DN Editorial: Sisters act

SUPREME Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor made a reasonable decision last week when she temporarily blocked implementation of the Affordable Care Act's contraception-coverage mandate in a case brought by a religious order of nuns that operates homes for the poor and elderly around the country, including Philadelphia.

It certainly doesn't hurt to wait a few days and hear the government's argument for immediate implementation. The eleventh-hour drama doesn't change the fact that the contraceptive-coverage requirement is good policy, and the mechanism for groups like the Little Sisters of the Poor to avoid violating their religious tenets is reasonable.

The cost of unplanned pregnancy on society as a whole, and the health-care system in particular, is enormous. Two years ago, the Guttmacher Institute, which advocates for reproductive health and rights, estimated that the cost to taxpayers was more than $11 billion annually. Making birth control as readily available as possible is unquestionably a good investment for the health-care system. That's why the Institute of Medicine recommended that it be included in the preventive care coverage of the Affordable Care Act in the first place.

Religious employers like churches are exempt from the contraceptive-coverage requirement. For-profit companies whose owners object on religious grounds to contraception are not exempt. Nonprofits that are affiliated with religious institutions -like the Little Sisters - fall into a third category that allows an avenue for avoiding the requirement while still giving lay employees access to birth control.

Last month, U.S. District Judge William J. Martinez agreed with the nuns that they were a religious organization, even though they are not a church. All they had to do to avoid substantial penalties was fill out and submit a form that certifies [its religious status and objection to contraceptive coverage.] The nuns object to this form.

Whether the Little Sisters or any similar institution likes it or not, their employees are free to use birth control and doubtless do. Right now, they do so by using one form of the compensation they are provided as employees - their salaries. Yet, no one would argue that this fact makes the nuns complicit in the use of contraceptives. That said, finding the balance between protecting the beliefs of organizations like the Little Sisters and those of its employees is tricky, and the nuns' contention that they faced an impossible choice between committing a sin or paying hefty fines should not be taken lightly. For that reason, Justice Sotomayor's grant of a reprieve makes sense. But it doesn't mean that the nuns will or should ultimately prevail. One of the consequences of living in a pluralistic democracy rather than a theocracy is that faith groups must accept that they will be touched in some way by beliefs, practices and ways of living of which they disapprove. That's not some new invention of the Affordable Care Act.