Ahhh, that’s so cute. Martha McSally pretending to be a lawyer — she claims “I actually took the time to read” the Hobby Lobby decision. Maybe so, but she clearly did not comprehend what she read, and is unaware of related court matters.
Per usual, on the rare occasion McSally actually takes a position on an issue, she tries to straddle the fence on both sides of the issue.
The Tucson Weekly reports McSally’s response to the Hobby Lobby decision Hobby Lobby Decision: Barber & McSally React:
McSally’s take:
I support women’s access to contraception as well as the protection of religious liberty. [Straddle that fence!] Unlike many commenting on the U.S. Supreme Court verdict, I actually took the time to read the opinion and my statement here is based on the facts of the very narrow ruling. At issue is not whether women should have access to contraception without cost, but whether the Obamacare mandates and substantial penalties are the legal way to provide that access. The court ruled that the Obamacare mandate for employers to provide twenty methods of contraception for free, including four post-fertilization methods, substantially burdens the religious freedom of closely held companies owned by individuals with sincerely held religious beliefs that life begins at conception. The court ruled that the mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which “prohibits the Federal Government from taking any action that substantially burdens the exercise of religion unless that action constitutes the least restrictive means of serving a compelling government interest.