By now, you, like me, are sick to death of hearing about the Hobby Lobby win. The Supreme Court has decreed that Hobby Lobby does not have to provide contraceptive protection to its employees.
I thought I might weigh in on this issue. It is a difficult exercise in not only ethics but tolerance.
Christians of the slant of those who operate Hobby Lobby are of the opinion that contraception is immoral, that abortion is immoral. Not just immoral, but that abortion is equivalent to murder.
Non-believers and others think that it is a violation of the rights of women to deny them the contraceptive coverage. They desire that those who operate Hobby Lobby be forced to provide these services… against their will.
Both sides, it seems to me, see this issue as purely black and white with no gray areas.
In America with its laws that provide equal rights it seems to me that Hobby Lobby, by law, should have been made to provide the services, despite the fact that this violated the ethics held deeply by those who operate Hobby Lobby.
Suppose however this was not in America that a dispute was taking place, but instead a country like Iran. You are an American doctor in Iran. You have set up shop because of a humanitarian desire to improve health conditions in this backward country. One of your familiar customers comes into the office. The man and his family have been in your care for years. He is there to request female circumcision for his daughter. By law, you cannot deny him this service and yet it goes against your ethical stance. Do you refuse, and go to jail, or do you provide the service?
Christians have always been accused of seeing everything in black and white. As I have demonstrated in the past that there are issues that atheists will not look at or discuss, I now have demonstrated that there are issues where atheists only see black and white with no gray areas in between. Remarkably, on a women’s issue, a feminist issue, which also reinforces my assertion that atheists and humanists have been co-opted by feminism.