Birth Control and the ACA
Whether or not to have a child and discuss the personal health-related lives of employees, has been an incongruity that companies preferred not to discuss. Many employers have provided birth control but not until it was regulated by the U.S. government has there been so much debate and dialogue between employees and employers, about their personal behavior. With the approval of Obamacare came a symposium of what methods to approve or challenge. Americans have largely been divided on the topic of birth control based on religious and political orientation, among other factors. The debate about whether businesses should support contraceptive coverage within their employee healthcare plans has been belabored since …show more content…
If there is a mandate that forces someone’s company to provide coverage for a service that goes against its faith then their right to religious freedom is being violated. In this particular case it’s hard to separate political views from religious ones, because the views are related and overlap. The central point of the argument against the mandate stems from the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The first amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” (findlaw.com) The Religious Freedom and Restoration Act upholds the first amendment and was established in 1993. It summarizes to the government not being able establish a law that substantially burdens a person’s religious …show more content…
(worldreligionnews.com) The Supreme Court thinks that beliefs are more important. In a 5 to 4 ruling, they ruled that the mandate was unlawful. Some unintended consequences that could take place due to this ruling are employees using their paychecks to get abortions, because they couldn’t get birth control coverage. A liberal commentator stated the following on the economist.com “The invariably low wage workers of these companies directly impacted will have that choice when an unwanted pregnancy occurs - abortion or more welfare/higher insurance costs.” This comment is the mindset of many liberals who were in support of the mandate. Liberals believe this ruling is based on the 5 conservative justices' personal prejudices---not on the Constitution or US statutory
Whether or not to have a child and discuss the personal health-related lives of employees, has been an incongruity that companies preferred not to discuss. Many employers have provided birth control but not until it was regulated by the U.S. government has there been so much debate and dialogue between employees and employers, about their personal behavior. With the approval of Obamacare came a symposium of what methods to approve or challenge. Americans have largely been divided on the topic of birth control based on religious and political orientation, among other factors. The debate about whether businesses should support contraceptive coverage within their employee healthcare plans has been belabored since …show more content…
If there is a mandate that forces someone’s company to provide coverage for a service that goes against its faith then their right to religious freedom is being violated. In this particular case it’s hard to separate political views from religious ones, because the views are related and overlap. The central point of the argument against the mandate stems from the First Amendment and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The first amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” (findlaw.com) The Religious Freedom and Restoration Act upholds the first amendment and was established in 1993. It summarizes to the government not being able establish a law that substantially burdens a person’s religious …show more content…
(worldreligionnews.com) The Supreme Court thinks that beliefs are more important. In a 5 to 4 ruling, they ruled that the mandate was unlawful. Some unintended consequences that could take place due to this ruling are employees using their paychecks to get abortions, because they couldn’t get birth control coverage. A liberal commentator stated the following on the economist.com “The invariably low wage workers of these companies directly impacted will have that choice when an unwanted pregnancy occurs - abortion or more welfare/higher insurance costs.” This comment is the mindset of many liberals who were in support of the mandate. Liberals believe this ruling is based on the 5 conservative justices' personal prejudices---not on the Constitution or US statutory