Excellent analysis. Last year, a member of the order argued that the opt-out form is a burden because it is "a permission slip where we authorize the use of our religious health plan to offer services that violate our beliefs and waive our protections under federal civil rights laws. That’s why they need our signature."

She then went on to compare it to pop machines being offered in schools, which are "bad for people": they don't become acceptable, she noted, just because the company pays for them. (The comparison rankled--comparing the needs of adult fertile women to pop-loving highschoolers. . .) 

I'm not a lawyer, but when she referred to it as "our religious health plan," is she right in any sense? It seems to me that this is not "their" plan but the insurance company plan that they contract with. And she ignores the fact that their employees are not necessarily Catholic.