Those who argued, like Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, that the Court’s ruling in the Hobby Lobby case was narrow, are turning out to be wrong faster than most people of their critics expected.
In less than a week after the Hobby Lobby ruling, the Court suggested in another case that it is open to broadening its ruling with other cases, and we now know “closely-held” companies employ the majority of American workers, meaning the Court’s decision about birth control can have a wide-impact.
The irony – or frustration – is that we are in an era in which the abortion rate is at an all-time low in large part because of increased contraception use. Now those who object the most to abortion are at the forefront of undermining that success by undermining the widespread use of contraception. And, no, the four types of contraception to which Hobby Lobby objected are not akin to the abortion pill.
I’m beginning to wonder which is more important to them, reducing abortion or making sure there is no “consequence free,” non-pro-creative sex?
Oh, while the Affordable Care Act has done a good job increasing contraception access to women, it does little for men. Why?
The ACA and vasectomies: http://www.vox.com/2014/7/3/5868477/obamacare-should-cover-vasectomies-too
Did the Court contradict itself less than a week after the Hobby Lobby ruling? http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/07/06/more-on-what-the-wheaton-college-injunction-does-and-does-not-mean-for-contraception-coverage/
Contraception use has reduced the number of unwanted pregnancies: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/study-abortion-rate-at-lowest-point-since-1973/2014/02/02/8dea007c-8a9b-11e3-833c-33098f9e5267_story.html