The Supreme Court's birth control ruling and why everyone should be concerned about it

Categories: Denver Blogs

person.person.meh.meme.jpg
Denver blog posts' rulings are important, too.

At our Show and Tell blog, Bree Davies explains why everyone should be concerned about the Supreme Court ruling on birth control.

Colorado Peak Politics thinks the left's attack on Bob Beauprez's "47 percent" comment could backfire based on regret that Mitt Romney wasn't elected.

Mile High Mamas' Amber Johnson suggests a day trip to Brainard Lake.


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
53 comments
Mike Renna
Mike Renna

Your not being denied acceess to plan b you just want it for free

Colleen Luckett
Colleen Luckett

On a related note: please, please, please don't ever breed.

luvlife229
luvlife229

Worst headline ever.  If people want birth control they can pay for it!!  Simple as that!!  People want everything for free and try and incorrectly claim it is their "right" to have it.  

Amanda McGregor
Amanda McGregor

"The rights of women everywhere are compromised!!!! Ahhhhh!!!! Hobby Lobby employees can't get free Plan B anymore!!! Next we won't have healthcare at all!" Just fucking stop already! If the Supreme Court had ruled against Hobby Lobby it would have been a war on religion. Everyone can find fault in a decision that they didn't have to make. Be happy that birth control is covered at all for their employees. Be happy that insurance companies can no longer consider having a uterus a preexisting condition. Some much healthcare reform has happened in the last decade, stop acting like women are being denied access to rights. If their employees still want an IUD that badly then they can pay for it. Birth control in general is dangerous and has so many potential side effects. They still cover vasectomies, which are much safer and easier to preform. The argument could be made that Hobby Lobby cares more about women, but fuck it. The reality is that 16 types of birth control being free is totally acceptable and won't crush our society.

Mike Renna
Mike Renna

Why is employers supposed to pay for morning after pills. Shit I'm gonna tell my boss he has to pay for boxes of condoms. Close your damn legs or take care of it yourselves

Dustin Friend
Dustin Friend

How do you knew that the Green's didn't make this move until lawyers informed them about this? Do you have some inside scoop top verify this? Also, yes, in their 401ks there are big pharmaceutical companies, but that is because, just like everyone else, they have a legal ERISA fiduciary requirement that there are specific mutual funds and index funds that (in some cases literally) invest in ALL companies, and there is no way for them to divest in that. Besides, how do you know what investments are in their 401ks? Do you work for hobby lobby? How do you know what investments the Greens have? All of these comments are pure speculation at best.

Cynthia Mendez
Cynthia Mendez

STFU about this already Westword. Effing liberal libel once again. Just because you re-write your bs story does not make it common cause.

Colleen Luckett
Colleen Luckett

Not only that, but we need to stop making this a woman's issue. Birth control very clearly affects the lives of all people.

Colleen Luckett
Colleen Luckett

The Greens didn't know nor care about these drugs until lawyers convinced them it was a way to save a few bucks. Unfortunately, they threw their employees - not just women, as this affects men and families, too - under the bus. The company still contributes to the very big pharma companies who produce these same drugs in their 401k plan. It's nice that you have a rosy picture of what happened, but unfortunately it's far from accurate. Furthermore, a belief should NOT trump science. That is a ridiculous claim I see being made that should scare the hell out of all if us.

Colleen Luckett
Colleen Luckett

And it's a privately owned business, but it's also a corporation, and I believe the current statistic is that 90% of companies have the same status and can now deny any kind of healthcare they wish based on their beliefs (blood transfusions, AIDs medications, etc.).

Colleen Luckett
Colleen Luckett

Conservative talking point. The company is not being "forced to pay" for anything. It came with comprehensive healthcare, and they didn't even know or care about it until lawyers came along to entice them with a stupid idea that merely throws women under the bus. A belief should not overrule scientific fact and restrict healthcare access to citizens. The outrage is that this opens the door to many lawsuits (that you as the tax payer will contribute toward defending) based on ANY religious belief a company has, despite not being based on any kind of fact. That's a scary, slippery slope. Companies are already writing letters that they want to be exempt from hiring gays and lesbians, which is straight up discrimination. If you don't understand what the outrage is about, you best do some research and figure it out, because some day, this WILL affect you.

