I’ve been reading a lot the last twenty four hours. Being tired from my weekend and travelling, it seemed the perfect thing to do. Also, there was a very interesting decision in the Supreme Court of the United States yesterday, so despite being halfway through an engaging novel, I was pulled away, engrossed in reading the reactions on both sides of the issue.
The case was an issue of a large, for-profit company, Hobby Lobby, not wanting to include birth control and morning after pills in their insurance plan, as the owner is a Christian, and believes that such medication is abortion and murder. The ruling came down in the favor of Hobby Lobby, and has been heralded as a victory for religious freedom by their supporters.
On the other side, however, this has been seen as a setback for women’s rights, and a loss of personal liberty. It also effectively opens the door to other business owners of various faiths to modify the benefits of their employees. I hope to explain my own views and concerns regarding this ruling in a way respectful to all sides. I am not attacking any person’s faith or beliefs, and if you feel I misrepresent any part of this debate, please feel free to message me or comment below.
To begin, I feel a few things should be stated, as they are simple facts. Birth control and morning after pills are legal. There has been many debates and discussion over the morality of using such medications, but the fact is that they are legal medications. Also, prior to yesterday, corporations, whether publicly or privately owned, have never had the protections of human rights, such as religious freedoms. Organisations that are religious in nature are allowed to enjoy extra benefits, such as tax exemptions, but at the cost of not being for-profit businesses, as their goal is one of faith and spirituality.
Religion is personal, this is a foundation of our nation. When our nation was founded, this was a luxury not afforded to the masses, and the results were disastrous. Religion was wielded as a weapon, and you would be hard pressed to find someone today who would claim the crusades or inquisition were in the true spirit of faith. To avoid this in our own nation, it was decided that no one could tell you what to believe, that you could not be told who to pray to, and you could not be punished for your beliefs, only your actions. This freedom was to be extended to all, not just the rich, the powerful, the leaders of churches, but to you and I, to your neighbor down the street, to the homeless man on the corner.
I adore religious freedom. I want to preserve religious freedom. This ruling does not actually support religious freedom. Power has been handed back to the big and taken from the small. One man decides for many, this is in complete contrast of the founding principle. Though people may argue that this big man is losing his freedom, he is not. He is free to not take all the pills he wants, he is free to find a spouse who shares his beliefs and have as many children as he wishes. But as an employer, he is not allowed to tell someone how to live, worship, spend the money they are paid, or otherwise violate personal liberties. Yet we have opened that door again, one we aimed to close over two hundred years ago.
Religious freedom has before been used this way. Slavers once claimed that it was their religious right to own people, racists claimed it as grounds for discrimination and segregation. These were not men of faith, rather men who perverted it to their own desires. Today it is being used to limit legal medical treatment to women. Religious freedom is about granting liberty, not taking it. If a company run by Scientologists were to remove anti-depressants from their plans, would that be acceptable? If a Jewish business were allowed to deny an employee a valve replacement because it came from a pig, would that not be cruel? Religion, faith, spirituality are suppose to be deep founded personal beliefs and practices, not something forced upon others. Is that really the will of your Savior? Did he say “Beat that whore into the dirt with rocks ‘cause it’s your place to judge” or was it something much kinder and more evolved? Where is the love, the understanding, the charity of Christ in forcing your way of life upon another? These are not the actions to drive people to faith, but from it.
Beyond what I feel is a misunderstanding of religious freedom, there is another issue here, one that some might claim doesn’t personally affect me (which I would argue, but another time), but one that I am no less passionate about, and that is women’s equality. I know it is very unpopular among Hobby Lobby’s supporters to hear someone call this an attack on women, but I think I can explain exactly how with one example, erectile dysfunction (ED).
It is no secret that ED is on the rise. It is a wildfire, spreading across the nation, and there seems to be a pretty clear culprit, pornography addiction. Dr. Abraham Morgentaler, Director of Men’s Health Boston and Clinical Professor of Urology at Harvard Medical School, has said "It's hard to know exactly how many young men are suffering from porn-induced ED. But it's clear that this is a new phenomenon, and it's not rare." It is becoming evident that the majority of ED issues in our nation today are in fact porn related. You can find loads more information at http://www.yourbrainonporn.com both about the damaging effects and resources for help if you or someone you know has struggled with this addiction.
Pornography is considered a sin in the majority of Christian faiths, and more than likely by those supporting Hobby Lobby. Yet Viagra is covered by their health plan, and there seems to be no interest on their part in banning it (I am not advocating anyone opting out of any type of medical treatment for their employees here, simply pointing out facts). Despite that this drug is a symptom of sin, as they see birth control, it has not even come up on the radar. I truly believe that this is because it is a men’s issue, and the American public is not comfortable telling men what they can do with their bodies, yet for some reason we are with women.
It is no secret that women have not had the same benefits and security in our society historically, and they continue to suffer such inequality today. We have made great strides in gender equality, but we still have a long way to go, a little further today. The issues of abortion and birth control are one of many modern battlefields for the supporters of true gender equality. Women who do choose to not have children or to pursue an abortion are met with abuse (verbal, emotional, even physical) and accusations about their character. They are called careless, heartless and selfish, none of which are qualities I have seen in women I know who have been considering abortion. I see tormented, panicked women, caught in a bad situation, struggling with the decision for weeks upon weeks, trying to balance the needs of family, lover, society, self and child. To impose additional burden, complication or judgement on any woman in this situation for any reason I feel is a cruel deed, unjust and uncalled for, and above all, not your place.
The Bible actually says some beautiful things about judgement, but my personal favorite is Luke 6:37 “Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven” (Luke is actually the best writer in the bible, in my opinion. Regardless of your beliefs he has a marvelous way with words(I am agnostic, but I still read books on spirituality and faith)). Luke is not only telling us judgement and condemnation are not our place, but that forgiveness is the path of love, understanding and salvation. We must allow others to live their lives free, and meet pain with love. It is for this I feel Christians should not celebrate the SCOTUS decision, just as I feel it is for this reason church attendance across the nation is dwindling, especially among my own generation. Allowing corporations to be voices and champions for your faith will drive a greater divide between people. As we focus less on the personal nature of faith and more on it as a commanding presence we move ever backwards. Were CS Lewis not allowed to live and think as an atheist would he have become the champion of faith he did? I think not.
There are so many other points, arguments and distractions in this ruling, but I think these points are really what it come down to: freedom, women, faith. I hope I have offended no one, I hope I have made my points clear, and I hope we can continue to discuss and debate with thought and respect, and work towards a future where differences don’t disturb peace. Thank you for reading.
