The Supreme Court ruled that a woman's healthcare is now between her, her
doctor and her boss at a chain store. I have a problem with this
You all do know that birth control is used for many more reasons than
recreational sex don't you? Why is it okay for a bunch of bible-thumping
men to decide what is or isn't right for women? I am a man who thinks women
know their own needs better than any man would. Ironically, however, I think
women know men's needs better then most men do as well! Perhaps it's
time to hand over control to women, and see if we can drag this country back up
and out of the nineteenth century.
@ VSTYou seem to have stated the obvious - that people have
differing opinions. I'm not sure how this addresses what was being
@ CletusI understand your point and agree that birth control is not
being denied. My point is that it is insulting that women's private lives
are even considered a proper topic of debate. So for me and many like me, no
misinformation is even required to infuriate. The fact that our nation's
highest court still deems it proper to entertain a religious belief (or any kind
of belief, for that matter) that seeks to assert control over or comment on a
woman's private life is enough. Five MEN. Five RELIGIOUS
men.But when I look at the young women coming behind me, I can see
that this won't be the case much longer. Women aren't becoming more
subjugated with time. No, we're becoming increasingly empowered and the
numbers of those who will not tolerate anyone but their spouse/partner weighing
in on their sexual lives is increasing as well. This voyeuristic state will not
last forever.BTW, I don't find "staggering" the
misinformation that our perpetual campaign machines and their media outlets
disseminate. It's exactly what I now expect from them.
Just a couple questions.Did the Greens change religions in 2012, because
before the ACA they paid for the birth control they just sued over?If you
make money by investing in the Pham. Company that makes these birth controls
that's within your morals?When you stock your store with goods made
in China, whom has such a great record on abortion and human rights to increase
your profit, that's alright.But to allow your employees to
choose for themselves what is right, is absolutely unacceptable, and an
infringement on Corporate Religion that has no soul to save, no body to
incarcerate, and is immortal.
@ Weber State Grad, don't overstate the concept of corporations. They are
creatures of the state, and their rights, powers and authority can be changed by
And when Christian-fundamentalist Chik-Fil-A refuses to hire those of us who are
Mormons because we belong to a satanic cult, will we cheer just as loudly as we
are cheering now?
Corporations have always been recognized as an individual in the eyes of the law
through a legal concept called "corporate personhood." By definition, a
corporation is an association of individuals united for a special purpose.
People acting in concert generally have the same equal protection of the laws
guaranteed to individuals in the Fourteenth Amendment...they do not surrender
their Constitutional rights when they act collectively.The doctrine
of corporate personhood has been reaffirmed by the Court many times –
going as far back as 1888 when the Court clearly affirmed the doctrine in
Pembina Consolidated Silver Mining Co. v. Pennsylvania. In that case, the Court
held "Under the designation of 'person' there is no doubt that a
private corporation is included [in the Fourteenth Amendment].
Birth control isn't really the major issue with this decision. The major
issue is that a corporation can impose the religious views of its ownership on
employees who are hired to perform secular functions. The decision is about the
erosion of religious freedom for individuals and the granting of special rights
and powers to institutions.
After Citizens United, corporations are now people, and money is now speech.
Pushing even farther, the Supreme Court has now given corporations religious
rights, and have singled out some corporations as being more equal than others
in the eyes of the law. This thing is going to grow into the monster from the
land of untended consequences when large corporations sue for equal rights.
@KarenI generally agree with you; "men and the religions they
control [SHOULD NOT] remain so presumptuous as to debate and decide for all
women what we may or may not do with our lives."The SCOTUS
decision did not do that and to say it did is a gross misrepresentation of the
facts and serves only to shore up a hysterical rallying cry by the left to
promote this mythical war on women in America.SCOTUS removed the
government mandate that employers MUST provide contraception coverage in their
insurance plans. It's as simple as that. Women are still free to choose
what they want to do with their bodies, what means of contraception they want to
use, and work with their doctor to decide what kind of health decisions are in
their best interest. The irony here is that most corporations will
still offer contraception coverage for employers; they just won’t be
forced to do so under the threat of government penalty.The
unfortunate misinformation about women’s rights is staggering.
@ CletusThe mere fact that this debate exists feels like an invasion
of privacy to many women, me included. It doesn't matter what the details
are. As long as men and the religions they control remain so presumptuous as to
debate and decide for all women what we may or may not do with our lives, they
will continue to hand leverage to their political opponents.
Of course it won't. But it will serve as a hysterical rallying
cry by the left to promote their mythical war on women. Liberals
still win by advancing misinformation to an uninformed electorate willing to
surrender their reason based upon an alleged infringement on a "right"
to an entitlement.