"Against Their Conscience"

     Conestoga Wood and Hobby Lobby have both filed cases wanting an exemption from including contraceptive services in their employee's health plan based on religious grounds. The New York Times posted an editorial anticipating the "showdown" on March 25.

     The editorial states the Supreme Court will have to decide whether or not this contraceptive condition breaks an act passed in 1993 granting more religious freedom. Both companies argue that including cost-free contraceptive services infringes on their religious liberty by forcing them to act against their conscience (beliefs). However the Obama administration argues the condition does not go as far as to violate the act as it does not rise "to a 'substantial burden' on religious expression." Another argument being whether corporations can be considered the "persons" protected by the act. Though a separation between church and state may prove a decisive factor in the case (as it would argue religious freedom for employees) it appears as though this argument has taken a backseat among the back and forth between the parties.

     I am personally for the use of contraceptives even though it goes against my religious beliefs. I feel we need to take interest in this case as it could spell out how much power religion may gain over government again. I understand the religious stance against birth control but in a world ruled by sex and its consequences (disease and overpopulation) I honestly consider birth control as a valid service needing to be fully covered by health plans. We are granted religious freedom by the Constitution and these companies are infringing on this right by trying to invalidate the coverage of contraceptive use from their health plans thus forcing [the companies] religious views onto [its] employees.