Enter to win every day in CTNOW's 21 Days of Summer Giveaways. Click here to see today's prize.

Hobby Lobby ruling an affront to women's rights [Letter]

Your editorial on the Hobby Lobby ruling is correct in saying that by limiting full access to contraceptives, the Supreme Court's decision likely will lead to more unwanted pregnancies and the social harms they cause ("Corporations trump people in Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby decision," June 30).

Furthermore, The Sun accurately stated that companies would now be able to argue other matters on the basis of "religious freedom," at the expense of freedoms the Constitution originally granted to individuals.

Yet The Sun failed to articulate the most central — and most worrying — aspect of the Hobby Lobby decision: Its affront to women's rights.

At its core, this decision removes women's control over their bodies, and therefore, their lives. Focusing on the public health outcomes of the case ignores the hard fact that the U.S. is backtracking on gender equality, while simultaneously awarding expanding power to corporations.

Indeed, corporations are dangerously close to having more rights than women. In Hobby Lobby's case, the company now has the authority — cloaked as constitutional liberty — over a choice that should not be its concern.

But the trouble really started with the Citizens United ruling in 2010. What we need is a constitutional amendment that clearly states that corporations are not people and are not entitled to the constitutional rights individuals enjoy.

At the very least, women would have one fewer opponent in their struggle for equality.

Maggie Tennis, Baltimore

-
To respond to this letter, send an email to talkback@baltimoresun.com. Please include your name and contact information.

Copyright © 2015, CT Now
Related Content
  • Little Sisters treated shamefully

    Little Sisters treated shamefully

    President Barack Obama's federal government has scored another big win in its war on religion in the United States, which used to be a nation under God ("Federal court rules against Little Sisters of the Poor," July 15). We should be ashamed of our court system as well as this "government" pledged...

  • School birth control makes parents' jobs harder

    School birth control makes parents' jobs harder

    It is the parents' job to teach their children right from wrong. At the very least, schools should not be making the parents' job harder ("Amid teen pregnancy decline, debate renewed about birth control in schools," June 6).

  • Stokes, like many before him, is wrong on birth control

    Stokes, like many before him, is wrong on birth control

    Readers Diana Philip and Spencer Hall were right to call out City Councilman Carl Stokes for his characterization of teen access to contraceptives as "a racist policy targeting African-American youth" ("Teens have a right to birth control," June 11).

  • Teens have a right to birth control

    Teens have a right to birth control

    As two organizations committed to increasing access to reproductive health care services for all Marylanders, we were glad to see The Sun highlight the availability of contraceptives in school-based health clinics ("Amid teen pregnancy decline, debate renewed about birth control in schools," June...

  • Little Sisters' employees have rights, too

    Little Sisters' employees have rights, too

    The Founders wisely gave us the First Amendment so that the followers of one faith could not force others to live their lives according to that faith. They had already seen how religion could be the basis for so much suffering. The case of the Little Sisters of the Poor and the Affordable Care...

  • Birth control in schools: Times have changed, and we must change with them

    Birth control in schools: Times have changed, and we must change with them

    The front-page Sun article "School birth control debated" (June 7) deserved the big headline. It is time for everyone to review the present and not the past. Thirty years ago, we would not have blinked an eye: Our parents would have said no to birth control; case closed. That was then, the good...

  • Pills don't prevent STDs

    Pills don't prevent STDs

    This letter is in response to Susan Reimer's column about the GOP's attitude about birth control ("On birth control, young Republicans get it," April 15). I think Ms. Reimer's opinion is very narrow-minded. While I agree that young people often have premarital sex with no desire to procreate, I...

  • On birth control, young Republicans get it

    On birth control, young Republicans get it

    Two-thirds of young Republicans believe that every woman should have access to affordable birth control, 65 percent believe that insurance companies should cover contraception without co-pays and 51 percent believe that the federal government should continue to fund contraceptive services for low-income...

Comments
Loading

91°