Hobby Lobby Hypocrisy

reply to post by NavyDoc


So I guess what you are saying is there are regulations that are good and there are regulations that are not good. I can agree with that and I think most reasonable/rational people would agree with that as well. Determining what regulations are reasonable/rational is where the debate is. For those on the fringe who state all regulation is bad and for those who state all regulation is good....well... I don't think either one of us will ever get through to the likes of them.


It is defeating though when you label people. Such as statist, bible thumper, fascist, tea bagger, or what not. BTW my grandfather did die in a coal mine but that is besides the point. I never got to know him..oh well.

As far as this issue goes there are people on both sides that believe they are right however regardless of who is in the right I think most rational people can agree that a corporation such as HL which in many ways supports and even profits off of BC and forced abortion policies to then turn around and claim they should be exempt from providing standard healthcare which gives those options to its employes based off of religious objection is the epitome of hypocritical. Wouldn't you agree.

Grimpachi
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

So I guess what you are saying is there are regulations that are good and there are regulations that are not good. I can agree with that and I think most reasonable/rational people would agree with that as well. Determining what regulations are reasonable/rational is where the debate is. For those on the fringe who state all regulation is bad and for those who state all regulation is good....well... I don't think either one of us will ever get through to the likes of them.


It is defeating though when you label people. Such as statist, bible thumper, fascist, tea bagger, or what not. BTW my grandfather did die in a coal mine but that is besides the point. I never got to know him..oh well.

As far as this issue goes there are people on both sides that believe they are right however regardless of who is in the right I think most rational people can agree that a corporation such as HL which in many ways supports and even profits off of BC and forced abortion policies to then turn around and claim they should be exempt from providing standard healthcare which gives those options to its employes based off of religious objection is the epitome of hypocritical. Wouldn't you agree.

Hypocrisy? Perhaps. However, I think the real issue is not that a company does not want to pay for something, be it on religious grounds or not, but rather, why do we want more government mandates, interference, and force? Do we really want the same government who gave us the NSA, Guantanamo Bay, Fast & Furious, etc, etc, etc, getting any more involved with our lives and businesses?

reply to post by NavyDoc


No, Government Sux a lot of the time, I totally agree, but you're wrong in saying that the Hobby Lobby Hypocrisy isn't the issue here. It IS the issue. So no changing the goal posts, or changing the argument now. Now that it's been exposed for the BS con job it is, don't start trying to change the argument.

Lot of Straw Man arguments supporting HL, I mean is that really all you have?

Our 1st amendment provides for freedom FROM religion. HL is still free to practice its faith, which I wasn't sure a corporation could do, but they're not free to force its faith on its employees.

Some of the weakest, most puerile arguments come from the right over ACA and some even weaker justifications to the duplicity of their own. SMH.

Derek

It seems to me that the point in question with this issue is control. Who has it? And when does that control become unacceptable.I know all the right thinking people on the forum believe in the absolute right of ownership. That is to say, "It's mine, I can do what I want with it." and I'm on board with that for the most part.

But let's start with the basic relationship. I have an idea and I need someone to do something to fulfill my ambition. Now I realize that I will need to provide something to the individual who is to do that something . Kind of like a trade. You do work for me I pay you money or what ever we agree to. If you don't like what I am paying or providing you, you needn't work for me. It's a free world and free will, will eventually determine each parties commitment to the arrangement. so far so good.

There is however a point in any enterprise, (I know there are many, who think in absolute terms, are not going to sit well with this.) when the importance of the interrelationships of all parties overrides the notion of arbitrary control by the one individual who originated and has ownership of the enterprise.

The Hobby Lobby as I understand it has several thousand employees whom do not directly participate in the liabilities and benefits of ownership, yet are as important to the existence of the organization, for with out them there would be no organization. Sure one could replace all those thousands with others if they do not agree or accept the owner's requirements or demands. Yet you still have that indispensable component of the organization that, I believe at some point has to have some standing. This is even more true when this thing, that was created by the entrepreneur, extends it's influence and economic impact beyond just it's organization.

At some point the true nature of humans as a social animal has to come to the front. and the hubris of one individual must take a back seat. No matter what one might want to think, ownership is not absolute.

And I'm with you OP, hypocrisy don't begin to cover it. This a political statement not an expression of religious belief. I'm not much in the way of religion, and as to God, well it knows better than me if it's out there. But if there is a God and it possesses all the wisdom and goodness we like to attribute to it. It most certainly don't need this phony baloney christian to set things right for it. And I have to believe that it, God that is, don't really like folks going around using it's good name like this.

