Reading the Supreme Court’s opinion in the Massachusetts buffer zone case, you might get the idea that free speech in the form of protests and handing out literature about social and political issues is practiced without restriction in the United States. But that is not the case.
Black women already have low and inconsistent use of birth control due to access barriers, and Monday’s Hobby Lobby decision is one more that puts effective care out of financial reach for many in need.
The Hobby Lobby case was about birth control coverage, but to see and hear the anti-choice protesters gathered in front of the Supreme Court steps Monday, you might have thought the Court was reconsidering Roe v. Wade.
Once hailed as a lifesaver and necessity for everyone thinking about having sex, condoms are now frequently maligned—young people are surrounded by messages suggesting they don’t work, they break, and they take all the fun out of sex.
I’m struggling to come to terms with the thought that the Supreme Court would invite discrimination and interference from bosses into the personal health decisions of women.
A spokesperson for Femcare told the Asheville Citizen-Times that the clinic would be closing on Saturday, but declined any further comment.
For Black women, the decision echoes a history of employers imposing their religious beliefs on our reproductive freedom.
The Hobby Lobby case is not some odd outlier regarding “religious freedom.” It’s just one of the many ways the anti-choice movement is trying to chip away at women’s access to contraception and instill the idea in the public’s mind that contraception is controversial.
A bill that requires adult film stars to wear condoms on set is one step closer to becoming law in California, despite pleas from porn performers.
This week, new studies accuse the public health community of ignoring the unique needs of bisexual men, find that casual sex is good for some people’s self-esteem, and show that women who get pregnant naturally at older ages may live longer.