Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 4 Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend (4 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   22 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

Private Parts

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 2   Well Said 2   Valuable 2  
View Ratings | Rate It Headlined to H4 6/24/14

Become a Fan
  (47 fans)
- Advertisement -

Cross-posted from Mike Malloy

David and Barbara Green
(image by Politicus USA)

The Supreme Court has one week remaining to decide several major cases, and -- as usual -- the mainstream media is largely ignoring the long-lasting implications these decisions will have. At stake are freedom of speech, religion, abortion rights, cellphone privacy, broadcast television rights, and more.

One case in particular has drawn our attention, Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, and it could have the effect of essentially eliminating the essential portion of the Affordable Care Act that mandates large employers provide health insurance to their employees. The lawsuit claims that the Affordable Care Act's requirement that businesses provide birth control health insurance coverage to their employees is unconstitutional under the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects their religious beliefs, which, Hobby Lobby claims, are violated by being forced to provide health insurance that includes birth control.

Makes you wonder if Hobby Lobby, which is owned by well-know Rapture Rightie David Green and his wife Barbara, also denies coverage for men seeking vasectomies. Or women who need hysterectomies for medical reasons, like uterine cancer. Hobby Lobby earned the nickname "Jesus Christ: Superstore" for a reason.

But reproductive decisions are not a joke, they are a medical matter. They do not belong in a courtroom or congregation house. Yet here we are, yet again, so many years after Roe v. Wade. Now we're arguing if pregnancy prevention is the same thing as pregnancy termination (of course not) and whether or not it's an employer's business why a woman might take birth control pills, as many do for hormone therapy or regulation as opposed to actual contraception.

The ruling, which could come any day now, could set a dangerous precedent that would allow any private employer, such as Walmart, Chic-Fil-A or Papa John's pizza, to name a few that come to mind, to legally avoid insuring its employees on the basis of religion. If this happens, then it would be a major victory for those, like the brothers Koch, who want to keep their feet planted firmly on the backs of the American workers, while waving their Bibles heavenward as justification of the unfair labor practices. Since the Supremes already decided that corporations are people in Citizens United, it doesn't seem a stretch for them to now declare that those "people" have religious affiliations that must also be protected.

Human Rights Campaign has this:

- Advertisement -

"The Supreme Court's decision could dramatically broaden employers' ability to object to laws on religious freedom grounds and potentially restrict access to contraception for thousands of women employed by companies that share Hobby Lobby's religious objections. Such a decision could also have drastic implications for LGBT individuals. If corporations are people with a right to refuse to comply with health-care mandates based on religious beliefs, they may not only be permitted to refuse birth control coverage but types of coverage seen as "promoting homosexuality" or acknowledging the health needs of transgender individuals as well."

Indeed ... what would prevent a corporation from arguing that it does not have to employ homosexuals because to do so would violate its religious beliefs. This could undermine existing anti-discrimination policies in place and also, as Karen Ocomb, writing for The Frontier states:

"The opinion could immediately impact the language and how the White House frames the announced Executive Order prohibiting discrimination against LGBT employees of companies with federal contracts, for instance. It could also effect the religious exemption language in a revised Employee Non-Discrimination ACT (ENDA)."
The fact that any corporation is fighting to prevent its employees from obtaining health insurance is, in and of itself, despicable. That the same corporation is specifically targeting women, and by extension LGBT individuals is also discriminatory and medieval. With so many individual states (finally) creeping out of the dark recesses of historic minority repression and acknowledging/legalizing marriage equality, a decision in favor of Hobby Lobby could have a chilling effect on these recent progressive policies.

How can our privacy rights be protected if employers claim the right to peek in our undies -- in the name of religious freedom -- and decide if they can sanction what we're doing with our private parts?

- Advertisement -

Where does the religious madness end?

Kathy never expected a career in radio as a talk show producer. Born and raised in Atlanta, Georgia, Kathy was completing her nursing degree when in 2001 - in an emergency - she was asked to fill in as the producer of Mike's program. Within a few (more...)

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
Google Content Matches:
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

March of the Mysogynists

Saving Earth

The Grinch Who Stole Health Reform

Hunger in America

Mixed Nuts

Tea For Two...


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
9 people are discussing this page, with 22 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

You wrote: "The fact that any corporation is fight... by Bill Johnson on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2014 at 7:16:45 PM
BillCut the crap.Medical benefits are a part of th... by Mark Sashine on Tuesday, Jun 24, 2014 at 8:27:46 PM
You are so correct! ... by Hosea McAdoo on Wednesday, Jul 30, 2014 at 2:00:59 PM
Bill, Aren't you the guy who wanted Trevor Martin ... by Daniel Geery on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 5:37:10 PM
I often buy remote control parts from what used to... by Daniel Geery on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:47:00 AM
They are on my boycott list and I hope many others... by Hosea McAdoo on Wednesday, Jul 30, 2014 at 2:03:50 PM
The claim made by Barbara and David Green -- which... by E. J. N. on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 3:32:32 PM
Well then the only next move is for corporations t... by Bill Johnson on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:30:36 PM
excellent idea. But only in that case the salary ... by Mark Sashine on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:48:00 PM
I disagree with you on employers not knowing healt... by Bill Johnson on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 5:01:43 PM
Wow!Here is the issue of safety? Cool, OK, so be i... by Mark Sashine on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:52:03 PM
I think there's a big difference between health in... by E. J. N. on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 5:22:25 PM
I agree with you that it is in a company's best in... by Bill Johnson on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 6:54:43 PM
So I suppose you pay 100% of any health insurance ... by Sandra Parson on Thursday, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:43:30 PM
In answer to your last question --- as long as it ... by Shirley Braverman on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:48:31 PM
The breaking of the Unions over the last 3 +decade... by Michael Dewey on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:48:56 PM
You wrote: Now we're arguing...whether or not it's... by Joe Reeser on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2014 at 5:07:04 PM
Look, it is human decency to provide every living ... by Sandra Parson on Thursday, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:52:07 PM
I understand you believe people have a right to he... by Joe Reeser on Thursday, Jun 26, 2014 at 7:16:42 PM
The International Bill of Human Rights, also calle... by E. J. N. on Thursday, Jun 26, 2014 at 8:54:51 PM
A lot of nice sounding platitudes which many of th... by Joe Reeser on Thursday, Jun 26, 2014 at 9:26:16 PM
Well the whole thing stinks and is wrong on so man... by Sandra Parson on Thursday, Jun 26, 2014 at 5:36:57 PM