That's perfect. Hobby Lobby is the lowest common denominator.First off, The Pelican would say Hobby Lobby is full of a bunch of religious nut-bags for wanting to defy Obamacare. . . . there's the Stern tie-in.
In a nutshell, Hobby Lobby intends to defy Obamacare's provision that they provide health insurance plans to its employees that includes the morning-after pill. Hobby Lobby doesn't want to be part of anything that "induces abortion." http://www.newser.com/story/160005/h...obamacare.html
Quick disclosure: I personally think the US government should fund abortion clinics, give out free morning-after pills, free IUD's, the whole bit. I have no problem with abortion. There should be more of them in my opinion.
That said, in what is supposed to be a free country, shouldn't it be the prerogative of individuals and businesses whether they want to participate explicitly in a program they find reprehensible? What victory is it for freedom, the freedom to live your life according to your values, when the US government wants to force a company to provide a type of health-insurance they believe to be evil?
Sure, we all pay taxes that go to shit we despise but it's nothing explicit. There is no line item in our taxes paid that reads, "War on Drugs tax" or "bombing a shit-berg country half-a-world-away tax."
Am I out of line here to think forcing a business to participate in what it considers morally wrong? Yes, the Hobby Lobby is probably coming from a religious angle on this issue, but what's wrong with that? Isn't one of the bedrocks of the US the freedom of religion? Even if one considers religious expression silly, think of it from the opposite: What if the US government explicitly forced a atheist-run business to fund a church? Say there was a provision of Obamacare that forced businesses to provide health insurance that covers religious consultation to the sick?
It all flies in the face of what I personally consider freedom. What say you?