Contraceptives and Condoms, Family Planning

Angry About the Hobby Lobby Case? Religious Barriers to Birth Control Are Nothing New

This week, the Supreme Court is hearing cases from two for-profit companies, Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood, who want a religious exemption from the Affordable Care Act mandate requiring health plans to cover birth control. If the Court rules in favor of the companies, any boss with an objection could potentially limit their employee’s access to birth control based on their own personal beliefs.

As this new video from Planned Parenthood Action Fund explains, this could be disastrous for millions of women all over America. But religious barriers to birth control are actually a problem worldwide. In many countries, major hospitals and clinics are run by faith-based organizations. And though some support family planning and offer comprehensive care,  others don’t offer a full array of contraceptive methods—or sometimes any contraception at all—because of religious beliefs.

At PAI, we think every woman should have access to the contraceptive method that works best for her. A woman in a developing country already faces many barriers in accessing family planning: she may walk miles to a clinic, or scrimp and save to afford the method she needs, or face a partner opposed to contraception altogether. Religion is just one more barrier standing in her way.

Birth control is every woman’s right (and no one else’s business) – no matter where she lives or who she works for. We hope the Supreme Court agrees.

4 Responses to “Angry About the Hobby Lobby Case? Religious Barriers to Birth Control Are Nothing New”

  1. Gordo

    Neither Hobby Lobby nor Conestoga Wood prevent a woman or man from obtaining and using birth control methods. Except for rape, copulation, whether for recreation or procreation, is a voluntary act. There is no valid reason why a company should be required to pay for either contraceptives or abortifacients.

    • lnn

      They should be required to do so because that is the law. What’s next? Will they deny treatment coverage for people who develop diabetes due to their overeating? Eating is a voluntary act. Will they deny treatment coverage for STDs because their religious convictions believe STDs are “immoral”? Will they deny treatment for alcohol abuse? Where would it end? Do Scientologists get to refuse payment for psychological treatments since their religion teaches that psychiatry is awful?

  2. John Light

    I could not agree more with views that you have expressed.

  3. John Light

    Could not agree more with the views that you have specified. Safe, dependable control over each individual’s birth planning is one of the greatest advances of the past one hundred years or more and further improvements need to be made and their use encouraged. Repression of and restrictions on birth planning is unacceptable in the modern progress made in science and individual human rights.

Comments are closed.

Most Recent

Visual_Insight_Header-01

Data for Development

Relevant, quality, and timely data are essential to effective policy and program design, and to monitoring the impact of interventions. Recognizing the importance of data for development, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) is working to build the capacity of … Continue Reading