It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Supreme Court debates the future of Obamacare

page: 3
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:10 AM
link   
While I agree, I also believe that an employer has no right to demand an exemption based on a business' beliefs. Next you'll see them try to discriminate against non-Christian employees...

Somewhere wondering when corporations started getting religious....




posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:11 AM
link   

beezzer

Cyprian
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl
 


Ah, but they are telling employees what they can and cannot get with their healthcare. That's the whole point. that's why they are in this situation...Hobby Lobby wants the right to determine that their beliefs can dictate an employee's healthcare, regardless of the law or the employee's wishes.

Somewhere fighting for rights I don't always agree with...


Isn't up to the individual?

The state is mandating, but shouldn't the individual decide and purchase their own "care"?

My question ... to support your opinion ... is it not the individual who is paying? Either by direct deduction ... or a reduction in salary?

You're damn skippy it's up to the individual!! And the GD government took the freedom to choose away from the people.

Eff "Mr." Obama!! and Mrs. Pelosi!! and the progressives!!



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:12 AM
link   

doubletap
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Since they are paying for it, it seems obvious that the rights of the business owner come first. No one is saying they can't get bc, they just have to be adults and pay for it themselves.

This comes from a guy who despises religion in any and all forms.


The business isn't using it, they are just providing the benefit to their employees. Look, I know this is all wonky and contradictory, I don't like Obamacare AT ALL, but going by the law, I apply my reasoning and this is how it turns out.

By the way, I ALWAYS defer rights to the individual over a business or corporation, Corporations aren't people (despite what the law says). Corporations don't practice religion, so they definitely don't get any say in religious rights. In the end, to me, this is just another corporate expense that the government is forcing businesses to purchase, and there are PLENTY of them on the books, many of which corporations don't agree with but they buy them anyways. The owners of Hobby Lobby threw the religious angle on there to create controversy, but until I see Hobby Lobby in a church on Sundays, I don't agree with their stance.
edit on 26-3-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Cyprian
 


The employer should not be mandated to provide coverage dictated by the state.

They can offer something, everything or nothing.

It should ultimately be up to the individual to choose a company/coverage that best suits their personal needs.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Yeah, because being able to choose an employer based on what healthcare they allow you to get is soooooo easy.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Just the same old ancient argument. Does a woman have 100% rights over her body or not?

Or, the best way to prevent abortions is to prevent pregnancy.

Or all men could look at the woman they are about to copulate with and ask the question:

"WHAT IF? Do I want her to have my baby?"

I bet the Court will see through this. It is Religious Right trying to get their morality legalized so they can punish non believers and pursue more of their agenda.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Cyprian
reply to post by beezzer
 


Yeah, because being able to choose an employer based on what healthcare they allow you to get is soooooo easy.


Versus having the government dictate it?

Hell yes!

Look, life never is going to be easy. Especially if you let government take care of you and your choices.

I'd rather have individuals decide than have the government decide for me.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:17 AM
link   
I would ask what kind of coverage Hobby Lobby had before the Obamacare fiasco.I believe they did provide health insurance. Did they not provide coverage for the abortion type pills and procedures?
If they did not, and their employees were ok with it then, why the uproar now?

I also wonder about their insurance policies. Does every employee have the same policy and coverage, where a single male with no children has the exact same policy and policy costs the the employer as say a married man or woman with 6 children?

In my union, we all pay the same amount for insurance regardless of dependants. If Hobby Lobby had various amounts of coverage couldn't they offer like a "rider" for a small deduction from pay for additional coverage? That way they are not really "providing" abortion services yet the employees can still have them.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   
The constitution protects the rights of people to practice their religious views. That was the founder's intentions. It wasn't to protect the rights of business's or organization's!
So if the court decides to side with hobby lobby won't it also be forced to side with every individual that argues the same defense? After all aren't those individuals being force to participate in plans that provide birth control to everyone in the plan that chooses to use it? And even if they choose not to participate aren't they then hit with a tax that will be used to provide this service?

