In the wake of the infamous Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. case, many religious corporations are attempting to find more ways to opt out of providing coverage for contraceptives for their employees.
The most recent development involved several nonprofit corporations suing the Obama administration for the new accommodation they rolled out for religious nonprofits. The accommodation would allow the nonprofits in question to opt out of providing birth control by notifying the Department of Health and Human Services, who would then set up a third-party insurer to pay for the coverage. Religious nonprofits argue that taking this option would be giving their employees a “permission slip” to obtain contraceptives, which would violate their beliefs.
First of all, the whole “permission slip” idea is ridiculous. All it proves is that this issue isn’t about the violation of religious beliefs anymore — it’s about people trying to impose their beliefs on other people.
The Obama administration’s accommodation would take the blame off religious corporations for providing contraceptives to their workers, and still allow employees the coverage they need. This should be a win-win situation, but the corporations wouldn’t be able to sleep at night if they knew that someone, somewhere had access to birth control.
Let me make things clear. It’s not their problem what a woman decides to do with her own body. Period.
Many people who oppose the use of contraceptives seem to think the words contraceptive and abortifacient are synonymous with one another. Contraception is the use of methods or techniques that will prevent a pregnancy. An abortifacient is a drug which induces an abortion.
Somehow, in these court cases they ignore that many of their employees need the type of contraception that prevents fertilization, which is where most religious groups define as the beginning of life. These contraceptives prevent fertilization from occurring, and usually aren’t effective after fertilization has occurred — so I don’t know why people are claiming that all contraceptives do is take lives away.
If we’re going to be objective about this, there’s really no reason for any corporation, religious or otherwise, to be against their employees having access to contraceptives.
For one, there are numerous health benefits for women who are on birth control. One study from British Medical Journal followed over 46,000 female patients from 1,400 medical practices throughout the U.K. for up to 39 years. The study found that women who had taken oral contraception had a lower risk of death from any cause compared to those who had never taken oral contraception.
It’s also economically smart, because if women are using contraceptives, employers don’t have to worry as much about employees going on maternity leave. To get down to the root of things, the biggest question surrounding the Hobby Lobby case boiled down to this: do corporations have the same religious rights as individuals?
As I was watching the case move along, I wasn’t worried, because I thought the answer would be obvious. Corporations aren’t people. Technically, the definition of a corporation involves it being a separate legal entity from its owners entirely.
The bottom line is that corporations aren’t individuals. They account for hundreds, if not thousands of others who most likely have a variety of different beliefs. It is the responsibility of the people in charge of those corporations to provide for the people who provide for them. And yes, that does include providing for all of their healthcare needs.
Erin Bamer can be reached at [email protected]