Cedar Park Assembly of God Case Takes New Turn in Fight Over Abortion Coverage
For over six years, the Cedar Park Assembly of God in Kirkland has been embroiled in a legal battle against Washington state regarding a law that mandates employer-sponsored health insurance to cover access to abortion. Recently, the U.S. legal landscape shifted once again when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals unexpectedly rescinded its March ruling, which had previously sided with the state.
In a significant move, the appeals panel ordered a rehearing en banc after 18 Republican-led states rallied in support of the church. This decision indicates that the court may now be reconsidering the potential implications of its prior ruling.
The complexities of this case center around the 2018 Reproductive Parity Act, which requires insurance plans covering maternity care to also include contraceptive and abortion coverage. Cedar Park Assembly of God argues that this law infringes on its religious beliefs, citing a 1995 state law that exempts religious organizations from providing specific services that conflict with their beliefs.
In the court’s recent order, no detailed rationale was provided for rescinding the earlier decision. The judges, appointed by Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Joe Biden, emphasized that they would schedule new oral arguments and issue a revised opinion “in due course.”
John Bursch, senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, contended that “the State of Washington can’t force Cedar Park to violate its faith.” This sentiment echoes a broader biblical principle: respect for individual spiritual convictions, as seen in Romans 14:5, which states, "One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind."
While the state maintains that employees may access abortion coverage through their employer’s insurance, the church argues that the law violates its rights. Washington’s insurance commissioner has approved plans that do not cover abortion, provided that such coverage is available through other means.
As this legal saga unfolds, the broader implications call for reflection. The situation presents an opportunity to consider how differing beliefs can coexist in a pluralistic society.
As we wait for the next court decision, it’s essential to remember the call for compassion and understanding, as espoused by Christ in Matthew 7:12: “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you."
This case serves as a reminder of the importance of dialogue and mutual respect amid differing viewpoints. Let us reflect on how we can embody love and understanding in our interactions with others, fostering a spirit of unity despite our differences.
Explore and dig up answers yourself with our BGodInspired Bible Tools! Be careful – each interaction is like a new treasure hunt… you can get lost for hours 🙂