By the way anything that the gov't provides to the poor with our tax dollars I consider to be a right to the entire population! After all by providing those services to the poor amoung us they are claiming it to be a need that needs to be filled! So since we will never eliminate medicaid yes healthcare is a right!! Otherwise how do you justify taking $$$ away from some with the intention of using that money to give someone else something the person you just took the money away can't afford themselves?

I ran across a somewhat related story.



"We believe that unless Sunnie and her family clearly understand that God has made her female and her dress and behavior need to follow suit with her God-ordained identity, that TCS is not the best place for her future education," Bowman wrote in the letter, which was given to WDBJ7 by Thompson
www.wdbj7.com...



So how many of you ladies out there like to wear their hair short? When was the last time you dressed up in a frilly dress- even on the coldest of day??? Who's to say that if Hobby Lobby pulls this one off that they will have the same "right" as this school has and start threatening to kick you off your payroll??
Because they have a deep religious belief that:


they have a responsibility to shepherd their employees in a way consistent with traditional values.

I believe that if the supreme court doesn't shoot down Hobby Lobby's argument unless it is carried through and the same argument for the individuals isn't asserted it will exalt the corporate rights above the individuals which I am pretty sure that the founders didn't intend on that one!! And I also believe that if uphold Hobby Lobby's rights in this area it will not stop there but rather businesses will use this decision to extend their right to control their employees further.

Like the girl in the news story said:

"I should just be able to be me and not let them worry about it."
Which I believe is the most basic right of all!

edit on 26-3-2014 by dawnstar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Cyprian
reply to post by GeorgiaGirl
 


Ah, but they are telling employees what they can and cannot get with their healthcare. That's the whole point. that's why they are in this situation...Hobby Lobby wants the right to determine that their beliefs can dictate an employee's healthcare, regardless of the law or the employee's wishes.

Somewhere fighting for rights I don't always agree with...


What about the "Right" to find another job if you don't like the way the company you work for does things?

I have had many jobs throughout my life. Some of them had crap insurance. Some of them had great insurance. Some of them didn't offer insurance at all. When I got old enough to worry about insurance, I exercised my "Right" and found another job that had the benefits that I wanted/needed. Never once did it cross my mind that I had absolutely no other choice.

We always want "Rights" when they are beneficial to us while paying little heed to other's rights. If the people that work at Hobby Lobby want benefits to suit their every need/want, maybe they should exercise their own rights and look to another employer who is willing to give them what they are asking for.

This shouldn't even be an issue IMO. Hobby Lobby owns Hobby Lobby. They do not own every business in America where this decision would negatively affect every person living here. People can choose not to work for Hobby Lobby, but they would rather force someone to do something that goes against their personal beliefs. Finding other employment would be far too hard apparently.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I think the hooks are in and to get this behemoth to change directions..... it is gonna take more than evidence it is not working and is unconstitutional.... it is a tax dummy, which makes everything nice a legal!
ACA is not working for many and will continue to not be affordable for many more.. The premiums will increase along with the fines.. ACA will be fixed or done away with, for in it's present form it is doing nothing but setting the ground work for people to go bankrupt, lose their doctors and affordable insurance they have had for years, and in many cases have their work hours reduced.

ACA canceled many insurance policies that individuals chose based on their wants, needs, or ability to afford, and it replaced those plans with what the government says is better insurance. This leaves little choice for us pedestrians and as a typical government program increases costs greatly. 16,200 new IRS agents and all the other clingons needed to administer the program; someone has to pay them, wonder who? Ill conceived bureaucratic B.S. that has really messed up big time this time, for the many not just the few. . Sugar coating a smelly turd is still a sugar coated turd call it what you may. Affordable.?.. not when the premium is 49% a month higher, co-payments are doubled and the always popular deductible which looms at the first sickness for many considered "the middle class".

