Was the Supreme Court right to rule that the Affordable Care Act violated the religio
1024
No - The ruling allows bosses to impose their religious beliefs on their employees. Besides, the Constitution grants religious freedom to individuals, not corporations.
483
Yes - The religious beliefs of company owners take precedence over their employees' right to have access to birth control.
Should religious family-owned companies be required to cover contraceptives under their insurance plans? The high court says no.
I'm curious how you nurses feel about this? Please take a second to vote in our quick poll.
This is a highly political topic, I'd rather not turn this into a hot argumentative subject, so please keep your comments civil :) But please feel free to comment. Thanks
In a 5-4 decision Monday, the Supreme Court allowed a key exemption to the health law's contraception coverage requirements when it ruled that closely held for-profit businesses could assert a religious objection to the Obama administration's regulations. What does it mean? Here are some questions and answers about the case.What did the court's ruling do?
The court's majority said that the for-profit companies that filed suit-Hobby Lobby Stores, a nationwide chain of 500 arts and crafts stores, and Conestoga Wood Specialties, a maker of custom cabinets-didn't have to offer female employeesall Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptivesas part of a package of preventive services that must be covered without copays or deductibles under the law. The companies had argued that several types of contraceptivesviolate their owners' religious beliefs. The ruling also covers a Hobby Lobby subsidiary, the Mardel Christian bookstores.
Shouldn't women have control over their own bodies - that is, have reproductive rights?
For women who demand complete control of their body, control should include preventing the risk of unwanted pregnancy through the responsible use of contraception or abstinence.
The statement, "It's my body and I can do what I want with it" is simply not true. In fact, all women AND men are already held responsible for using and controlling their bodies lawfully. Since we live in a physical world, almost all laws involve the control and use of our bodies in one way or another. Nobody is completely free to use their body any way they want. The use of our body is ALWAYS governed by its effect on others - especially harmful effects.
If someone wants to use their body in a way that harms others, our laws are especially restrictive in this regard and they are not free to do so. And if they do, shouldn't they be held responsible? Or were they simply exercising their 'right' to control and use their own body the way they wanted to? When a woman gets pregnant, it’s not just about her body anymore – it’s about her body AND the unborn child's body.
Also, 99% of all abortions are on pregnancies resulting from consensual sex, not forcible rape. Both the man and the woman clearly knew a pregnancy could result from sexual intercourse. Our public schools have all but guaranteed our children have this information through sex education classes at an early age - that sexual intercourse can result in a pregnancy - even when using contraceptives - and that teen pregnancies are extremely common. By having consensual sex, both the man and woman knowingly and willingly took an active part in causing an unborn child to stand in need of her body. They willingly involved themselves in becoming a part of a new child's life.
We should give women their due respect by acknowledging she had complete control of her body when she got pregnant and entered as a co-equal partner with a man in bringing a new life into this world. Likewise, men who don't want to share in the responsibility for their own children should also be acknowledged for their part - through the strict enforcement of child-support laws.
Ironically, many women report feeling a 'loss of control over their body' while on the operating table for an abortion. Post-abortive women have described their abortions as being similar to a rape and have even used the term "medical rape". Abortion involves the painful intrusion into a woman’s sexual organs by a masked stranger/abortionist who invades her body. Once she is on the operating table, she loses control over her body. Even if she protests and asks the abortionist to stop, chances are she will either be ignored or told that it’s too late to stop the abortion.
NancyJo Mann experienced complications from infection and bleeding following her abortion which eventually led to a hysterectomy (surgical removal of her uterus). Recalling her experience, she said: "Beforehand, I liked myself. I had never entertained the idea of abortion. But the minute that needle went through my abdomen, I hated it, because I knew it could not be reversed. I wanted to scream, ‘Don’t do this to me!"
Really? You mean when a woman gets pregnant, only SHE was involved and only SHE incurred the taxpayer expense to cover the cost of birth control?
Its not about shaming women - its about shaming BOTH those women AND MEN who have sex and then ask others to pay for it.
In fact, although women and men are involved in the act that creates a pregnancy, women are often the only ones who deal with the product of the pregnancy. The sperm donor often is not in the picture. Single mothers are much more common in our society than single fathers. Single parenthood is the leading socioeconomic indicator for poverty in women. If anyone incurs shame by conceiving a child out of wedlock these days it certainly isn't the man. The ones I've seen are either annoyed or proud of themselves. There is still a double standard in our society around sex.
