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: 4
49
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: MOMof3
Congratulations! And to the Muslims, Mormons, and Jehovah Witnesses. Sharia law for you daughters and sons in the workplace, is on its way.


No one is forced to work somewhere they disagree with the "uniform" or the company regulations.

Obama was trying to force an employer to do something against their religious beliefs. No one is forced to work for Hobby Lobby, if free birth control is a defining issue for an employee, they can find another job where it is given. Working at Hobby Lobby doesn't entail a skill that can't be used at Michaels, or Sears, or Macy's.

If a Muslim owns a business and has the abaya as a uniform, that is no different than Hooters forcing its waitress to wear their uniform. No one forces waitresses to work at Hooters, no one will force anyone to work for an employer where they disagree with their company policies.

This law was trying to force an employer to do something with no way out for his/her religious beliefs.



+5 more 
posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Destinyone
Let people go to Planned Parenthood for BC.


The religious right is doing everything they can to abolish Planned Parenthood, too.

It really does come down to the "Christian value" of the importance of money. And, in the end, the owners of Hobby Lobby will be paying for the birth control of their employees, anyway. And so will I! And so will you!

This is funny! LOL



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: buster2010

As far as I know planned parenthood charged according to income! Many would still have to pay some maybe all of the cost.....

Many women have been enjoying free birth control even before obamacare I believe or at least it was covered!
So just how does making women take up more of the cost for this = more affordable healthcare??
And the idea that it is less restrictive to have the cost shared by the taxpayer is insane!!



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Destinyone

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Destinyone
a reply to: windword

I can see you don't buy BC. You do know you can go to any Planned Parenthood and get it for practically free.

Making it a mandate was never a good idea in the first place.

Des


In many cases BC does help with the woman's health. They are many problems that BC treats so by denying it to their employees Hobby Lobby is denying healthcare for their employees.


Buster...the tide is turning against the Nanny Government that thinks no one should be RESPONSIBLE for themselves in any way. As a Woman, I can tell you. BC and any reason a person may need it. Is NOT the responsibility of government. Nor should it be a burden on the taxpayers. We aleady pay for a vast organization called Planned Parenthood set up for this purpose.

Des


Beautifully put.

Here we are, arguing about a mandate, when it is ultimately, the responsibility of the individual.




posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Destinyone

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Destinyone
a reply to: windword

I can see you don't buy BC. You do know you can go to any Planned Parenthood and get it for practically free.

Making it a mandate was never a good idea in the first place.

Des


In many cases BC does help with the woman's health. They are many problems that BC treats so by denying it to their employees Hobby Lobby is denying healthcare for their employees.


Buster...the tide is turning against the Nanny Government that thinks no one should be RESPONSIBLE for themselves in any way. As a Woman, I can tell you. BC and any reason a person may need it. Is NOT the responsibility of government. Nor should it be a burden on the taxpayers. We aleady pay for a vast organization called Planned Parenthood set up for this purpose.

Des

Des

Planned Parenthood is funded in part BY the government so it will still be falling on the taxpayers to pay for it. So why are you crying about a nanny state when you you are wanting people to run to a program that supports the nanny state?
Planned Parenthood


Planned Parenthood receives about a third of its money in government grants and contracts (about $360 million in 2009). By law, federal funding cannot be allocated for abortions, but some opponents of abortion have argued that allocating money to Planned Parenthood for the provision of other medical services "frees up" funds to be re-allocated for abortion.

So now it will cost taxpayers more because some biblethumper is crying BC is against my faith.


+3 more 
posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I don't see this as only an birth control issue. I think it can open the door to arguments over many different subjects. This is the start of one religion dictating how government is run. Religion has claimed separation for their benefit but not when it hurts them.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

From what I have seen and been anywhere close to, it's not abolishing Planned Parenthood as much as cutting off ANY and ALL Federal or State funding for it. We've come to see Government as the source of all to be Mother, Father and all inbetween for our needs AND desires. That is the path to Roman levels of fail, but that's a larger issue too.

In this one, well? Is a business owner forced to supply something by affirmative action on their part, which runs against every fiber of their values and morals as people? Nope. They aren't.

Planned Parenthood is really a necessary thing, in my view and I'm somewhere out right of Rush Limbaugh on some things, I just don't drink the party kool-aid to be lock step on anything for THAT reason.

Having said that, Planned Parenthood supplies services aside from just abortion ...but the fact they DO supply something a good majority seem to have personal issues with, should be enough to say the public as a whole isn't the one paying their light bill or payroll expenses.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Destinyone
Let people go to Planned Parenthood for BC.


The religious right is doing everything they can to abolish Planned Parenthood, too.

It really does come down to the "Christian value" of the importance of money. And, in the end, the owners of Hobby Lobby will be paying for the birth control of their employees, anyway. And so will I! And so will you!



And when planned parenthood is shut down and there is no contraception for poor women and they have all those poor little babies.....who will pay for their welfare?

I don't think the conservative religious right has a clue as to it's ultimate ramifications.

War on women.......sounds like it!


edit on 30-6-2014 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: buster2010


In many cases BC does help with the woman's health. They are many problems that BC treats so by denying it to their employees Hobby Lobby is denying healthcare for their employees.

Actually, the company provides coverage for birth control in their health insurance plan. What they objected to was being required to provide coverage for four very specific forms, that the owners considered to be methods of abortion. That may not be the case for other employers, but in the case of Hobby Lobby, your claim is invalid. (The issue of whether those methods are abortifacients is not relevant, legally, because the employer's objection is based on their opinion that they are, and the court is ruling on whether they are allowed to have an opinion, not what that opinion is.)


