In an effort to counteract policies which contravene "traditional values," the religious right is fighting back under the rubric of "religious freedom." In bizarro Christian right wing world, this is the freedom to use their bible and their god to justify denying services to gays and reproductive rights for women who now, thanks to the ACA, have access to free contraceptives - access that is being opposed by so called Christian businesses like Hobby Lobby who feel that this mandate violates their religious freedom - an argument frequently heard, on Fox News in their validation for the Catholic bishops' opposition to the law. But there's another uglier argument which seems related to the Christian right's skewed sexual views; i.e. that "we" shouldn't have to pay for slutty women to have non-procreative sex. While it was bad enough when Limbaugh articulated it, it was even worse when Fox's "leg chair" gal, Andrea Tantaros pretty much said the same thing.
Tuesday, the discussion began with a "fair & balanced" juxtaposition of the Hobby Lobby matriarch defended her company's position followed by comments from demonstrators, outside the Supreme Court, who oppose it. But then the agitprop began with Eric Bolling's validation of the religious right's position: "OK, folks.Your First Amendment right, your religious freedom, guaranteed to you by the Constitution, hangs in the balance."
After Dana Perino provided a reasoned explanation of the case, Bolling repeated the propaganda: "Ands, it feels like political ideology, ideology trumping small business, people who demand their own First Amendment right to religious freedom." (Of course, the opposing argument is that business owners don't have the right to impose their religion on their employees.) Tantaros then went off on a rant about how progressives hate the First Amendment which, in Foxworld, doesn't apply to atheists and those who say Happy Holidays. She said that if people don't like their health care plans, they can work elsewhere. This, of course, is easier said than done in today's limited job market, not that Tantaros would know anything about that.
Greg Gutfeld, again, underscored his ignorance and misogyny. He mansplained: "It doesn't constitute a burden if your boss isn't buying your pills. That's not a burden. Your lack of happiness is not a burden. You can -- if you have a problem buying these pills but you can buy everything else, the problem is on you." Gutfeld, who earns a nice salary at Fox (which does cover birth control) doesn't realize that for low income women, monthly birth control pills are costly as is the IUD which costs about $700.
Bolling reinforced the agitprop with the question of whether this is "about women's rights or is it liberal ideology crushing religious freedom." After he asked if the NY Times was being "fair & balanced" (HAHAHAHAH) when it described the case as "pitting women's rights against women's rights," Tantaros launched into her vile rant:
"I hate to break it to "The New York Times," there's no women's right in the amendment. There's a First Amendment right. And frankly, to have women and assume there's a woman sitting in the finger painting department of Hobby Lobby who is so upset she can get these other forms of contraception but she can't afford a $20,000 or $30,000 or $40,000 plan B abortion pill should probably worry about getting another job to pay for it. It's not our responsibility for the woman in the cross stitching section to fund and subsidize her sex life. If it was so important, the administration could figure out another way to get her a check directly..." [So Ms. Tantaros, who makes far more money than the average Hobby Lobby worker, is telling them that they should get a second job to pay for their Plan B. Nice.]
So it's all about the sex - not about how if a woman has an unplanned pregnancy it affects her financial bottom line and could, potentially, put her back on welfare and make her, according to Tantaros et al., a "taker." Unplanned pregnancies also cost the insurance companies far more than birth control. Obviously Tantaros doesn't know that for some women, another pregnancy could cost them their lives. If they are unable to take hormonal birth control, an IUD could be the only answer and without the coverage, the IUD would be inaccessible.
Just when you thought that Andrea Tantaros couldn't be any more disgusting....
Yeah. It’s great that HL thinks that the “corporation’s” freedom of religion trumps that of the company’s workers. I have to wonder what the Founding Fathers would think if they learned the individual freedoms they sought so hard to protect were being applied to companies? The Constitution opens with “We, the People.” The Declaration of Independence declares “All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” Somehow, I don’t see where they intended to consider “corporations” to be the equal of “people” or “men.”
