General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSoooooooooo... now corporations can "define" what an abortion is?
Read the decision, the SCOTUS's more or less take the corporations word for what an abortion is... they weren't going off of any relative professional input.....
This decision
was
not
thought
through
Regards
BootinUp
(47,207 posts)Xipe Totec
(43,892 posts)uponit7771
(90,370 posts)Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)barefoot and pregnant if they've a religious reason for doing so.
uponit7771
(90,370 posts)... like what do they call an "alternative" that should be offered.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)They referred specifically to the setup where religious nonprofits would have their workers covered by a health plan that put 100% of the burden of payment on the insurer to supply contraception, and they even cited the fact that those costs would net out with the costs of the pregnancies they would prevent.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)They took the FDA's impression of what an abortifacient might be. They referred to a FDA website:
http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/byaudience/forwomen/freepublications/ucm313215.htm
where the words, "It may also work ... by preventing attachment (implantation) to the womb (uterus)." were used to describe Plan B, the words "It may also work by changing the lining of the womb (uterus) that may prevent attachment (implantation)." were used to describe Ella (ulipristal acetate), and the words "...may prevent the egg from attaching (implanting) in the womb (uterus)." were used in describing the copper IUD.
If any of the above is provably untrue, why didn't the government make that case?
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)You can't abort prior to the start of a pregnancy.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)But some view fertilization as the moment that human life begins. The SCOTUS just said that RFRA covers that belief.
toddwv
(2,830 posts)The right-wing idealogues that constitute Robert's SCOTUS know EXACTLY what they are doing and have thought it through. This precedent, regardless of their verbage about how it's limited in application, opens the door and you can guarantee that the corporatists and the American Taliban will flood through it.
BootinUp
(47,207 posts)uponit7771
(90,370 posts)... Alitos logic is.. I mean ... even he doesn't believe the shit he tried to pass as law
longship
(40,416 posts)Against all that biological science says.
Note that they deliberately limited this ruling to the girly parts of medicine.
Did I mention that they are all Catholic?
Pshaw!
uponit7771
(90,370 posts)... kinda funny why they would only apply that logic in this context and be so wrong about the particulars
longship
(40,416 posts)Why indeed?
One can barely ignore the inevitable conclusion.
It's those girly bits and they're Catholics.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Very much like what they did with Bush v. Gore.