Our divided Supreme Court allowed everyone to win in the dilemma of Little Sisters of the Poor and the government's birth control mandate. It is a lesson in what could be if we tried to get along.

Our culture is burdened in all facets of life by a false dilemma that says one person's gain is, by necessity, another's loss. We see it in politics, law, business and personal interactions. An immigrant's gain is some poor citizen's loss. Republicans cannot win unless Democrats lose, and vice versa.

This impoverished mindset is so infectious we see politicians openly emphasize a refusal to compromise, which means they've abandoned a fundamental mechanism of any enlightened society's functional political dynamic.

The perspective is seldom based in rationality. Our society is so rich, complex and able to grow that we often see competing ideas and interests flourish side by side. An immigrant, for example, can take an American's job. But an immigrant can also create new jobs for Americans. A new supermarket can threaten the competition, but it more often improves the competition. Victory does not always cause defeat.

So it should be no surprise that our country can support a health-care mandate for contraception coverage and simultaneously defend religious objections to the mandate. Who loses if religion or the government wins? Probably few, if any.

On that basis, the Supreme Court on Monday remanded Zubik v. Burwell back to the circuit courts and vacated its rulings against Little Sisters of the Poor. The case pitted the Affordable Care Act against Little Sisters, Priests for Life, multiple religious universities and other religion-based employers that did not want to provide employees with health insurance plans that pay for birth control and/or abortion.

"This is a game-changer. This unanimous decision is a huge win for the Little Sisters, religious liberty, and all Americans," said Mark Rienzi, senior counsel at The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. "The Court has accepted the government's concession that it could deliver these services without the Little Sisters. The Court has eliminated all of the wrong decisions from the lower courts and protected the Little Sisters from government fines."

Don't take his word for it. President Barack Obama, who previously wanted the mandate enforced, also seemed pleased with the outcome. And for the same reason. He said everyone would win.

"The practical effect right now is that women will still continue to be able to get contraception, if they are getting health insurance," Obama said in an interview following the court's decision. "And we are properly accommodating religious institutions who have objections to contraception."

The court's decision to free Little Sisters from fines was based in the government's explanation that contraception is readily available without the mandate. The government told the court, in part, "Employees will ordinarily obtain coverage through a family member's employer, through an individual insurance policy purchased on an Exchange or directly from an insurer, or through Medicaid or another government program."

Our free society is full of win-win options. Nearly all women can have access to free or low-cost contraception, and nearly all Americans have the option to exercise religious objections to paying for it. As is often the case, both sides can win.

REPRINTED FROM THE COLORADO SPRINGS GAZETTE