Dena Sue
Dena Sue

Stacey, you are uninformed. The birth control methods in question are not abortifacients. Secondly, you say these women are free to work elsewhere. How many jobs must a woman go through before she isn't treated like a second-class citizen? Hand in your woman card and be gone.

Lindsay Christopher
Lindsay Christopher

Not true! You clearly are the one who doesn't know the details, Stacey Rogers. "On Tuesday, the Court said the ruling covered all 20 forms of contraception protected through the Affordable Care Act, despite the fact that Hobby Lobby’s lawsuit only covered 4 of the 20." http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/court-conservatives-add-insult-injury-contraception also, how about some real science?? Studies show that neither Plan B nor Ella interfere with fertilization, which is the Catholic definition of the beginning of life, if not the medical one. In other words, not the death of an embryo.

Louis Moore
Louis Moore

Hey dude, I get it, I'm an old man, I'm married, I don't need birth control. I don't want to pay for other people's birth control. Young healthy women who use contraception don't want to pay for my meds, either. The whole idea of insurance is to figure out what it costs to take care of a population of people and distribute the costs more or less equitably over that population. This again points to Single Payer, the larger the population pool the more efficiently costs can be distributed. When it comes to talking about women's rights and free contraception, I think most women would be fine if men got free vasectomies and took some responsibility for family planning.

Louis Moore
Louis Moore

This is pretty much why Single Payer is the right way to go. Having health insurance as an expense for a business leads to a lot of conflicts in rights.

Lindsay Karson
Lindsay Karson

Whether or not some people use abortion as a form of birth control is irrelevant. We are talking about the law, and (now) a company's right to override the law on the basis of religious beliefs, even if the science behind those beliefs is incorrect. Insurance companies are not required by law to cover abortions. But they are required to cover contraceptive care including IUDs and "the morning after" pill. If "some" don't think there is a difference between preventing an egg from being fertilized (IUDs and "morning after" pills) and actually removing a fetus from the uterus (abortion) then they are simply uneducated or unable to understand science. Test have shown emergency contraceptives prevent ovulation and don't work if the women has already ovulated.

Louis Moore
Louis Moore

The ACA set minimum requirements that an insurance plan, offered by employers, had to cover. A lot of preventive health measures were included in these and contraception is generally considered a preventive health measure. For actual religious institutions (read churches), an exception was carved out for contraception. The quasi-religious institutions (read universities) decided they too should be spared covering contraception so a mechanism was set up for these organizations to basically sign a document saying that they wanted to waive covering contraception. If this coverage was waived, then insurance companies had to cover individuals' contraception. This too was too much for quasi-religious institutions who feel that signing a waiver is an undue burden, so SCOTUS has granted them a exemption as of last Thursday. Note that the waiver allowed individuals to get contraception that these institutions DID NOT have to pay for, but it would allow employees to get coverage.

Briana Wilson Ballinger
Briana Wilson Ballinger

This in no way takes away a woman's right to whatever birth control they chose. I just prevents a privately owned business, who makes it perfectly clear that they run their company with Christian values, from being FORCED TO PAY for forms of birth control that do not prevent fertilization but prevent a fertilized egg from attaching. In their belief, this is a form of abortion. It is their belief that life begins at conception. They should not be forced to pay for something g that is against their beliefs. Any employee who wishes to use the forms that are not covered by this ruling, can still go out and get them. They just have to pay for it themselves. I, for the life of me, can't figure out what the outrage is all about.

Louis Moore
Louis Moore

The short answer is I don't know if it is illegal. Most people know what FoF does, so a devout anything-other-than-christian probably wouldn't apply there. If they did, were accepted and then denied for not signing a standard of faith, they could sue and let the courts sort it out. Since employers have a lot of latitude on requirements, I'd suspect that this requirement would be like a requirement that you be a RN for a nursing job, or signing an appropriate use policy for an IT job.

Aaron Lloyd Bauer
Aaron Lloyd Bauer

Thank Bill Clinton, Chuck schumer and solieto for this. A smart person knows why these three at the reason this came to be. The War on women, ran by the left since it started!

