Democrats illustrate disregard for US Constitution

During my morning reading of various news sources I came across an article on Yahoo! titled Dems Strike Back on Hobby Lobby Case With 'Not My Boss's Business Act' (http://news.yahoo.com/dems-strike-back-hobby-lobby-case-not-bosss-182210871--abc-news-politics.html) In the article, Democratic Sen. Patty Murray is quoted, "We are here to ensure that no CEO or corporation can come between people and their guaranteed access to healthcare. I hope Republicans will join us to revoke this court-issued license to discriminate and return the right of Ameircans to make their own decision about their own health care and their own bodies."

Sen. Murray, healthcare is not a right afforded Americans under the United States Constitution. The decision by the Supreme Court to uphold  the owners of Hobby Lobby's US Constitutional Right to be able to exercise their religious views is a Right guaranteed all Americans. While I understand the attempt of this legislation is to score political points; rather than to observe the restrictions our Constitution places on Congress, the President and the Judicial branch.

Nothing in the Hobby Lobby cases is preventing any American to ability to make their own decisions on their own health care or bodies. Ironically, the Affordable Care Act does as it mandates all Americans to have health care coverage or face additional taxation for not. Thus taking away the option for any American to self-insure.

Another point getting lost in the conversation is healthcare, at least until the ACA, is a benefit offered by an employer to attract and retain employees. Benefits offered to employees by employers are not a right of employment thus can be changed at anytime. No one denies people the right to pursue their own happiness and success; rather people need to understand that when you trade your services for money and benefits you give up some of your rights afforded you under the US Constitution while performing the duties of said job. Prime example is the three paragraphs every computer displays when one has to sign into a work station that essentially states that by hitting ok you, as the employee, are giving up your right to illegal search and seizure protection is so far as the use of the computer.

Sen. Boxer (D-CA) quips in the article, "The court's majority has decided that corporations are entitled to more rights than individual Americans." Again a chirp to score quick political points rather than actually reading the application of the decision. Why does Sen. Boxer think it is okay for Congress to pass a law and the President of the United States to sign said law that curtails one ability to practice their religious beliefs without fear of retribution from the Government?

Yes, Hobby Lobby is a closely held corporation. A reason people will incorporate their business is to limit their liability and protect their personal assets. By doing that, does an American give up their Rights afforded to them by the US Constitution?

Marcia D. Greenberger, Co-President of the National Women's Law Center, is quoted at the end of the article, "Bosses should stick to what they know best: the boardroom and the bottom line. Stay out of the bedroom and the exam room." Now, I did read the opinions rendered in the Hobby Lobby decision, all sides, and I don't recall a single sentence that  authorized a boss to dictate to employee what they are to or not to do in the bedroom or the exam room. I wonder too if Marcia Greenberger understands that when, at least prior to the ACA, employer offered healthcare as a benefit of employment it never translated to a right guaranteed by the US Constitution.

Now, if real change wants to occur the Senators need to look to the US Constitution to make that change otherwise they can waste taxpayer money debating a law that is already Unconstitutional. The only reason why ACA is allowed to remain in effect is that Congress has the power to tax.