Left’s anger over Hobby Lobby not about access to medicine
by Kelli
Again, Hobby Lobby’s health plan pays for birth-control pills, vaginal rings, contraceptive patches, and other items to help female employees plan their pregnancies. The Left’s arguments to the contrary are — surprise, surprise — lies.
What Hobby Lobby will not cover are four contraceptive methods that its owners fear are abortifacients:
Plan B (“The Morning After Pill”)
Ella (a similar type of “emergency contraception”)
Copper Intra-Uterine Device
IUD with progestin
Rather than simply prevent sperm and ova from uniting, Hobby Lobby’s owners believe that these medications either kill human beings when they are fertilized eggs or prevent them from implanting themselves in utero, whereupon they die.
Hobby Lobby does not prevent its female employees from using any of these four types of contraceptives. However, since they believe these innovations kill babies, they simply require that any employees who want to use them buy them with their own money….
At its core, the Left’s moaning over Hobby Lobby is less about access to medicine and more about access to free stuff.
~ Deroy Murdock, National Review Online, June 30
[Photo via act.mtv.com]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
There’s a lot of evidence that Plan B and Ella cause no post-fertilization effects (and they don’t even work very well at all, in general). Honestly it’s more likely the garden-variety pill has a post-fertilization mechanism (though there is evidence against that and it’s unlikely) than a one-shot regimen like Plan B or Ella. IUDs might have a post-fertilization effect, but it is very, very small, because the primary mechanism is killing sperm and ovum.
But anyway, it wasn’t about the specific medications not covered, it was about religious objections to allowing whatever the employer finds immoral to be covered. I’m just waiting for further lawsuits about covering other things that suddenly companies find immoral.
“At its core, the Left’s moaning over Hobby Lobby is less about access to medicine and more about access to free stuff.” – rubbish. It’s about being dictated to by someone else’s religious beliefs via a corporation. Contraception will still be free, just not what would be the best form for some women. That’s the point. It’s like saying “yeah yeah, we provide free lunch for everybody! We just don’t allow gluten-free products for those who need them.”
What it’s about is the bizarre Leftist schizophrenia over all things crotchy.
They say their crotch stuff is none of anybody else’s business, then they won’t shut up about it.
They say their crotch stuff is nobody else’s business, then they want other people to subsidize it.
If it’s none of our business, they should shut up and do it in private on their own dime.
Reality, you have no problem with coercion, you after all have no issues with the federal government dictating everyone’s health insurance plan, under penalty of law. Yet you object to someone simply being free from coercion, not forcing their workers to do anything. Just be honest!
Yes, Yes, Yes…. the protestors and lobbyists are lying. It is the same lie as always: “Republicans want to ban all contraception. There is a War on Women. Christians hate women.”
The abortion lobby (NARAL) desperately want to deflect attention away from abortion. We need to keep the message clear: “This was never about contraception. This is about abortion. Supreme Court says Obama cannot force any family business to pay for abortion drugs.”
To which church do the owners of Hobby Lobby belong?
In my eyes, religiously speaking, contraception use, even between husband and wife when one is not open to new life being formed, makes the other a sex object. That is LUST.
The dumbest reason to end up in hell is standing up for someone else’s sin when you did not get any pleasure from that sin and did not make any money (not the pimp or abortionist). There one is in hell, waiting for your ‘friend’. They have a conversion, repent and are on their way to Heaven. Meanwhile you are waiting and waiting.
What is your definition of lust? The pro-choice/pro-abort crowd know it is all about sex, anytime with anyone and no babies unless you want one with that other person. You?
Christina great point. My body my choice my purse strings it ought to read. Mind your own business …id be happy to but youre standing there with that huge sign so you have just made it my business. Stay out of my uterus. Lol how on earth could I not? We wont go back! Well youre not going forward. BTW if a mman really cares about having sex with you then ask him to buy you some birth control after he takes you to Burger King for dinner. Is he that broke that he cant buy a condom? Pro aborts…always keeping it classy.
My birth control my decision. Except if you cant afford it then it isnt your decision. What a bunch of spoiled brats.