This family of owners might want to let God take care of other people's sins and get back to taking care of business.

mOjOm
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

No, Government Sux a lot of the time, I totally agree, but you're wrong in saying that the Hobby Lobby Hypocrisy isn't the issue here. It IS the issue. So no changing the goal posts, or changing the argument now. Now that it's been exposed for the BS con job it is, don't start trying to change the argument.

edit on 2-4-2014 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)

It's not changing the argument at all--it's expanding it into the real, underlying issues. People so often get so wrapped up in things that they cannot see the forest for the trees.

Is HL a hypocrite? Sure. So what? Government and business and charities and individuals are full of hypocrites. Why get bent out of shape about one and not the others? Because this one happens to have a stance that is against your idealistic position? If government wasn't going about dictating things to people, then this would not even be an issue to discuss about.

reply to post by NavyDoc

Hypocrisy? Perhaps. However, I think the real issue is not that a company does not want to pay for something, be it on religious grounds or not, but rather, why do we want more government mandates, interference, and force? Do we really want the same government who gave us the NSA, Guantanamo Bay, Fast & Furious, etc, etc, etc, getting any more involved with our lives and businesses?

I can agree that there are many issues which I feel the government overstepped, but I am not going to say I don't want any more government mandates because it depends on the issue. It depends on if it is rational or reasonable. Depending on the issue is how I look at each mandate, law, legislation, etc..


When speaking in general about the HL case I feel the real issue is do we want to set a precedent where corporations gain even more rights putting them on par with personhood which I do not want to see.

In all honesty though the issue in this thread at least is the hypocrisy HL is displaying.

Here is the issue as I see it. Here in America we have separation of church and state, and for a good reason. Therefore one must win when the two collide. I personally think that the state, in this case the law, should trump religious beliefs. Of course one could easily claim infringement of their rights, however, here is the problem...

Hobby Lobby willingly entered into an agreement with the state when they decided to open for business. And because of this, they are bound by the laws of that state. A person can have their religious rights protected, but an entity, a business, should have no such rights. That is how I view it anyway.

"It's okay if it makes them money but not okay if it costs them money..." I believe that's found in the New Testament-- Hypocriticus 1:13

This completely explains Hobby Lobby's stance on these matters.

reply to post by JiggyPotamus


Thank you for your rational contribution to the thread.

Personal feelings about the ACA and/or the government putting its grubby fingers in everyone's business have no bearing on the Hobby Lobby's hypocrisy. Simultaneously refusing to fund your employee's access to contraception/abortion and investing in companies that are directly affiliated with contraception/abortion is either double-think or hypocrisy, and I am disinclined to believe that it is double-think.

I opposed the ACA since day 1, but I also oppose the shameless moral bankruptcy of corporations. Every time that a law is circumvented, our constitutional republic is degraded. Yes the ACA needs to be revised or repealed, but until that happens, it should be enforced. If Hobby Lobby wishes to remain a legal business, it should either consistently demonstrate its dedication to Christian values or drop the charade.

FlyersFan

windword
Not true

Again ... they aren't fighting the workers from getting contraception. Their religion is that they can't help people get it. And talking to a doctor about getting it is indeed breaking their religion. So they won't pay for a person to talk to a doctor about contraception. But they don't stop the person from going and talking ... as long as the person pays for it.

Contraception is usually given with a prescription.

Most contraception isn't. Over the counter. Condoms. Foam.
And as far as 'the pill' goes, Planned Parenthood and neighborhood clinics have them.
Anyone can walk in and get a prescription.

Taking this argument to it's conclusion. An employee can use their wages earned while working at Hobby Lobby to purchase contraception. So isn't the act of employment itself against their religion unless they make all employees sign an agreement that they won't purchase contraceptives with wages earned while working for them?

This whole thing could also be looked at as the corporation forcing their beliefs on their employees. Don't we all agree that that's wrong and that an employer shouldn't be allowed to dictate how you live your life?

reply to post by BritofTexas


Hobby Lobby does NOT buy from China. Hobby Lobby buys from Chinese Companies. Are these companies they buy from in China also performing abortions? If not, there is no hypocrisy! You can't blame things that the Chinese goverment does on people outside the Chinese government any more than you can blame me for what Obama is doing even though I live in the USA.

It is this bad attitude that encourages things like sanctions, which punish individuals for the actions of their government that they cannot control.

wayforward
Are these companies they buy from in China also performing abortions? If not, there is no hypocrisy!

