Watchman on the Wall, by Jennifer LeClaire

Want to receive Watchman on the Wall by email? Sign up here

4 Ridiculous Lies Anti-Life Liberals Are Spreading About Hobby Lobby Victory

News crews await Hobby Lobby decision from SCOTUS
Media crews gather outside the Supreme Court building in anticipation of Monday's Hobby Lobby decision. (Reuters/Gary Cameron)

Christians rejoiced on Monday as the Supreme Court ruled that business owners—like Hobby Lobby—don't have to provide birth control as part of their health insurance plans if it violates their religious conscience.

Within moments of the announcement, all the typical rhetoric flooded my e-mail inbox. Here are four ridiculous lies liberals are spreading about the Hobby Lobby victory:

1. The Supreme Court sanctioned discrimination against women.

The National Health Law Program (NHeLP) opined about how the High Court's decision has "far-reaching ramifications for women's health."

"The Court has sanctioned discrimination against women," said Elizabeth Taylor, executive director of NHeLP. "By providing some companies an opt-out of federal law, the court has singled out women's health and permitted these bosses to impose their beliefs on their employees' health care—absolutely unacceptable." 

The truth is this ruling wasn't about women's health or women's rights at all. Rushing out with the Twitter hashtag #NotMyBossesBusiness doesn't change that. This case was about the legally protected rights of privately-owned businesses to follow their religious convictions. If women want healthcare coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, there are plenty of places besides Hobby Lobby and Catholic universities to work.

2. The Supreme Court is endangering the healthcare of women.

The American Humanist Association (AHA) was also up in arms about the ruling. Roy Speckhardt, executive director of the AHA, argued that the High Court has placed the religious views of corporate shareholders over the legitimate health care concerns of employees—and more.

"The Supreme Court is endangering the health care of many Americans based on the fictitious idea that a corporation has religious convictions," said David Niose, legal director of the AHA's Appignani Humanist Legal Center. "By expanding the rights of corporations, this court is in fact contracting the rights of hard-working Americans who expect full health care coverage as required by law."

The truth is women can buy their own abortifacients—substances that induce abortion to which Hobby Lobby was opposed—if they really want to end the life growing inside them. Not getting insurance coverage for the abortion-inducing drugs that Hobby Lobby is standing against doesn't endanger anyone's health but the pre-born baby's.

3. The Supreme Court just opened Pandora's Box.

NARAL Pro-Choice America is incensed, saying the decision by "five male justices is a direct attack on women and our fundamental rights" that "allows bosses to reach beyond the boardroom and into their employees' bedrooms."

Ilyse Hogue, president of NARAL, argued, "Today it's birth control; tomorrow it could be any personal medical decision, from starting a family to getting life-saving vaccinations or blood transfusions."

Please. Of all the liberal arguments, this one is perhaps the most ridiculous. The justices did not launch an attack on women. Women can still buy birth control, Plan B or whatever abortifacient they want with a doctor's prescription. There's just no reason a Christian company should be forced to pay for it.

4. This Is the First Amendment Gone Mad

Meanwhile, opponents of the Supreme Court decision are upset that corporations are being treated as "persons" that are entitled to First Amendment rights. A group of Christians even gathered Monday night to hold a prayer vigil opposing the Supreme Court decision.

Rev. Richard Cizik, former vice president of the National Association of Evangelicals, put it this way: "If you are pro-religious liberty and pro-life and family, you can't support allowing a for-profit corporation to use religion to deny contraceptive coverage."

It's important to understand that Monday's decision wasn't chiefly based on the First Amendment but on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, or RFRA. President Clinton signed RFRA into law in 1993 as a means to protect religion from the federal government. As a side note, it's also important to understand that the employer mandate was an order from HHS and not actually attached to Obamacare, as the uprising would have you believe.

Finally, Nita Chaudhary, co-founder of UltraViolet, a national women's advocacy organization, isn't just pumping out rhetoric about this so-called "outrageous precedent" that puts "women's health at risk" and "imperils women's access to comprehensive healthcare." She's also urging President Obama and Congress to take action to immediately remedy this alleged injustice.

Justice was served, Ms. Chaudhary. Justice was served.


Jennifer LeClaire is news editor at Charisma. She is also the author of several books, including The Making of a ProphetYou can email Jennifer at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  or visit her website here. You can also join Jennifer on Facebook or follow her on Twitter.

Did you enjoy this blog? Click here to receive it by email.

Your Turn

Comment Guidelines
View/Add Comments
Use Desktop Layout
Charisma News - Informing believers with news from a Spirit-filled perspective
button
button

Newsletters from Charisma

Stay in touch with the news, bloggers and articles that you enjoy.