The Supreme Court’s decision in the Hobby Lobby case was everything that Christians and conservatives across the nation could have hoped for—carefully reasoned and faithful to the law. The Court held that closely held corporations like Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood cannot be forced to comply with the Obamacare insurance mandate, because doing so would force them to fund insurance coverage for four potentially abortion-causing birth control mechanisms that violate their sincerely-held religious beliefs. Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, government may not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion unless the government’s action is the “least restrictive means of serving a compelling government interest.”
Unsurprisingly, the Left has responded to this fair and logical decision by trotting out its “War on Women” rhetoric, and liberal politicians have made public statements that blatantly misrepresent the Court’s decision. U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) claimed that “it is simply wrong to allow bosses to use their personal beliefs to limit what health care services an employee has access to.” U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) fumed that the Court’s decision “immediately denies thousands of women basic rights to healthcare and contraceptives.” Even Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (D-Manhattan)—not known for his concern for women—registered his disapproval. Of course, nothing in the Court’s decision prevents anyone from using any forms of birth control; it just prevents the government from forcing Hobby Lobby to pay for them.
The most bizarre and overheated response to Hobby Lobby we’ve seen so far came from former U.S. Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Ms. Clinton compared the decision to “foreign countries where women are deprived of rights. ‘Among those rights is control over their bodies, control over their own health care, control over the size of their families... It is a disturbing trend that you see in a lot of societies that are very unstable, anti-democratic, and frankly prone to extremism.’”