Skip to main content

See also:

SCOTUS sides with conservative Christianity over Obamacare

Judge Samuel Alito wrote the majority Supreme Court opinion.
Judge Samuel Alito wrote the majority Supreme Court opinion.
Photo by Pool/Getty Images

Supreme Court decision

Rating:
Star4
Star
Star
Star
Star

Two rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) continue to reverberate days after being issued Monday, June 30. One with specific implications in California upholding the state ban on reparative therapy will be addressed more in detail here Thursday, while the other affects citizens across the nation holding a more conservative view of Christianity.

SCOTUS settled a conflict between the Afforable Care Act (Obamacare) and some religious freedom advocates over the so-called contraception mandate. The photo list shows the predictable partisan majority voting justices.

Obamacare mandated employers to pay for access to contraception as part of any health care provided. Hobby Lobby was at the forefront of companies challenging that providing some or all of the options in the contraception mandate violated their religious freedom.

In this case, the SCOTUS party-line vote fell in the right direction. For starters, there is no older or more core freedom in this nation than the freedom of religion sought by founders. While free expression is necessary for free worship, it ultimately affects the short-lived natural life while religious freedoms are eternal.

Moreover, Hobby Lobby was willing to provide most contraception. They felt paying for access to the so-called "morning-after pill" and intrauterine devices (IUDs) that prevent inseminated eggs from implanting in the uterus essentially kills a new life form. That may not be everyone's interpretation of when life starts but who is the government to dictate a reasonable belief?

The ruling continued to reverberate Tuesday, with Cory Booker (D-NJ) calling on congress to draft legislation to fix the SCOTUS ruling. He believes this makes health care decisions between the employer and employee rather than a medical decision. This may be of less importance to some Christians than the one between someone and God, but religious freedom includes the freedom for someone else to not believe in God.

Most legal experts agree that this decision will open the door for more battles over the extent of Obamacare. Knee-jerk conservatives may also want to consider whether this contraception mandate ruling could open the door for someone not funding a war that runs counter to their religious view, etc.

Legislation could indeed fix the problem without opening up new ones if the wings of both parties could accept funded alternatives. Citizens should not be forced to go without a service because of someone else's religious belief, but no businessperson's reasonable religious freedom should be violated by the contraception mandate.

Perhaps the business and employee could opt for an alternate service. Obamacare can already fill in the gaps with currently-funded alternatives, but do not count on any additional solutions in the partisan society we live in: Democrats will try to fight any limits and Republicans will seek to gain even more ground with this SCOTUS ruling undermining their top enemy, Obama(care).