Ginsburg's dissent in the Hobby Lobby case

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was pissed, to say the least, on the regressive Court majority decision in this case. See this article for commentary and a link to the dissent. She said it opens the door for any other similar closely-held corporation to deny any variety of health services on their insurance plans due to its religious beliefs. Plus there is no justification that allowing such services on its insurance plan forces Hobby Lobby or any of their employees to use that contraception. Those that choose not to don't have to, so it places no burden on their religious beliefs. And there is a larger, compelling societal and public health interest in allowing those that want it to get those services, which is now being denied.


Setting aside the obvious absurdity that a corporation can have religious beliefs, the majority logic is saying that if its religious beliefs contradict known and proven science then the former trumps the latter. Like in this case, Hobby Lobby believes that some forms of contraception are abortion, and as they are religiously opposed to abortion then they shouldn't have to their insurance plan cover it. The scientific facts are though that the types of contraception so names are in no way causing abortions. So a mythic belief overrides scientific fact? That is typical regressive (non)thinking.