from feministing.com

I’m sure most of you are aware, that today the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled that private companies can refuse to provide contraception medication to their employees based on the company’s religious beliefs. Seriously.  First, I didn’t know companies could have religious beliefs, thought only people could. You know, like women, they’re people. Next, do these religious companies only hire people that mirror those beliefs? If so, isn’t that called employment discrimination? Problemo, numero dos, señor.

To be clear it’s not just about the refusal of the medication, it’s that the government and bosses (which, ew) have rummaged their way into how a woman is going to protect her body, again, HER body. Frankly, it’s none of their damn business to know why a woman takes certain medication, just like it’s none of an employers business to know that a man over 60 requires Viagra to, ahem, keep his wife happy. IT’S AN INVASION OF PRIVACY, hellur.

Also, I don’t think on a job interview a woman should have to ask a health benefit question like, “Do you provide birth control because it’s a medical necessity for my Endometriosis.” Many forget that women don’t just take the pill to protect themselves from becoming pregnant or subsiding a heavy flow, but also for medical necessity. (Dysmenorrhea, Endometriosis, etc.). Through this ruling, women are being punished for being women and that sex has been framed as a crime punishable with pregnancy.

The red lining gets thicker, those Supreme Court Justices who ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood’s mandate were all men. Which you know, infuriates me because just when you think women are taking two steps forward in society, five men wearing robes move us 10 steps back. It’s another example of how our cultural history of having a lack of female representation still creates further shockwaves of inequality.

This one ruling will send a spiral of random “religious beliefs” leaching out of the woodwork of greedy corporations like, “I (because companies are now people, remember) don’t believe in paying people money for their work, I’d rather pay them in banana chips.” But on a more serious note, could corporations stop providing healthcare coverage for LGBTQ people, women who have children out of wedlock, people who have STDs? This one ruling could open up a slew of issues where people’s health and wellness are jeopardized in favor a companies keeping more money in their pockets. Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, can’t say she didn’t warn us in her dissent statement today, “the court I fear, has ventured into a minefield.” They better come up with a Plan B.