Even if you totally dismiss the China connection there is still Hypocrisy from them being major investors in the drug companies who manufacture the drugs that they are saying they don't want to pay for. They are making money from those very same contraceptives which they say they are against. Their whole stance and "deeply held religious belief" argument is a LIE. It's all a big scam backed by variety of people and groups that go well beyond, but does include Hobby Lobby and it's owners.

reply to post by BritofTexas


This whole thread is an absolute and total farce! I challenge anyone who thinks this is a real story anything but a joke to ask their companies executives what companies their 401(k) are invested in and if any of their 401(k) money went to the abortion pill companies. None of your companies top executives can answer your question! How many people here know what companies their mutual funds are invested in? Oh thats right, about 0%. So you have near 0% chance Hobby Lobby had any idea they were investing in companies producing Plan B or any other abortion pill.

And even then, even on the 1 in 10,000 chance the executives knew, its still ridiculous to ask people to shoot them self in the foot over a contract when they they 99% agree with and 1% disagree with the choices. This whole story is 99% a lie and 1% truth since 99% of the money went to a pooled 401(k) where the company absolutely did not tell the mutual fund to put 99% in things they agree with and 1% into the abortion pill company.

The impression of this story is that the company made a choice to put money into a company invested into contraceptives. Wrong. Even if Hobby Lobby did know they are 1% hypocrites 99% not hypocrites since they shouldn't be making investment decisions on 1% fringe issues and neither should anyone else.

I really don't take the attack artists on this thread seriously and am sure none of them actually supported Hobby Lobby in any way, shape, or form before they got all excited over this story. The story makes it out like Hobby Lobby made a conscious decision to place money into abortion pills. No. Never happened. You have at best expecting every company to ditch every contract where there is a 1% disagreement over. Basically every contract they have. No again.

Don't get me wrong, I'm neither a fan of big pharma nor Chinese government, but I just don't agree with what you're saying.

In terms of the China issue... That's like saying if one sells American products, then one is supporting horrific medical and psychological experiments, torture, or homosexual marriage. I'm sorry sir, but that'd be a fallacy... just like saying that selling Chinese products is the same as supporting forced abortions is a fallacy.

Also, Christianity is China, while still persecuted today to lesser degrees, is growing very rapidly. So using similar logic one could allege that not selling Chinese products is the same as condemning Christians in China. This simply isn't true, and we all can agree that it's a ridiculous claim.

In terms of big pharma... I don't like them very much. Instead of selling us expensive theraflu why not just give us proper doses of tea made from the white pine trees up north? But I digress... they believe these companies do much more good than harm. it simply isn't as you're making it out to be.

reply to post by wayforward

I challenge anyone who thinks this is a real story anything but a joke to ask their companies executives what companies their 401(k) are invested in and if any of their 401(k) money went to the abortion pill companies. None of your companies top executives can answer your question! How many people here know what companies their mutual funds are invested in? Oh thats right, about 0%.

I get a monthly mailing from my 401K and IRAs that tell me exactly what I am invested in. If an owner of a company doesn't have access to that information then he/she is a dumb Arse. You can move that number up from 0% now.

So...

Viesczy
Our 1st amendment provides for freedom FROM religion.

Just to make sure you completely understand the Constitution the 1st Amendment protects the citizens from the government, i.e. the government establishing or mandating a religion. Many of your rights are and do get abridged when you are involved in the private sector. To wit; an employer can ban employees from discussing politics while at work, this has a long history of legal precedent and does not interfere with your rights as a citizen.

I agree it's hypocracy. If the company has an issue with providing birth control, then why on earth do they own stock in a company that produces and sells birth control?

That is the issue. Pure and simple;

Derailing this thread into yet another debate on healthcare reform is unnecessary, it just turns into a competition for who can shout loudest.

reply to post by Grimpachi


How about this for a challenge. We take turns asking people who we know have 401(k) until both of us have found someone who can name a stock one of their mutual funds is holding? That ought to yield a telling result, no?

reply to post by NonsensicalUserName


The interesting thing about HL is, a few months ago, in the St Pete Times newspaper in Florida, there was a big article on HL and how they are a Christian store, Christian owners, pay more than minimum wage ($14 an hours or so to start)...but what the article said was that they don't only hire Christians. They stated that they employed people who were not Christians, and get this, even Muslims !! To them, it didn't matter what religion the employees were, as long as they were good workers and believed in good customer service. So, now this becomes a classic example of how the so called Christians try to impose their beliefs on other faiths. Hypocrites is too nice a word for them.