Court: Religious rights trump birth control rule

First time high court has ruled businesses can hold religious views
Associated Press
Jul 1, 2014


A sharply divided Supreme Court ruled Monday that some companies with religious objections can avoid the contraceptives requirement in President Barack Obama's health care overhaul, the first time the high court has declared that businesses can hold religious views under federal law.

The justices' 5-4 decision, splitting conservatives and liberals, means the Obama administration must search for a different way of providing free contraception to women who are covered under the health insurance plans of objecting companies.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote in his majority opinion, over a dissent from the four liberal justices, that forcing companies to pay for methods of women's contraception to which they object violates the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act. He said the ruling is limited and there are ways for the administration to ensure women get the birth control they want.

But White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the decision creates health risks for women, and he said Congress should take action to make sure they get coverage.

"President Obama believes that women should make personal health care decisions for themselves rather than their bosses deciding for them," Earnest said. "Today's decision jeopardizes the health of the women who are employed by these companies."

Contraception is among a range of preventive services that must be provided at no extra charge under the health care law that Obama signed in 2010.

Two years ago, Chief Justice John Roberts cast the pivotal Supreme Court vote that saved the law in the midst of Obama's campaign for re-election. On Monday, Roberts sided with the four justices who would have struck down the law in its entirety, holding in favor of the religious rights of closely held corporations, like the Oklahoma-based Hobby Lobby chain of arts-and-craft stores that challenged the contraceptives provision.

Hobby Lobby is among roughly 50 businesses that have sued over covering contraceptives. Some, like the two involved in the Supreme Court case, are willing to cover most methods of contraception, as long as they can exclude drugs or devices that the government says may work after an egg has been fertilized.

But Monday's ruling would apply more broadly to other companies that do not want to pay for any of the 20 birth control methods and devices that have been approved by federal regulators.

Alito said the decision is limited to contraceptives. "Our decision should not be understood to hold that an insurance-coverage mandate must necessarily fall if it conflicts with an employer's religious beliefs," he said.

He suggested two ways the administration could deal with the birth control issue. The government could simply pay for pregnancy prevention, he said. Or it could provide the same kind of accommodation it has made available to religious-oriented, not-for-profit corporations.

Those groups can tell the government that providing the coverage violates their religious beliefs. At that point, creating a buffer, their insurer or a third-party administrator takes on the responsibility of paying for the birth control. The employer does not have to arrange the coverage or pay for it. Insurers get reimbursed by the government through credits against fees owed under other provisions of the health care law.

That accommodation is the subject of separate legal challenges, and the court said Monday that profit-seeking companies could not assert religious claims in such a situation.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was part of the majority, also wrote separately to say the administration can solve its problem easily. "The accommodation works by requiring insurance companies to cover, without cost sharing, contraception coverage for female employees who wish it," Kennedy said. He said that arrangement "does not impinge on the plaintiffs' religious beliefs."

Houses of worship and other religious institutions whose primary purpose is to spread the faith are exempt from the requirement to offer birth control.

In a dissent she read aloud from the bench, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg called the decision "potentially sweeping" because it minimizes the government's interest in uniform compliance with laws affecting the workplace. "And it discounts the disadvantages religion-based opt-outs impose on others, in particular, employees who do not share their employer's religious beliefs," Ginsburg said.

Leaders of women's rights groups blasted the decision by "five male justices," in the words of Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

The administration said a victory for the companies would prevent women who work for them from making decisions about birth control based on what's best for their health, not whether they can afford it. The government's supporters pointed to research showing that nearly one-third of women would change their contraceptive if cost were not an issue; a very effective means of birth control, the intrauterine device, can cost up to $1,000.

The contraceptives at issue before the court were the emergency contraceptives Plan B and ella, and two IUDs.

A survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation found 85 percent of large American employers already had offered such coverage before the health care law required it.

Most working women will probably see no impact from the ruling, corporate health benefits consultants expect. Publicly traded companies are unlikely to inject religion into their employee benefit plans, said Mark Holloway, director of compliance services at the Lockton Companies, an insurance broker that serves medium-sized and growing employers.

"Most employers view health insurance as a tool to attract and retain employees," said Holloway. "Women employees want access to contraceptive coverage, and most employers don't have a problem providing that coverage. It is typically not a high-cost item."

It is unclear how many women potentially are affected by the high court ruling. Hobby Lobby is by far the largest employer of any company that has gone to court to fight the birth control provision.

The company has more than 15,000 full-time employees in more than 600 crafts stores in 41 states. Hobby Lobby is owned by the family of David Green, evangelical Christians who also own Mardel, a Christian bookstore chain.

The other company is Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp. of East Earl, Pennsylvania, owned by a Mennonite family and employing 950 people in making wood cabinets.




The idea of businesses providing health and welfare benefits to employees is an unintended consequence of FDR's fascistic wartime wage and price controls.

Now not unexpectedly, the current fascists want it mandated with all the bells and whistles.

Health ins. should be like auto or home owners insurance - purchased individually.

Watch as employers eliminate their health and welfare benefit plans and dump their employees on the state and Obama☭are health care exchanges.

