Burwell VS hobby lobby

             I’m all for religious freedom, having worked for a summer camp that is funded by the dioceses of Rochester I value that people have this right. I was raised catholic and I appreciated when my parents afforded me the decision to question and participate however I chose. I don’t believe that one person’s religion should impinge upon the rights of others. It is my opinion that this is what the ruling in the Burwell VS Hobby Lobby does. This case could have been a huge step forward for women in a lot of ways. It provided legitimate discourse to the issue of women’s rights, and the ruling is nothing short of disappointing. A CEO’s religious beliefs should not trickle down and directly affect all the women that work for him or her. What is more concerning is that religion can now be used as argument for exemption from federal laws. As discussed in class birth control has far more functions than putting someone in control of their reproductive life. A central part to hobby lobby’s argument was that birth control was an agent of abortion. So in this case individual’s scientifically debunked beliefs are still being upheld because they sincerely believe them. The quote from Sarah Mirk at the end of the article stating  “it seems like the Supreme Court is happy to protect freedom of religion—as long as its the religion of the people at the top of society” I think this accurately sums up what cultural influences were at play in this decision.