Hobby Lobby case would thwart Obamacare's benefits for casual sex

The Hobby Lobby case could hurt Obamacare benefits for casual sex, as conflicts continue between religion and the sexual liberation agenda. Photo: http://www.doyougotinsurance.com/

WASHINGTON, December 2, 2013 — Obamacare has always included the agenda of sex-without-consequences. It was behind the original push for free birth control. It shows prominently in Colorado’s Obamacare ad campaigns promoting casual sex. It was reflected in speeches by President Obama: free birth control without even a co-pay; morning-after pills for those who didn’t use protection.

Even more liberating, Obamacare shifts responsibility away from both partners and onto somebody else: your boss. If employers like Hobby Lobby don’t liberate you by providing contraception, they must be pilloried and fined over a million dollars per day.

SEE RELATED: To our children and the Obamas: Thanksgiving is spiritual, not political

Obama cloaks his contraceptive mandate in asexual, clinical language, but he has always been in alliance with the movements spawned from the sexual revolution of the 1960’s. The sexual liberation agenda has always been in conflict with religion and traditional values.

It is not an isolated event that the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the Hobby Lobby case and sister cases on Obamacare’s mandate for employer-provided contraception and abortifacents. It is part of the war against religion launched as part of that sexual liberation agenda. The conflict that includes Hobby Lobby is explained by a statement attributed to an Obama appointee, Chai Feldblum: When sexual liberty comes into conflict with religious rights, sexual liberty wins.

Feldblum is a Georgetown University law professor and a lesbian. She was appointed by Obama to the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission). Through Feldblum’s efforts, the EEOC is seeking to advance that sexual liberty agenda aggressively. Obamacare is a separate beachhead but part of the same campaign.

It requires creative lawyering to undermine the explicit Constitutional right of religious freedom and supplant it with sexual rights that are nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. Part of that legal fight is lawsuits brought by Catholic institutions, including the University of Notre Dame, against Obamacare’s overall contraceptive mandate. But those lawsuits have not yet reached the Supreme Court.

SEE RELATED: Obama’s problems have not slowed down his agenda; he’s speeding it up

Three Obamacare cases are now before the Court, however. Among the issues raised, it’s the abortifacents that are the sticking point for the owners of Hobby Lobby, David and Barbara Green and their family.

I’ve known the Greens for years as I represented Oklahoma City in Congress. Media accounts are on-target when they say that the Greens run Hobby Lobby on Christian principles and that they built it from a tiny operation to a major national chain. Their stores all close on Sundays. They run faith-promoting religious ads on Easter and other occasions. They immerse themselves in community efforts but shy away from political activity. They pay workers well and provide health coverage that includes birth control, including 16 of 20 FDA-approved and Obamacare-required contraceptives. But the Greens draw the line at four particular contraceptives (two drugs and two devices) that they sincerely conclude induce abortion rather than preventing pregnancy.

For refusing to have a role in what they conclude is an abortion, they face fines of $100 per employee per day. For 13,000 workers, that is $1.3-million daily, $475-million per year. That is how severely the backers of Obamacare desire to punish anyone who opposes the sexual-social agenda behind their contraception mandate.

Why such an enormous penalty when most birth control pills are now an inexpensive product?

If there is one facet of Obamacare that was rigid from the beginning, it was absolutism on sex without pregnancy. The public may not know whether Obamacare covers an appendectomy, but they know it covers everything related to birth control.

Making birth control a “free” feature was a core goal for Planned Parenthood, the National Organization of Women and other feminist groups. In his typical no-compromise way, Obama made it an untouchable issue; he mentioned it in almost every speech he gave to promote Obamacare. His standard line was that he wanted to guarantee “affordable birth control.”

Then came Sandra Fluke. A feminist star was born when Rush Limbaugh’s over-the-top name-calling played into the hands of the feminists. Rush accurately identified their underlying theme of sexual freedom. But when he called Fluke a slut, later apologizing, his personal cheap shot allowed the Left to use their favorite theme of victimization and launch a phony War Against Women claim.

Obamacare’s effort to make birth control an issue of economic justice was always greatly exaggerated. Sandra Fluke claimed birth control might cost her $3,000 during law school even while her nearby Target was advertising birth control pills for $9 a month. In some places, it’s currently less. Even today, the left-wing website thinkprogress.com says “birth control can cost more than $1,000 each year.” Got that? It can cost over $1,000. Or it “may be” $3,000 over three years of law school. But it’s a lot more honest to talk about $9 a month at Target. As Obama himself might say, that’s less than a pack of gum a day.

A better and remarkably clear illustration of the agenda comes from the recent Obamacare ad campaign in Colorado, part of $21 million in taxpayer money spent trying to get 20-somethings to enroll. Sex and alcohol themes dominate the series of ads. In one, a young woman holds birth control pills, eyeballs a smirking guy and exclaims, “OMG, he’s hot! Let’s hope he’s as easy to get as this birth control. My health insurance covers the pill, which means all I have to worry about is getting him between the covers.” Below is the logo, “Thanks, Obamacare!”

Widely denounced for depicting young women as sluts, these ads reveal an agenda that’s always been behind the contraceptive mandate: to enable total sexual freedom, without commitment and without consequence.

When birth control became inexpensive and widely available it created conditions for America’s cultural upheaval. Women can have sex without the consequence of pregnancy and men can take advantage. But other consequences don’t cease, including diseases of the body, mind and spirit.

Despite phony pretense from the Left, there is no issue over availability of birth control. It’s widely available and immensely affordable. Nobody is taking it away and nobody is even talking about taking it away. Widespread availability and affordability is a permanent circumstance in America, even without Obamacare.

So why should Obama and other advocates impose a $475-million fine on Hobby Lobby when birth control pills can be bought for $9 a month? The only answer seems to be that the president and this alliance have zero tolerance for those who disagree with them, especially those who disagree with them publicly. They must compel us to join them and to demonstrate our obedience. Sorry, Mr. President, but I’m opposed to The Borg and we don’t need to be assimilated.

You can receive Ernest’s free newsletter by email. Simply sign up here.

This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.

More from Ernest Istook: Knowing the Inside
blog comments powered by Disqus
Ernest Istook

Ernest Istook spent 25 years in public office, including 14 years in Congress. He was rated one of the top 25 conservatives in the U.S. House of Representatives. Then was a Heritage Foundation fellow and a fellow at Harvard's Insitute of Politics, where he led a study group on Propaganda in American Politics Today. 

Now as a radio host and a commentator, Ernest aims to expose Washington's gimmicks--to help you avoid the pitfalls. He brings clarity out of the confusion. 

Native to Texas, Ernest transplanted to Oklahoma after graduating from Baylor University.

Contact Ernest Istook


Please enable pop-ups to use this feature, don't worry you can always turn them off later.

Question of the Day
Photo Galleries
Popular Threads
Powered by Disqus