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.

 

Hobby Lobby wins Supreme Court case, limits the ACA contraception mandate

page: 24
49
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: SearchLightsInc
Well done american christians. You've stood up for what you believe in and forced it on everyone else



Please state in one or two sentences exactly what is being forced on everyone.

Employees want their medical plan from the company to cover birth control. The companies owner says you can't have it because it's against our faith so now you will have to live by our faith by not having access to it through your medical benefits.
That short enough for you?




posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

Really?

That's a blatant lie. Prove it.


Prove what?

I've posted a lot here today.


Did you try clicking on your highlighted name to see which post I was responding to?


I didn't know that.

wow.

As for the rest, I called you all a bunch of communists because you want the state to dictate what a company should do per their beliefs.

It was a couple of pages back.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

No. Try again. I said:

"the author replied to this post:


originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

Why does there have to a master at all? Some people want (not as many as you seem to think) government to have authority over people. Others (You guys insist on calling your selves Libertarians even though the word traditionally meant Socialist) want private companies to have authority over people. Someone complaining about either doesn't necessarily favor the other.

You want to trade one master for another. I want freedom from both."

Then you said

"Bull.

You argue for an authoritarian-entitlement state!"



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: Sunwolf
This is one of the most entertaining threads ever!The crying,the crying,the crying!I would have never guessed there were so many entitlement crybabies in this country.How much does B.C. cost anyway?Is it like a car payment?A mortgage payment?


I already showed that in a previous post!

It's absolutely free from Family Planning for those whom make under 240% of the poverty rate!

Amazing isn't it! These poor women are being so abused by an Evil Christian company! pffffft


So you're good with a for profit corporation refusing some basic health care coverage in their compensation packages for their female employees, that they are entitled to, by law, and allowing the American tax payer to foot the bill instead?





Yep!!!! Why be in business if you don't make a profit? Like I said, they have a cheap AND/OR FREE way of getting their birthcontrol already! What's the problem?

This is much ado about nothing! Other than those whom have an anti religious view to jump up and down and scream like spoiled children......

No one pays for my dental or eye work. Who do I blame for that?



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

Really?

That's a blatant lie. Prove it.


Prove what?

I've posted a lot here today.


Did you try clicking on your highlighted name to see which post I was responding to?


I didn't know that.

wow.

As for the rest, I called you all a bunch of communists because you want the state to dictate what a company should do per their beliefs.

It was a couple of pages back.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

You know Bee, when it is a cause they want the government to stay out of then they will understand.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
it's against our faith so now you will have to live by our faith

Not even close.
No one is stopping these people from getting access to the abortificants.
They can still go and get it on their own. No problem.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw

That is a good point,how many employees are unhappy with this decision.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

No. Try again. I said:

"the author replied to this post:


originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer

Why does there have to a master at all? Some people want (not as many as you seem to think) government to have authority over people. Others (You guys insist on calling your selves Libertarians even though the word traditionally meant Socialist) want private companies to have authority over people. Someone complaining about either doesn't necessarily favor the other.

You want to trade one master for another. I want freedom from both."

Then you said

"Bull.

You argue for an authoritarian-entitlement state!"


Because you aren't making any sense!

You want the company to knuckle under and obey the dictates of the government.

You aren't defending Hobby Lobby.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: thesaneone

Dude, your religion isn't their religion. And yes, I think they are laughing their asses off.

ETA: en.wikipedia.org...




Okay and how many of those religions are for abortions or abortion pills?




In most "civilized" countries, what a religion dictates doesn't play into what health care its citizens can access.


Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe (PACE) Recently, PACE in a ground breaking resolution on the right to access abortion, recommended to Member States of the Council of Europe that they provide contraception at a reasonable cost, reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, and eliminate discriminatory effects of abortion restrictions on women who have limited access to information and few financial resources.

Reasons for Subsidization of Contraceptives
Numerous EU Member States have subsidized contraceptives on the grounds of public health or to uphold fundamental rights. The human rights dimension of contraceptive subsidization was taken into account in Poland and in Slovenia. The Polish Ombudsman for Human Rights found the withdrawal of subsidies for contraceptives to be a discriminatory practice.36 The Slovenian Government considers family planning to be a fundamental human right guaranteed by Article 55 of the Constitution, which grants all citizens the right to determine the number and spacing of their children.37 The 1992 Health Services Act makes preventive health care for women a mandatory part of the primary health care system, and requires that all health care centers provide such services.38

The Belgian Constitutional Court, in addressing the constitutionality of the law on pricing for pharmaceu- ticals, stated generally that that the policy behind the scheme is to improve access to drugs that promote public health and social benefits. The Court noted that contraceptives are a type of drug that must be accessible to the public at an affordable price. The Court further explained that providing access to contraceptives is justifiable on the grounds of public health and social protection in order to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies.39 Similarly, the Danish Government policy considers family planning services, including subsidization of contraception, “an integral part of the national health service.”40 In similar terms, the French Transparency Committee’s research on the use of vari- ous oral contraceptives in France indicated that the provision of oral contraception “presents an interest in terms of public health.”41
Member States that subsidize contracep- tives fully or to some extent to all.

reproductiverights.org...



edit on 30-6-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)

edit on Mon Jun 30 2014 by DontTreadOnMe because: shortened overly long quote IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN


IF IF IF IF IF IF IF

A business establishment were to be ordered by a high level tyrannical governmental body to

shoot on entry to the business door . . . say . . . all customers with blue eyes or all homosexuals or all Hindus or all Muslims . . .

