Scientific Mistake vs. Scientific Mistake
The latest spin on Hobby Lobby is that their claim that the four birth-control methods they don't cover sometimes act as abortifacients is a scientific mistake. When we look at the data that's supposed to prove it was a mistake we see that only one of the methods has sound evidence that I could locate that it is not normally an abortifacient. (On the other hand, only four pregnancies were prevented and that isn't enough to ensure that the levonorgestrel pill never acts as an abortifacient.) In the other direction, the Copper IUD looks very suspicious:
When used as emergency contraception, the Cu-IUD could also act to prevent implantation, due to copper's effect of altering molecules present in the endometrial lining. Id. However, studies show that the alteration of the endometrial lining prevents rather than disrupts implantation. Id. at 304.In other words, at best they can show that Hobby Lobby should have refused to cover only one of the methods under dispute.
Speaking as a libertarian, I also hold they have the right to refuse to cover medications for no reason whatsoever. It is not the State's business what they cover.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home