DN Editorial: Sexy Casey at the bat

THIS WEEK, U.S. Sen. Bob Casey may have become the sexiest man alive.

OK, maybe not literally, but we are betting that many women had very warm feelings toward him when he sponsored the Protect Women's Health from Corporate Interference Act. The bill was also known as the "Not My Boss' Business Act."

The bill would have made sure that for-profit CEOs cannot interfere in their employees' decisions about contraception and other health services. It was designed to mitigate the impact of the recent Supreme Court decision on Hobby Lobby, which allowed the company to flout the law and keep certain contraceptives from being covered by their health plan.

Casey is a well-known pro-life legislator but, unlike many of his ilk, is able to distinguish between abortion and contraception, which adds to his allure. In fact, he supports family planning because he grasps the simple concept that increased access to contraception can actually reduce the number of abortions. This obvious conclusion gets lost in the reaches of conservative lawmaking.

If the notion of Casey as sexy warps your sense of reality - well, get used to it, because "reality" as we collectively know it in this country has also been irreparably warped by a Supreme Court that is so pro-business that it insists that corporations are people - as it asserted in the Citizens United decision.

Here's how Justice Samuel Alito put forth this crazy notion in his Hobby Lobby argument: "A corporation is simply a form of organization used by human beings to achieve desired ends. An established body of law specifies the rights and obligations of the people (including shareholders, officers and employees) who are associated with a corporation in one way or another. When rights, whether constitutional or statutory, are extended to corporations, the purpose is to protect the rights of these people."

This is scary enough, but the Hobby Lobby opinion, and the actions of the Senate that defeated the Corporate Interference bill this week, ensures that the twin institutions of church and corporation take increasing priority over the interest of the public. That is far more disturbing than the prospect of Casey as a hottie.

A woman's right to determine her own family planning might contradict some religious teachings, but it shouldn't undermine the actions of Congress, or the laws governing this country. Could this Supreme Court ruling lead the way to women being able to be fired for using the wrong contraceptives?

The arguments about contraception - at the nexus of sexual politics, religion and ideology - are rarely rational, and often hypocritical. (To wit: If Hobby Lobby insists on directing an employee's family planning, why not offer generous paid maternity leave?)

But we found a surprising source for an eloquent argument against Hobby Lobby on a Christian website. On Think Christian, Josh Larsen writes:

"Religious freedom, after all, should not put an onus on others who believe differently. If anything, it should require those who are religious - particularly Christian - to bear a burden of some kind. . . . When exercised with both conviction and humility, religious freedom protects us from having to sacrifice our faith.

It may, however, also mean that we must sacrifice our desire to manage the faith of others."