Winter storm warning: The National Weather Service has posted a Winter Storm Warning for parts of the state Wednesday morning through Thursday morning.  Stay with WTIC NewsTalk 1080 for the latest forecast, and for traffic problems resulting from the weather. Read More

The Outrage

View Comments
(Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

(Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

RAYDUNAWAY Ray Dunaway
Read More

I can understand the outrage over yesterday’s decision from SCOTUS in the case of Sebelius v Hobby Lobby.  But judging from the reaction on line, and on air, it seems members of Our Lady of Perpetual Indignation have no idea what the case was about. The ruling won’t send the nation back to the days prior to Griswold v Connecticut which overturned a state law preventing the sale or use of contraceptives. But judging by the reaction from those on the left, one would think that’s what happened.

Self-proclaimed Native American, Lizzie Warren tweeted her fears that big corporations would “deny women access to basic care.”

No, they won’t.

The iconic Sandra Fluke expressed the same sentiments and fears based on………nothing.

By the way, Hobby Lobby covers the cost of birth control pills for all female employees. Their problem with Obamacare was that it mandated the inclusion of abortion-inducing drugs, such as the “morning after pill” in all policies and that violated the principles of the owner’s religious faith; And that’s where the first Amendment came into play.

And, the Supreme Court as well.

Most entertaining though, was the reaction from members of Congress, especially the Senate. The usual suspects were ready to man the barricades, storm the Bastille, and fire up the Guillotine.

Harry Reid managed to tweet:

“It’s time the 5 men on the Supreme Court stop deciding what happens to women”

At the core of Sebelius v Hobby Lobby was this question: Can the government force organizations to submit to regulations that counter their beliefs? 5 justices decided “no”.

And where might they have gotten that idea? Well, if Senator Reid’s memory was still intact he would remember.

In 1993, the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” sailed through Congress with overwhelming bi-partisan support and was signed by President Clinton. The RFRA allowed exemption from government mandates that would violate one’s religious beliefs.

Reid was not alone in expressing his anger at the Supreme Court’s ruling. He was joined by Barbara Boxer, Chuck Schumer, Patty Murray, and Dianne Feinstein, all of whom voted in favor of the RFRA.

There’s a reason Sen. Reid forgot. 1993 is after all, over 20 years ago, and well- with a failing memory it’s understandable that he might not remember. Just like he couldn’t recall who told him that then candidate Mitt Romney hadn’t paid taxes for 10 years.

So he has an excuse. Age.

But why did those champions of religious liberty mentioned above reverse their opinions?

It couldn’t be politics, could it?

View Comments
blog comments powered by Disqus
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 882 other followers