The U.S. Supreme Court is prepared to hear a religious debate over the Obamacare contraception mandate. The case will be heard March 25, and it sparks the longtime argument over abortion and reproductive rights.
The legal question at hand is whether corporate employers with religious objections must include contraceptive coverage in their employee health plans. This does not include drugs that cause an abortion, or end pregnancy. Oklahoma-based arts-and-crafts retailer Hobby Lobby, controlled by evangelical Christians, and Pennsylvania-based cabinet-manufacturer Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp, owned by Mennonites, object to President Barak Obama's requirement on religious grounds.
But the underlying scientific debate is whether certain forms of birth control prevent conception or destroy a fertilized egg. Past research does not support either side, and there is no conclusive definition of when pregnancy begins. Some believe it begins at fertilization while other advocate that pregnancy doesn't start until the fertilized egg implants itself into the lining of the uterus.
The companies have no problem with birth control that prevents conception, but do have an issue with emergency contraception like the morning-after pill that prevents pregnancy.
"For us, the issue is the life-ending mechanisms that some emergency contraceptives can have," said Anna Franzonello, an attorney at Americans United for Life, according to Reuters. The anti-abortion legal group has filed a brief for seven Catholic and other anti-abortion groups siding with the companies.
The family companies believe that the egg should be protected from the moment of fertilization, and that morning-after pills wrongly terminate pregnancy because they stop implantation from happening. Plan B, for example, they are strongly against, and various evidence reaches different conclusion. No one is saying for sure at which step, before or after fertilization, Plan B ends pregnancy.
One spokeswoman for the anti-abortion Association of American Physicians and Surgeons offers a question to think about.
"If you can't be absolutely sure the drugs don't block implantation, what probability of killing a human being would you accept?" said Dr. Jane Orient.
The high court will not be ruling on the science or defining pregnancy.