Matthew Nelson
Matthew Nelson

if corporations are people, why did the government bail out all the companies that crashed the economy and ruined millions of lives?

Stacey Rogers
Stacey Rogers

Abortion is used, by some, as a form of birth control...that is why it relates to a subject of birth control. To some, having a fetus removed from the uterus is no different that it being chemically (plan B) or via mechanical means (IUD) prevented from implanting...so, it is perceived by some to be abortion.

Lindsay Karson
Lindsay Karson

I can understand why narrow-minded, ignorant, or fearful men wouldn't have a problem with the recent Supreme Court rulings. But I don't understand why any self-respecting woman would be ok with her rights and the rights of women across the country being sacrificed to fight the Affordable Care Act? I just can't imagine hating the ACA so much that I'd be willing to play that dangerous game.

Lindsay Karson
Lindsay Karson

According to the law insurance companies have the right to cover all, some, or none of the costs associated with abortion. Subsequently companies can choose which insurance company to use, according to their beliefs. In contrast ALL insurance companies are REQUIRED to provided contraceptive care and counseling to women. Wether or not insurance companies should pay for abortion has nothing to do with this specific argument.

Dustin Friend
Dustin Friend

And it's okay to disagree with that, if your science or personal beliefs say otherwise. But he's not taking away someone's ability to use said contraception. With that being said, he's not forcing his belief on someone else, however, by making him pay for those specific types of contraception, that is absolutely imposing your current set of beliefs upon him. See the difference?

Dustin Friend
Dustin Friend

Besides, where your feelings begin shouldn't be where other's rights end. Here's another way to look at it, the Green's are paying for the employees health insurance, if they didn't pay for it,that money would go directly to their profits because health care is an expense. Because off his beliefs, and because he is pretty much directly paying for their health insurance, he doesn't want to pay for a couple of specific types of contraception. Women can still go get them, they will just have to pay out of pocket. So he's not oppressing them or saying they are second class citizens, he's saying that he views that life begins at conception and he doesn't want to pay for something that destroys that.

Dustin Friend
Dustin Friend

Everyone keeps saying that these employers at hobby lobby ate imposing their beliefs on its employees by debuting then the morning after and the week after pill. But how does pushing your beliefs on the owners of hobby lobby any different? He's not denying women contraception, he's just saying he doesn't want to pay for it because of his beliefs. You can still go get a dose of plan b at the drug store for $35. Just like we have to pay for condoms at $15 a box. Seriously, cut the crap about saying they are denying women rights. Who said you are entitled to free contraception anyway? Us as men certainly aren't.

Stacey Rogers
Stacey Rogers

OK, let me ask you guys this: abortion is legal. Should insurance pay for that? It is a form of birth control. (I am stating a fact, not a moral opinion)

Stacey Rogers
Stacey Rogers

Ahhh, I see what you are saying Louis. I guess I look at it like this: Focus on the Family is a company in Colorado Springs whose recruiters contact me ALL the time. Full time employees must sign a statement of faith...something I absolutely refuse to do. Is their requirement illegal? I guess that is a fight I am not interested in fighting.

Lindsay Karson
Lindsay Karson

Stacey I agree that privately held companies should have the right to do as they please - but only if those actions are within the law. This case has allowed "closely held corporations" -which make up 90% of all US business - to put their religious beliefs above the law. By placing the religious beliefs of Hobby Lobby's owners above the beliefs and medical needs of their employees, the court has open the door for corporations to further erode women's right to healthcare. This ruling can easily expand to allow "closely held corporations" to deny ALL forms of birth control to female employees, and in fact this process has already begun. Furthermore when you look at the facts and the science involved, you will see that the birth control HL doesn't want to pay for actually does not go against their beliefs! HL is using women as a pawn to fight the Affordable Care Act.