RIGHT, I forgot that it wasn't just ANY baby that could be aborted, they had to go into the future to see if the child turned out to be gay or religious or had blue eyes. I murder AT LEAST 500 million "children" a day and I have no trouble with it.



THEN the other side in this debate MIGHT understand Hobby Lobby's feelings

about being FORCED to help murder innocent babies in the womb.

BTW, the judgment for the 50 or so million murders so far is evidently looming closer at hand than ever before:

It burns...
I had no idea that Hobby Lobby had FEELINGS. I thought it was a multi-Billion dollar corporation, but since now I know that it has "feelings"... I still don't think it should be able to claim religious exemptions on abortions. It doesn't exist. It can't have religious beliefs. I can hear it crying now, as I break its wittle non-existent heart.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
So you're good with a for profit corporation refusing some basic health care coverage in their compensation packages for their female employees, that they are entitled to, by law,

So you're good with people refusing to allow others to practice their faith that they are entitled to do so by law ... by the constitution?



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
In most "civilized" countries, what a religion dictates doesn't play into what health care its citizens can access.

In most 'civilized' countries, people are allowed to follow the religion of their choice. Oh .. and no one is dictating what health care the workers can access. Not one bit. They can still go get their abortificants elsewhere.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: grandmakdw



With that snarky remark I can only conclude you are a staunch supporter of the Obama administration, are a Lib or Progressive or Dem.

And your conclusion is wrong. I'm an Independent but seeing how we are forced to deal with either the Reps or Dems it's best to go with the one that is less evil.


Guess you believe in amnesty for the "children" (wearing 2XL-5XL underpants) That would be consistent with being a Lib. etc.

Another wrong guess they should be sent back to where they came from. If I had my way everyone whose family that hasn't been in this country for at least 150 years would be packed up and shipped back to where they came from. It's the descendants of the carpetbaggers that came after this country was settled that is ruining this country.


Which means you support the loss of more jobs for americans.

This old BS. Many of the jobs that these people do Americans won't do. Let's see how many Americans that are willing to go and pick food in the summer heat for minimum wage.


I still say slavery was abolished long ago

Not abolished just changed now they are called wage slaves. They are the people that have to live paycheck to paycheck because they barely earn enough to live on.


no one is forced to work for anyone who doesn't give them what they think they deserve.

In many cases it's either do that or become homeless and starve. Which do you think people would choose?
edit on 30-6-2014 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   
I can hear the democrats spin this one...."more war on women"

It's a winning issue. The GOP better take note. It's not about reality, it's about perception.

When the GOP loses the female vote, the minority vote and the poor vote.

Hillary will wipe the floor with anyone the GOP trots out there.
There just aren't enough conservative, white, males out there to elect a republican.

Reality sucks huh?
edit on 30-6-2014 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 05:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: seeker1963

originally posted by: Sunwolf
This is one of the most entertaining threads ever!The crying,the crying,the crying!I would have never guessed there were so many entitlement crybabies in this country.How much does B.C. cost anyway?Is it like a car payment?A mortgage payment?


I already showed that in a previous post!

It's absolutely free from Family Planning for those whom make under 240% of the poverty rate!

Amazing isn't it! These poor women are being so abused by an Evil Christian company! pffffft


So you're good with a for profit corporation refusing some basic health care coverage in their compensation packages for their female employees, that they are entitled to, by law, and allowing the American tax payer to foot the bill instead?





Yep!!!! Why be in business if you don't make a profit? Like I said, they have a cheap AND/OR FREE way of getting their birthcontrol already! What's the problem?

This is much ado about nothing! Other than those whom have an anti religious view to jump up and down and scream like spoiled children......

No one pays for my dental or eye work. Who do I blame for that?


So, for you, this isn't about a religious stand, but about saving money, by shifting the responsibility from the employer to the tax payer, by claiming religious objection.




posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 05:06 PM
link   
I definitely don't. It has serious consequences for the workers at Hobby Lobby and sets a terrible legal precedent that would enable other corporations to do the same thing.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 05:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: windword
In most "civilized" countries, what a religion dictates doesn't play into what health care its citizens can access.

In most 'civilized' countries, people are allowed to follow the religion of their choice. Oh .. and no one is dictating what health care the workers can access. Not one bit. They can still go get their abortificants elsewhere.

That's because in most "civilized" nations there is a national healthcare plan that takes care of the people.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

I'm oblivious as to how a corporation can have religious beliefs. I'd love to meet this corporation so I can tell him all about what I think of his religious beliefs.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

Employees want their medical plan from the company to cover birth control. The companies owner says you can't have it because it's against our faith so now you will have to live by our faith by not having access to it through your medical benefits.
That short enough for you?


Your thinking is so freaking twisted that its not even funny. You just stated that employees are the ones demanding birth control, so who's trying to force who here? How does someone saying no amount to force? I just don't get it.



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join