Perspective On Birth Control Insurance In Faith-based Organizations
Perspective On Birth Control Insurance In Faith-based Organizations

Perspective On Birth Control Insurance In Faith-based Organizations

Available Only on StudyHippo
  • Pages: 2 (958 words)
  • Published: November 7, 2021
Text preview

Introduction

Hobby Lobby and Wheaton College made a case by saying that they won’t offer health insurance at all because the schemes were providing health insurance to women. The two institutions felt providing contraceptive insurance was going against their faith. This is basically because the Bible is against abortion. A lot has been said on whether these institutions were acting ethically in stopping the healthcare insurance altogether because it incorporates the cover of contraceptives.

Starting with Wheaton College, the institution is an evangelical Christian-based Institute which stopped offering healthcare for its workers. This is mainly because the Obama care was objecting all institutions to provide contraceptive coverage as part of the general health insurance. According to the constitution of USA, it is the responsibility of the government to safeguard the beliefs and misconceptions of individuals as long as they are in line with the statutory provisions of the constitution (Charo, 2014). With the conviction that contraceptive was against the Christian values, the College was morally justified to do away with the contraceptive insurance part of Obama Care. The devout Christian organization took a wise decision as it indicates the seriousness with which the believers in this institution perceive their religious conscience.

In the mission statement for Wheaton College, it states clearly that the college is committed to serving Christ through offering liberal arts courses that would educate

...

students who would be God-fearing and advance his Kingdom in the society through excellence in academics. Therefore, it was sensible for the college to believe that its members must uphold the God-given laws that human beings should be able to live from conception to death. In their Christian beliefs, the Wheaton College had the duty to prevent their members and other people in the society from supporting abortion through training, people to carry out or paying for other people to carry out the heinous Act. This is the ethical basis that made Wheaton College move to court to bar Federal Government from enforcing Health insurance laws that supported contraceptives.

Abortion is an act that is openly against the biblical scripture and therefore the move to the College to ban the Health insurance that seemed to support abortion was so much in order. All the religious denominations should uphold the basic principles that are based on their religious readings even to the extremes as Wheaton College did. Christian beliefs provide that life begins at the fertilization of the egg before implantation into the womb. Some of the contraceptives provided by the Healthcare were meant to terminate the fertilized egg from being implanted into the womb. This translated into abortion to totality and therefore as devout Christian believers; the move to take the matter to court blocking the health insurance was quite an ethically justifiable move.

On the other hand, Hobby and Lobby, a Christian store chain was able to offer partial birth control insurance to its workers after an exemption offer from the Supreme Court (Harbach, 2014). Out of the 20 approved contraception medication by the Federal government, Hobby Lobby has only objected to four of those as it believes that

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay
View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

the rest support abortion which is a termination of life as per the Christian readings. According to Steve Green, the President of Hobby and Lobby Stores, the Federal government was forcing them to do ‘things’ that were contrary to the word of God. However, the company took a firm stand against the Health insurance that would cover contraceptive, and they were able to secure an objection.

In the case of the two companies, it is quite commendable that they fought for what they believe. In fact, moving to court to block health care laws was the best and only left the option for the company as the laws were not only unconstitutional but unethical as well. Termination of an unborn life was uncalled for according to the Bible and therefore the provisions of the Obama care should be subjected to some amendments so that the controversial clauses that contradict the ethical and Christian beliefs on lives are scrapped out to cater for all the groups in the population. In the constitution, it is clear that all the government policies and clauses should not contradict the religious beliefs, social expectations and the ethics of the society as a whole. In many communities, abortion is considered evil and immoral and therefore it would be seen as unethical in a general viewpoint.

Other the maxims of ethics, the Constitution of the USA is clear that every human being has a right to life and therefore, it was contradictory for the government to introduce contraceptive health care policies that seemed to support abortion both directly and indirectly. It is thus clear that the two institutions, that is, Wheaton College and Hobby Lobby, had an ethical case by blocking the contraceptive insurance from their insurance covers.

However, some extremes of the blockage to contraceptive insurance were detrimental to the general population. For example, in the case of Wheaton College, cutting off the public health care insurance to the students had adverse effects on poor students. The institution should concentrate on having the part of the contraceptive cover scrapped other than doing away with the whole health insurance because of the contraceptive clause.

In conclusion, the two institutions acted in utmost good faith in upholding the biblical readings on safeguarding the life of the unborn. Therefore, they were justified to defend the ethical standards and moral beliefs that the contraceptive cover was supporting abortions.

References

  1. Charo, R. A. (2014). The Supreme Court Decision in the Hobby Lobby Case: Conscience, Complicity, and Contraception. JAMA internal medicine,174(10), 1537-1538.
  2. Harbach, M. J., & Walsh, K. C. (2014). Religious Liberty and Access to Contraceptives Coverage in the Wake of Hobby Lobby and Wheaton College.
View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay