[Synthesist]

FreedomNotSafety,

You apparently misread what I posted. I did not write that the majority proclaimed that they themselves believe that life begins at conception.

Of course, the majority agreed with the plaintiff’s *argument*, otherwise the plaintiffs would have lost!

The main thrust of this case was that the plaintiffs *argued* that:

Abortifacients cause abortion which results in the death of a living fetus (= murder), which in their firmly held religious belief is a sin. Therefore, to force them to pay for insurance that provides abortifacients goes against their religious belief and violates their freedom of religion.

Five justices DID agree and decided in their favor!

[Balding_Eagle]

I did not write that the majority proclaimed that they themselves believe that life begins at conception.

True that.

You posted that "the court has agreed with a plaintiff’s argument that LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION!"

[BuckeyeTexan]

You apparently misread what I posted.

No, I didn't. You said:

I believe that this is the first time that a majority of the court has agreed with a plaintiff’s argument that LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION!

The justices did not agree with their argument that life begins at conception. They agreed with their argument that the HHS contraception mandate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

You said nothing about abortifacients or insurance in your first post. Your argument has now changed and is factually correct.

[FreedomNotSafety]

You wrote:

“The U.S. Supreme Court made history today. I believe that this is the first time that a majority of the court has agreed with a plaintiff’s argument that LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION!”

What did I misunderstand? You say in this post that a majority of the SC agree that life begins at conception.

I will state again that the SC made no such declaration.