The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty has released a helpful infographic highlighting some key facts regarding Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., which will be argued before the Supreme Court tomorrow.

HBLB-infographic-v2 (1)

Upon digesting all of this, it’s worth emphasizing how meek and mild the Greens’ basic complaint actually is. The demands of the State are awfully high for a feature of the faith as small and tolerable as this.

As Ross Douthat once wrote:

If you want to fine Catholic hospitals for following Catholic teaching, or prevent Jewish parents from circumcising their sons, or ban Chick-fil-A in Boston, then don’t tell religious people that you respect our freedoms. Say what you really think: that the exercise of our religion threatens all that’s good and decent, and that you’re going to use the levers of power to bend us to your will.

Do opponents actually believe that Hobby Lobby’s stance on this small selection of contraception “threatens all that’s good and decent”? Is such a stance so offensive that it demands excessive economic sacrifice in exchange for (supposed) peace and pluralism? If so, what’s next?

It’s about time we made things clear.

For more information from the Becket Fund, see their Hobby Lobby resource page.

The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success

The Victory of Reason: How Christianity Led to Freedom, Capitalism, and Western Success

In The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark advances the idea that Christianity is directly responsible for the most significant intellectual, political, scientific, and economic breakthroughs of the past millennium. 


  • Marc Vander Maas

    Here’s another great roundup of the bald-faced lying going on about the Hobby Lobby case and the mandate in general.

    In the Bizarro World of the newspapers, not paying for someone else’s contraception is the same thing as prohibiting them from purchasing and using them themselves. This is an obviously false equivalence, but one that leftists are bent on telling themselves. No matter how many times you point out that the business owners in these cases aren’t preventing their employees from purchasing and using contraception, a smug leftist will smile and say “but women’s rights, you see,” as if these magic words excuse the lie.

  • JeffreyRO55

    What’s odd is that Hobby Lobby buys most of its merchandise from China, a country with a forced abortion policy: women who already have one child must abort any pregnancies. If Hobby Lobby is really opposed to abortion, why would it buy from a communist country that forces the women who make its products to get abortions if they get pregnant? I’m really troubled by this, and will no longer shop at Hobby Lobby.

    • Marc Vander Maas

      As if you ever shopped regularly at Hobby Lobby before. You realize that your name is linked to tons of your prior comments on this issue, right? I don’t get the impression from your other posts that you’re a craft-loving individual with deep concern over abortion policy.

      • JeffreyRO55

        How would you have any idea what I do with my free time? I don’t get the impression that you much support religious freedom, or oppose abortion, if you are shilling for a company that buys its merchandise from a communist country that not just legalizes abortion, but actually forces women to have them! Hobby Lobby can’t buy its junk from some place that at least doesn’t force women to have abortions, while it’s busily clutching its pearls and wringing its hands about having to obey a health care reform law?

        • Marc Vander Maas

          I’m not “shilling” for Hobby Lobby. As I said in response to your other comment on another thread, the China issue may be worth a discussion, but has nothing to do with the issue in question, which is whether or not owners of private businesses have the right to operate their business in keeping with their religious values. Which, if the Freedom of Religion acknowledged in the Constitution has any meaning at all, they clearly do, health care reform law or no.