Front Page
NMJ Search
Editorials
Commentary
Archive
NMJ Radio
Constitutional Literacy
Islamofascism
Progressivism
Books
NMJ Shop
Links, Etc...
Facebook
Twitter
Site Information
About Us
Contact Us
  US Senate
  US House
  Anti-Google






Archive Email Author

About Betsy McCaughey
Betsy McCaughey, PhD, is a constitutional scholar with a PhD from Columbia University, a patient advocate and health policy expert, and a former Lt. Governor of New York state. In 1993 she read the 1,362-page Clinton health bill, warned the nation what it said, and made history. Today she is doing it again. With a PhD in Constitutional History, she can actually tell us what the Obama health law says. In 2009 medical excellence and freedom came under assault again, and McCaughey put her skills to work. She was the first to uncover the health provisions slipped into the February, 2009 stimulus bill. Members of Congress were stunned to learn the stimulus bill could limit care for seniors and dictate your doctor’s decisions. Betsy McCaughey is the author of over three hundred scholarly and popular articles, and three books, including a history of the US Constitution. Betsy McCaughey has taught at Vassar College and Columbia University, and she produced prize-winning studies while at two think tanks, the Manhattan Institute and later the Hudson Institute. http://betsymccaughey.com
Social Bookmarking
Print this page.
Hobby Lobby A Case of Religious
Freedom, Not Women's Rights

Betsy McCaughey
March 29, 2014
The First Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees that if you like your God, you can keep your God. Meaning you can freely exercise your religion without government interference.

But the Obama administration insists that all health plans, including those provided by religious employers, cover contraception, sterilization and morning-after pills.

On Tuesday, the US Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., a case that the Democrat Party is falsely calling a test for women's rights.

Nineteen US senators and 91 members of the House, all Democrats, filed briefs supporting Obama's legal war against Hobby Lobby, a family-owned chain of craft stores providing health insurance to all employees but refusing for religious reasons to cover morning-after pills, such as Plan B and Ella.

Sen. Patty Murray claims, "What's at stake in this case before the Supreme Court is whether a CEO's personal beliefs can trump a woman's right to access free or low-cost contraception under the Affordable Care Act."

Nonsense. Not one word in the Affordable Care Act guarantees health plans will cover birth-control products. There is no such "right."

Section 2713 of the law says insurers must cover whatever service the US Preventive Services Task Force rates an A or B. It also empowers the Health and Human Services secretary -- a presidential appointee -- to add others.

While the Preventive Services Task Force doesn't call for covering birth control, President Obama and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius insist that plans cover it. The next occupant of the White House could do the opposite.

So these court battles are not about what Murray incorrectly calls a "right." Women have a constitutionally protected right to use birth control, but not to get it at work. And access is a trumped-up issue -- a straw woman.

The expensive part of getting birth control is visiting the gynecologist for a prescription, and all health plans -- including Hobby Lobby's -- cover that. The Hobby Lobby battle is over who pays the cost of the morning-after pill -- a mere $35. That's less than the cost of a haircut and blow dry, a carton of 128-count Pampers or dinner for two at Applebee's.

Poor women can get help with birth-control products through Medicaid, federal community health clinics and Planned Parenthood. So this battle is not about access.

It's political. Obama's Justice Department argues that saving women a small fee ($35 for the Ella pill) outweighs honoring a business owner's religious views. But the First Amendment bars government from "prohibiting the free exercise of religion."

This means freedom not only to worship, but also to live and run your business according to your faith. Dozens of religious employers have filed lawsuits challenging the Obama administration's mandate. Hobby Lobby is the most watched Supreme Court case this term.

The Green family, owners of Hobby Lobby and Mardel, a chain of Christian bookstores, incorporated their business, and that technicality is giving the Obama administration a leg up before the court. It's one thing to argue that individuals have the freedom to worship, but harder to argue that corporations do.

Yet in this case, the Greens run their businesses according to Biblical principles. They close on Sundays, forgo hauling beer, even when their trucks have to run empty, and refuse to provide morning-after pills. That devotion to religion conflicts with the president's political agenda.

Gender equality is Obama's hobbyhorse for the 2014 elections. The Democrats' legal briefs argue that women generally have higher out-of-pocket health costs than men because of birth control.

Their remedy is to compel employers to provide "free" birth control, no matter the harm to an employer's religious freedom. Respecting religious freedom vs. $35 for a "free" morning-after pill. Expect the Supremes to rule religious freedom is worth more than that.

This article was originally published in Investor's Business Daily. Refer to original article for related links and important documentation.








The BasicsProject.org informational and educational pamphlet series is now available for Kindle and iPad. Click here to find out more...

The New Media Journal and BasicsProject.org are not funded by outside sources. We exist exclusively on donations from our readers and contributors.
Please make a sustaining donation today.







Opinions expressed by contributing writers are expressly their own and may or may not represent the opinions of NewMediaJournal.us, its editorial staff, board or organization.  Reprint inquiries should be directed to the author of the article. Contact the editor for a link request to NewMediaJournal.us.  NewMediaJournal.us is not affiliated with any mainstream media organizations.  NewMediaJournal.us is not supported by any political organization.  Responsibility for the accuracy of cited content is expressly that of the contributing author. All original content offered by NewMediaJournal.us is copyrighted. NewMediaJournal.us supports BasicsProject.org and its goal: the liberation of the American voter from partisan politics and special interests in government through the primary-source, fact-based education of the American people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance a more in-depth understanding of critical issues facing the world. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.


The Media Journal.us © 1998-2014    Content Copyright © Individual authors
Powered by ExpressionEngine 1.70 and M3Server