Monday, June 30, 2014

Supreme Court

No, I haven't read the rulings and I don't know all of the details, but I am truly disgusted at the Supreme Court's recent rulings in regard to women's health care.

1) The elimination of the buffer zones around clinics.  The Supreme Court has its own buffer zone.  These clinics have been the target of significant amounts of violence, including murder.  Police have been unable to keep staff and visitors to the clinics safe.  The buffer zones were workable help.  Surely the protesters are still allowed to protest, but there is no guarantee in the first amendment that people have to listen.  Nor should the physical safety of the staff and visitors be so blatantly threatened.  Buffer zones exist in other circumstances as well.  This was a bad decision.

2) Hobby Lobby and contraceptives.  I don't want employers to be deciding on women's health care.  Period.  As Ruth Bader Ginsburg has said, this is a very slippery slope.  Additional questions:  So, is it now legal to ask potential employers what their personal beliefs on birth control are?  Will they be required to disclose to applicants that their insurance policies are incomplete?  

"Still, according to studies from Columbia University and New York University, closely held corporations employed 52 percent of the American workforce and accounted for slightly more than half -- 51 percent -- of economic output from the private sector." 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.../a-lot-of-people-could.../ 

In other words, over half of the American workforce could be affected by this decision.  

I am disgusted. 
__________________________________

Addendum:  I am still disgusted, but I also need to add that I am alarmed at how rapidly this "narrow" decision has widened.  There are supposedly 149 cases already pending that the lower courts will be allowed to use this ruling to determine.  These cases encompass not only the birth control methods objected to in the Hobby Lobby case, but additional methods and even ALL types of birth control.  This could be a major disaster for women.
 

2 comments:

  1. Well said, Laura. Defining corporations as persons who can, therefore, hold a religious belief, opened up a hornet's nest of problems. Why is it always women who end up being hurt?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cynically, I would say it is because most of us don't own Congressional representatives and judges.

      Delete