Supreme Court's ruling on health care set to affect thousands

JA'PHETH TOULSON Special to the AmNews | 6/28/2012, 3:12 p.m.

"How can you tell people of your country that you're against their health?" said owner of Retirement Aspirations Greg Hankins.

Hankins recalled injuring his back during a two-year stay in India. His X-rays cost 200 Indian rupees, which is equivalent to almost $4.

"That's only because I wanted copies of my X-rays," Hankins said. "And they call India a third-world country. What does that say about us?"

But some who oppose the bill aren't concerned about affordability. Cheryl Rehman, an co-captain of the Stand Up for Religious Freedom rally, will be required to pay for contraception and abortion-inducing drugs.

"This is the first time in American history that government has tried to define what makes a religious institution religious enough to be allowed that exemption," Rehman said. "It's been understood, since the time of the Catholic Church, that birth control has been taught to be wrong, and so the Catholic Church wants to be able to not have to be forced to pay for the contraception and abortion-inducing drugs. When the government says, 'I don't care how you practice your faith, you are forced to do this,' well, that's clearly government intrusion."

For this reason, Rehman said the plan is unconstitutional. She added that while she had no problem with contraception drugs being available, the Catholic Church shouldn't be told to pay for birth control.

Meanwhile, Lembo said people have to respect the process of the plan coming down to the Supreme Court, although it has been implemented for two years now.

"I haven't spoken to the president about this, but being a constitutional scholar, he understands that this is part of the process," Lembo said. "Is it unfortunate? Yes. Is it unfair? I don't think so."