[quote=UCGal]As mentioned above. What if a private corp is owned by a Christian Scientist. Are they allowed to impose their religious beliefs on their employees and offer NO medical care?
Or Jehovah Witnesses – refuse to cover blood transfusions?
What about Catholics? They believe any birth control is a sin, right? So can Catholic business owners insist that the employer provided insurance provide not birth control – even if it’s being used for non – birth control purposes?
I find it interesting that the precedence for this decision was the one that allowed (vs restricted) the use of peyote for religious purposes. The precedence was expanding the ways to practice your beliefs (without impacting those around them.) This case is a twist on that – the religious rights of the owners trump the religious rights of the employees. They are allowed to restrict access to something that is legal and should be between a woman and her doctor. They are basically putting the employer/owners in the position of parent, and the employees in the position of child.[/quote]
UCGal: You’re engaging in an overly broad reading of an extremely limited decision of narrow scope.
But if we follow the bouncing ball, and? If I read the decision correctly, an employee is eligible for recompense, regardless.