Licorice Schtick

Hobby Lobby hypocritically claims to be defending their religious freedom but the truth is they seized an opportunity to force their beliefs on others.

Will a business owned by a Jehovah's Witness be permitted to deny blood transfusions to employees?

If religious-based exemption from the law is a right of ownership, what if there are two owners who disagree? ten? Does a single stockholder of a publicly-held corporation who objects to birth control have his rights violated if the company provides it? Of course not.

This is a partisan decision by a corrupt, partisan court, based on preference, not principle. The outcome is absurd.


Re: "the truth is they seized an opportunity to force their beliefs on others."

So better for the central planning leftists to force their socio-economic philosophy on everyone?

Sour grapes: If the decision was 5-4 AGAINST HL, you'd be cheering and gloating.


Obama☭are - 0

Licorice Schtick

Your reply has nothing to do with what I wrote.

Obamacare ain't ☭ommunism. Obamacare makes corporation pay for healthcare. With communism, there are no corporations.

Your derision of Obamacare, or any sort of national health care, over and over and over again, depends on your "leftist" hyperbole, but there's plenty of centrist support, too. Opposition to national health care depends completely on Oligarchy by greedy selfish people, obstructionism, and corruption of the democratic election system with money.


Re:"Obamacare ain't ☭ommunism."

Some parts are fascistic some are communistic.

Enjoy whatever Marxist flavor you desire. It doesn't work.


Re: "national health care,"

The first modern national health and welfare programs were enacted under autocrat Otto von Bismarck.

Nice model for lefty looney programs?


Re: "Will a business owned by a Jehovah's Witness be permitted to deny blood transfusions to employees?"

No. At most they would not have to pay for insurance for blood transfusions for anyone who is covered by their company health insurance. They have no ability to control what healthcare any of their employees receive. They can only have a say in what they pay for insurance, if the courts find in their favor... if it would ever even become a case. I have no clue if a closely held company is owned by a devout JW that wants to restrict his company paid health insurance... do you? If and when such a case is brought we will see what happens, anything that anyone here would claim is what I would consider a guess.




Very misleading headline there SR. You make it seem as if all birth control is being eliminated. Just abortion inducing drugs is all this has too do with. Hobby Lobby still offers numerous forms of birth control to its employees. Those are not in jeopardy. The left has been trying to spin this so bad its almost comical. Once again King Obama has been beotch slapped by the SCOTUS!!


In lieu of talking about the war on women what about the war on men? Obama feels the ladies should have free drugs no deductibles so they can have a good sex life and maybe kill a few unborn babies if needed but I still have to pay a deductible to get my clopidogrel a drug that my cardiologists advises is essential to keep my heart healthy as I did have a myocardial infraction. Well maybe Obama feels a woman's sex life is more important than my life.


Re: "good sex life"

As in: Scr*w anyone and anything and don't worry about the consequences, 'someone' else will help pay for it regardless of the results.

U.S. - The politics of victimology

Licorice Schtick

Fancy expensive (formerly) patented drug clopidogrel ("Plavix") ain't much better than aspirin, if at all. Now that the patent's run out and cheap generics are available, the pill pushers are moving on to other quackery.


You are an absolute fool anthras! Do you honestly think that birth control is all about having a good sex life??????? Keep taking your clopidogrel and while you're at it, get your Viagra prescription filled eh?


meowmix, If birth control does not pertain to sex life would you please advise me what it does pertain to?

Also you are attempting to judge me and being presumptuous as actually I do not need Viagra at this time maybe some day but not now in lieu my mild myocardial infraction I am very active and healthy.


Re: "mild myocardial infraction,"

Having sexual intercourse is an option, having a functioning heart is not.

Agree with most if not all of your argument.

Licorice Schtick

Yes, solid point. But does it follow that national health care should pay only for what keeps you from dying, not what makes you healthier?

Regarding whether contraception for women is just to improve their sex life; No.

In some cultures more than others, women are pressured into sex whether they want it or not. Contraception gives control over whether it results in pregnancy.

The use of "the pill" for health benefits that neither provide contraception nor improve sex life have nothing do with this discussion.


Re: "In some cultures,"

Thought the subject was the U.S.? Off-topic.


The Pill isn't just for birth control! It can also protect against certain life-threatening cancers, plus help relieve some painful period symptoms. It provides PMS relief, endometriosis relief it, taking them can result in less painful menstral cycles.

Oh, but you're a man--surely you knew all of this already right? Plus, what kind of woman would rather take a pill than deal with the full of what womanhood offers us up every month??? Now, you go sit down, put your wittle feeties up before you have another "mild" INFARCTION!!! Geez, got the deadly disease and can't even spell it...ya big puss


WOW , Meow !!!


lololol jazzbo! (and hell, I'm not even on my period!!!) :})

Licorice Schtick

What happens then? Do you get even more sexist? Or just more sarcastic?


