Before the progressive left suffers a meltdown, we who logically look at the facts must sympathetically intervene and offer them some cold water, and a place to sit down and rest, a chance to recover and rest before going on to the next idiotic harangue. The New York Times editorial page yesterday “Limiting rights: imposing religion on workers.” To the esteemed (but lapdog media charlatans) editorial board of the New York Times, the Supreme Court’s decision on Hobby Lobby, dismaying as they said “because it imposed their religious views on employees. It gave for-profit companies the right to impose their religious views on employees. The decision,” says the New York Times, “ruled in favor of employers who do not want to include contraceptive care in their company health plans as required by the affordable care act. And that this will deny, “they said,” many thousands of women contraceptive coverage vital to their well-being and reproductive freedom.”
NARAL, the pro-abortion group, has a new board member Jessica Valenti. She’s the founder of a website called Feministing.com and she’s now on the board of NARAL Pro-Choice America. She just sent out a Tweet yesterday (one word will be censored as I oppose that kind of language): “Maybe women should organize a safe sex f***-in at every Hobby Lobby across the country, in the glitter aisle. Just a thought.”
The left has started to lose it. Here in a more political and longer distorted form is Hilarious Clinton (the designee for the next democratic president) who completely lost it yesterday in Colorado at this big meeting of the best minds of the country on the liberal left. Here is the first thing she said, “Just think about this for a minute. It is the first time that our court has said that a closely held corporation has the rights of a person when it comes to religious freedom. Which means that the corporation and closely held are often family based, not exclusively but usually. That the corporation employers can impose their religious beliefs on their employees and of course deny women the right to contraception as part of their healthcare plan is exactly that. I find it deeply disturbing that we are going in that direction.” Applause, applause from the others in the meeting.
Denying them contraception, imposing their religious beliefs.
Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio “They could say that is against my religious belief, or in cases involving gays and lesbians, or cases involving individuals of different foreign origins.” That is an egregiously ignorant statement by a woman who is supposed to be the Supreme Court reporter for NPR.
Now Debbie Wasserman Schultz, of course has to weigh in, she is chairwoman of the Democratic National Party, “Republicans want to do everything they can to have the long hand of government and now the long hand of business reach into a women’s body and make health care decisions for her.”
What is actually going on? You’ve heard the New York Times say that this is imposing religion and denying thousands of women contraceptive coverage and imposing religious views on employees. You’ve heard Hilarious Clinton say the same thing. In fact, she has now talked about a hypothetical salesclerk at Hobby Lobby, “A salesclerk at Hobby Lobby who needs contraception, which is pretty expensive, is not going to get that service through her employers healthcare plan because her employer doesn’t think she should be using contraception.” That is the world according to progressives. That is the world according to the woman who is the leading candidate for the Democratic Party nomination for president.
The facts of the matter
Now, let us look at the facts- the actual health care plan which the salesclerk at Hobby Lobby and every other employee of Hobby Lobby has available to them. Search a little bit and you can find it online yourself, if you choose to not believe me.
It includes access (with no co-pay) to the following categories of FDA approved birth control: Male condoms, female condoms, diaphragms with spermicide, sponges with spermicide, cervical caps with spermicide , spermicide alone, birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin, birth control pills with progestin alone, birth-control pills, extended continuous use contraceptive patches, contraceptive rings, progestin injections, implantable rods, vasectomies for male partners, female sterilization surgeries, female sterilization implants.
This salesclerk at Hobby Lobby cannot use male condoms but they are available for free if she chooses that contraceptive method in conjunction with her partner. So what is the New York Times and Hilarious Clinton talking about? That is 16 categories of contraceptives available to Hobby Lobby female employees absolutely free. Four forms of contraception are not.
Plan B-the morning-after pill, Ella, a similar type of emergency contraception, copper intrauterine device and the IUD with progestin. Those four the Hobby Lobby employer-owners believe interfere with the process of a fertilized egg attaching to the will of the womb and therefore, in effect killing life because at that point the egg is fertilized. Whether you believe that are not, that’s actually the medicine of it, whether you believe in abortion or not that’s another thing. What the Supreme Court is saying that four out of the 20 different FDA approved contraceptive methods are available for the employees. The other four are available at every pharmacy in the country at minimal cost.
All this brouhaha is about is the November election. This is Hilarious Clinton getting the women riled up to vote over an issue that isn’t true. Hobby Lobby is not trying to impose a religious belief on people because as a female employee if you want a Plan B morning-after pill you can go by one it’s available without a prescription. The employer has the right to make a choice as well and it’s certainly not as the New York Times foolishly said in their lead editorial that the decision,” The decision ruled in favor of employers who do not want to include contraceptive care in their company health plan.” Hobby Lobby has contraceptive included in their health plan- 16 of the 20 different FDA approved types.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissent was noted by the New York Times saying that the effect of the ruling was to “deny many thousands of women contraceptive coverage, vital to their well-being and reproductive freedom.” So Obama has decided he can ride this wave of uninformed discontent, so he is now pledging executive actions against this Supreme Court ruling.
The liberal out
If the left was not so dominated in the last 48 hours after this Hobby Lobby case had been decided and announced by the Supreme Court, they would’ve realized this decision is absolutely good for liberals. When you actually read the decision, as opposed to screaming about the denial of contraceptive rights, the actual decision by one of the concurring opinions by Justice Anthony Kennedy. He says that as the government has already accommodated nonprofit corporations with religious objections, by saying okay you could write that you’re objecting to and we’ll take the stuff that you aren’t providing over to the insurance company and the government will subsidize that coverage so that everyone in your employee will get the coverage. You just won’t have to pay for it. So if the government requires it to be provided as an individual requirement on the employees, there is nothing much the employer can do about that. So Kennedy lays out how the liberals can get around this decision. He says, “The accommodation, if applied to profit-making corporations furthers the government’s interest, but does not impinge on the plaintiff’s religious beliefs”. He changes it to a requirement of employees and not of the employer so Kennedy basically maps out how the liberals can go around this thing, and in so doing, provide a direct government benefit. Which of course is the precursor to a single-payer system which the uber left has always wanted.
The RFRA was the basis of all of the current legal proceedings. The Religious Freedom and Reform Act was passed back in the day when the culture wars were really hot. People were worried about government coming down against religion and so the RFRA said the government has to provide some test, if you want to restrict somebody’s freedom of religion you have got have a compelling state interest, this is the most of logical and least impactful way to handle this interest, etc. First of all the RFRA passed unanimously in the House and nearly unanimously in the Senate in 1993, when the Congress was controlled by Democrats. The act they are currently complaining about being applied to Hobby Lobby was passed by them and signed by Bill Clinton and by the way has been ruled constitutional on several occasions. Lets repeat this one more time. The act that provided the basis for the Hobby Lobby decision was passed in 1993 by Democrats who controlled the Congress nearly unanimously and signed by Bill Clinton. Now as it used to be said on the radio, you know the rest of the story.