The Congressional Budget Office estimates 31 million will still be left uninsured.... ACA was supposed to make insurance affordable for everyone, No? I thought one of the big selling points for President Obama was that ACA would insure the uninsured. Silly me I need Alzheimer's or to go deaf so I do not have to remember what was said or is still being said to sell this scam.

Every revelation about ACA screams that this law was completely un-vetted, or those who wrote it, need to cut back on the psychotropic drugs . Its creation and implementation have been sugar spread on everything in sight yet when looked at closely almost everything shows just how disastrous this whole thing has been... It is like Fukushima in some ways; both will cost a fortune and both can kill you . Americans (or anyone else) deserve better IMO. - See more at: www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 26-3-2014 by 727Sky because: it



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:23 AM
link   

tinner07
I would ask what kind of coverage Hobby Lobby had before the Obamacare fiasco.I believe they did provide health insurance. Did they not provide coverage for the abortion type pills and procedures?
If they did not, and their employees were ok with it then, why the uproar now?


This is poor reasoning. I enjoy the health care that is provided for me by my work, but if tomorrow the government mandated that all employer health care provide a certain benefit that I wasn't receiving before, you can be damn sure I'd be upset if my company were to fight the government over providing it, citing religious grounds. Just because I like my coverage doesn't mean I am content with it.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by MOMof3
 


Who is preventing the women from getting birth control? No one.

Why can't women pay for it themselves?



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by doubletap
 


Because it is expensive for the women who really need it. And a woman does not get pregnant all by herself. Unless, she is the virgin Mary.

I used birth control when young for ovarian cysts. Saved me an operation and the expense of more medical care.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by MOMof3
 


Does a woman have 100% rights over her body or not?

Oh, I do certainly agree with you here. But a woman does not have rights over a viable life form she is bearing. She made the choice to have intercourse and all of the future obligations that entails. Had she chosen to decline intercourse, we're in different waters ... but that's a decision a court should make, as a life is at stake (and I hope they consider that fairly). Tough sh*t if she can't make her case ... because I am definitely Right To Life ... and I'm not afraid to state it!

Do you think it would be fair for a father to condemn an arrogant son to death, because he doesn't agree with his son's wishes?
edit on 2632014 by Snarl because: Autocorrect



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:27 AM
link   

doubletap
reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe
 


It's hilarious to see supporters of obamacare claiming that birth control is a right. These losers believe they have a right to force others to pay for their birth control .

Even if hobby lobby loses this case, they still have another option.... They can simply refuse to hire any woman who is of child bearing age.


You seem to know nothing about birth control. Birth control helps many women with health issues so Hobby Lobby has two choices. First dump health care for their employees. Second remember that organizations have no right to express religious freedom that right belongs to people so pay for the health care and leave the owners religion at the door.

Also refusing to hire a woman just because she is of child bearing age would open them up for a huge discrimination lawsuit.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:28 AM
link   

doubletap
reply to post by MOMof3
 


Who is preventing the women from getting birth control? No one.

Why can't women pay for it themselves?


Because this is a Nanny State now. We no longer need personal responsibility... Big Daddy will take care of us so we will not have to worry about anything ever again.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Snarl
reply to post by MOMof3
 

Do you think it would be fair for a father to condemn an arrogant son to death, because he doesn't agree with his son's wishes?


Kind of offtopic, but I read this and immediately thought how funny it is that Christians are always so up in arms about abortions, but their bible tells them to do the VERY thing that you just said.
link
edit on 26-3-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:30 AM
link   
The founders are rolling over in their graves that we are even discussing whether the government should be mandating types of contraceptive coverage businesses must pay for.

I'm pretty sure they would all come down on the side of Hobby Lobby here.

How far we have come from the ideas of freedoms.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Snarl
 


Is not the man part of the Holy number 3? Without sperm there would be no life. So are you guys dogs that have no choice? I don't think Jesus thought that way.




top topics



 
24
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join