Reality, companies are run by PEOPLE not our robot overlords (at least not yet). People don’t check their religious and moral convictions at the door just because they run a company. Hobby Lobby isn’t forcing their female employees to use or not use ANYTHING. They’re just saying they don’t want to pay for it. If they truly don’t want their boss in their bedroom they need to stop inviting him in by asking him to fund their bedroom activities.
Chris, Sydney: We should try to avoid responding to Reality’s posts.
When one of us responds, he gets the notion that we read them.
Here is an interesting article from the New York Times from a woman who felt bad after her abortion, but still thought it was the right thing to do:
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/02/i-couldnt-turn-my-abortion-into-art/?ref=opinion
Why is it that when a woman is faced with an unplanned pregnancy, the only options presented seem to be between having an abortion and bearing an unwanted child that is going to grow up to be a serial killer? What about adoption? The author says that she didn’t want her child. I’m sure that someone out there would have.
Isn’t a pack of birth control pills about $10.00? That’s 120.00 per year. And if the partner/spouse or whatever chips in half, which I think he should, then it will be $60.00. Feminists always say that men should share responsiblity in doing household chores, childrearing, etc., but I have never heard ONE of them say a man should be equally responsible in providing/using birth control.
The summation line is BS – what this is about is who gets to call the shots. That’s a cheap cop out line from somebody trying to score political points rather than understand the complexities of the issue. I don’t know the person who wrote the quote, but I think they are being dismissive towards an activist ruling that greatly changes the game in historically how we’ve viewed both Religion and companies in this country.
Schizophrenia is a biologically-based brain disorder and has nothing to do with a “split personality” but rather life-crippling delusions, paranoia, & suicidal ideation. It’s a serious psychiatric disorder, causing life-long challenges & disability, not an political statement or adjective for demeaning someone else.
“not forcing their workers to do anything” – that’s not correct.
There are republicans who want to ban all contraception.
“People don’t check their religious and moral convictions at the door just because they run a company.” – no one’s asking them to. What they shouldn’t do is impose those religious and moral convictions on others.
“Hobby Lobby isn’t forcing their female employees to use or not use ANYTHING.” – they are discriminating on the basis of religion.
“They’re just saying they don’t want to pay for it” – then they should stop providing healthcover at all.
“When one of us responds, he gets the notion that we read them” – ??????? LOL
I read yours Del. I especially liked the one that went “A fetus in the womb is as fully formed and organized as a newborn child, an adolescent, an adult, or an elderly person”
“They say their crotch stuff is nobody else’s business, then they want other people to subsidize it.”
…except for that little arrangement where employees, you know, exchange their time, labor, and money (yes, money to cover premiums and deductibles) for that health insurance. It wouldn’t surprise me if you thought wages were a handout, too.
“People don’t check their religious and moral convictions at the door just because they run a company.”
Then they should have opted out of providing insurance altogether and paid the fine if their moral convictions are so strong. The First Amendment doesn’t enshrine the right to sell glue guns and glitter. Oh, and glue guns and glitter sourced from China, a country which–we’re reminded of near-weekly on this blog–has a really excellent pro-life track record.
I really hope lots of companies suddenly find things not to cover. The money they spend on medical benefits is money that they don’t put in our paychecks. I’d much rather have the money in my pocket to spend as I choose than have my employer spending the same money for the contingency that I might want or need a particular thing. Besides, when I had health coverage through work (that ended thx to ACA), the insurance company continually reduced its coverage without notifying either me or my employer first. With things that were covered, it only covered the bureaucratic costs, and the plans that are available now are even worse.
Rachel –
Maternity coverage?
Well baby visits?
Just nix them?
[…] more at Left’s anger over Hobby Lobby not about access to medicine – Jill […]
coppe europe, campionati europei, coppa del mondo, tutto a portata di click, perfettamente visualizzabile dsu tutti i dispositivi mobili!
If these companies moral ideas are so offensive, Go Work Somewhere Else!
[…] With political leaders like Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) saying that the Hobby Lobby case, which prevailed by a 5-4 vote in the Supreme Court, was based on “vague moral objections”, it’s no wonder that much of the public is also ignorant of the issues at stake. Of the 20 federally approved contraceptives to be subsidized, only four were objected to because they crossed the line from preventative to potentially abortifacient methods. […]