Previously, a religious organization can opt to employ based on its convictions, but that has not included corporations with a primary objective of economic gain. As of today, corporations (not religious entities) can decide for themselves which laws they will obey and which they will not on the basis of their religious beliefs.
The last time I checked, corporations are inanimate and incapable of holding beliefs. The whims of corporations should not ever supersede the law of the land.
While I'm thinking about it, I'd really like to know how one measures sincerity. Is there a sincerometer?
Read my original text copy of Ginsberg's Dissenting Opinion here.
A couple of gems pulled from these pages you need see. This decision is primarily concerned with the employers' primary aim of denying contraception and certain types of health coverage to women.
“The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.” - Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505; U. S. 833, 856 (1992).
“Women of childbearing age spend 68 percent more in out-of-pocket health care costs than men.” - Sen. Mikulski
"I would reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit and affirm the
judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit." - Justice Ginsberg
I support Justice Ginsberg's recommendation as my reading thus far suggests the ruling is blatantly discriminatory on the basis of religion and creates a climate of discrimination based on gender, more specifically, the reproductive rights of women. The opinions here are my own and not necessarily a representation of the diversity of the Asheville chapter of the National Organization for Women.
- Sherri McLendon
Vice President of Asheville NOW
Vice President of Asheville NOW
Feel free to add your own findings and insights. Feel free to be outraged, but please choose your words wisely. We reserve the right to edit comments for a cross-generational audience.
