Hobby Lobby Case Summary

Even today the fight for reproductive health care has been problematic. Planned parenthood stands as an advocate for woman’s health. Planned Parenthood has strived to make a difference in woman’s reproductive health care and continues to implement their goals as stated in their mission statement: Planned Parenthood believes in the fundamental right of each individual, throughout the world, to manage his or her fertility, regardless of the individual's income, marital status, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin, or residence. (Planned Parenthood) Planned Parenthood demonstrates their mission statement to the fullest when performing services for anyone who walks into their available centers. Whether the patient in need has a low income, is diverse, has different sexual orientation, is of a young or old age, or lives in a different town Planned Parenthood will help. Planned parenthood does all of this and more because it is a right for woman, men, and teens. Should people who have lower income be refused medical attention? No. Should people of a different race be denied their rights as a U.S citizen? No. Should Planned parenthood, one of the main sex educators and trusted health care providers, be punished for helping and saving the lives of millions around the world? No. If all of these answers are no, why should Congress say yes to defunding Planned Parenthood, it

Planned Parenthood is a National issue fighting for abortion access, giving women facing an unintended pregnancy must have access to safe, legal abortion services. Birth control and the fact all people deserve access to birth control and other preventive care, health care equality and the idea all people should have equal access to reproductive health care. For years politicians in Congress and statehouses across the country have attacked Planned Parenthood’s patients’ access to care. But I believe Planned Parenthood’s health centers provide high quality, affordable reproductive health care, to 2.4 million people across the country. When politicians talk about defunding Planned Parenthood, they really mean depriving patients who depend on public

In the 1920s, birth control was a very significant issue that led to the controversial debate between Winter Russell and Margaret Sanger. Most people believed that Planned Parenthood caused the decline of population in human race. Many viewed it harmful to human being’s welfare. Sanger’s debate about birth control was to stand for the entitlement of women to access birth control. Today in our society, birth control plays a big role in our lives. It gives women the power to make a decision when or whether to get pregnant.

supporters of Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood is a non-profit organization that provides, "vital reproductive health care, sex education, and information to millions of women, men, and young people worldwide" (plannedparenthood.org). Planned Parenthood has been federally funded since 1970; however, because it provides access to safe and legal abortions, pro-life activist wish to cut federal funding for the facility. This debate has been around for decades, but protesters need to realize that Planned Parenthood is a lot more than just abortions. As a woman, I believe the general public and policy makers need to educate themselves on the numerous services that Planned

Birth control means This includes abortion or many other hormonal contraceptive methods. Many countries are now starting encourage this new policies in order to decrease the rate of population growth, which is affecting our Environment and society to a great extent. The main pros of enforcing a Birth control policy (according to the WHO) are: “Reducing infant mortality, Helping to prevent HIV/AIDS, Reducing adolescent pregnancies and Slowing population growth”.However, there are still some debates regarding how this practice comes against religious and ethical principles.

Planned Parenthood is a topic that is continuously discussed in correlation with the concept of money as many believe that it “...emphasizes abortions instead of preventative care” (Attira). Because of birthrights, abortions, and the controversy that surrounds such issues, many individuals believe that the government should not be responsible for providing funding. Therefore, actually defunding Planned Parenthood is often brought up as a solution to the highly-debated consensus of government-funded healthcare services. Although many believe that creating a barrier between opinion and action is a positive push, actually defunding the program would be more catastrophic than perceived. Defunding Planned Parenthood would mean blocking and preventing individuals from receiving the health care that they are reliant on. As a majority of the patients are low-income and living in Medically Underserved Areas, they are dependent on the organization because it is their only source for healthcare. To view in specifics, “In 2013, 78 percent of Planned Parenthood patients had incomes at or below 150 percent of the federal poverty line, which is $36,375 for a family of four” (Four Reasons). A majority of the individuals that are assisted are women of color; 22 percent being Latino and 14 percent being African American according to 2013 statistics. Further so, these two groups

Issue: Is there existence of a right in the Bill of Rights allowing married couples to use contraceptives to prevent conception?

