A story (Herald, July 10) again ignored some very important facts regarding the United States Supreme Court’s ruling on the Hobby Lobby “contraception issue” the public is entitled to know and understand.

The issue would have been better understood if the definition of “contraceptives” and “abortifacients” had been given in the beginning because it seems none of the Herald’s sources clearly understand the difference and how it applies to the Supreme Court ruling.

Very simply put, contraceptive medications or devices are used to prevent pregnancies. Abortifacient medications or devices are generally used to end pregnancies.

Hobby Lobby does, and will continue, to cover payment for contraceptive medications and devices for their employees through the company health-care plan. The Supreme Court ruling did not change that.

The issue before the court only addressed the use of abortifacients, which are known to cause a fetus to be aborted. There were two “morning-after” type medications and two “IUD” type devices the owners of Hobby Lobby didn’t want to have to include in the family-run business’s employee health-care plan because they believe that life begins at conception, and, therefore, supporting the use of those medications, or devices, would be against their religious beliefs.

No employee of Hobby Lobby will be denied access to contraceptive medications or devices by the company health-care plan.

Basically, the Supreme Court considered and ruled on the issue of religious freedom as is found in the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act,” passed into law in November 1993 – and then found for Hobby Lobby.

Dahrl Henley

Pagosa Springs