For some reason, I just can’t get worked up about the ruling in the Hobby Lobby case

tumblr_kr2omkHkTY1qzb7gjo1_500In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled this morning that Hobby Lobby and similarly “closely-held” companies cannot be required to pay for contraception coverage for their employees (see HERE).

This isn’t the ruling I had hoped for, but neither does it strike me as evidence that the sky is falling on women’s rights.

Will the ruling make it unduly difficult for women to obtain contraceptives? No.

Does the ruling open the door to other mischievous cases in which businesses invoke their so-called religious rights at the expense of their employees’ rights?  Perhaps, but I’ll worry about those matters when they arise.

Does this ruling affect big companies? No, not if their stock is publicly traded.

Will public reaction to this ruling politically benefit conservatives more than liberals? I doubt it. It might turn out that the opposite is the case, especially if liberals can effectively make the argument that the court’s decision has emboldened right-wing Republicans to further undermine the rights of women.




  1. Something isn’t right when five Catholic men make a decision that effects a huge majority of women because of a corporation selling buttons and bows with beliefs from the dark ages.

    • Neftali

      “effects a huge majority of women?” Oh please. Even Pat readily admitted this won’t have much of an impact on contraception availability. The ONLY thing this affects is companies being forced to provide contraception coverage. The vast majority of companies will continue to provide contraception coverage because it’s the right thing to do. I seem to recall people being able to easily acquire contraceptives before ObamaCare made it a mandate. This ruling changes very, very, very few. Liberals need to quit crying about it. The correct decision was made.

      Want more contraceptive availability? Donate to Planned Parenthood. My wife and I donate to them of our own free will, but we don’t think government should force people to go against their religious beliefs. This country is founded on religious freedom, it shouldn’t be in the business of taking it away.

      BTW, what the hell does being a Catholic man have to do with anything? Should the only people that are allowed to determine religious freedom be atheist women?

  2. If that’s the case Nef then this should not have been heard by the SC in the first place. But the anti-abortion crowd along with a host of bible beaters, birthers and assorted neo-cons had to make a case by punishing women.

    • neftali

      Women are not being punished. Hobby Lobby still covers 16 forms of birth control. They only thing not being covered are the 4 types they feel induce abortion, like Plan B. My God some of you liberals are so overly dramatic.

      • Do you have any concerns about the future uses of this ruling? Or do you think that Justice Ginsburg is being overly dramatic?

        “”In a decision of startling breadth, the Court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law (saving only tax laws) they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs,” Ginsburg wrote. She said she feared that with its decision, the court had “ventured into a minefield.”


  3. Interesting how vasectomies are ok with Hobby Lobby. Maybe one of the bible thumps out there can explain that.


  4. The greater issue with this ruling extends beyond the birth control issue. Doesn’t this give standing to other religious types who don’t support other things like gay marriage?

    Doesn’t that allow people who own bakeries who make wedding cakes to legally discriminate against gays now? I know there’s been some cases about that.

    What about renting a hall for the wedding? Can some business say no because it goes against their religious beliefs?
    What about renting an apartment from a landlord with strongly held religious beliefs?

    I think those are going to be the next type cases we’re going hear about. I know a couple who refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple were told by the state they were wrong to discriminate and were fined. I think the bakery closed. Seems to me their beliefs are no different than Hobby Lobby owners were when it comes to religious convictions.

    I can see this ruling being applied in many ways and used as a challenge by those who want to discriminate and use religion as their reason. The ruling is wrong because of the broader appeal its going to invoke.

  5. HL for some unscientific reason objects to intrauterine devices and emergency contraception as opposed to hormonal birth control pills. By doing so they limit a women’s ability to choose what’s best for her own body. It won’t be long before they’ll object to menstruation.

  6. wilson

    That darn HL denying a woman’s right to purchase birth control. what is happening to our country. What else will HL deny us?


    • neftali

      What’s sad is that idiot liberals actually believe that statement. Of course, nothing is preventing women from purchasing birth control. Liberals are just pissed they can’t get it for free. This is the sad state loony left has become. They feel so arrogant, entitled, and privileged that they DEMAND free stuff or they throw a hissy fit as evidenced by the last couple of days.

      • That’s not my beef, that they can’t get it for free. It’s that an employer can deny mandated health care coverages based on their religious beliefs. Somehow the cons just don’t get that point. What will the next religious persons beliefs be able to deny a renter, a customer, a patient, an employee, et al,and have it sanctioned by the SCOTUSA?

        • Notice my rational who’s next case scenario’s, unlike the religious right nuts that jumped to man on dog relationships being the next group to seek special rights, after the first states approved gay marriage.

          The minds of far right religious people can sure go to some strange places. I wonder what they think about they’re not telling us?

          At least I use past historical events and outcomes to support my concerns.

          You can call me Logical Bob. LOL

  7. wilson

    Robert is a christianphobe, he has an aversion Christians and believes that they are idiots. I venture to say he feels that way about Jews, Muslims or any religion and to heck with the first amendment.
    He makes that clear in the previous HL Blog.
    The idea that denying a renter etc. seems naive and a stretch, people are denied everyday. “No shoes no service”, no income, no money.

  8. This is Walgreens calling Mr. Alito we have your prescription for Viagra ready at no cost to you.

  9. It looks like this religious organization (and others) want “special rights”,. They don’t even want to fill out forms because it violates their belief system.

    One thing you can always depend on from the far right and the religious organizations that were the ones that used the term “special rights” when trying to deny gay people equal rights is, they always project exactly what they are guilty of onto their opponents.

    By the way, does anybody remember The Faith Based Initiative that GWB set up as pay back to the evangelicals and other religious organizations that supported the republican party. Talk about pigs at the trough. I’d like to know how much Falwell and Robertson got from that fund.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *