Hobby Lobby: Supreme Court Finally Rules In Birth Control Debate

Mon, June 30, 2014 12:07pm EST by 15 Comments

It is a sad day for women’s rights. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that employers can decide whether or not to cover their employees birth control and contraception.

On Monday, June 30, the United States Supreme Court voted 5-4 that employers are not responsible for covering their employees birth control through company health insurance if it goes against the company owner’s religious beliefs. Should religious freedom be allowed to interfere with women’s rights?

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Against Employer-Covered Birth Control

Wow. This is very surprising.

The United States Supreme court has ruled that an employer can decide whether or not their employees have access to birth control through their health insurance.

On Monday, June 30, the court ruled 5-4 that if birth control and contraception goes against a closely-held company’s religious beliefs, they can decide not to cover it through the health insurance they offer their employees.

Not surprisingly, Republican and Democrat politicians had very different views on this upsetting outcome.

“Today’s Supreme Court decision makes clear that the Obama administration cannot trample on the religious freedoms that Americans hold dear,” Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told MSNBC.

However, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid expressed his concern about women’s rights to appropriate health care and contraception due to this ruling.

“Today’s decision jeopardizes women’s access to essential health care. Employers have no business intruding in the private health care decisions women make with their doctors. This ruling ignores the scientific evidence showing that the health security of millions of American women is strengthened by access to these crucial services.”

Shortly after the ruling, the White House commented on the ruling, stating:

“As millions of women know first hand, contraception is often vital to their health and well being. That’s why the Affordable Care Act ensures that women have coverage for contraceptive care, along with other preventive care like vaccines and cancer screenings. We will work with congress to make sure that any women affected by this decision will still have the same coverage of vital health services as everyone else. President Obama believes strongly in the freedom of religion, that’s why we’ve taken steps to ensure that no religious institution will have to pay or provide for contraceptive coverage. We believe that the owners of for-profit companies should not be able to assert their personal religious views to deny their employees federally mandated benefits. We will of course respect this supreme court ruling, and we will continue to look for ways to improve Americans health by helping women have more, not less, say over the personal health decisions that affect them and their families.”

The controversial decision has sparked outrage throughout the nation, with many women’s rights organizations claiming that employers can now impose their religious beliefs upon them.

Hobby Lobby Under Fire For Fight Against Contraception

The fight against birth control made headlines in 2013 when the privately owned Hobby Lobby franchise objected offering it’s employees birth control through their insurance plan.

Hobby Lobby’s stance against birth control cited “religious freedom” as their defense, and unfortunately low-level courts were not able to come to a decision.

The case was then brought to the Supreme Court, which is where it was decided that Hobby Lobby — and other privately-owned companies — would win their fight against being legally mandated to offer cover their employees birth control.

Tell us your thoughts, HollywoodLifers — Do you agree with the ruling, or is it going too far? What’s your stance on women’s rights? Let us know your thoughts below.

– Lauren Cox

More Related News:

  1. Justin Ross Harris Speaks At Dead Son’s Funeral, Says He’s ‘Sorry’
  2. Alysia Montano Completes 800 Meter Race While 8 Months Pregnant
  3. Matt Lauer Grills GM CEO Mary Barra On Motherhood — Too Far?

Leave a Reply

To comment, please fill in the fields below, enter your comment and select the Comment button.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

View Comment

dnd

Posted at 3:48 PM on July 1, 2014  

I can’t believe how misleading these articles are that people are writing. This SC decision did NOT prevent birth control pills to anyone!! It simply prevented the morning after pill and IUD’s. What’s the big deal?? In my opinion NONE of this should be covered by insurance!! If you want to play around in the bedroom, and you don’t want to get pregnant, you and your “mate” should be willing to purchase a condom, iud, morning after, or whatever you deem best for your case. Why should those people who DON’T play in the bedroom have to pay for this extra clause in their insurance policty? Hell, I play golf for my extra curricular activity, why don’t we raise hell with government and make them supplement the cost of my clubs and balls?? The truth is, It should never have gotten to the point where our government is making these kinds of decisions!! And where on earth did this idea that this whole argument is all about “women’s health” come from?? Personally, I think Americans have lost their minds and have finally started to stoop to the level that government knows best how we should run our lives.

