There is a well-publicized bit of untruth out there being pushed by Senator Patty Murray whose credibility should be taking a pretty big shot right now, (as viewable in video in, “Democrats Unveil Bill to Reverse Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby Ruling,” Stephanie Condon, 7/9/2014, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/democrats-unveil-bill-to-reverse-supreme-courts-hobby-lobby-ruling/.
Senator Murray falsely attributes the following to the Hobby Lobby decision and states, “People across the country understand that if bosses can deny birth control they can deny vaccines, HIV treatment or other basic health services for employees or their dependents.”
The Supreme Court SAID, "THIS DECISION CONCERNS ONLY THE CONTRACEPTIVE MANDATE and should not be understood to hold that all insurance-coverage mandates, e.g., for VACCINATIONS or BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS, must necessarily fail if they conflict with an employer's religious beliefs. Nor does it provide a shield for employers who might cloak illegal discrimination as a religious practice." (emphasis added), page 5, http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf.
Senator Murray also uses the term “BOSSES.” But there are already MILLIONS of people whose bosses are not bound by Obamacare at all and/or are not required to provide free contraceptives. For Obamacare fetishists, wake up, THE LAW ITSELF EXEMPTS EMPLOYERS ALREADY!
The decision states, “All told, the contraceptive mandate ‘presently does not apply to tens of millions of people.” 723 F. 3d 1114, 1143 (CA10 2013).” As noted by the Court, “In addition to these exemptions for religious organiza¬tions, ACA exempts a great many employers from most of its coverage requirements. Employers providing ‘grandfa¬thered health plans’—those that existed prior to March23, 2010, and that have not made specified changes after that date—need not comply with many of the Act’s re¬quirements, including the contraceptive mandate. 42 U. S. C. §§18011(a), (e). And employers with fewer than 50 employees are not required to provide health insurance at all 26 U. S. C. §4980H(c)(2),” pages 16-17, http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf.
STOP flipping out.
The decision SUPPORTED OBAMACARE and its FREE birth control idea even for the specific forms of birth control at issue. That provision is SUPPORTED. The Court stated, “We will assume that the interest in guaranteeing cost-free access to the four challenged contraceptive methods is compelling within the meaning of RFRA,” http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf, p.46. THAT’S what it SAYS, the interest of guaranteeing cost-free access to…contraceptive methods is compelling.”
In the context of establishing the LEAST RESTRICTIVE way of getting women their free birth control, as provided by the RFRA, the Supreme Court suggested the possibility for “the Government to assume the cost of providing the four contraceptives at issue to any women who are unable to obtain them under their health-insurance policies due to their employers’ religious objections,” http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf, p. 47.
The decision held that “As applied to closely held corporations, the HHS regulations imposing the contraceptive mandate violate RFRA,” http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf, page 2.
