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: 4
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Snarl
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). Though 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?


Until that life form is capable of surviving on it's own it is still part of the woman's body so she has every right to say what is done with her body.




posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:33 AM
link   

MOMof3
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.


Basic BC isnt expensive at all.

Planned Parenthood prices $30 for the pill

So you believe a business shouldnt have any say in what they pay for?

If Hobby Lobby was smart, they would just refuse to hire any woman of child bearing age if they lose this case. Thats exactly what any business should do who objects to this.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Krazysh0t

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)

Starred (like the rest of your posts in this thread) ... but I'm not a Christian by definition ... not even close, brother.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   

buster2010

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.


Again: Hobby Lobby is NOT refusing to pay for contraception. They only don't want to pay for those which cause termination of pregnancies.

Hobby Lobby would be delighted to pay for contraception which helps women with health issues. They just don't want to pay to abort your baby.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:35 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?


It's not about prevention, it is about an employer denying something that the government says should be given to all employees of all businesses that provide health care. Yes, these women can go out and still buy their own morning after pill, but the LAW says they shouldn't have to. The argument here is the employer denying their employees this part of the law that the rest of the country can take advantage of. It's about equality for all under the law.

Like I said, I don't agree with Obamacare, but until it is repealed and/or replaced, I will fight for it to be implemented fairly for everyone.
edit on 26-3-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:36 AM
link   

buster2010


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


Aside from the unconstitutionality of government telling business how to operate in terms of hiring/firing, there are always ways around it. It happens every day...someone is more qualified, "sorry, position is already filled", "sorry, your availability doesnt fit with our needs" etc etc.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:37 AM
link   

buster2010

Snarl
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). Though 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?


Until that life form is capable of surviving on it's own it is still part of the woman's body so she has every right to say what is done with her body.


And yet someone can be tried for murder of an unborn baby when they murder a pregnant woman.

I've never understood that one.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Do you believe Obamacare is unconstitutional?

Personal opinion, not what the 9 jackasses in black robes think.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   

doubletap

MOMof3
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.


Basic BC isnt expensive at all.

Planned Parenthood prices $30 for the pill

So you believe a business shouldnt have any say in what they pay for?

If Hobby Lobby was smart, they would just refuse to hire any woman of child bearing age if they lose this case. Thats exactly what any business should do who objects to this.


Then Hobby Lobby would be shut down under sexual discrimination charges. A company cannot just refuse to hire women of child bearing age.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:38 AM
link   

doubletap
reply to post by Krazysh0t
 


Do you believe Obamacare is unconstitutional?

Personal opinion, not what the 9 jackasses in black robes think.


I'm Libertarian, what do you think?



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:41 AM
link   

GeorgiaGirl

buster2010

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.


Again: Hobby Lobby is NOT refusing to pay for contraception. They only don't want to pay for those which cause termination of pregnancies.

Hobby Lobby would be delighted to pay for contraception which helps women with health issues. They just don't want to pay to abort your baby.




Obviously the difference between those two are hard for folks to grasp. They hear what they want to hear and believing that Hobby Lobby just hates women and wants them to all forego BC makes it easier for them to put another nail in their own cross.
edit on 3/26/2014 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I am just curious to see if Hobby Lobby will make good on their threat to shutter their stores if they lose (I agree with the person who said this will happen 5-4).
Some sites have said this was taken out of context, but if their beliefs are so strong to take it to the SCOTUS, will the Greens take their money and thumb their nose at the thousands of employees? I guess we will see soon.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I don't understand why all medications don't come with a co-pay. It seems like this would simplify the law. No picking and choosing, it's 10% or 20% or whatever % is decided upon for ALL medications. What is prescribed is between the doctor and the patient.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Krazysh0t


I'm Libertarian, what do you think?


If you are truly a libertarian, and wholeheartedly believe this obscenity is unconstitutional, then you should be opposing it constantly, not fighting to see it implemented.




A legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Krazysh0t


Then Hobby Lobby would be shut down under sexual discrimination charges. A company cannot just refuse to hire women of child bearing age.


As I posted above, there are numerous ways to do so without explicitly stating the reason.

All it takes is a little creativity.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Snarl
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


And by the time that the court decides she would be so far along in pregnacy that it could possibly be infantcide!!

I've got you ask you something?
Are you willing to go against the biblical teachings and tell women outright that it is perfectly okay in God's eyes to say no to their husband's advances?? Because it is my understanding that the women should be obedient to their husbands in ALL THINGS!!! Which means that the same "beliefs" that Hobby Lobby is claiming to have also gives the married women no choice one way or the other!! She shouldn't say no to the husband's sexual advances and she shouldn't say no when he says great let's have our sixth kid or oh great no I have to pay for another abortion!!!



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by doubletap
 


Because while the fight to repeal this law rages on, the law is being implemented. I want to make sure that while the law is being implemented and enforced, that it is being implemented and enforced fairly. What I am doing is called compromise, something that most of our politicians and many of our fellow countrymen have forgotten how to do. I am allowing the bill to go forward for now, but I am applying my Libertarian values as well for the implementation.
edit on 26-3-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:46 AM
link   

MsAphrodite
I don't understand why all medications don't come with a co-pay. It seems like this would simplify the law. No picking and choosing, it's 10% or 20% or whatever % is decided upon for ALL medications. What is prescribed is between the doctor and the patient.


Because that makes too much sense.
I hope your post doesn't get buried in this exchange.



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


In other words, you support abortions up to age 16?



posted on Mar, 26 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by the owlbear
 

I dont' see where making all medications (preventive medicine) would solve the issue. Hobby Lobby would still be paying for a portion of the birth control.

As far as why she can't just pay for it itself??
Well I am wondering just how many could do this before obamacare but now that it's passed and the cost of the premiums and the higher deductables along with fines if you just can pay those premiums has INCREASED the cost of healthcare for so many well
Maybe now she'd have to take that thirty dollars out of the grocery bill and let the kids she has go hungry every other day or something?

It's amazing how this Affordable Care Act has made healthcare unaffordable for so many!!!



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join