Hobby Lobby Files Suit over HHS Mandate, Could Face $1.3 Million in Fines

page: 3
17
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Katharos62191
 

You may be making this a little harder on yourself than you need to.

Who are we to say what women can and can't do with their bodies, but also who are we to say a company should or shouldn't have to abide by certain laws other companies do!
I don't believe that the discussion is what women do with their bodies. I'm sure Hobby Lobby won't fire a woman because she gets an abortion. The question is, can the government order Hobby Lobby to pay for abortion drugs, when paying for them goes against their religious principles? Principles that existed well before there was a US.


If a woman pays her premiums will she not be able to get covered for certain procedures because it is against her employers religion? Wow. This is getting crazy. One thing I can't understand is how can one be so religious and truly run a business. If someone came to your establishment and did not have money would you give them free product? What is it that makes a business religious? Because you profit in the name of the Lord? What? There is no such thing. You are in business so follow the rules!! Don't play the "religious card" to your benefit or pay the fine and shut up. Religion is not the place for "for profit " businesses - plain and simple.




posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreebirdGirl

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Katharos62191
 

You may be making this a little harder on yourself than you need to.

Who are we to say what women can and can't do with their bodies, but also who are we to say a company should or shouldn't have to abide by certain laws other companies do!
I don't believe that the discussion is what women do with their bodies. I'm sure Hobby Lobby won't fire a woman because she gets an abortion. The question is, can the government order Hobby Lobby to pay for abortion drugs, when paying for them goes against their religious principles? Principles that existed well before there was a US.


If a woman pays her premiums will she not be able to get covered for certain procedures because it is against her employers religion? Wow. This is getting crazy. One thing I can't understand is how can one be so religious and truly run a business. If someone came to your establishment and did not have money would you give them free product? What is it that makes a business religious? Because you profit in the name of the Lord? What? There is no such thing. You are in business so follow the rules!! Don't play the "religious card" to your benefit or pay the fine and shut up. Religion is not the place for "for profit " businesses - plain and simple.


If the woman is paying for her health care she can do what she wants. If she isn't paying for it, she should not expect someone else to pay for something they believe is wrong when it is not medically necessary (so a woman who requires birth control out of medical necessity should be exempted). Just so you know, many NON PROFIT organizations are effected. You don't seem to have a firm grasp of the topic.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   
Hobby Lobby is not fully paying for their employees insurance. The employees are responsible for their own premiums. They have no right to dictate their employee's lives. As far as non profits goes not all non profits are religiously affiliated. It would be fair to evaluate them on a one on one basis. I do believe something could be worked out for those who believe that certain procedures compromise their beliefs.However, there should also be consideration for employees of non profits. Nevertheless, since this post is about a "for profit" business suck it up Hobby Lobby!!! You don't seem to have a firm grasp of the post.
edit on 25-10-2012 by FreebirdGirl because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   
The cost to the insurance company is negative.

They save about $600k
over the long term.


Christian employers would probably be glad to pay $6 a month to not include
abortifacients in any health care plan. So why is the penalty so astronomically high?

You do realize that this means insurance companies
have now found a way to profit from absence of life.

I don't know what you think you are defending.
But the facts are pretty simple.


Mike Grouchy



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreebirdGirl
Hobby Lobby is not fully paying for their employees insurance. The employees are responsible for their own premiums. They have no right to dictate their employee's lives. As far as non profits goes not all non profits are religiously affiliated. It would be fair to evaluate them on a one on one basis. I do believe something could be worked out for those who believe that certain procedures compromise their beliefs.However, there should also be consideration for employees of non profits. Nevertheless, since this post is about a "for profit" business suck it up Hobby Lobby!!! You don't seem to have a firm grasp of the post.
edit on 25-10-2012 by FreebirdGirl because: (no reason given)


The law effects everyone, it's the same regardless of if you are for profit or non-profit. The law is what is being questioned. This is not something that is a medical necessity any more than condoms are a medical necessity for men. As I stated, for those VERY few women who can prove it is a medical necessity it should be covered. Otherwise it is elective. It should be stated up front that this elective drug is not covered, and if it is such a big deal women can choose to not work there. The government has no business telling businesses they must provide coverage for ELECTIVE medical expenses that go against religious beliefs.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 02:14 AM
link   
I think I see where the argument and misunderstanding is in this situation. I believe some people aren't fully aware of how businesses provide medical insurance. I'll give a real-life example:

My husband's company is large enough (about 150 employees) to provide medical benefits to their employee in the form of monies that is added to an account that is managed and under-written by various companies that are licensed to manage the money-pool and pay bills as they come in. Let's say, for instance, the company has a total annual deposit of 1.5 million, including employee contributions and employer matches and family members added without company match. Let's say all of the medical expenses added up to only 750 thousand dollars, the company now has a surplus for the following year and the employees will end up paying less the following year. Perhaps the total medical bills totaled 2.5 million. Then the company that is underwriting and managing the fund may lend the difference to the company or set up funding through other financial institutions (usually the company's go-to financial institution). If this happens, then the employees will either a)pay higher premiums the following year or b) have fewer medical expenses covered the following year, or c) both.

The underwriting agency will sit with the company and go over what is to be covered. Perhaps 80% of the employees are between 20 and 30, so why have viagra? Maybe most are men, so prostate care will be provided. What ever the company decides to fund, the underwriting agency (aka insurance company) will adhere to, when paying the claims that come through. Most are set up with categories and levels of coverage, not so many are ala carte these days, but even then it is to the discretion of the company. Why? Because it is the company, the business, the owner, the employer, (what ever you want to call the money man) that is paying the bill!