The owners of Hobby Lobby Stores Inc., the Greens, devoted Christians and married couple who filed a suit back in November 26, 2013. This lawsuit was filed because of what the Green’s had to offer their employees in their health care agreement. Being devoted Christians, it is against most people’s belief to use contraceptives. As a business owner who is closed on Sundays and pays 90 percent more above the federal minimum wage, it 's safe to say that the Green’s mix their religious beliefs into their business and make sure there employees are taken care of. Out of 20 FDA approved contraceptives that are federally mandated, the Green’s had only objection to four of them. Those four contraceptives are the week after pill, the morning after pill, Plan B, and Ella. All these contraceptives are all forms of pills that help terminate a pregnancy. To the Green family they see these contraceptives as life-threatening drugs and do not follow their belief that life begins at the

Before the 1960s, not all women were allowed access to the popular birth control contraceptive known as “the pill.” Birth control pills were only given to married couples, due to the Supreme Court ruling in the year 1965. However, what about all the other unmarried women who needed means of contraceptives, right? Well, it was not until the year of 1972, that the supreme court ruled in Baird versus Eisenstadt, that the oral birth control contraceptive be legalized for all women regardless of what they marital status was at the time. This time period from the 1960s - 1980s was known as the Sexual Revolution.

Birth Control pills are a sort of drug that ladies can take every day to anticipate pregnancy. They are additionally frequently called "the pill" or oral contraception (Rowan 2011) Hormones are compound substances that control the working of the body 's organs. For this situation, the hormones in the Pill control the ovaries and the uterus.

Many people would argue that if the government were to stop funding Planned Parenthood that thousands of women would lose access to the medical care they need, but this is simply not true. There are alternative options to Planned Parenthood that provide safe primary care treatment, contraception, sexually transmitted disease (STD) testing, and cancer screenings. In the article “If Planned Parenthood goes, where do women go?” Charles C. Camosy, an associate professor of theological and social ethics at Fordham University, states, “Rather than the one-size-fits-all franchise approach of Planned Parenthood, these community health centers nicely embody the principle of subsidiarity in responding to the diverse local needs of women — whether in

The case of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. has opened the door for corporations to deny all kinds of protections and laws to their employees. What if the corporation in question was a car insurance company, and they did not want to cover their employees birth control? Would they still hold the same position if a citizen (or a whole state) claimed religious exemption to being forced to purchase car insurance? When asking if corporations should have religious freedoms, I think the more crucial question is should a corporation be considered a person. This relates to how we interpret the 14th Ammendment of the US Constitution. Only the people within the grouping of the corporation should be considered people and have religious freedom. Also, the rights of one person should never take precedent over, or limit, the rights of another.

One of the most effective and crucial programs for women’s health is currently under attack by the so-called president of the United States, Donald Trump. In an attempt to convince the people that he is willing to stand up for everyone, including the unborn, but instead, Mr. Trump is oppressing women and taking away their rights as human beings. Without Planned Parenthood, 2.5 million men and women would be left without affordable, high-quality health care. One in five women have visited a Planned Parenthood in their lifetime. The fact that all of the care and help Planned Parenthood gives can all be lost due to something as petty as abortion services is almost laughable. But, due to the severity of its effects, it is much more than just ridiculous.

Hobby Lobby ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby giving family owned businesses the right to be exempted from laws for religious exceptions. This lawsuit was in response to the Affordable Care Act’s insurance mandate of providing birth control to female employees. But some strict Christians are against certain methods of contraception due to the belief that the contraception prevents fertilized embryos from implantation. By allowing a business owner to remove the birth control methods that do not follow their Christian faith, the government is opening the door for other religious groups and businesses to reject other government mandated decisions. These decisions differ from the current conscientious objection laws that prevent healthcare providers from having to participate in procedures, such as abortions, if it goes against their moral beliefs (Harris, 981). However, the difference between conscientious objection and the results of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby is the limiting of access as result of the rulings. In the case of conscientious objection, an individual seeking an abortion may not be able to receive an abortion from her doctor because it is against the doctor’s morals to perform the procedure, but the patient will be given references on who will perform the procedure for her. In the case of the result of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the employees of Hobby Lobby do not have the option of having an IUD placement covered by their insurance, unless they

With culture and religion playing a big role in our everyday and life choices contraceptives go against a lot of cultural and religion choices and