The Sisters of Life is a Catholic religious organization built to help individuals find their worth through God. Not only this, but the Sisters of Life are known for helping with poverty, chastity, obedience, and maintaining the sacredness of human life by providing free aid to pregnant women in need. New York, recently, passed a law, A11150, that forces pregnancy centers to go through investigations but, more importantly, to give their disclosure agreements to the government that reveals personal information about the ins and outs of their program. Specifically, the government is requiring information about agencies’ training, supporters, and even about individual women who seek their help. New York argues that this statute is very necessary due to the low costs of all care provided by pregnancy centers and how these minimal costs can lead to a deceptive nature of practice and care given to patients. The Sisters of Life went to the Commissioner of Health to ensure that the government is not permitted to use this law to interrupt their practices or force them to reveal their internal religious documents, but this act allows the Commissioner to request any information they deem necessary to know. The basis of The Sister of Life is built on relationships full of trust and confidence between the agents and their patients. Many come to the Sisters when they are in need of saving. The Sisters of Life agency filed a federal lawsuit against Mary T. Basset, the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health, demanding the protection of their private religious documents from being able to be viewed by the public.
I believe that forcing The Sisters of Life to reveal private information of individuals is an infringement of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because this organization has not violated any previous limitations and guidelines provided to them by the state of New York. Women can speak freely under God without the fear of governmental interference. With the state of New York becoming involved, Jefferson’s and Madison’s past beliefs of the separation of the church and state are becoming violated. The state is taking power from churches by forcing them to release private information even when they have not violated any laws. This case is similar to the 2015 case Reed v. Town of Gilbert because both of these cases focus on targeting particular views and preventing the First Amendment from protecting specific groups. The Establishment Clause is infringed upon because the government is prohibiting a religious group to practice what they deem necessary without government interference. This issue is very important to our world today because there is a strong debate over abortion among citizens and the government is trying to remain neutral. The government trying to interfere with a religious group that helps women with abortions is not only an infringement on religious freedoms, but also intervening on private versus public institutions, the ability to have doctor-patient, priest-practicer confidentiality, and women's rights.
Do you believe that this government interference to gain private knowledge is necessary to keep cheap-costing institutions in check? How can the government ensure that cheap-costing programs are giving out sufficient care without interfering with peoples’ personal rights?
I agree with you that the government is infringing upon the organizations First Amendment rights. However, I would not argue neutrality but rather just the separation of church and state is needed, and the issue of a slippery slope. The government does not need detailed records because the money is funded through the church and by the church. I would argue a slippery slope would occur because of what happens with confessions between a civilian and a priest. Would the priest be required to keep detailed records of their confessionals? I think the government wanting documentations before the pregnancy of the patients is where the line needs to be drawn. Once the child is born I think then the government can have some agency but until then the help and aid provided by the organization is well within their rights. As well, I think this places a substantial burden upon the organization because patients will be more reluctant to seek help if they know the government is taking their private information they are confessing to their personal religious organization.
ReplyDeleteIn this particular situation, the government is certainly infringing upon the Sister's right to practice their religious beliefs in a zone of privacy as stated under the First and Third Amendments. In this case, the Sisters are not utilizing public funds or taxpaying dollars, but rather they are self-supported through the church. Additionally, the government's heavy interference in terms of wanting detailed records absolutely infringes on their rights, but also there is clearly no distinction between church and state.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Chloe that in this situation the government is infringing upon the sister's right to practice religion in a private matter. However, I do not believe that by requesting access to the churches documents that the government is infringing upon the churches ability to establish and practice their religious beliefs. Tallulah is arguing that the government is targeting this one organization and not others, however the A11150 law that was passed is requiring all pregnancy centers to go through investigations. No where is it stated that only this organization is the only one getting investigated or being requested to share their documents with the government. This is an extremely upsetting law that is being passed as I do agree this might be a slippery slope in terms of the churches ability to provide confidentiality with their parishioners, however it is not infringing upon any constitutional rights regarding the establishment of church.
ReplyDelete