It’s also important to note that the business owners’ objections were not to contraception, per se, but to abortion. They argued that four types of contraception required to be covered amounted to abortion, as Alito noted and which Solicitor General, in arguing the Obama Administration case in March, has rejected as contrary to any ordinary understanding of what abortion is. Alito:

The owners of the businesses have religious objections to abortion, and according to their religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients. If the owners comply with the HHS mandate, they believe theywill be facilitating abortions, and if they do not comply, they will pay a very heavy price—as much as $1.3 million per day, or about $475 million per year, in the case of one of the companies. If these consequences do not amount to a substantial burden, it is hard to see what would. ( Source)



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: Destinyone
a reply to: windword

I can see you don't buy BC. You do know you can go to any Planned Parenthood and get it for practically free.

Making it a mandate was never a good idea in the first place.

Des



The ACA was designed to relieve tax payer burden for birth control by placing the mandate in basic health care coverage that is already being provided in employee compensation packages.

I'm past the age and don't need BC. But my daughter does, and her IUD copay was $800.



Then your daughter was way overcharged, probably by a private Doctor. Back in the day I paid $35.00 for an IUD via Planned Parenthood.

By mandating that BC must be in insurance packages, the cost will be much higher than through low cost clinics.

Des



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:33 AM
link   
So an insurance company will write a special hobby lobby policy and make sure their system honors it which will save HL a couple of dollars a month but cost much more which will be passed on to everyone else by the insurance company.

That's if so called 'programmers' in India can do it without breaking the whole thing.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:34 AM
link   
This means any store can pick and choose what they cover, based on the religion of the owners, right?

Here's an article (opinion piece) about the possible outcomes of this ruling:

Defenders of Religion Should be Careful What they Wish For



American law has traditionally bent over backward to accommodate individuals forced to choose between obeying the law and complying with their beliefs. If that privilege is pushed too far, public support for accommodating religious objections could erode.
...
It isn't just, as a federal appeals court in Philadelphia pithily put it, that businesses "do not pray, worship, observe sacraments or take other religiously-motivated actions." It is that business corporations are legal entities distinct from the individuals who create them.


I know I feel less inclined to accommodate religious beliefs because of this ruling. It feels like religious people are forcing their beliefs onto the unwilling. Religious freedom, as protected in the first amendment, is for PEOPLE. Hobby Lobby does NOT practice religion as a business.

I will never go to a Hobby Lobby again. And I just might join a protest.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Destinyone
Let people go to Planned Parenthood for BC.


The religious right is doing everything they can to abolish Planned Parenthood, too.

It really does come down to the "Christian value" of the importance of money. And, in the end, the owners of Hobby Lobby will be paying for the birth control of their employees, anyway. And so will I! And so will you!



And when planned parenthood is shut down and there is no contraception for poor women and they have all those poor little babies.....who will pay for their welfare?

I don't think the conservative religious right a clue as to it's ultimate ramifications.





Maybe this will make people more responsible when they want to knock boots.

To me it seems that the more time has past the more people won't think for themselves and rely on government to make their choices for them, I think it's about time for us individuals to learn how to be responsible again.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:38 AM
link   
a reply to: adjensen
They are using their faith to say the BC is abortion which is a lie. The morning after pill is the only one that can be truly called abortion.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
I don't see this as only an birth control issue. I think it can open the door to arguments over many different subjects. This is the start of one religion dictating how government is run. Religion has claimed separation for their benefit but not when it hurts them.


The Obama administration was trying to dictate how religious people MUST obey the government in matters of religious conscience.

SCOTUS said the government may not dictate the behavior and by extension the religious beliefs of individuals.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
So an insurance company will write a special hobby lobby policy and make sure their system honors it which will save HL a couple of dollars a month but cost much more which will be passed on to everyone else by the insurance company.


Yes so that way HL will pay attention to their true God. Money



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
So an insurance company will write a special hobby lobby policy and make sure their system honors it which will save HL a couple of dollars a month but cost much more which will be passed on to everyone else by the insurance company.

That's if so called 'programmers' in India can do it without breaking the whole thing.




Then why not blame the government for those costs they are the ones who tried to jam it down our throats.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: buster2010

So you are really objecting to them having an opinion?

Because according to something I read earlier, Hobby Lobby provides coverage for 16 different forms of birth control. They aren't denying birth control.


Hobby Lobby refused to provide coverage for two types of IUDs and for Plan B and EllaOne, the morning-after and week-after pills, respectively.

Correcting popular misconceptions, Keim emphasized that the Greens are not Catholic, but Protestant, and said they happily provide 16 of the 20 different types of contraceptives in the mandate – just not the four drugs and devices that can allegedly cause abortions. (Source)

What is your "proven health benefit" that those two IUDs and two post-conception pills provide to women that no other medication can?



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone



Maybe this will make people more responsible when they want to knock boots.



Good luck with that. There have been unwanted pregnancies since time began, and there will be unwanted pregnancies right up until time ends.



posted on Jun, 30 2014 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

So isn't all other types of healthcare the responsibility of the individual!
Which is more responsible??
Buying an insurance plan to cover the cost of your healthcare or running to family planning and hoping for a freebie?
And why should that insurance plan cover free tests for all kinds of possible future problems but not cover birth control???



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join