Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Free to Choose vs. Cost-Free Access
Townhall.com ^ | July 1, 2014 | Debra J. Saunders

Posted on 07/01/2014 2:18:35 PM PDT by Kaslin

How did women get birth control before President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act? Before Obamacare, a woman could go to a doctor and get birth control. She often had to pay or make a copayment for contraception. But in the 2014 political lexicon, that means she had no access.

On Monday, the Supreme Court issued its 5-4 Hobby Lobby decision, which recognized family-owned corporations' religious right to not offer contraception mandated under the Affordable Care Act in their employee health insurance plans. In her dissenting opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg charged that the ruling would "deny legions of women who do not hold their employers' religious beliefs access to contraceptive coverage that the ACA would otherwise secure."

The Obama administration broadly prescribed what constituted health insurance coverage in 2012 when the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced that contraception constituted essential preventive care. Hence, under Obamacare, birth control is exempt from copayments and mandatory in most employer-sponsored health plans.

What if employers have deeply held religious objections against contraceptive methods that they consider to be abortion-inducing? Surely, the Obama administration expected resistance.

It came from Hobby Lobby CEO David Green, who, as a devout Christian, had been providing health care to his 13,000 full-time workers for years. The company plan included contraception -- but not four methods that Green and his family believe "risk killing an embryo." In a court brief, Hobby Lobby objected to being forced to be "complicit in abortion."

If the Obama administration were tolerant, then the White House could have worked to accommodate dissent by allowing employers with demonstrated religious beliefs to opt out of Obamacare.

Indeed, the Affordable Care Act already exempts grandfathered employer-sponsored health plans -- which means about a third of workers have health coverage that does not include birth control. Obamacare also exempts small employers from the contraception mandate. Surely, if the Obama administration can exempt millions of workers for reasons of political expediency, then it can find a way to exempt the rare corporation with strong moral objections.

Mark Rienzi -- senior counsel of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represented Hobby Lobby in court -- hailed the ruling as "a great decision for freedom and diversity." In a free country, he argued, the government knows that "the answer is not to crush people for having different beliefs."

Justice Samuel Alito Jr. wrote for the majority: "There are other ways in which Congress or HHS could equally ensure that every woman has cost-free access to the particular contraceptives at issue here." Here's a radical idea: If Washington wants to make birth control free, let Washington pay for it. Here's another radical idea: To paraphrase the U.S. Constitution, let Washington pass no regulations prohibiting the free exercise of religion.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: 0bamacare; contraception; courts; hobbylobby; mandate; supremecourt

1 posted on 07/01/2014 2:18:35 PM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The liberals lost and it’s music to my ears to hear them whine.


2 posted on 07/01/2014 2:23:23 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (1 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. Psalm 50 v 10)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

>> How did women get birth control before President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act?

How did Obamacare give the liberals a new sense of entitlement over the 1st Amendment and Liberty?


3 posted on 07/01/2014 2:24:10 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This has been the Dem argument for pretty much everything since Woodrow Wilson. You aren’t really free to choose if you can’t afford something. Ergo, the government has to provide it for free. I remember listening to John Kenneth Galbraith make this argument in th 70s over and over again until I was about ready to throw up listening to him. The government has to provide all manner of things to allow people to “choose” them. Define X, Y or Z — birth control, water utilities in Detroit, food stamps — as a fundamental right and then force the taxpayer to pay for it for everyone.


4 posted on 07/01/2014 2:42:12 PM PDT by Opinionated Blowhard ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

I’m not sure the liberals actually lost. They have an issue for the low information voters, and they have a President who is inclined to ignore the law. I have no doubt that he will find a way to make Hobby Lobby pay.


5 posted on 07/01/2014 2:49:28 PM PDT by Daveinyork
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson