COMPELLING INTEREST: and legalize… Strict Scrutiny…or secular law vs religious law A standard of Judicial Review for a challenged policy in which the court presumes the policy to be invalid unless the government can demonstrate a compelling interest to justify the policy. In this instance can the government justify requiring an employer to provide birth control to an employee based on the view that a woman’s health is more compelling than a company’s religious view based on the religious view of the business owner. The emotional argument made by Michelle Malkin is “Hobby Lobby’s company health insurance plan covers 16 of the 20 FDA-approved contraceptives required under the Obamacare mandate — at no additional costs to employees. What Hobby Lobby refuses to do is to be forced to cover abortifacients that violate the owners’ faith and conscience. Every employee is aware of the founders’ history, devout work ethic and faith. No one is forced to work at Hobby Lobby. If workers want birth control, they can pay for it themselves. (And unlike so many other service workers, they have more take-home pay to spend on the “preventive services” of their choice.) “ Apparently Hobby Lobby dedication to biblical principles that led Hobby Lobby in April to raise full-time employees’ starting minimum wage to $14 None the less… Unfortunately for their women employees, the companies science is in line with those who think people and dinosaurs walked the earth at the same time. According to a friend of the court brief filed in the Hobby Lobby case by Physicians for Reproductive Health, the companies fail to cite any scientific authority for their assertions that any FDA-approved contraceptives are abortifacients ... there is no scientific evidence that emergency contraceptives available in the United States and approved by the FDA effect an existing pregnancy. None, therefore are properly classified as abortifacients.
Posted on: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 15:09:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015