Hobby Lobby

For those of you who are uninformed, the Supreme Court has ruled in a 5-4 decision that Lenny is the sexiest man alive. It hath been decided.

No, actually, it hath been decided, via the “Hobby Lobby decision“, that privately owned for-profit corporations are exempt from a law that they religiously object to, if there is a less restrictive means of furthering the law’s interests.  Basically, employers no longer have to cover the contraceptive mandate in the Affordable Health Care Act (Obamacare) if they have a religious objection.

Hobby Lobby (and the Supreme Court) argue that corporations should have the same religious rights as people. Except, here’s a fun fact for you, they aren’t people, they’re corporations! Are inanimate objects living beings? No, Ok well that’s settled. Thanks for reading!

A little dramatic, but funny nonetheless.

Supporters of Hobby Lobby argue that this decision is about personal freedom and religious tolerance. Here is a hypothetical for you. If the Greene family, the owners of Hobby Lobby, were Muslim, would this decision have been passed? The answer is no. “It is one thing for a religious adherent to make spiritual claims, but quite another for them to rest a religious claim on a demonstrably false fact about the physical world” (WP). What this decision does is take a personal, religious belief (that God says abortion is wrong) and forcibly administer it onto the public. This ruling isn’t actually about religious liberty; it’s about Christian conservative’s forcing their perceived sense of superior morality onto everyone else.

Well fine, then I believe in the “Leonard religion” and my religion says that all men named Leonard are entitled to free hamburgers for life and we are exempt from paying taxes. Seriously though, this is a dangerous precedent to establish. What if someone has a religious adherence against vaccinations? Against prescription medication?

Many people will argue that this is about economics; that the cost of paying for contraceptives should fall on the individual, not an employer. That’s a fair argument, but that isn’t what this is really about. Just look at the landscape of our country right now. It is increasingly difficult for women to obtain birth control because of laws already established and judicial rulings like this one. It is very hard for poor to middle-class woman to get any form of birth control, especially in the South. Honestly, it’s more economically sensible to provide these women birth control, because the cost of raising a child far outweighs the cost of contraceptives. When a parent has a child that she/he is unable to care for, it becomes the responsibility of the government and who pays for that? We do. The entire country saves money by ensuring that parents only have children when ready. So don’t let this decision fool you into thinking this has anything to do with economics. This decision has to do with the affirmation of privilege for the advocates of conservative sexual morality. Many people don’t want anyone or anything to pay for contraceptives because they do not believe in female reproductive health as that is a “Godly issue”. So let me perfectly clear. Every ruling, law, ordinance, and argument that comes out a Christian white man’s mouth having to do with women anatomy, is not actually about women’s health, it is about control. Control over women, control over freedom of choice. It is selfishness disguised as religious piety. Nothing more.

Leave a Reply

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 )

Connecting to %s