I’m going to get real with you here for a bit. I love to tackle controversial topics, such as feminism and fucking teddy bears, but one thing I tend to not talk about is politics. This is mainly because in the US we’re a 2 party system, which generally means that if you discuss politics you’re effectively alienating half the population.
But I wanted to discuss the Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, or SCOTUS. First, the result of the decision, without the hype:
Religious people who own closely owned for-profit organizations are no longer required to provide access to 4 specific types of birth control which can be considered abortifacients, such as Plan B (Levonorgestrel) which is widely known as “The morning after pill.”
There are a few important factors in this. The first is the term closely owned. What they mean by this is they are “corporations [that are] owned and controlled by members of a single family, and no one has disputed the sincerity of their religious beliefs.”
This limits the effect of the decision, but there’s still an effect. The next thing we need to look at is the types of birth control. Plan B, Ella, and certain intrauterine devices. The thing to remember here is that 2 of these are “Emergency Contraceptive” in other words, they’re morning after pills, which are useful, for sure, but let’s not fool ourselves and call them anything but the “Didn’t want to use a condom” pills. So I’m going to focus on the intrauterine devices.
The reason that these devices are listed is because of a technicality in how they work, and the lack of knowledge in the scientific community on exactly how the shit you’re shoving up people’s crotches work. There’s a divide in belief, and I’m going to call out the religious community on this one. When they’re fighting abortion they continuously say that you are a person as a fetus, but now when it comes to Hobby Lobby and intrauterine devices, they are claiming that you’re a person when the egg is fertilized, even before it has attached to the uterus and developed into a fetus.
This seems to be an abuse of the legal systems allowances for religious belief. But, given that I have experience with these devices and that they made my wife extremely sick, I have to admit, I’m not all that upset.
In fact, given that the court is still requiring these companies to allow access to other types of birth control, it’s not like they removed access entirely.
No, what’s gotten everyone up in arms is that women are being told what types of birth control they can use, and to that I have this to say:
I go to the doctor, and I have a list of prescriptions that I’m allowed to purchase based on my insurance, and I’m a guy. So if I can’t decide which pain medication to use, even if one of the banned ones would work better, how is that any different than you having to opt for a different form of birth control? If you want to use a different birth control, the ability is still there, you just have to do it yourself, just like me if I want to substitute whiskey for my ibuprofen.
That sounds harsh, because it is. I’m harsh because I want you to know that you are being ridiculous. But you’re not the only one.
SCOTUS has a history of misinterpreting the First Amendment to say that you have to bend for all religions or you’re favoring one over another. It makes more sense to make no wavers for any religion at all. If our government changes for a religion they are effectively insulting all others. But bend to none and you tell them it is they who must change to fit society.
The idea that you can make all religions happy is as absurd as the idea that you can effectively run a government with only two major political parties. Especially when both parties are chuck full of morons.
There is one thing in the decision that isn’t getting wide notice, and it’s something that I think will change a lot of minds.
SCOTUS made mention that the Department of Health and Human Services already has a policy in place for non-profit organizations of a religious nature that allows them to get around the very issue that SCOTUS was deciding on for for-profit businesses, and as they said in the decision, there is absolutely no reason why that same policy and system couldn’t be expanded to included all religious organizations, including those that fall into the header of closely owned for-profit corporation.
Until then, though, you’re just going to have to remember to pick up condoms.