NYTimes and Religious Liberty

Federal Judge Brian Cogan of Brooklyn, NY recently ruled that four Archdiocese of New York schools and hospitals should be exempt from HHS-mandated contraceptive coverage.  The decision sparked immediate outrage from the NYTimes editorial board, who decried this newfound menace to religious freedom in the workplace.  “The threat to religious liberty,” they suggested, “comes from employers trying to impose their religious views on workers.”

Yet, upon further examination, how are the Archdiocese’s actions any way exceptional?  When do organizations not “impose” values upon their employees?  Every business fosters a particular culture; from Starbucks baristas to church ministers, particular people are drawn by organizations to reinforce specific, mission-driven values.  As a religious institution, then, the Archdiocese is well within its means to withhold contraceptive coverage on religious grounds.

Furthermore, as the schools and hospitals are private organizations, they are voluntary in essence, operated by freely joined individuals who set values and goals as they please.  Tocqueville argues that this self-determination is a prerequisite for healthy democracies, for societies that honor the natural rights of all.  By ensuring the voluntary nature their relationship, the free expression of both employee and employer are thus rendered mutually sacred, neither constrained by undue burdens of state or one another.

The Supreme Court will invariably voice a lofty, definitive answer to this controversy and others like it.  Justice Sotomayor entered the arena this week, and further interventions are inevitable.  However, any decision imposing undue limits upon employer conscience rights will further undermine the entrepreneurial spirit so cherished by Americans for centuries.