I don't really understand why people are making as big of a deal out of this as they are. I personally think the world would be better as a whole if more birth control were used, but the idea that birth control is necessary and things like lasik aren't seems pretty ridiculous.

It is based on complete misinformation too. The morning after pill and the little plastic clip contraceptive thing don't cause abortions, regardless of what anybody believes. Preventing pregnancy isn't abortion. Also, this isn't about religious freedom, it is about conservative sexual morality.

Birth control costs less than children. Lasik costs more than glasses.

Somebody didn't read the majority opinion.

To the contrary, its an argument against public health-care.

The Court correctly noted that the government could just subsidize this themselves, and that the government doing it was far less intrusive than forcing private citizens to violate their religious beliefs. If the government had no power in health-care the Court might have decided differently.

This was a common-sense ruling that adheres pretty strictly and narrowly to how the Court normally does its business.

No. He pays for 5 abortions a month.

Freedom of religion is an archaic right that makes our modern society less ideal. Removing freedom of religion (and instead protecting religious rights under more general rights) would allow us to curb unwanted and destabilizing religious "freedoms". It would also allow us to label cults as such, giving the government the authority to raid, confiscate and arrest members/property of those who belong to cult such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientology.

I wouldn't like that very much.


I agree with this.

Actually, it's very possible for the morning after pill to cause a fertilized egg to not attach itself to the uterus (according to WebMD). That is definitely an abortion.

Also, it IS about religious freedom since Hobby Lobby has no qualms providing hormonal IUDs, standard birth control, etc. Who's uninformed now?

A fairly good explanation of the situation

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/06/hobby-lobby-isnt-waging-a-war-on-women/373717/

Its not like women can't buy birth control any more, or just choose not to be involved with the company



I heard about this, that actually makes the whole thing a bit more suspicious for them... I'm sure liberals will extol them with claims of hypocrisy.

I'm pretty sure it's just about saving money. Silly religious arguments aside, I don't really think it should be the governments job to decide which elective treatments are offered by private insurance.



The argument is dead as long as our political system works the way it does. Insurance companies spent over $150m on lobbying last year, you think our congress is going to give that up to appease some peasants?