In fact, although women and men are involved in the act that creates a pregnancy, women are often the only ones who deal with the product of the pregnancy. The sperm donor often is not in the picture.
We should give women their due respect by acknowledging she had complete control of her body when she got pregnant and entered as a co-equal partner with a man in bringing a new life into this world. Likewise, men who don't want to share in the responsibility for their own children should also be acknowledged for their part - through the strict enforcement of child-support laws.
Single parenthood is the leading socioeconomic indicator for poverty in women. If anyone incurs shame by conceiving a child out of wedlock these days it certainly isn't the man.
Yes, MEN need to be taken to court to take care of THEIR children. Regardless, taking the life of a child, born or unborn, is not justified.
What if the mother would suffer emotionally, physically, financially, etc. by carrying the baby to term?
Such burdens do not warrant killing a child outside the womb, nor do they warrant killing a child inside the womb. Teenagers are especially known for causing emotional and financial burdens on their parents, but this does not justify killing them.
But this question completely ignores the emotional, physical, and financial cost and burden we all caused our own parents. This easily violates the ethic of reciprocity known as the Golden Rule: "Do not treat others in ways you would not want to be treated." The answer to the question, "Are we thankful our parents didn't abort us?" would promptly reveal the unjust double-standard which desires less for others than ourselves. Furthermore, no civilized society would suggest killing such a 'burdensome' child after birth because that would be murder - regardless of whether the child is wanted or not.
With this in mind, any justifications for making abortions allowable for such cases seem disingenuous in light of the fact that any similar suggestion pertaining to a child already born, even a newborn, would be considered outrageous. Given the huge waiting list of adoptive parents in the U.S. who don't view childrearing as 'burdensome', why isn't adoption a reasonable alternative?
"There is usually a heartbeat (when the skull is crushed)." (Ref: Abortionist Carolyn Westhoff describing a partial birth abortion while testifying in court, "Forum: Abortion Trials and Tribulations", Washington Times, 4/25/2004)
But this question completely ignores the emotional, physical, and financial cost and burden we all caused our own parents. This easily violates the ethic of reciprocity known as the Golden Rule: "Do not treat others in ways you would not want to be treated." The answer to the question, "Are we thankful our parents didn't abort us?" would promptly reveal the unjust double-standard which desires less for others than ourselves.
Nope, I'm not. My mother should have had an abortion. I've believed this for many, many years. Having children with my biological father ruined her life. I am not so selfish to believe that my existence is more important than her well being. My birth essentially trapped my mother in a loveless, abusive marriage for 18 years. I'd rather she have terminated the pregnancy and gotten away when she could.
My patients get prescriptions for Colace. They do not have co-pays. They are poor and sick and they get their medicine. If they can 't pick it up it gets delivered to them. And then they stay out of the ICU.
Specializes in Med/Surg, Peds, Geriatrics, Home Health.
This is about more than contraception. This is a woman's health issue.
No, it is not a women's health issue. It is a legal issue and it has been put to rest. You want to make it a women's health issue, or an abortion issue, or a viagra issue, or whatever genius thing comes out of your mouths next, but the bottom line is this is about law.... it's about freedom of religion. And for the one above that said telling someone to find another job is something that only privileged people would say, oh my gosh what a surprise to hear that because all conservatives/republicans MUST be rich white men, right? Yeah, no. You are also wrong. You don't have to come from privilege to stand up for what you believe in. And WOW! Really people? You really compare birth control with viagra?? Do you need a refresher course to know what each of these do? Maslow's hierarchy of needs says that sex is a basic human need! That's why the viagra is covered! And i'm not sure but I believe abortions and birth control are NOT on that list of basic human needs. Just because YOU choose that for yourself doesn't mean I have to help you fund it. Keep changing the subject, keep rewording it into different ways, keep making huge generalized blanket statements to try to avoid what this court decision truly is about, but the bottom line is the decision was made and you all can just get over it. You don't like it? Too bad, nobody is forcing you to stay at that job. Move along and don't let the door hit ya in the butt. Put on your great big huge left wing panties and stop your crying.
