After spending nearly a year in the Assembly Appropriations Committee, Senate Bill 729 was unexpectedly released last week by Committee Chair Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks, setting the stage for final legislative approval and igniting concerns among religious and conservative groups across California. This bill, which redefines infertility and mandates insurance coverage for a range of fertility treatments—including those for same-sex couples and single individuals—has been a focal point of controversy for Christians who argue that it undermines the sanctity of life, religious freedom, and the traditional family structure.
The Redefinition of Infertility
SB 729 seeks to broaden the definition of infertility beyond its traditional medical scope. Historically, infertility has been defined as the inability to conceive after one year of unprotected intercourse due to a medical condition. However, under SB 729, infertility would be redefined to include healthy individuals who are unable to conceive due to their lack of a sexual partner or because their sexual partner is of the same sex. This redefinition is intended to ensure that LGBTQ+ identified individuals and single people have access to fertility treatments like in vitro fertilization (IVF) and surrogacy.
The bill’s author, Senator Caroline Menjivar (D-Van Nuys), argues that this expansion is a necessary step toward healthcare equity, insisting it’s an issue of “reproductive justice.” At a press conference for SB 729 last year, Menjivar talked about the struggle she and her “wife” had over whether to spend money on a house or on expensive IVF treatments to start a family. “That’s a decision no one should have to make, ” she said. However, the California Family Council views this redefinition as a dangerous departure from biological reality, an assault on the sanctity of human life, with dangerous implications for religious liberty.
(Watch the supporter’s press conference below)
The Ethical and Religious Concerns
The California Family Council, grounded in biblical values, believes that every human life is sacred from the moment of conception. SB 729, by mandating coverage for IVF, raises significant ethical concerns. IVF often involves the creation of multiple embryos, not all of which are implanted. Instead, these embryos are often discarded, frozen indefinitely, or used in experimental procedures. Treating every embryo with the utmost respect is important because human life begins at conception, and as bearers of God’s image, each embryo deserves to be safeguarded and honored with dignity. (See full CFC IVF statement)
California Family Council’s Outreach Director, Sophia Lorey, expressed the organization’s deep concerns about the bill’s implications: “SB 729 paves the way for the destruction of human life at its earliest stages and is a direct threat to the sanctity of life, something we are called to protect as a society that values human dignity,” Lorey explained. “This bill also undermines the nuclear family of father, mother, and child, forcing society to foot the bill for a fabricated concept called ‘fertility equality.’ The reality is, healthy singles and same-sex couples can’t reproduce—not because of infertility, but because of biology.”
Furthermore, SB 729’s mandates could force religious healthcare providers and insurers to cover procedures that conflict with their deeply held beliefs about the sanctity of life and the natural order of human reproduction. Such mandates erode religious freedoms and compel individuals and organizations to act against their conscience, which is a violation of their First Amendment rights.
Despite SB 729 including a provision that it “shall not apply to a religious employer,” the bill still poses significant threats to religious liberty. The narrow definition of “religious employer” excludes many faith-based charities that operate under religious principles but do not qualify for the exemption. This limited scope means that these organizations could be forced to provide coverage for procedures like IVF or surrogacy, which conflict with their deeply held religious beliefs. Furthermore, even exempt religious employers might face indirect pressures to conform to the bill’s mandates, fostering internal conflicts and exposing them to legal challenges that could gradually erode their ability to operate according to their faith.
Additionally, the broader cultural shift promoted by SB 729 could affect religious business owners and individuals not directly covered by the exemption. The bill sets a legal precedent that may lead to more restrictive laws in the future, incrementally reducing the scope of religious liberty and compelling religious individuals and businesses to comply with practices they find morally objectionable. These indirect pressures and potential future legal challenges make SB 729 a threat to religious freedom despite the apparent protections for religious employers.
The Financial Impact on Californians
Beyond the ethical and religious concerns, the financial implications of SB 729 have caused the California Chamber of Commerce and Newsom’s Department of Finance to register their opposition. The cost of fertility treatments, particularly IVF, is extraordinarily high. In California, a single IVF cycle can cost between $12,000 and $15,000, not including medications or additional procedures like genetic testing or embryo freezing. When all associated costs are factored in, the total can easily reach $20,000 to $30,000 per cycle.
The mandatory coverage of these expensive treatments is likely to drive up insurance premiums for all Californians. This increase in premiums will disproportionately affect low-income families, who may already struggle to afford healthcare.
Surrogacy and Its Broader Implications
For single males and males in same-sex relationships, SB 729 extends insurance coverage to include surrogacy-related medical costs, such as the IVF procedures needed to create an embryo and the IVF care for the surrogate during pregnancy. The practice of surrogacy, where a woman is paid to carry a baby she will not raise and has no rights over, is an unethical commodification of women’s bodies.
This issue has gained attention due to high-profile celebrities using IVF and hiring surrogates, raising concerns that vulnerable women might be exploited under economic or social pressure, similar to the risks seen in black-market organ sales. By promoting state-mandated coverage for surrogacy, SB 729 indirectly endorses these practices, raising concerns about the long-term societal impact of normalizing such arrangements.
To get a feel for what this looks like, see the advertisement below for the West Coast “Men Having Babies Conference,” which has been taking place in San Francisco for the last ten years. (www.menhavingbabies.org) Or check out the California Surrogacy Center, which promotes itself as a “trusted provider of egg donation and surrogacy,”… “helping individuals and couples find alternative methods of having children.”
The Erosion of the Traditional Family Structure
One of the most significant concerns about SB 729 is the way it challenges the traditional family structure. The bill’s redefinition of infertility and its support for alternative methods of conception, such as IVF and surrogacy, reflects a broader societal shift away from the Judeo-Christian understanding of marriage and family as the union of one man and one woman. That shift undermines the family as the fundamental unit of society and disregards the well-being of children, who are best raised in a household with both a mother and a father.
SB 729 is now ready to be voted on by all Assembly and Senate representatives by the end of the month. Please contact your state Assembly member and Senator today and ask them to vote “no” on SB 729.