Sarah Nelson
Sarah Nelson

Right! If it was an Islam trying to force their religious beliefs on their employees, the same people for this ruling would be completely against it, I bet. :)

Louis Moore
Louis Moore

Stacey Rogers, SCOTUS clarified Hobby Lobby decision the next day to allow companies to exclude all 20 forms of BC in the ACA. The real problem is a court deciding a closely held corporation (which accounts for 90% of US companies and 52% of US employees) can be considered a person with enhanced rights to apply its beliefs to its employees. Given the wide range of sincerely held religious beliefs in the world this decision is an open invitation to chaos. Add into that, the beliefs of Hobby Lobby are not actually medically correct and you have chaos built on top of ignorance.

Seth Dolan
Seth Dolan

This is like saying because your employer won't buy you a car, It's taking away your right to travel. Also, this actually moves us away from a theocracy, because the same precident also prevents the government from mandating subsidy for abstinence only sex education as a form,of birth control. Basically, anytime the SCOTUS rules against the government doing anything, it's a good thing.

A Chris Heismann
A Chris Heismann

I don't understand how people can't see the hypocrisy of hating this particular supreme court decision, but liking the ACA itself, which did far worse to the individual choices of tens of thousands of families. The mandated changes of the ACA meant tens if thousands of families (if not more) lost access to health plans and/or doctors they were happy with. Where is the outrage for that loss of choice?

Matt Leising
Matt Leising

Lindsay you now live in country where your GOVERNMENT dictates what kind of health care you have and they are the biggest corporation of all!

Stacey Rogers
Stacey Rogers

Lindsay, I hear what you are saying, but the "corporation" is owned, privately, by individuals. If it is a publicly traded company, that would be different. Understand that I am prochoice (and agnostic) and think that a privately held company can do as they wish. Chickfila is closed on Sundays because the owner believes Sunday should be a day of rest, as it states in the Bible. Can an argument be made that he is creating a hardship on employees who need the money so would want to work that day? Our government interferes enough. Again, if people do not agree with the beliefs of the owners of the company, they are free to work elsewhere.

Wesley Honegger
Wesley Honegger

The ruling is fucked up on so many levels. For one it says that women have less rights regarding what they can chose to place in their bodies than their employers if they are in a state of financial hardship. On that level it fosters both gender and income inequaility. What's more scary is that it also moves us one step closer to being a Theocracy. Like medieval Europe or Iran. Fuck that.

Lindsay Karson
Lindsay Karson

The danger is in the precedent it sets. This ruling has placed the religious beliefs of a corporation over the individual beliefs of the employees of that corporation. Do you want to live in a country where corporations can dictate what kind of healthcare you receive?

Denise Budowsky OBrien
Denise Budowsky OBrien

The problem isn't that poor Hobby Lobby is restricting ALL birth control. They offer birth control. The first problem is that they are restricting which birth control people can use. The second, and bigger problem is that the birth-control they are restricting is completely legal. As a for profit organization they should have no right to prevent people access to legal products. Freedom of religion means you cannot force your religious views onto me.

Stacey Rogers
Stacey Rogers

Do you have a resource for the Supreme Court ruling that indicates otherwise? Do you have paperwork for healthcare provided by Hobby Lobby that indicates otherwise? If so, please post it here to wake me up. Or are you buying into the hype too, but have just the rhetoric you have seen on Facebook to "educate" you?

Augustus Sundry
Augustus Sundry

this writer is particularly ignorant and is really good at turning facts into an insane fantasy.

Stacey Rogers
Stacey Rogers

I honestly do NOT understand why everyone is so upset! Hobby Lobby's health insurance IS still paying for birth control, just not two specific forms of birth control. I think everyone has jumped on this bandwagon without knowing the details.

michael.roberts
michael.roberts moderator editortopcommenter

Interesting post, Amanda. We're going to feature it as an upcoming Comment of the Day. Thanks for weighing in.

michael.roberts
michael.roberts moderator editortopcommenter

Colleen, thanks for sharing your thoughts in comment and the others you posted. Much appreciated.

michael.roberts
michael.roberts moderator editortopcommenter

You address some interesting points, Louis. Thanks for weighing in.

michael.roberts
michael.roberts moderator editortopcommenter

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Briana.

michael.roberts
michael.roberts moderator editortopcommenter

Strong post, Matt. Thanks.

Now Trending

Denver Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...