|
"it's about actively placing barriers to women being able to access birth control...women shouldn't be allowed to control their reproductive system through anything except abstinence when unmarried, and once married not at all."
Not seein' how you get that.
If Jane wants the pill but Jane's employer won't pay for it, nuthin' is stoppin' Jane from gettin' it herself, by way of her own cash.
#
"religious freedom"
Never saw how the whole HL thing was a religious issue (was disingenuous to frame it as such).
Seems to me: HL (as business) is the property of the owners who can use their property as they see fit (including deciding how much to pay employees and/or deciding what benefits to offer).
That is: it’s a property rights issue.
#
"If you have a system where healthcare/insurance is effectively part of the employment package..."
Such a thing should be the choice of the business-owner.
|