
On MSNBC’s Politics Nation with Al Sharpton last night, Boxer affirmed that under the proposed amendment proposed by Sen. Roy Blunt, an employer would not be forced by the government to pay for medical practices against his religion.
“I mean, are they serious? Sharpton exclaimed, “How do you make a law where an employer can decide his own religious beliefs violate your right to be insured?”
“Oh Absolutely,” Boxer said, “Let’s use an example, let’s say somebody believes that medicine doesn’t cure anybody of a disease but prayer does and then they decide no medicine.
“No medicine!” she exclaimed, “Under the Blunt amendment, they could do just that.”
The only problem with Boxer’s comment, of course, is that there is no such thing as a right to health insurance. It’s not in the Bill Of Rights (and it doesn’t belong there, either) or anywhere else in the Constitution. If the opponents of the Obama Administration are correct and there really is a conflict between the law and the First Amendment, the the First Amendment wins not some non-existent right to health insurance.