Re: "The Pill,"

Not to worry, when the leftist loonies finally get their single payer (FREE) health ins. - EVERYONE will get what they want, when they want it, right? :)

Licorice Schtick

The Medicare model, if imperfect, is pretty good. The model is to pay for what's essential and cost-effective. If you want more, you can pay yourself. Medicare delivers a lot of bang for the buck. What we really need is Medicare for Everyone, because we already know how to do it, but that would disrupt the parasitic health insurance industry, even more than Obamacare did.


Re: "The Medicare model, if imperfect, is pretty good."

An estimated $60-100 billion annually is lost in Medicare and Medicaid through waste, fraud and abuse.

"Pretty good model"? lol


Peanuts compared to the fraud, waste and abuse in legal and lobbying industries, military industrial complex, and public contracts in general. Not to mention the excessive profits by huge insurance companies for "paper work".


Re: "huge insurance companies for "paper work".

Little "paper work" with Medicare and Medicaid which leads to tens of billions in fraud and abuse - it's called:

Pay and chase.

The dumbed-down BIG govt. lover answer: Hire more bureaucrats. lol


Birth control pills are used for a variety of other medical conditions. I use it to help balance hormones and migraines. It keeps the hormones at a constant level which in turn keeps the migraines creeping in during a drop in hormones. There are many things that birth control can help with that has nothing to do with having sex.


They did not outlaw birth control. They just do not want to pay for plan B and medicinal abortions.


I realize that. I was answering a remark that birth control was only for having a good sex life.


"You are an absolute fool anthras! Do you honestly think that birth control is all about having a good sex life??????? "

It is in this and the general case. In this case, the only products they don't cover are abortifacients which are completely about avoiding consequences of a good sex life. In the more general case, all the alternative uses you mention are off-label applications and were covered before the ACA mandate.

Dr. Information

MSNBC and CNN were up in arms yesterday after the judgement came in. The one representative from Hobby Lobby took a disappointed liberal commentator to the woodshed.

Facts are HL pays its employees more than double the minimum wage.
Facts are HL covers 16 birth control contraceptives and only opposed 4 that in the owners eyes violated their religious rights.

This WAS a win for the people today no matter what side you are on. The government and Obama got their hands slapped today for going to far into the cookie jar.

Contango, great point about healthcare being purchased privately.
Companies have insurance policies to cover work related injuries and in fact would pay more per hour if they didn't have to provide insurance.


Re: "Companies"

Employer sponsored auto and homeowner's ins. plans have been attempted in the past - all failed.

Govt. mandated cradle to grave responsibility for employees is BS.

Yea, and the VA is a GREAT model for a U.S. single payer (FREE) health care system! lol


You are just dumb. It's called workman's compensation, not health insurance. They have to carry it in order to be in business if you employ more than a certain number of people.

What's more cost effective? Birth control or having to replace an employee on leave due to the FMLA, or possible missed work due to a difficult pregnancy, and on and on and on. SCOTUS is setting this country back. You idiots want to see it as a slap down of the President but he can not give birth or benefit in any way. This helps women in the workplace. Birth control has many benefits and has been used by most women at some point. It was only a win for the haters. Keep biting off your noses to spite your faces. Don't be shocked when you look in the mirror.


Re: What's (snip)"

Great lefty looney Obamabot talking points, pipsqueak!


Blamer-in-Chief - 0


What is funny is birth control and plan "B" are already given away for free at Planned parenthood and the health dept. If liberals cannot figure that out they seriously need help and by that i mean the mental kind.


Make no mistake about it; the looney liberals are aiming to enact FDR's Second Bill of Rights:

"Obama, FDR and the Second Bill of Rights":

Licorice Schtick


Roosevelt believed the American working class was still getting skewered, and the way to fix it is to make sure eight specific "rights" are within their reach:

Employment, with a living wage
Food, clothing and leisure
Farmers' rights to a fair income
Freedom from unfair competition and monopolies
Medical care
Social security

So, if you don't like the second Bill of Rights, why? Which of the eight would be OK to be out of reach for an American citizen? Or do you hold the delusion that they're all within reach for each and every American now? (Gotta admit we got one step closer with Obamacare.)


Rights aren't something others are forced to pay for. For those "rights" to be done require others to pay for your way.

Nothing in the Bill of Rights requires others to pay your way.


Re: "second Bill of Rights,"

Reminds me too much of Marx's Ten Planks.

You like those don't you?


"It's called workman's compensation, not health insurance."

Distinction without a difference.

Dr. Information

No different than Social Security. I feel bad for this younger generation because its not going to be there and this nation is either going to borrow more to pay it forward OR just tell everyone its not there, sorry.

The government in general (local and nationwide) is a prime example of why they should not be in charge of running anything. IT FAILS EVERY TIME!!!!


Always enjoyed how the fascistic imbeciles likened mandated health ins. to mandated auto ins.

1. Auto ins. is the purview of the states, NOT the feds.

2. 30% of drivers in large states like TX and CA drive WITHOUT ins.

3. No pre-existing would equate to drunks and bad drivers being able to purchase auto ins. at affordable rates.

Central planning is the road to serfdom and ruination.

Licorice Schtick

No, that would be "no big government." You know, anarchy. It ensures serfdom, ruination, environmental devastation, thug justice and general misery. You just think you'd wind up being one of the thugs, the only group with any security. But I doubt it.


