Except I'm not. I don't agree with SCOTUS at all.
I've never had a problem with unwanted, unplanned pregnancy. On the contrary, my pregnancies had to be heavily planned. I would personally never chose abortion for myself; I couldn't do it. I consider myself pro-life in that way.
However, I've always believed that my religious freedom should not trump your right to determine for yourself what is or is not right for your body. I may not agree with you choice and I may long for some alternatives, but I agree with your right to choose it.
I also recognize that some alternatives - like birth control - prevent abortions from needing to occur. I wish that my fellow Catholics would get on board with this idea as a means of preventing a much greater harm, in the church's view.
But ultimately your choices are your own. This is why is believe that SCOTUS's decision to side with Hobby Lobby has opened a Pandora's Box that will allow companies to opt out of paying for treatments under the veil of "religious freedom". Here is my concern...
Now, it's contraception. That may seem like no big deal to some, but that's because our own narrow-minded view is that the Christian ideals are the right ones.
As a special needs parent, my kid takes anti-anxiety medication. Other SN kids take varieties and cocktails of other drugs that allow them to focus, remain calm and regulated, and generally feel better by mitigating some psychiatric symptoms like depression or anxiety. Let's say that The Hubs' law firm was suddenly acquired by Scientologists. Scientologists do not agree with the use of psychiatric drugs. What if they decided that they no longer wanted to cover those drugs, leaving Jack in the lurch for his much-needed medication?
Now, SCOTUS didn't say anything about any treatments or drugs other than contraceptives, so that is like arguing apples and oranges...
Maybe, but the reality of the SCOTUS is that their rulings are used to establish legal precedent. When the Scientologist-run law firm decides to sue the state saying that state insurance mental health mandates infringe on their freedom to practice their religion as they see fit, they will use this Hobby Lobby case to establish rationale for why the SCOTUS should side with them. Basically, they 'll be saying, "You did it before, why not do it again?"
But they didn't outlaw anything. If you want a treatment that your company opts out of, then pay for it yourself!
Have you actually looked at the Explanation of Benefits pages that your insurer mails you? If not, you should. Health care isn't cheap. The amount billed to your insurance company is significantly more than you will ever see in a bill. If your insurance company denies a claim outright because it's not covered, you are responsible for that cost. Often, it is out of the financial reach of most families. Telling someone to pay full price for their medical care puts a huge strain on families. These drugs aren't cheap and - as such - can force parents to choose between paying rent or buying food and getting their kids' medications.
It's convenient to impose that on others when it does not affect you. Once it does, you'll fight harder against such rulings.
Okay, so just get another job! Go with a company that will cover your treatment!
It's funny that this would even be a consideration given that the Recession left so many out of work. Getting another job isn't always the answer and - in some cases can't come soon enough to cause not disruption in treatment. For some conditions, any disruption in treatment could have disastrous consequences.
I have the religious freedom to go be the Catholic I want to be. That freedom does not give me the liberty to force my choices upon others. And if we do not want the choices of others thrust upon us, our families, and our children, we should think long and hard about whether or not SCOTUS's decision means that much that we would be willing to sacrifice any number of treatments - blood transfusions, vaccines, and porcine heart valves are among those that are against the religious beliefs of some - for the ability to stop a woman from using contraception.
More importantly, would you be willing for your children to forgo those treatments? Something to think about, friends.