(June 30, 2014 at 1:30 pm)rasetsu Wrote: I don't think it's a good precedent. The question is, where do we go from here? Does this open the flood gates?
As far as I'm aware, it's a very narrow ruling, pertaining explicitly to the morning after after pill and IUD's. For now all companies must still cover condoms, 'the pill', etc. And Jehovah's Witness' owned companies still can't deny blood transfusions and the like. Not sure exactly what the repercusions will be, but it at least the court was very specific in its decision.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
- Thomas Jefferson