Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Jewish view on birth control currently varies between the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform branches of Judaism. Among Orthodox Judaism, the use of birth control has been considered only acceptable for use in certain circumstances, for example, when the couple already has two children or if they are both in school.
Eleven states and Washington, D.C., have laws that protect the right to contraception, according to data from the Guttmacher Institute, a research group that supports access to abortion ...
The new rule would let insurers and employers refuse to provide birth control if doing so went against their "religious beliefs" or "moral convictions". [ 75 ] [ 76 ] However, later in 2017 federal judge Wendy Beetlestone issued an injunction temporarily stopping the enforcement of this new rule.
Zubik v. Burwell, 578 U.S. 403 (2016), was a case before the United States Supreme Court on whether religious institutions other than churches should be exempt from the contraceptive mandate, a regulation adopted by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that requires non-church employers to cover certain contraceptives for their ...
The first over-the-counter birth control pill, Opill, will be available nationwide — including in Texas — by the end of this month. Still, Arvallo emphasized the implications of the latest ruling.
Following the 1968 publication of Humanae Vitae, an encyclical by Pope Paul VI that expressly forbade abortion and most methods of birth control [9] and that sowed controversy within the church over its restatement of the prohibition on birth control, [10] Catholic bishops in the United States started to stress anti-abortion views as a central facet of Catholic identity and preached against ...
An amendment, the Blunt Amendment, was proposed that "would have allowed employers to refuse to include contraception in health care coverage if it violated their religious or moral beliefs", [19] but it was voted down 51–48 by the U.S. Senate on March 1, 2012. [20]
In the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which usually serves as a model for state RFRAs, Congress states in its findings that a religiously neutral law can burden a religion just as much as one that was intended to interfere with religion; [11] therefore the act states that the "Government shall not substantially burden a person's ...