Link Roundups, Live from the Lilith Blog 1 of 2

July 2, 2014 by

Your Guide to the Hobby Lobby Case and Its Crushing Consequences

Thousands of women may now face restrictions on access to contraceptives. (Wikimedia Commons)

Thousands of women may now face restrictions on access to contraceptives. (Wikimedia Commons)

Curious–or confused–about the fallout from Sebelius vs. Hobby Lobby, a case decided this week by the Supreme Court with potentially massive consequences for women’s health in the United States? Here’s a Lilith-curated roundup of articles on the subject, discussing consequences for religious minorities (including Jews); Ruth Bader-Ginsberg’s dissent on the ruling; and the fallout for women’s reproductive (and medical) choices in the United States.
 
“The ‘slippery slope’ of Hobby Lobby includes discrimination against Jews”: Jay Michaelson writes about how the twisted logic of the Hobby Lobby case could be used to discriminate against religious minorities, including Jews. [The Forward]
 
 Repressive legislation against the Pill has traditionally targeted women’s sexuality. But like Sandra Fluke before her, Zoe Fenson talks about another–vital–use of contraceptives: as medicine for conditions like PCOS (polycystic ovarian syndrome). [New Republic]
 
The best lines from Ruth Bader-Ginsberg’s dissent in the Hobby Lobby case: a curated selection of quotations from one of our favorite Jewish justices, writing against an all-male majority. [Mother Jones]
 
These 77 companies might deny contraceptive coverage based on the Hobby Lobby case. [Daily Beast]

“The Court won’t classify Hobby Lobby’s woman-only scientifically illiterate objections to contraception as “discrimination” against women. But it would be discrimination if Hobby Lobby’s religious objections applied to black people or gay people. Are you following? Me neither.” A scathing commentary by Erin Gloria Ryan. [Jezebel

No, the Hobby Lobby case is not a “win” for religion, writes Jack Jenkins. Religious minorities, including the American Jewish Committee and Jewish Social Policy Action Network, have voiced their objections to the ruling. And a substantial number of Christian theologians have posed their own challenges to a case that’s supposedly a slam-dunk for the faithful. [ThinkProgress]