Re: "anarchy"

Where was "anarchy" mentioned? Off-topic.


This decision was not about "religious freedoms" as it was about corporate bigotry. "The few controlling the masses." It won't end here either now that the conservative-laden SCOTUS has opened the door wider for control by a few. This newest obstruction to real democracy is a sham akin to a baseball owner demanding that his players attend a certain church, harbor certain beliefs, think the way he/she does and act as they do. It is another step backwards towards domination through the wallets and perceptions of a select few. It also another cheap and chicken chit method of attack by the so-called "religious right" who hide behind the scriptures as they, and only they, interpret them. At its core this decision was wrong, wrong, wrong.
We need term limits for members of the Supreme Court.


Re: "'The few controlling the masses.'"

Agreed! Long past time for the people to take their natural rights of individual freedom and personal responsibility back from the bureaucratic central planners in DC and elsewhere.

SCOTUS spoke - the separation of powers and the limitations on fascistic overreach still work.


Re: "We need term limits for members of the Supreme Court."

It's called: Death or retirement.

Sour grapes: If it was 5-4 against HL, you'd be cheering.

Maybe Pres. Obama should threaten to pack the Court like FDR did in order to get his fascistic programs enacted?




Re: "AMEN to PB&J"

And the socialists say: Let us prey.

thinkagain's picture



"This newest obstruction to real democracy is a sham akin to a baseball owner demanding that his players attend a certain church, harbor certain beliefs, think the way he/she does and act as they do."

No, it's more akin to the owner refusing to contribute money directly to the churches the players CHOOSE to attend, or fund campaigns to promote the players' beliefs.

Why are so many people too dense to comprehend that the right to do something does not equate with the right to have someone else pay for it? To read all the morons claiming that Hobby Lobby is telling their employees what they can and can't do, it's a wonder people aren't marching for a law that states turning 21 entitles them to all the free booze they want.

Truth or Dare

U.S. Presidents, be they Republican or Democrat and upon election have been "stacking the deck" of the SOTUS for how long now? I agree on term limits, all throughout government and at all levels. As far as personal responsibility for "personal" healthcare coverage, how about we welcome everyone into the REAL WORLD, starting with government employees at the Federal level, working our way down to the State level and then City/Twnshp./Village, whatever. Let them pay 100% of their own personal/private healthcare coverage!

What better way to produce even more millions to put into the pockets of Capitol Hill Warriors, otherwise known as lobbyists. Pretty sure some of the millions saved by such "religious" corporations due to this decision will end up in CEO's and lobbyist's pockets, as well the campaign chests of many a politician.

By the way, that "free" birth control/pre-natal care through health departments isn't free. I received my prenatal care for all 3 children through the Erie County Health Dept., as we didn't have coverage. I recall paying the Health Dept. according to a wage scale, as well paying every last red penny of the full cost to the hospital and the doc. for delivery and after our 3rd. child was born, voluntary sterilization to prevent any further pregnancies. Our youngest was 13 before it was all paid off, but WE paid it, no one did that for us.


"I recall paying the Health Dept. according to a wage scale.....Our youngest was 13 before it was all paid off, but WE paid it, no one did that for us."

Uhem.....if it was scaled based on your wages, then you did NOT pay it all - the taxpayers picked up a portion.

thinkagain's picture

The Pro-KILL fanatics are incapable of considering abortion unconscionable, as they do not have a conscience in the first place. They have no problem discriminating against those who believe abortion to be morally and ethically wrong. Typical liberal hypocrisy.

The liberals believe in only one thing, and that is: what’s in it for me? Give me, give me, give me...


The rightwing folks believe in only one thing, and that is: I should be able to tell other people what they can and and cannot do, especially if it relates to personal reproductive/sexuality issues.

So, in other words, the party that whines constantly about "government intrusion into our personal lives" believes that government should be able to intrude into people's bedrooms and dictate how they live their personal/private lives.

I am personally against abortion, but I am ProChoice, because I believe that I should not be able to make a personal decision for someone else. Because ProChoice people strive to control other people's lives, I find THEM morally and ethically wrong.

As an atheist, I believe that I have a more highly developed conscience than religious people. I do the right things and live a moral life because it's the right thing to do, not because I'm afraid of eternal punishment, and not because an imaginary god waves a carrot/promise of eternal life.

For a religious person, you are quite judgemental, aren't you?

thinkagain's picture

“For a religious person, you are quite judgemental, aren't you?”

Thank you, that’s the nicest thing an atheist ever said to me.

If you don’t mind, I’ll forward to God your excellent review of my obedience to the job that my Creator gave me.

You really need to pay attention during my class on the subject of judging. Or, in case you missed my last six posts on this subject…ONE MORE TIME, just for you.

It is not judging someone to exercise discernment about ungodly behavior or false teaching. You judge someone wrongly when you make an authoritative pronouncement about their individual eternal destiny.

“The mouth of the righteous speaketh wisdom, and his tongue talketh of judgment.” (Psa 37:30)

“With my lips have I declared all the judgments of thy mouth.” (Psa 119:13)

“Open thy mouth, judge righteously,...” (Prov 31:9)

Jesus commended Simon, “Thou hast rightly judged.” (Luke 7:43)

“Now, thou son of man, wilt thou judge the bloody city? yea, thou shalt show her all her abominations.” (Ezek 22:2)

“But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.” (1 Cor 2:15)

“Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?” (1 Cor 6:2)

“Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?” (1 Cor 6:3)

There are many other passages and verses in the Bible about judging. While God is our ultimate Judge, He has also commanded Christians TO judge.


You are not in church and this is not a pulpit Rev. Go away!


The corollary:

The left wing useful idiots believe in only one thing, and that is:

They should be able to force everyone pay to pay for whatever 'cash and prizes' the wealthy Political Ruling Class need in order to gain and retail power and control.

To h*ll with personal freedom and individual accountability!


thinkagain's picture

“I am personally against abortion, but I am ProChoice, because I believe that I should not be able to make a personal decision for someone else. Because ProChoice people strive to control other people's lives, I find THEM morally and ethically wrong.”

You are ProChoice, but you find ProChoice people morally and ethically wrong? Pick a side, any side, will ya?


"The rightwing folks believe in only one thing, and that is: I should be able to tell other people what they can and and cannot do, especially if it relates to personal reproductive/sexuality issues."

Because if I refuse to PAY for you to do something, that's the same as me forcibly preventing you from doing it, and the right to have/do something equals the right to make someone else pay for it, eh? Fine, let's apply your twisted reasoning across the board. I want a match grade left handed bolt action .308 rifle with a 4-20x40mm scope, and I want YOU to pay for it. No, you say? There you leftwingnuts go again, denying my Second Amendment rights and trying to tell me what I can and cannot do. I want to announce my philosophy to the entire city, and if Matt Westerhold doesn't give me the entire front page of the Register to do it, he's denying my First Amendment rights. And mind you, in my case, we're talking about full on, got their own amendments, EXPLICITLY ENUMERATED rights, not something the courts manufactured from penumbras and emanations they pulled out of their backsides.

"So, in other words, the party that whines constantly about "government intrusion into our personal lives" believes that government should be able to intrude into people's bedrooms and dictate how they live their personal/private lives."

No, this has nothing to do with that. The government didn't say squat about what people can do ON THEIR OWN DIME. However, your side wants the government to be able to intrude into peoples' places of business and dictate the terms of their personal contracts. The terms of your employment, including what compensation you receive, are between you and your employer. If you want your employer to specifically buy you birth control outside your normal paycheck (because, maybe. you lack the basic self-discipline forgo the one pack of smokes it a month it would take to cover it yourself?) then no one is interfering with your right to go out and find an employer who is willing to offer you those terms and telling the current one who isn't that he can "take this job and shove it."
"I am personally against abortion, but I am ProChoice, because I believe that I should not be able to make a personal decision for someone else."

Then you're a fool. There are only two internally consistent positions on abortion. Either A) it's the murder of a human being, or B) it's like removing a polyp from your colon. Choose one. If it's B, then there's no rational basis for even the mildest distaste about it. If it's A, then there's no rational basis for allowing it under any circumstances where the pregnancy has a chance to come to term. ANY other permutation is self-contradictory. Speaking of which....

"Because ProChoice people strive to control other people's lives, I find THEM morally and ethically wrong."

I'll give you the benefit of a doubt there and guess you meant to type "Because ProLife people..." because the way you're going, you need all the help you can get.

"As an atheist, I believe that I have a more highly developed conscience than religious people. I do the right things...."
That's a nice delusion you got there. Only problem is, your definition of right things is borrowed from the theistic historical context in which you live, and you couldn't otherwise form a basis for it. To a true atheist, the whole universe is of no more consequence than a game of The Sims, and if someone were to kill you, it would just be one seredipitous set of molecular interactions altering the relationships of another serendipitous set of molecular interactions, no different from a volcano erupting and burning some trees, with no logical reason to call it wrong. There is only one real atheist morality - do what thou will, PERIOD.

But hey, I get it; logic is hard.


...and the conservatives believe in only one thing, and that is: what’s in it for me? take , take , take..."

Do you think only liberals get abortions ?
Do you think only liberals are homosexual?


I have to say I agree with the ruling, because businesses have first amendment rights, also. They're owned by people, not robots.

If it were another scenario, like cease ALL methods of birth control, then that would be a different story.

It's not like policy holders can't drop insurance companies.

Dr. Information

Just a FYI. Hobby Lobby still covers birth control. Get over it, you lost this one and rightfully so.


We Dems are over it. The ruling by a conservative Supreme Court was disappointing, but not a surprise. These are, after all, the people who thought Citizens United was a good idea. The court is supposed to be non-partisan, but that's not the case these days...

America is becoming less conservative each year, as the old white base of the Republican Party dies off. The current old, white, conservative Supreme Court is less representative of America than it used to be. Young people aren't 'haters', which is why a sizeable portion of the Age 30 & Younger demographic lean left. It's only a matter of time before SOTUS becomes more like the rest of America.


