Hobby Lobby Dilemma

NOTE: Under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) employers were required to offer contraceptives that could destroy fertilized eggs.   

 In 2012 Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. sued the federal government.  Hobby Lobby was already offering a health care plan to their employees that included compensation and coverage for contraceptives.  The new mandate by the ACA was opposed by Hobby Lobby on moral and thus religious grounds.  Hobby Lobby viewed the additional mandate as abortive in nature by destroying fertilized eggs and not just preventive in nature.

 The lawsuit made it to the Supreme Court.  In 2014 in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the court issued a 5-4 decision in favor of Hobby Lobby’s refusal to expand their insurance to include pregnancy ending coverage.

As the old saying goes; “If mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy” and we are about to hear from mama on the Supreme Court’s most recent Hobby Lobby ruling.

 As the same old tried arguments are being screamed from the highest hills and as the heart of the issue continues to be ignored, it may be wise for us to consider the following.

Let’s begin with the inevitable battle cry that this is a female issue and thus the demand that all men shut-up on the subject.  This will be followed by an insistence that the ruling is bogus because the five Supreme Court justices who supported the law are all males.

 It’s ironic that women who once bristled over, and were furious with those who advanced the argument that women couldn’t hold high level positions of responsibility because their thinking would be clouded or irrational during ovulation, are now using the same sexist type logic and arguments regarding this issue as well as the abortion issue. 

 Yet no one needs to be a woman to understand that child birth is painful or that the demands of a primary care giver and motherhood and are incredibly demanding – or - to know the difference between right and wrong.  Any guy who lies down with a woman believing she should bear the sole responsibility for her pregnancy – so he can continue to get his jollies – is a slob and any woman who sleeps with him is an idiot.  That certainly is not a female issue and is at the very heart of this dispute. 

This will of course brings us to the altogether familiar attacks on religion.  

 Religion or no religion, immorality and irresponsibility are the cornerstones of this issue and where it becomes contentious.  This topic and its discussion present the same dilemmas and challenges we face with abortion.  Common sense dictates that abortion should be legal so the procedure is safe for those who may have a legitimate medical need.  Yet the law is badly abused.  Abortion on demand supports and promotes selfish and irresponsible behavior.  The very same threat exists with regards birth control in that its abuses will further fuel irresponsible sexual activity and cultivate our cultural decay.

 We next will be bombarded with the premise that this law jeopardizes any and all forms of birth control, rather than distinguishing between preventative and non- preventative measures.  This is where we need to be mindful that the Supreme Court has frowned upon just two IUD's and two “Morning After” pills. 

 To be certain, we are dealing with somewhat of a dilemma here.  Common sense, once again, dictates that any form of birth control deemed a medical necessity for the health of the patient should clearly be made available.  The “Morning After” pill could be necessary for a victim of rape or incest and an IUD may be necessary for women who, for whatever medical reason, may not be able to consume birth control pills or could not withstand a hysterectomy.  Yet the irrational and false claims that these minor Supreme Court restrictions support ending ALLL forms of birth control will undoubtedly and loudly be bandied about.    

 There are no easy answers as to how to protect those engaged in responsible behavior without supporting the ugly, self-centered and careless behavior surrounding casual sexual activity.  However, those pursuing the answers need to be encouraged to continue, while the rest of us demand an end to the unreasonable and harsh criticisms and misconceptions on both sides of the argument.   

 It is clearly a very difficult dilemma which requires the attention of those who possess a rational thought process.