Hobby Lobby didn’t object to all birth control pills

AN ARTICLE about the Democrats’ reaction to Charlie Baker’s remarks concerning the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision is a missed opportunity to inform readers about the background of this ruling. (“Charlie Baker backs away from Hobby Lobby comments,” July 10).

The court decided that Hobby Lobby owners, because of religious concerns, did not have to provide contraceptive coverage in health insurance for employees. Hobby Lobby owners, however, did not object to 16 of 20 available oral contraceptives. They balked at being forced to pay, through insurance premiums, for four drugs that could induce abortions. Their female employees are free to buy these with their own money.


This tempest in a teacup apparently forced Baker, Republican candidate for governor, to show that he is “in step with Massachusetts thought,” in the words of Tobe Berkowitz, a professor at Boston University. Have we sunk so low in Massachusetts that individuals are incapable of forming their own opinions but are lumped together in some kind of Orwellian group-think?

Bernhard Heersink


Loading comments...
Real journalists. Real journalism. Subscribe to The Boston Globe today.
We hope you've enjoyed your free articles.
Continue reading by subscribing to Globe.com for just 99¢.
 Already a member? Log in Home
Subscriber Log In

We hope you've enjoyed your 5 free articles'

Stay informed with unlimited access to Boston’s trusted news source.

  • High-quality journalism from the region’s largest newsroom
  • Convenient access across all of your devices
  • Today’s Headlines daily newsletter
  • Subscriber-only access to exclusive offers, events, contests, eBooks, and more
  • Less than 25¢ a week
Marketing image of BostonGlobe.com
Marketing image of BostonGlobe.com