| More

Scoot's Blog

Tune in to "The Scoot Show" for lively, candid discussions about news, politics and culture with WWL's "Radical Moderate!"

Weekdays 1pm-4pm

Twitter: @scootwwl
Email: scoot@wwl.com
Facebook: Scoot on the Air

Scoot: Is Hobby Lobby guilty of Christian hypocrisy?

This week’s Supreme Court ruling that allows closely-held companies like Hobby Lobby to opt out of providing certain contraceptives for employees has sparked another huge controversy about religious freedom in America.
Hobby Lobby is a large corporation owned by devout Christians, and under Obamacare, the company was being forced to cover some forms of contraception mandated under the new law – for example – the pill that has become known as the “morning after pill.” Hobby Lobby and others that oppose the “morning after pill” believe it is an abortion pill – which is medically inaccurate. The “morning after pill” does not cause an abortion. The pill known as RU-486 does induce a miscarriage or abortion after becoming pregnant and should not be confused with the “morning after pill.”
The “morning after pill” is designed to act in several ways: 1) prevent or delay ovulation  2)  prevent fertilization  3)  prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus, which defines the state of pregnancy. 
The Hobby Lobby controversy reflects the passionate dedication of pro-life Americans, who oppose legal abortion. But if the “morning after pill” does not cause an abortion, is the controversy founded on misconceptions?
The controversy over a Christian family-owned business denying certain mandated coverage of health care based on religious freedom also feeds the growing panic in America that, as a nation, we are losing our precious right to freedom of religion.
Many Christians are proclaiming that Hobby Lobby is being hypocritical for denying coverage for the “morning after pill,” while continuing to do business with China, which has one of the world’s most pro-abortion policies.
For years the Chinese government has had a one-child per family policy in effect as a way of controlling the population. If a family has a child and the wife gets pregnant, abortion is mandated by the government. If a Christian family-owned business is opposed to abortion to the point of refusing to provide the “morning after pill” for employees because they think that pill causes an abortion (which it does not), then shouldn't they refuse to do business with a nation that has mandated abortions in certain situations?
Selecting when to apply Christian beliefs is often based on what is convenient and not financially devastating to a business. Perhaps Hobby Lobby can afford to apply its strong Christian beliefs to the denial of coverage for the “morning after pill” – but not in the case of severing business relations with China. Theoretically, that seems hypocritical.
Any religious beliefs should be invoked consistently and not just on the occasions that are financially convenient to use for the promotion of religious standards and seemingly make one feel better about oneself.
The use of religious freedom to condemn the growing acceptance of homosexuality by refusing to serve gay and lesbian customers is another example of how religious beliefs are being selectively applied. Condemnation of homosexuality is based on the belief that the lifestyle is a sin. Yet, those businesses that want to use their religious freedom to deny service to gays and lesbians do not seem to care about serving heterosexual customers – all of whom are sinners! Why is one sin worthy of rejection and another not? 
There are certain issues that expose obvious hypocrisy in America. Hobby Lobby’s decision to refuse coverage for contraceptive items, like the “morning after pill,” could be seen as being hypocritical if the company continues its financial relationship with China.

Condemnation of the “morning after pill” seems to be based on irrational emotions. Since the “morning after pill” does not medically cause an abortion, Hobby Lobby is demonstrating the selective application of religious freedom.
And even if the “morning after pill” did cause an abortion, it could be argued that if Hobby Lobby were true to it religious convictions, it would refuse to do business with China.
The act of social and political hypocrisy has been turned into an art form in America.  We should all challenge ourselves to be consistent with our convictions.

Do you think Hobby Lobby is being hypocritical by refusing to cover the “morning after pill” believing it is an abortion pill – while continuing to do business with China – where it is believed up to 13 million abortions are performed every year?
Send your comments and reaction to me: Scoot@WWL.com - some of the emails may be read on “The Scoot Show.”

Tags :  
Topics : Religion_BeliefSocial Issues
Social :

07/02/2014 7:06PM
Scoot: Is Hobby Lobby guilty of Christian hypocrisy?
Please Enter Your Comments Below
07/03/2014 7:48AM
I don't buy cigarettes for my adult daughter because I disapprove of smoking, but I give her money, I shop at some stores that sell cigarettes, and who knows what's in the mutual funds at my 401k - quite possibly some tobacco firms. Does that make me a hypocrite?
07/03/2014 8:29AM
Is this what we have become?
Are we really this shallow of a society that the great injustice perpetrated against women is that women who choose to use certain types of contraceptives don't get them for free? This is the great cause? No one is denying women access to healthcare. Scoot you are a complete joke who claims to see things down the middle but you take every chance to denigrate the Christian faith. Why don't you write about Islam the same way? Muslims have been known to stone their women for adultery. But that does not compare to the these women hating Christians who make them pay for certain contraceptives themselves. Christianity is an easy target, because you can mock the religion and you won't be butchered and crucified like they do to people in Syria. You are a complete coward.
07/03/2014 8:38AM
Fertilized egg?
Point 3 of your argument about the "morning after" pill seems to deny an already fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus. Does this not result in the destruction of egg by forcing it out of the body?
Title :
Comment :
Recent Posts
Tag Cloud
No Tags Found !