So what your saying is it is only a matter of time before the SCOTUS becomes a gaggle of brainless morons who are easily swayed by a wanna be dictator enough to neglect their duty to keep his power in check?
The ENTIRE purpose of the supreme court is to be a check on the laws from encroaching on citizens rights.
(BTW the ONLY job of your god is to enforce the law, NOT to make it.)


The under thirty crowd in every generation historically leans left and tends to move to the center as the generation ages. For example today's baby boomers were far more left leaning in the 60's and 70's than they are as a group today.

Licorice Schtick

...unless they went to Hillsdale. Then they're entering the "real world" very much on the right.

Truth or Dare

Oh, now it's Pro-KILL FANATICS w/zero conscience? I don't usually go there, but where might you folks stand on any church hierarchy that has protected itself and many a collared priest and frocked nuns, all the while ignoring sexually abused/exploited children, as well men and women over the centuries, protecting themselves and the deviants from prosecution through the power of Church government? Do a little studying of the true history, through an INDEPENDENT lens. Pretty sure the numbers of skeletons to be found not only in closets but graves is higher then we care to imagine!

You can follow whatever organized, counterfeit "Christian" org. you so choose. What I say about the lobbyists, the CEO's, the corps. and politicians is true and you know it! Organized religion has certainly become one heck of a profitable yet tax-free, corporate-like-mega-business, which creates great wealth for far too many. There is a word in the dictionary that explains what that is.

thinkagain's picture

“skeletons…in closets”

Totally non-sequitur to this article. Reads like a desperate attempt at deflection.

I’m a Christian, not a Catholic. You’ll have to ask someone else…

I’m having a fantastic day in the stock market. Aren’t CEO’s and corporations wonderful?


Evangelical Christians have long argued that life begins at conception, and therefore that medical procedures that disrupt the first stages of pregnancy amount to murder. In the case of Hobby Lobby, this extends to a woman taking pills or anything which would prevent her ovaries from releasing an egg that could be fertilized after unprotected sex.

Hobby Lobby also objected to long-term birth control methods such as IUDs but that does not explain why Hobby Lobby doesn't object to covering the cost of its male employees' vasectomies.

The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday.---- OF COURSE THEY WON'T, EITHER.


If you do not want other opinions on what you do with your body quit asking others to pay for it. The insurance will cover a woman getting a hysterectomy as well as a vasectomy if directed by a doctor.
Hobby lobby objects to 3 types of birth control that are given away at planned parenthood and other government abortion clinics.


Government abortion clinics? SMDH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Government funded, Its the government. You know if you smacked yourself a little harder it might knock some sense into you.


Go away and take your stupid link with you!!!!!!!!!


Re: "Government abortion clinics?"

Medicaid doesn't pay for abortions or birth control, pipsqueak?

You're on Medicaid, you should know.


No Medicaid does not!


Re: "No Medicaid does not!"

So if the leftist loonies want corps to pay for it for FREE, shouldn't Medicaid (FREE) pay for it?


You are stating inaccurate facts. The owners of Hobby Lobby did not object to birth control pills that interfere with ovulation but with medications such as Plan B and devices that actually prevent or dislodge a fertilized ovum. In fact Hobby Lobby's medical plan pays for 16 out of 20 birth control plans as well as tubal ligation for women.

Licorice Schtick

It is now accepted as scientific fact that "Plan B" cannot prevent implantation of a fertilized egg, nor cause its dislodgement. In Europe, the drug is labeled that way. The FDA just hasn't gotten around to it. It is not an abortifacient.


I see your point , Meow...

The female method prevents the release of an egg.
The male method prevents the release of a sperm .

One gets covered , the other doesn't.

Hobby Lobby has some explaining to do.



You got your post in while I was still typing mine.

Im letting it ride.


SCOTUS has opened another Pandora's Box with this decision. Now that this Genie is out her box...we have even more dissention than ever.

Just wait for their ruling on, "Thou shall not have sex without having a pastor or priest watching". Or the one that reads, "Thou shall not marry between religious factions". Or "You must tithe to be admitted to a "Christian" faith. And then the one that says, "No sex shall be allowed between the races". Ethnic (and religious) "purity" (and its one-sided mindset) is only a few steps from your bedroom window and brought to you by our good friends and protectors at the SCOTUS.


Re: "'Thou shall not have sex without having a pastor or priest watching'".

The atheistic fascists will not allow this country to become a theocracy.

Go spread that fanciful manure elsewhere.


....and the word du jour is "fascist".


Re: "fascist"

Apropos, pipsqueak.


Re: "opened another Pandora's Box with this decision. Now that this Genie is out her box..."

Mixed metaphors are the best!


Nice try, ThinkAgain. As usual, you're using the Bible as an excuse for discrimination and bigotry. Cherry picking Bible verses? As is usually the case, one can easily find a verse that says the exact opposite. Try this one: Judge not, lest he be judged. Yours is not a very convincing argument, if you're hoping to coerce someone to your viewpoint.

The conservative Supreme Court's logic can be summed up thusly:
Corporations are people, but women are not.


Re: "Judge not, lest he be judged."

