Yesterday the SCOTUS made a landmark decision in the so-called "Hobby Lobby" case. There are a lot of opinions flying around and it's getting tough to keep the facts straight, so I'm going to lay out for my readers how I understand the ruling. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Corporations in which the ownership and the people who run the corporation are not differentiated have been exempted from adhering to provisions of the Affordable Care Act that conflict with their religious beliefs, citing freedom of religion. In the case of the owners of Hobby Lobby et al., specifically, have been exempted from providing coverage for employees for abortifacients (not contraceptives, which are different).
The Green Family objects to having to provide insurance coverage for their female employees to use drugs or devices that prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to a uterine wall (abortifacients) because of their belief that life begins at conception. To keep a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall is tantamount to abortion, in their view. The Court agreed in a 5-4 decision.
IUDs, RU486, and elle, if I understand correctly, are not contraceptives. They do not prevent conception. These are what the Green family doesn't want to cover in employee insurance plans.
There's a lot of shouting going on about the Green family being exempted from providing coverage for contraceptives, but that's not what the ruling says. Am I wrong?
No comments:
Post a Comment