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

mike terry

Posted at 11:27 PM on June 30, 2014  

why is it a sad day? insurance has not covered birth control and most employer provided insurance did NOT have birth control coverage…so nothing has really changed except that an unconstitutional NEW law has been successfully challenged…

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

MATTHEW CHARLES

Posted at 10:13 PM on June 30, 2014  

16 OF 20 FDA CONTRACEPTIVES WILL BE COVERED BY HOBBY LOBBY. WHATS’ THE PROBLEM? THIS IS THE SAME 16 THAT THEY HAVE BEEN COVERING FOR YEARS. WHEN I WAS A KID (I’M 46) I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR MY OWN CONTRACEPTIVE.

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

Sam

Posted at 8:34 PM on June 30, 2014  

So let me get this straight. A woman should be able to go out and have irresponsible sex, and then it should be her employers responsibility to pay-off the repercussions. And this is an inherent freedom that everyone is endowed with. Right.

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

Ice

Posted at 6:33 PM on June 30, 2014  

Hobby Lobby is not a person you moron! It is not entitled to any religious freedom!

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

quarred

Posted at 10:09 PM on June 30, 2014  

You Moron, Hobby Lobby is OWNED by a person, who chooses NOT to fund the crap, GET OVER IT.

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

Sir Ricardo M (@RickMena1)

Posted at 3:49 PM on June 30, 2014  

In the same manner, Muhammed Ali was not sent to fight in the Vietnam War because he claimed the government could not trample on his religious freedoms, freedoms this country was founded on. Likewise Obamacare cannot trample on Hobby Lobby’s religious freedoms as well.

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

Sir Ricardo M (@RickMena1)

Posted at 3:46 PM on June 30, 2014  

This is NOT true, this is NOT what the court ruling stated. Hobby Lobby is not obligated to pay for the morning after pill, that’s all. Get the story straight.

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

carey

Posted at 2:55 PM on June 30, 2014  

So Hobby Lobby should not be allowed to PROFIT from their investments in the Manufacturing of contraceptives. Oh- their religion says it’s okay if they are making money but not okay to hand it out? These “religious” organizations are ridiculous.

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

Libegal

Posted at 1:18 PM on June 30, 2014  

So republicans want government out of health care but corporations enmeshed in it? This decision reminds me of the ad the republicans kept running about Uncle Sam popping up at your gynecologist visit–they should run that again but insert your boss in this time.

What happened to the separation of church and state? Did 5 justices forget about that part?!

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

Emily

Posted at 12:21 PM on June 30, 2014  

Your poll question is leading and bias. The fact is that employers should have the right to opt out of paying for something that goes against their conscience. It is a civil liberty that all Americans have. Once you start to encroach on civil liberties, it is a slippery slope towards a tyrannical state. Honestly, stop with the bias reporting of this issue and do some research of the laws and civil liberties of the US.

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

DD

Posted at 12:27 PM on June 30, 2014  

Very well said Emily and I agree.

This is a win for people who are sick and tired of paying for others bad behavior.

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

ladymagic

Posted at 1:14 PM on June 30, 2014  

so DD if a company doesn’t want to pay for your blood transfusion or therapy for bi-polar or depression, it fine.
This opens up a flood gates of what company can deny due to religious beliefs. While people can choose not to be employeed there what happens if we have a handful of major companies stop paying for these things?
its a slippery slope, beside if we can stop woman from having birth control (which is used for more than just birth control), because its “un-holy”; can we stop men from using Viagra (cuz If God wanted you to stay up, you wouldn’t need it)

 
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

Sir Ricardo M (@RickMena1)

Posted at 3:51 PM on June 30, 2014  

@ladymagic, Obamacare does not require payments for Viagra..

 Reply
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

ladymagic

Posted at 10:04 PM on June 30, 2014  

@sir Ricarrdo M, I understand that, my point is I don’t see anybody going after men sexual discomfort. I see states, law makers and courts going after females birth control, for religion beliefs but not going after men.

HL will allow some forms of birth control which is good, but not IUD or Plan B. the pills don’t work for all females and some need the IUD. Plan B may be given to ladies who have been raped to stop a woman from getting pregnant.

all im saying is that this ruling may go beyond birth control into other areas of health or laws which companies can deny its employees due to beliefs.

 
Share this comment at Share with Twitter

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,303 other followers