At a glance, there are at least three glaring factual errors in this:
1. Hobby Lobby, while employing some 17,000 Americans in 600 or so stores, is not really a "big corporation." It is not publicly-traded, and is owned by a single family, the Greens, of Oklahoma City.
2. Hobby Lobby is not denying women "access to basic care." The company is giving its employees health insurance; is willing to provide 16 of 20 birth control options under its plan; and only objects to the four "birth control" options that, in their view, constitute abortifacients that end what their religion tells them are human lives. Women employees remain free to go purchase those abortifacients at the local pharmacy using their own money. Is the English language really so degraded in our current political culture that the sentence "X refuses to pay for Y to get Z where Y can easily pay for Z herself" now means "X denies Y access to Z"? (All of this begging the question... why is birth control considered part of "basic care" to begin with? Sex and pregnancy are not diseases.)
3. "Vague moral objections"? Is Warren unaware that the largest Christian denominations in the world (and Islam for that matter) believe that conscious action to abort a human child is a grave sin? Calling a fundamental tenet of both Catholicism and Evangelical Christianity a "vague moral objection" strikes me as walking right up to the edge of religious bigotry.
I don't know what's sadder: that this person is a U.S. Senator; that this person may be a candidate for the 2016 Democratic nomination for President; or that this supposed "intellectual" was once a full professor at Harvard Law School.
No comments:
Post a Comment