Ashley Markel, in Western New York, recently organized a protest
against the United States Supreme Court decision in Burwell V. Hobby Lobby.
By a vote of 5-4 the court decided that privately held,
for-profit companies are exempt from a provision of the Affordable Care Act
that requires businesses to cover abortifacients, drugs that cause abortions.
Ms. Markel told WIVB News,
“It’s a step backward. We’re all here
to stand up for women’s rights and equality.” (1)
But lets be clear about this ruling.
The Hobby Lobby ruling only invalidates four out of the twenty contraceptives mandated by the ACA. That leaves sixteen other options on the
table covered for their employees.
According to WIVB News,
“Markel and
others worry that the Supreme Court’s decision may be interpreted more broadly
than that by other corporations, who may choose not to cover “regular” forms
of birth control, because of it.”
I’d say that if she is correct, the outcome will fall into the
category of unintended consequences.
There is a seventeenth choice, though not a popular one for obvious reasons.
Abstinence could be considered a "regular" form of birth control. Its free and effective. The primary reasons given for considering an abortion are of a self interest nature. (2) If the desire to maintain a standard of living, continue a course of education, or continue a career path outweighed the desire to have sexual relations, abstinence would be a good choice.
(1)
http://wivb.com/2014/07/12/womens-rights-advocates-protest-hobby-lobby-birth-control-decision/
(2)
http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/a/AbortionReasons_2.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment