Federal judge rules mandated coverage for HIV PrEP drug violates religious freedom
· Sep 9, 2022 · NottheBee.com

A federal judge in Texas has ruled that the government cannot require businesses to cover HIV PrEP, a medication used primarily in the gay community to slow the spread of HIV while also encouraging promiscuous behavior.

Why it matters: HIV PrEP — which is more than 90% effective in preventing the transmission of HIV — is recommended for adults who are at high risk of getting HIV, which includes men who have sex with other men.

  • The plaintiffs in the case — six individuals and two Christian-owned businesses, Braidwood Management and Kelley Orthodontics — had argued that they should not be mandated to offer coverage of HIV PrEP because they did not want to encourage "homosexual behavior."

Context: Under the Affordable Care Act, most health insurance plans must cover certain recommended preventive services, including HIV testing for people aged 15-65 and HIV PrEP for adults who are at high risk of getting HIV...

Details: O'Connor ruled that ACA's PrEP mandate violated Braidwood's rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected."

  • The law is often used in legal cases challenging abortion and contraception access, as well as health care for transgender people.
  • O'Connor said that PrEP specifically violates Braidword's religious rights.

So it looks like religious freedom is still at least somewhat alive in this country. Though we'll see how long this ruling lasts.

And I'm sorry, but if you're someone who thinks this is a matter of human rights and that businesses should be required to provide this medication, you're part of the problem. Businesses have every right to simply not encourage something which goes against their religious beliefs. That's common sense.

I know you'll call it fascist, you'll call it Christian nationalism, or whatever the next cool nickname for conservatives is, but this is America, and we still have freedom here.

And sometimes that freedom includes the freedom to not.

In this case, not encouraging sinful behavior.

Another win for religious liberty!


P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇

Keep up with our latest videos — Subscribe to our YouTube channel!

Ready to join the conversation? Subscribe today.

Access comments and our fully-featured social platform.

Sign up Now
App screenshot

You must signup or login to view or post comments on this article.