Out of context. Jesus told the audterous woman to sin no more.

Socialists say:

Go ahead and "sin" with whomever or whatever and as often as you want. Don't worry, someone else will pay for any and all consequences.

Women can still buy birth control on their own, why do corps have to pay for it?

Why don't YOU pay for it? Start a charity, Sport.

thinkagain's picture

Are you really going to make me hold yet another class on Matt 7:1-5? You must be a slow learner. Until you start paying attention in class, go sit in the corner and wear your Dunce cap.



Go back to school. You flunked.


HHS doesn't supply the numbers, but it's been estimated that Medicare and Medicaid lose an estimated $60-100 billion annually through waste, fraud and abuse.

Just wait until the wrongheaded lefty loonies get their single payer (FREE) health care.

Wanna try for $1 trillion in annual taxpayer losses?

The Big Dog's back

This from a company whose shelves are stock with Chinese merchandise. This is a COUNTRY that has mandatory abortion.


Re: "This is a COUNTRY that has mandatory abortion."

Old news - China is facing a generational crisis and is rethinking the "one child" policy.

Better watch more MSNBC for some better talking points, Derwood.


Dog has a point. Admit it poohpers!


Re: "a point."

Only to the ignorant, pipsqueak.


They are facing a crisis because they are killing off all the female fetuses and now have too many males vying for their females. But, like BD pointed out, where is HL's moral conscience when they are buying all their crap from a country like China???


Re: "crap from a country like China,"

So you don't buy "crap from a country like China," hypocrite?


Re: "killing off all the female fetuses,"

That's cultural, not govt. policy.

So NOW you're arguing AGAINST abortion on demand? lol

You can't have it both ways, Sport.


So you are saying it is Asian culture to abort female fetuses or just the Chinese?


Re: "So you are saying,"

Watch MSNBC, they might provide the answer for you. :)


Face it, there are just too many members of the he-man woman haters club that feel emasculated in today's society. They feel they have the right to still control women, right down to their uterus. They don't even see the sheer irony of everything that is available to them to ensure their penis keeps on keeping on past the age of eighty but they would rather see an 18 year old working girl have an unwanted pregnancy than get free, her $10.00 per month birth control pill. Unreal--how can people be so freaking selfish??


Re: "free, her $10.00 per month birth control pill."

It ain't FREE, Sport.

One person's subsidy is another person's tax.


Re: "how can people be so freaking selfish??"

Why are leftist useful idiots stupid enough to fall for organized theft by the govt. kleptocrats?

Guess they just prefer slavery to freedom.

Within limits, I don't give a d*mn what you do - I just don't want to pay for it. Capice?


It cost a lot more to pay for a unwanted child. Birth control is cheap, children are not. Capice??!!


Re: "unwanted child."

Who are these women who were 'forced' to have sex?


This particular ruling only pertains to 4 methods of birth control. 3 medicinal and one device. But it opens up the possibility for other closely held companies that are owned by folks, usually families that have strongly held religious beliefs, usually more fundamental orthodox. But it won't cover something like GM where it is NOT a closely held corporation. Some Jewish and muslims won't want to pay for some devices and medical supplies that have used pig parts such as heart valves and other such things I could add Christian Scientests that don't agree with vacinations and some other procedures and such. If those folks own CLOSELY held companies they can sue for relief also. But if a company is owned by a family that holds such beliefs they should not be forced at the point of a gun to pay for things against their beliefs. That is the power of gov't... the point of a gun. The legal point of a gun.


Re: "they should not be forced at the point of a gun to pay for things against their beliefs."

Were HL employees purchased at a slave mkt? Who's 'forcing' them to work there?

Victims, victims, everybody in the U.S. anymore is a victim.

And the lefty loonies want to redress every supposed inequity and wrong with someone else's money (private property) - legalized theft.


Publicly traded companies are not "closely held companies... by definition. Very few companies large companies will be affected, but many small companies are closely held companies, mostly family owned companies, and then they would have to be in one of those orthodox religions, and actual believers, who practice their religion. I don't imagine it is a very large pool of companies. But if you wish to complain about it at least use some facts when you make your complaints. It is hard to take someone seriously that after being told that birth control pills were not among the few medicinal birth control that was included in the case that was ruled on. I thiunk muslims, some jews and some real orthodox christians might have religious beliefs about them... it would take owners of a close held company to bring that to trial. Not all that likely. You actually have to read what the decision says, not what you wish it said so you can point and say how bad it will be. Facts tend to trump jumping up and down and pointing.


What ever happened to women wanting to be empowered?
"I am woman hear me roar" Has turned into "I am woman i need someone to pay for this for me".

The Big Dog's back

done again, when in doubt blame women right?


I do not blame women at all. I asked a question. I would gladly show them the Planned parenthood and other government handout groups supply birth control if they haven't the brains to figure it out themselves. so they can drop the drama show about the supreme court.
Do you or your mom need birth control? I'm sure the world does not need any more of your type, We are already over loaded with brain dead morons who worship Obama.


That's gonna leave a mark!

Dr. Information

What everyone, including the absent minded left is this all could have been avoided if it wasn't for the shoved down the throat, not read but voted on piece of chit called Obamacare.

