Burwell v. Hobby Lobby
On November 25, 2013, Burwell sued Hobby Lobby for not providing certain health benefits for women. Hobby Lobby is a for profit company that is also a Christian owned company. They believed that they could exercise a right to deny female employee a complete female oriented healthcare(abortion, birth control, etc.). They used the Religious Freedom Act in order to argue their conservative belief toward pro life. On June 29, 2014, The Supreme Court decided with a 5-4 favoring Hobby Lobby because they believed that as a Christian organization they did not need to pay for certain women’s health benefit since it goes against their religion ideals.
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2013/13-354
Question:
How does this case promote women’s equality in the society? Does this court case benefit more women or not?
The Supreme Court case, Burrell v. Holly Lobby, does not benefit women in our society. The Supreme Court ruled that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 allows a for-profit company, Holly Lobby, to deny its employees contraceptive coverage, based on religious objection. In doing so, women employees of the company are denied financial coverage for medically prescribed birth control, which is unjust. The Affordable Care Act (ACA) mandates that employment group health care plans provide for FDA approved contraceptives, and it seems unfair that women are being denied this federally mandated right based on the religious opinions of their employer. Although one might argue that such employees willingly chose to work for a religious for-profit organization, it crosses a line to carry over those religious ideals into the personal right of privacy decisions women make regarding contraception. Women employees are unfortunately left with paying the prescription bill out of pocket, with jobs where employee wages are not high.
ReplyDeleteIn Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, limits the equality of women, adding another barrier between them and their equal rights. Religion in this case has limited the rights of women due to the supreme court decision siding with Hobby Lobby in their case for the Affordable Care Act. This court case in this scenario does not benefit women because it inhibits their rights in favor of religious concerns.
ReplyDeleteThe case does not benefit women because it denies women healthcare for abortion, birth control, etc. The Supreme Court decided in a 5-4 decision that as a christian organization that they did not need to pay for their healthcare.
ReplyDeleteThis case doesn't benefit women's equality. It denied women's acces to things the SCOTUS finds constitutional. I believe they did have the write to deny it, because it wasn't funded by the governement and it was a private organization.
ReplyDeleteThis case does not promote women's equality, because it is denying women from basic health care that should be provided for all regardless of gender. This case does benefit women on burrell"s side by fights for there rights but the outcome of it all does not support women.
ReplyDeleteThis case does not benefit women because women can not get the health care they need. They are unable to get abortions and birth control. Its unfair for the court to decide on a women's body rather than be concerned for her health
ReplyDeleteThis case does not benefit women because women can not get the health care they need. They are unable to get abortions and birth control. Its unfair for the court to decide on a women's body rather than be concerned for her health
ReplyDeleteThis case does not benefit women because women can not get the health care they need. They are unable to get abortions and birth control. Its unfair for the court to decide on a women's body rather than be concerned for her health
ReplyDeletewomen should be able to do whatever they want, and men should not be more superior then men.
ReplyDeleteThis case does not promote women's equality in society because they are denying certain healthcare to their women employees because they are a Christan owned company. Because they do not believe in birth control or abortions they deny the right for a woman to be in control of her own body and decide for herself. However, they do have the right because of the Religious Freedom Act. Nevertheless, this makes the court case's decision unhelpful in benefiting women by not supporting their equal rights.
ReplyDeleteit does not promote womens equality at all. Nor does it help women, women should be able to do what they want to do. Do You Boo Boo
ReplyDeleteThis case does not promote women's equality in our society. It is the complete opposite since, the supreme court decided that, as a christian organization, they do not need to pay for certain woman's health benefits since it goes against their religion ideals. It is not right for them to deny specific health benefits to women becuse to this day, it is much harder for a woman to get a job, and men have it much easier. The women have a hard enough time trying to make a living since they do not make nearly as much as a man even when doing the same work, so the last thing they need is to be denied health support.
ReplyDeleteit does not promote womens equality at all. Nor does it help women, women should be able to do what they want to do. Do You Boo Boo
ReplyDeleteThis case is an example of what type of "equality" we have. It limits their rights due to religious beliefs.Since its a christian company they have the right to do that. This shows the limitations of women in the religious field.
ReplyDeletethis case does no benefit women because they can't deny certain healthcare to women.
ReplyDeletethis case does no benefit women because they can't deny certain healthcare to women.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, it doesn't support women's equality denying health care because of religion.
ReplyDeleteThis case is not supportive of womens rights because it is denying them access of health benifits that are needed.
ReplyDeleteThis case is not supportive of womens rights because it is denying them access of health benifits that are needed.
ReplyDeleteThis case doesn't support women's equality and is denying their health care based on their religion.It is limiting their rights for religious beliefs.
ReplyDeleteThis case most definitely does not benefit women. It kind of creates a controversy between equal rights but religion, because it's like, women having the right to choose what they do regarding childbirth and prevention, but it's also going against their religion. I think it was probably a really hard decision to make because if they sided to strongly with the Hobby Lobby side, it would make it seem like they are favoring a religion over equal rights. It is a hard decision, because to force the insurance money and such for things regarding childbirth etc, may create a lot of problems with various groups of people, but it has to be included in insurance I assume. I think it doesn't promote women's equality, because if they did, they would let women have the right to choose what they do and are taking it away.
ReplyDeleteThis case does not promote women's equality because they are not allowed to have female oriented healthcare. With the religious freedom act, Hobby Lobby did not have to provide women's benefits. This case did not benefit women because the Supreme Court said that religious companies don't have to provide certain healthcare.
ReplyDeleteThere is a limit when it comes to religious ideals. You cannot revoke basic human rights because of religious ideals, it is unconstitutional. You are allowed to hold the idea that you disagree with it, but you cannot use those ideas to prevent others from basic rights that should not be denied. If you don't have to treat women the same because of your religious beliefs what else are you allowed to do to people despite it being unconstitutional?
ReplyDeleteUnless they also do not pay for men's reproductive health, then it's unfair for them to not pay for women's productive health. This would only promote gender equality if they did the same for men as they did for women, this court case does not benefit women in any shape or form.
ReplyDeleteThis court case does not benefit women, as it limits their contraceptive rights. The Hobby Lobby was a very controversial case, as it pitted women's rights against religious rights. This case limits women 's rights, but it did expand religious ones, making it more liberating for a religious company, but harder on female workers.
ReplyDeleteThis certainly does not benefit women they have limited options it isn't morally right to take away some health care benefits for women disregrading age religion.
ReplyDelete