Sure I have the right to pretend I am a lot younger and better looking than I really am, but most certainly that should not be codified into law.
Who would have guessed that all 5 Catholic males on the Supreme Court would vote to curtail women’s reproductive rights? Who would have guessed? With of course Good Pope Francis on their side…
Is there a name for this kind of thing? Something like Catholicsharia Law?
There should be some sort of “idiot test” for these kind of religious decisions. That if the religious concept and the results of a law are so stupid it makes no sense – in this case denying minimum wage women any aspect of birth control – then the law gets turned over to Champion to make toilet paper with.
The biggest change in America will not come from the House, the Senate or even the Presidency (other than appointment) but from replacing one conservative with one liberal on the Supreme Court.
Here are seven more key quotes from Ginsburg’s dissent in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby:
“The exemption sought by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga would…deny legions of women who do not hold their employers’ beliefs access to contraceptive coverage”
“Religious organizations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith. Not so of for-profit corporations. Workers who sustain the operations of those corporations commonly are not drawn from one religious community.”
“Any decision to use contraceptives made by a woman covered under Hobby Lobby’s or Conestoga’s plan will not be propelled by the Government, it will be the woman’s autonomous choice, informed by the physician she consults.”
“It bears note in this regard that the cost of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month’s full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage.”
“Would the exemption…extend to employers with religiously grounded objections to blood transfusions (Jehovah’s Witnesses); antidepressants (Scientologists); medications derived from pigs, including anesthesia, intravenous fluids, and pills coated with gelatin (certain Muslims, Jews, and Hindus); and vaccinations[?]…Not much help there for the lower courts bound by today’s decision.”
“Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be ‘perceived as favoring one religion over another,’ the very ‘risk the [Constitution’s] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude.”
“The court, I fear, has ventured into a minefield.”