BOOOM goes the dynamite.

looking around

Reading the threads, love when conmantango breaks out in a sweat and froths at the mouth snarling and attacking like a rabid dog. He looks at this decision as a foot hold for his fight on a slippery slope.

Licorice Schtick

Part of the froth is the name-calling and insults. When you see that, he's probably cornered. All part of the deflection.


Re: "deflection,"


Obama☭are - 0

Get over it, Sport.


The court did miss one important point. When Kennedy said that there were other less intrusive means to achieve the aims of the mandate, he should have added, "such as the free market." The Pill is $5/month at the Target pharmacy, i.e. a price that could be covered by one fewer packs of smokes or six packs of beer each month. So much for the whole "war on women" line. That's a month worth of worry free sex for $5 -where on earth can a man get a deal like that?


Licorice hit the nail on the head. My favorite: when we point out that they are deflecting to another topic, they then accuse US of deflecting to that topic. Logic and conservatism are often mutually exclusive.


Deertracker, unfortunately, you just don't get it. The decision did not exempt HL from paying for any form of birth control, only those four (out of 20)that are effectively forms of abortion. No, I did not see it as a slap down of anyone, but a win for people of faith who wish to remain true to their beliefs as per the constitution. By the way, why does everyone who disagrees with the liberal agenda need to be classified as a "hater"? Seems that the libs are the ones spewing hate and vitriol here. God bless America!


"By the way, why does everyone who disagrees with the liberal agenda need to be classified as a "hater '. '

It is another redefinition of a word. See Investment instead of tax. Gay instead of homosexual. Haters is becoming just another word that means disagreeing with the speaker. It takes away the sharpness of the words when someone usurps the meaning. If it was rarely used it would keep the sharpness of it's original intent. Much like racist is becoming. Misuse and overuse has dulled the impact of it. Gay really isn't a good example as it was very rarely used in it's original meaning before it was usurped. Hater is being diluted from overuse and mostly misuse.


People only get labeled "hater" when they do or say something that earns that label. If you are a anti-gay, anti-minority, etc., you are denying someone else the same rights you enjoy, and you're by definition a bigot. If you're outspoken in those beliefs, either here online or elsewhere, then you've graduated to the level of "hater" IMHO.

Often, bigots are the last people to realize that they're bigots...


The Hobby Lobby CEO is basically a jerk. I just read that, prior to Obamacare, Hobby Lobby DID offer contraception to its employees. He also owns stock in companies that make contraceptives. So, if it makes money and helps himself, he is for contraception. If it costs him money and helps other people, he is against contraception. Not exactly Christian-like, is it?

This morning, Hobby Lobby placed a full page ad in the Toledo Blade, making a tenuous connection between religion and our Founding Fathers. Hobby Lobby, of course, is ignoring wording in the Constitution that established separation of church and state, and the ad makes no mention of dozens of obviously atheist/agnostic quotes by Washington, Jefferson, Franklin and many others. Jefferson actually rewrote his Bible, removing any mention of God throughout.

America was NOT founded as a Christian nation - that is a recent myth invented by the Religious Right. On the contrary, our Founding Fathers went to great lengths to assure that America didn't become a theocracy.

Dr. Information

Untrue coaster. Keep listening to MSNBC. I see that talking point about HL owned stock was destroyed but you keep on gob bobbing on it.

HL pays for 16 of the 20 listed pills. Get over it. You suck, people won.


Actually, I don't watch/listen to MSNBC.

People didn't win. A Corporation won and Religion won. Why conservatives continue to side with the rich 1% is beyond me. Anyone who believes that Hobby Lobby's CEO cares about anyone but himself and his wallet is entitled to that delusion.

I am over it. I don't shop at Hobby Lobby, or any place in which the proprietor pushes their religion in my face.


People did win. Liberty won. It's really very simple. Person A wants someone to do some work. Person B can do the work and wants to be compensated. In a free country, A and B can sit down and come to an agreement as to what work, and what compensation they both find acceptable, and have a transaction. This decision moves us closer to being such a free country, as opposed to the essentially fascist construct you advocate where the government swoops in and says, oh no, you don't - your deal must conform to our dictates or it won't be allowed.

If you want a job where your employer pays for birth control (because, maybe you lack the basic self discipline to drink one less six pack a month in order to cover the cost?) then you are free to go out and find an employer willing to meet your terms based on the value you bring to the table as an employee. If you don't care about that (just suppose you have the brain power to set aside $5/month to facilitate your own sex life) and would rather have a 401K or a higher wage or a more flexible work schedule or any number of other things that someone might value over being relieved of responsibility for personal budgeting, you should be free to find an employer whose compensation package fits your needs.

Dr. Information

Liberals hate losing and they cry so bad. Hey Coaster, HL pays nearly double than minimum wage to its employees AND they have retirement packages and good benefits AND they cover nearly every birth control pill 100%.

I doubt HL would want you in their stores. Freedom chump (coaster).......we know you hate freedom but we also know you are a closet HL shopper too. Eweeeeeee I know this just burns you buns so bad.