posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 08:55 PM
The problem with this case are battles of perspectives from anywhere from broad views to narrow views.
First off, I can agree and disagree with this ruling at the same time. I can somewhat agree with a "person" not liking the fact their coverage
includes the ability to take pills that could induce abortions. I do not believe though that their is some religious right or directive to go against
abortion. If one is a Right Wing Old Testament thumper of Christianity, then one can find many examples that God does not give two #s about unborn
children or children in general if you want to compare quotes to the bible. The Right Wing New Testament types may have a bit of a problem, but I
don't exactly see them trying to ban the death penalty.
I'm sure we can debate all day long on whether or not Obamacare/ACA is a good thing or bad. The fact of the matter is that our hospitals, our
insurance companies, our drug makers, and medical equipment makes are almost all damn near profit driven, and almost all damn near corporations whose
number one goal is make more and more money for its shareholders, all other objectives are secondary. This system is not sustainable and something
will have change at some point, hopefully answers will reveal themselves eventually.
We are now at a stage where corporations can have an excuse not to follow a law. Argue all you want that the owners of a corporation can have their
religious beliefs, but considering that the movement of shares of ownership can switch around in a blink of eye daily with our economic system,
what's to stop the "Rich and Religious" from buying controlling ownerships of any and all corporations and dictating how we use our healthcare that
is forced upon us anyway. This could also apply to many different religions or philosophies, including atheism. One can say that none of us are slaves
and we can work anywhere we please, this is true for now. We are getting the point where religions can affect employment now.
If abortion is a sin, and a company is not mandated to provide coverage due to a religious belief, what's to stop a business from firing an employee
who is getting a divorce? Is it not against Christian values to get a divorce? What about pregnancies outside of marriage? Will a corporation have a
right to not pay for paternity coverage in case pregnancy outside the bonds of marriage? Will Jehovah Witness believing corporations not pay for
surgeries involving transfusions? What about corporations that follow the Faith Healing practices, why have insurance at all if its in God's hands?
If I am going to have a government mandated health coverage, I would expect that my insurance covers what I wish for the most part, its my right to
that healthcare. Our corporations may be people but those people suffer from "Multiple Personality Disorders" because let's face it, tomorrow Hobby
Lobby could have new owners with a whole new personality. I don't personally believe that Corporations are people, at least until a corporation goes
to jail for not paying fines or that entire corporations are held accountable to the law like normal oxygen breathing citizens are held.
I can understand a woman not wanting to go into Planned Parenthood. I am a man and I know that when it comes to penis and testicles, I would much
rather my personal doctor that I go to everything else check me. A woman would have to see a completely different doctor from her normal OB/GYN going
into Planned Parenthood. I'm sure those women enjoy showing their vaginas to complete random strangers as much as I like showing my penis to complete
random strangers as well. Wouldn't the ability for a woman to to go a OB/GYN for all her check up and BC needs be more cost effective rather than
having two businesses for different needs make more economic sense?
People can say that abortions/abortifacients/contraceptives are all different, but it all does the same thing, it stops unwanted pregnancies. I don't
see much difference is a fertilized egg, an egg being stopped from dropping, to sperm being chemically or physically routed. Going back to the cancer
= abortion argument, its not a far jump. One of the big arguments against birth control is that it interferes with God's plan. Well, if its God's
plan to for one to die of cancer, who is that person to fight against God's will and that's was the point that the person was thing to make. Its
always funny how its a stepping stone/stumbling block from God if you live, but its God's calling one home if you die.
I find it funny that Republicans would stop something that Democrats would use to not reproduce. Unfortunately our political system is so polarized
that its now there are only two ways to look at things. America, the home of 31 flavors, infinite toppings on pizza, abundance of choice is stuck with
these two sides. This decision was not a win for anyone else but those who wish to hold some much power that they can dictate what America means as a
Remember, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. This is a
social issue and not a constitutional one. A woman taking this pill or that does not effect another's religion. A person using a government mandated
coverage will not stop a person from expressing their religion. When I see a person sentenced to Hell because of government mandated health coverage
or a person sent to Heaven because fought against government mandated health coverage I could change my tune.
Also The 9th amendment states "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by
the people." If this is a tax in exchange for this government mandated health coverage, its my right to any and all parts of that health coverage
regardless of the belief of my employer.
This is a win for corporations and a loss for workers everywhere.