New research reveals the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood cases are a product of deep coordination between anti-choice and free market groups.
Vox Senior Editor Timothy Lee said that if an employer restricts contraceptive coverage, “people are free to pay for their own birth control.” Here’s why he’s wrong.
If corporations are people with a right to refuse to comply with health-care requirements based on religious beliefs, it stands to reason that they would not only be permitted to refuse birth control coverage but other types of coverage as well.
It’s been said over and over again that birth control is “life-saving” for some women, who need it to aid conditions such as endometriosis and ovarian cysts. But people also, overwhelmingly, use birth control to do exactly as its name implies: to control their fertility. Let’s stop hiding some of the lives we fight for under a “tactical” shroud.
While Hobby Lobby opposes offering contraceptive coverage, it does sell three types of knitting needles, just the kind that in the not-so-distant past, women who became pregnant and didn’t have access to legal abortion used to try and end their pregnancies themselves.
The leaders of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corporation have invited themselves into their employees’ bedrooms and medicine cabinets under the guise of religious freedom, and these bosses are seriously out of line.
The federal Health Equity and Access Under the Law for Immigrant Women and Families Act would lift current barriers lawful immigrants face in accessing affordable health insurance.
A decision from Arkansas reinforces fetal viability as a constitutional bright line for abortion restrictions, even as more early abortion bans pass in the states.
No one should be forced to choose between her job and her dignity, but that’s what I feel I’m being forced to do right now.
According to a recent piece by Reuters, the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga cases are going to tackle the “unsettled science” of contraception. But there is no “unsettled science” here, no “scientific dilemma” concerning when pregnancy begins beyond one created by anti-choice activists.