Wait, I don’t think I have the title quite right.
I know name calling and ridiculing those who disagree with me isn’t the most effective way of conveying my own position. I usually believe that a certain amount of civility should accompany debate. Unless of course, a position is so groundless and void of reason and logic that not to name call and be uncivil would legitimize the sheer idiocy spewing from the mouths of dolts.
Criticism of the Hobby Lobby decision falls into this category. To advocate that the government can force one private party to violate their religious beliefs for the benefit of another private party is so contrary to religious liberty that it barely warrants discussion; except for the sad fact that so many people have bought into this tripe.
Let’s see, would I rather have free birth control and no religious freedom, or would I rather pay for my birth control and keep my religious freedom? Hmmm, that’s a tough one. Of course, I’d rather have religious freedom because I can still purchase birth control all by myself.
The fact that religious freedom won the day in Hobby Lobby with only 5 votes is absolutely frightening.
In addition to not knowing the specifics of the Holly Lobby case, critics don’t seem to have a clue regarding basic law. First, it’s not uncommon for laws to have exemptions for religion. For example, in some situations, religious institutions can discriminate in hiring. There are also conscience clauses for individuals in other various situations.
Second, except in very limited situations, there is no legal duty to act on behalf of a third party. If you see someone else’s kid drowning, and you’re not the lifeguard, you can sit on the beach drinking your margarita, and watch the kid drown (legally, not morally).
Your right to do something does not create a duty on the part of a private third party to buy it for you. I can’t afford to buy an AR-15. Is my boss denying me access to guns by not buying me one?
Third, I’ve seen a number of memes mocking Hobby Lobby saying that their religion says they don’t have to pay taxes or pay back student loans, and so on. These comparisons are legally inaccurate, and the lack of understanding of religious liberty is just pathetic.
Taxes are between an individual and the government, not a private third party; different parties, different obligations. Student loans are a contractual agreement entered into voluntarily. The government is not mandating anything, you signed a freaking contract.
Seriously people, before criticizing something you might want to get some of your facts straight.
For specifics regarding the Holly Lobby case see:
+ For those who are not going to click on the link, here’s a brief refresher.
Hobby Lobby, a Christian-owned store, didn’t have a problem with paying for contraception for their employees under the ObamaCare mandate. They had a problem with post-conception birth control. They went to court to challenge the mandate because compliance would violate their religious beliefs and liberty.
This case had NOTHING to do with contraception. Currently, Hobby Lobby covers sixteen different types of contraceptives, including the Pill. They had a problem with post-conception birth control. But according to the hysterical biddies, paying for sixteen different types of contraception is tantamount to “denying access” to birth control.
See, you got your panties in a wad (British translation: knickers in a bunch) for nothing. If you’re all bent out of shape because you think women will be “denied” birth control; you’re upset over a complete fabrication.
Facts be damned! When the Hobby Lobby decision was announced last week, those who don’t know their head from their ass, went ballistic; including Hilary Clinton, among others. They made outrageous claims that women were going to be denied access to birth control. They compared this ruling to sharia law, the actions of ISIS, the imposition of apartheid, and Jim Crow laws. Just a tad bit of an exaggeration, don’t you think?
If I understand them correctly, not forcing a third-party to pay for your birth control is in the same category as female genital mutilation and honor killings? Their arguments are so vapid there’s very little substance to criticize. Their arguments expose them for the true extremists they are.
For being such liberated and independent women, it seems counter-intuitive to me to demand to be dependent on a third-party to supply my birth control. They whine like damsels in distress, calling on the government to protect them against the big, mean employer who won’t pay for their personal decision to use birth control.
Some of the signs held by protesters outside the Supreme Court read:
Mind Your Own Business
Contraception is My Business
My Birth Control, My Decision
The fact that these protesters were completely oblivious to the irony of their message would have been painful if it wasn’t so freakin’ funny.
I wholeheartedly agree with every single one of those slogans. Yes, it’s your own business. Yes, it’s your decision, which is why YOU should pay for it. If you want your employer to mind its own business, why are you asking your employer to get involved by demanding payment? By demanding payment, it’s almost like you’re inviting your boss into your birth control business.
Some have pointed out that if one employer can opt out of a provision based on religious beliefs, what’s to stop others from opting out of other provisions. EXACTLY!!! This is a perfect illustration of how inherently flawed ObamaCare is at its core. The government should not be mandating health insurance coverage — period.
There are other cases on their way to the Supreme Court regarding the ObamaCare birth control mandate. One involves a convent of Catholic nuns who minister to the sick and poor.
Under the mandate, these nuns will be forced to pay for birth control coverage for their employees, who are nuns.
Only in Obama’s America.
by: Ana Henry – 05 July 2014