SCOTUS Rules In Favor Of Hobby Lobby

[CapnAwesome]

The government forcing a company to pay for birth control (Hint: you can buy it for yourself) is not equal to hating women.

First of all, when you receive a benefit for working at a place, that isn't your boss' money. That's YOUR money. You earn it as part of your compensation package for the labor you provide. When your boss says insurance money can be spent for viagra but not for female care, as is often the case with these pious companies (my wife who worked in health insurance can offer you many stories along these lines), that is sexist. Regardless, your boss should not have the authority to butt into your life and dictate to you how your benefit money is spent.

Second, you missed the earlier Supreme Court ruling, that Christian terrorists are entitled to harass and threaten women who seek health care services at clinics that provide abortions. That's part of the package of the recent far right wing rulings by the SCOTUS.

Third, corporations are NOT people and the do NOT have religious faith. This twisted ruling swings the door wide for religious discrimination and harassment at the workplace.

Well at least with me you are making arguments and not calling me a sexist. Which is good. In regards to your first point, I'm sure that many people's wives/partners are happy that Viagra is covered by health insurance. It is hardly something that just benefits men. That thought mentality is part of the archaic belief that women don't enjoy sex and that men are the only one who benefit from it. Obviously a ridiculous comparison. The latter point that your boss is butting into your life and arguing how your money is spent is a lost one. You can still buy birth control. I've paid for my own condoms most of my life (my college included them with my tuition, which just means people who weren't getting laid were in part paying for the condoms I was using then. One of the weirdest subsidies ever.) Birth control just isn't that expensive. The people effected by this are obviously employed.

Your second point regards free speech. I'm a free speech absolutist. Of course people have a right to protest, harass, whatever anybody they feel like as long as violence is not committed. I doubt that you truly believe that unfettered free speech is a right-wing ideal. I also note that that decision was unanimous by all the justices, including the left wing ones.

Your third point I agree with. However this decision only applies to privately owned companies, which are owned by individuals. So it's rather a moot point in this case.