2020_010_A
Support the Café
Search our site

Birth control on next week’s Supreme Court docket

Birth control on next week’s Supreme Court docket

The U. S. Supreme Court will hear arguments next Tuesday in two cases that could help determine how and whether millions of American women will be able to obtain contraceptives.


Stuart Taylor, Jr., of The Daily Beast has the story:

The key question is this: can privately owned businesses be hit with crippling fines of $100 per day, per worker if their devoutly Christian owners refuse on religious grounds to include in their health plans four contraceptive methods that they equate with abortion?

The cases, Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius, are the leading edge of more than 90 other related, pending suits filed around the country by Catholic and other Christian plaintiffs, including hospitals, social service agencies, universities and schools, and businesses.

More than 1,000 religious institutions and other employers with millions of employees have similar religious objections. The administration has exempted a narrow category of these employers—mostly churches, other houses of worship, and nonprofits with religious missions. Religious groups, freedom-of-religion groups, and others who oppose the mandate have filed 59 friend-of-the-court briefs. Feminists, health care advocates, civil rights defenders, and others who support it have filed 23.

While this article provides a clear and useful summary of the issues before the Court, it perpetuates the notion that the beliefs of people of faith have lined up on one side of this issue and secular activists have lined up on the other. It just isn’t true.

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

3 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
tgflux

Re the equation of “religious” and “anti-birth control”: AAAARGH!!! WHY is the secular media so passionately in love w/ this meme? (Religion = Social Conservative) Methinks it’s because they’re lazy (religious progressives is something they Just Can’t Be Bothered About). OCICBW.

JC Fisher

Don’t blow this, SCOTUS— birth control is a HUMAN RIGHT!

Gregory Orloff

“The key question is this: can privately owned businesses be hit with crippling fines of $100 per day, per worker if their devoutly Christian owners refuse on religious grounds to include in their health plans four contraceptive methods that they equate with abortion?”

Let’s rephrase that question:

“The key question is this: can privately owned businesses be hit with crippling fines of $100 per day, per worker if their devoutly Jehovah’s Witness owners refuse on religious grounds to include in their health plans blood transfusions, which they equate with eating blood?”

Any takers?

Also:

Do those who consider warfare a violation of God’s command “Thou shalt not kill” and Christ Jesus’ ethic of nonviolence get an exemption from paying taxes that go toward our military budget?

John B. Chilton

There’s plenty examples showing that not all people of faith are on one side of this issue.

You have to wonder if the press just puts those people of faith into the category of secularists. Which of course they are not. Or is it about intensity of the issue? Many people of faith on the pro-contraception side don’t rank the issue high on their agenda although some do. Or if they do they don’t frame their support of contraception in a faith context. Most opponents do rank it high on their agenda.

Facebooktwitterrss
Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café