Clearing Up Some Confusion on the Hobby Lobby/Conestoga Case

I’ve noticed a lot of confusion this week in reports about the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the HHS Mandate. Here are two clarification points for you as you’re reading about the case:

Supreme CourtFirst — Many media outlets are saying the two companies, Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties, oppose providing birth control coverage to their employees. This is not true. The family owners of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga opposed only four of the 20 types of contraception that the government requires employers to provide. The families argued that the four types aren’t just contraception; they can be abortion-causing, life-destroying. Abortion is what the families object to paying for.

Second — Some pro-abortion groups claim that the four drugs/devices in question don’t cause abortions because they don’t interrupt a pregnancy. However, these groups define pregnancy as beginning when the embryo implants in his/her mother’s uterus. They fail to acknowledge that a new human life begins before that point. According to biologists, a new human being forms at the moment of fertilization. The four drugs/devices may sometimes work by preventing an embryo from implanting in the womb, thus killing him or her. That’s why the families who own Hobby Lobby and Conestoga are opposed. They do not want to be forced to pay for the destruction of innocent human lives.

As you read news about the case, please keep these facts in mind.

Comments are closed.