Specializes in Med/Surg, Peds, Geriatrics, Home Health.
As a woman's health nurse who counsels women on birth control and pregnancy options every single day, I've got to say that I've never been so angry and upset by a thread at AN than I am at some of the responses in this thread. I just need to leave this thread before my head explodes.
Why? Because you think all women should feel like you do? Does it make you angry and upset because you feel every woman should have the right to murder her unborn child but other women do not feel that way? Well unfortunately we live in a country that says it's okay for you to do just that. It makes me angry and upset too, but for different reasons. Maybe as a woman's health nurse you should teach women not to have sex if they don't want children instead of expecting taxpayers to support them or just pointing them toward the nearest baby killer clinic. Yeah, makes my head explode too!
Specializes in Med/Surg, Peds, Geriatrics, Home Health.
If I was an employee of HL, PAYING for coverage, I'd be more than a little unhappy to have them having any say in any part of my coverage. "I've saved some sunlight if you should ever need a place away from darkness where your mind can feed." - Rod McKuen
And if I was a fetus and then you destroyed me, I'd also be more than a little unhappy. Pay for it yourself.
Specializes in Med/Surg, Peds, Geriatrics, Home Health.
Really? You mean when a woman gets pregnant, only SHE was involved and only SHE incurred the taxpayer expense to cover the cost of birth control? Its not about shaming women - its about shaming BOTH those women AND MEN who have sex and then ask others to pay for it.
The only woman "shamed" is the one forced to pay for someone elses birth control. I'm "shamed" because the government takes my tax money and filters it into such disgusting acts.
And if I was a fetus and then you destroyed me, I'd also be more than a little unhappy. Pay for it yourself.
It is IMPOSSIBLE for contraception to "destroy" a fetus. Contraception does absolutely nothing to disrupt an implanted pregnancy. The fetal stage does not begin until the 9th week.
cncyana
47 Posts
Shouldn't women have control over their own bodies - that is, have reproductive rights?
For women who demand complete control of their body, control should include preventing the risk of unwanted pregnancy through the responsible use of contraception or abstinence.
The statement, "It's my body and I can do what I want with it" is simply not true. In fact, all women AND men are already held responsible for using and controlling their bodies lawfully. Since we live in a physical world, almost all laws involve the control and use of our bodies in one way or another. Nobody is completely free to use their body any way they want. The use of our body is ALWAYS governed by its effect on others - especially harmful effects.
If someone wants to use their body in a way that harms others, our laws are especially restrictive in this regard and they are not free to do so. And if they do, shouldn't they be held responsible? Or were they simply exercising their 'right' to control and use their own body the way they wanted to? When a woman gets pregnant, it’s not just about her body anymore – it’s about her body AND the unborn child's body.
Also, 99% of all abortions are on pregnancies resulting from consensual sex, not forcible rape. Both the man and the woman clearly knew a pregnancy could result from sexual intercourse. Our public schools have all but guaranteed our children have this information through sex education classes at an early age - that sexual intercourse can result in a pregnancy - even when using contraceptives - and that teen pregnancies are extremely common. By having consensual sex, both the man and woman knowingly and willingly took an active part in causing an unborn child to stand in need of her body. They willingly involved themselves in becoming a part of a new child's life.
We should give women their due respect by acknowledging she had complete control of her body when she got pregnant and entered as a co-equal partner with a man in bringing a new life into this world. Likewise, men who don't want to share in the responsibility for their own children should also be acknowledged for their part - through the strict enforcement of child-support laws.
Ironically, many women report feeling a 'loss of control over their body' while on the operating table for an abortion. Post-abortive women have described their abortions as being similar to a rape and have even used the term "medical rape". Abortion involves the painful intrusion into a woman’s sexual organs by a masked stranger/abortionist who invades her body. Once she is on the operating table, she loses control over her body. Even if she protests and asks the abortionist to stop, chances are she will either be ignored or told that it’s too late to stop the abortion.
NancyJo Mann experienced complications from infection and bleeding following her abortion which eventually led to a hysterectomy (surgical removal of her uterus). Recalling her experience, she said: "Beforehand, I liked myself. I had never entertained the idea of abortion. But the minute that needle went through my abdomen, I hated it, because I knew it could not be reversed. I wanted to scream, ‘Don’t do this to me!"