Birth control test case

If health-care reform simply meant a robust effort to care for those who can't take care of their medical needs themselves, few would oppose it. What troubles reform opponents is the specter of government intervention in the name of health care, especially if it were to be used as a weapon against individual rights in a totally unrelated area of personal freedom: religious beliefs.

A version of that theoretical fear is playing out in a real-world case at Belmont Abbey College, just outside of Charlotte. Belmont Abbey is a Catholic institution, and not just in name. It ranks high among Catholic colleges that adhere to church doctrine, according to the Cardinal Newman Society, an apostolate dedicated to the strengthening of Catholic identity in higher education.

Here's the dilemma facing Belmont Abbey President Dr. Bill Thierfelder. The church opposes the use of artificial contraception. Thus the college's health insurance plan doesn't cover it because, as Thierfelder explains, to do so would clearly contradict church teaching, and he is in the teaching business. And it doesn't take a theology degree to see the hypocrisy of preaching against artificial contraception Sunday and funding it Monday.

Yet that reasoning escapes eight faculty members (six of them men) who complained to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. They cited the 1964 Civil Rights Act to charge the college with discrimination against women because the health plan doesn't cover prescription contraceptives. (Belmont Abbey falls under EEOC jurisdiction because it accepts federal funds.)

The weakness of the professors' charge was recognized by the Charlotte EEOC office, which in March found no basis for a discrimination claim. That common-sense ruling was effectively overturned in July, when the complaint was appealed and EEOC District Director Reuben Daniels Jr. wrote that "By denying prescription contraceptive drugs, (Belmont Abbey) is discriminating based on gender because only females take oral contraceptives. By denying coverage, men are not affected, only women."

Although the EEOC wants to mediate the dispute, for the college president there is little room for compromise. Thierfelder told the Catholic publication Our Sunday Visitor that he would close Belmont Abbey rather than violate church doctrine by funding artificial contraception.

One of the complainants is Janette Blandford, an associate professor of philosophy. She described herself to InsideHigherEd.com as a practicing Catholic who disagrees with the church's birth control doctrine. Judging by her remarks, Blandford may be using federal law to press her theological disagreement with the church. What's troubling is that the feds have taken the bait by taking her side in an arena in which the government has no business being involved.

That's not just my opinion. North Carolina is among many states that mandate contraception coverage if an employer's health insurance plan includes prescription drugs. Importantly, however, the law provides a clear exemption for religious organizations.

It seems to me that Belmont Abbey -- founded and owned by Benedictine monks -- qualifies. Not so, says Blandford, who says the institution is not religious because, among other things, it hires non-Catholics. However, no doctrine mandates that only Catholics can teach at church-sponsored institutions. If Belmont Abbey adopted the "Catholic only" hiring policy Blandford believes is required of a truly religious institution, the college clearly would be discriminating.

The professor, her colleagues and the EEOC's Daniels have misinterpreted the college's refusal to cover prescription contraceptives. That policy isn't aimed at women. Belmont Abbey also refuses to pay for vasectomies. Thus the college, in accordance with church teaching, opposes funding artificial contraception regardless of the gender-specific method.

This is the kind of situation that concerns many opponents of sweeping health-care reform. If the1964 Civil Rights Act can be used to force a Catholic college owned by monks to pay for artificial contraception, imagine the havoc that could be brought upon religious freedom in the name of health care.

Latest Comment View all comments