>>>Right - if the Bishops are the ones telling these institutions they can't provide contraception then ultimately it's the women who get screwed (pardon the pun).
>
>Wrong, you invented that because it is more convenient. In the real world the religious employers still must include contraception in their health insurance cover.
>
>>>Correct - of course the Bishops are all against rubbers and sterilization (they want more members/money).
>
>The first is a widely understood religious principle. People who don't like it are not compelled to take jobs for religious institutions any more than a Jehovah's Witness must take a job at a blood bank or a Muslim take a job at Uncle Bob's Brewery unless they can maintain separation between their own beliefs and their employer's. This happens all the time in all sorts of jobs- ask Asian immigrants.
>
>I know it has become popular to label coffee cups "contents may be hot" or label tin cans "do not consume" in case some idiot tries, so perhaps the next law should be that bishops should have to wear signs on hats saying "this is not a condom" in case a female employee concludes he must have a very large member and decides she wants some of that. Society can go down that route or society can expect at least some common sense of itself and get on with it.

Religious porn, OMG. LOL