So, we need to erase our preconceived idea of insurance and realize that the term insurance is a service and not a product. The service is the pot that is being paid into. The more general the pot (individual insurance where you are actually pooling your monies with millions of other individuals) the more general and blanketed the coverage will be. The more specific (aka the smaller pot, where maybe a few hundred are pooling the money or only one entity is paying the ante) the more specific the the plan and services will be.

So, it is not about women's rights or labor laws or individual rights. It is about my right as a business owner to offer what I want, how I want, and those that disagree with me do not have to work for me. That would be socialism, which we aren't there, yet!
edit on 25-10-2012 by SourGrapes because: (no reason given)


Oh I also wanted to add this: You don't HAVE to accept your company's plan, you are free (at least for now) to get your own, if you don't like the plan that is offered.

To sum it up, essentially you are getting medical services and using your employers credit card. Now, do you think the employer has a say in what is charged on that card? I think so.
edit on 25-10-2012 by SourGrapes because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 02:26 AM
link   
To own and operate a business one must do so according to the law.

I love how religious folks think that the law does not apply to them.

I used to like hobby lobby. Now they will not be getting any business from liejunkie.

The law is the law folks, religious people are no better than anyone else, even though deep down they really think that they are. Even if they do not want to admit it. That is one reason I am not religous.

Fair is fair and this is why we have a court system.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 02:45 AM
link   
Insurance companies make so much money, they could offer employees a discount on contraceptives if the employers insurance does not cover abortion procedures or contraceptives.
Wishful thinking..

I don't think that employers should pay anything towards a abortion.

I'm not saying im pro-life, it's just they shouldn't have to cover your personal accidents or sexual irresponsibility. That has nothing to do with them.

Contraceptives on the other hand should be covered because if you become pregnant they'll have to pay more to cover the entire pregnancy and everything that comes a long with that AND give the employee months off even after the baby is born.

edit on 25-10-2012 by LightWarrior11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by liejunkie01
To own and operate a business one must do so according to the law.

I love how religious folks think that the law does not apply to them.

I used to like hobby lobby. Now they will not be getting any business from liejunkie.

The law is the law folks, religious people are no better than anyone else, even though deep down they really think that they are. Even if they do not want to admit it. That is one reason I am not religous.

Fair is fair and this is why we have a court system.


The law is the law, that's funny since it has NEVER been the law. It was only done recently as propaganda to gain votes. Way to obfuscate the issue, which is not the law is the law, it is that the law was changed in an unconstitutional manner. What if a law came out that said all 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th children must be aborted. The law is the law right ...



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by SourGrapes
I think I see where the argument and misunderstanding is in this situation. I believe some people aren't fully aware of how businesses provide medical insurance. I'll give a real-life example:

My husband's company is large enough (about 150 employees) to provide medical benefits to their employee in the form of monies that is added to an account that is managed and under-written by various companies that are licensed to manage the money-pool and pay bills as they come in. Let's say, for instance, the company has a total annual deposit of 1.5 million, including employee contributions and employer matches and family members added without company match. Let's say all of the medical expenses added up to only 750 thousand dollars, the company now has a surplus for the following year and the employees will end up paying less the following year. Perhaps the total medical bills totaled 2.5 million. Then the company that is underwriting and managing the fund may lend the difference to the company or set up funding through other financial institutions (usually the company's go-to financial institution). If this happens, then the employees will either a)pay higher premiums the following year or b) have fewer medical expenses covered the following year, or c) both.

The underwriting agency will sit with the company and go over what is to be covered. Perhaps 80% of the employees are between 20 and 30, so why have viagra? Maybe most are men, so prostate care will be provided. What ever the company decides to fund, the underwriting agency (aka insurance company) will adhere to, when paying the claims that come through. Most are set up with categories and levels of coverage, not so many are ala carte these days, but even then it is to the discretion of the company. Why? Because it is the company, the business, the owner, the employer, (what ever you want to call the money man) that is paying the bill!

So, we need to erase our preconceived idea of insurance and realize that the term insurance is a service and not a product. The service is the pot that is being paid into. The more general the pot (individual insurance where you are actually pooling your monies with millions of other individuals) the more general and blanketed the coverage will be. The more specific (aka the smaller pot, where maybe a few hundred are pooling the money or only one entity is paying the ante) the more specific the the plan and services will be.

So, it is not about women's rights or labor laws or individual rights. It is about my right as a business owner to offer what I want, how I want, and those that disagree with me do not have to work for me. That would be socialism, which we aren't there, yet!
edit on 25-10-2012 by SourGrapes because: (no reason given)


Oh I also wanted to add this: You don't HAVE to accept your company's plan, you are free (at least for now) to get your own, if you don't like the plan that is offered.

To sum it up, essentially you are getting medical services and using your employers credit card. Now, do you think the employer has a say in what is charged on that card? I think so.
edit on 25-10-2012 by SourGrapes because: (no reason given)


It is refreshing to see someone that understands the issues. As I already said, let the free market decide. If this is an issue that is truly defining and unacceptable no one will work there. This is an ELECTIVE cost. Companies should have the say on what ELECTIVE procedures are covered. If they want to cover breast enhancement more power to them, they shouldn't be forced to. Great post.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by LightWarrior11
Insurance companies make so much money, they could offer employees a discount on contraceptives if the employers insurance does not cover abortion procedures or contraceptives.
Wishful thinking..

I don't think that employers should pay anything towards a abortion.

I'm not saying im pro-life, it's just they shouldn't have to cover your personal accidents or sexual irresponsibility. That has nothing to do with them.

Contraceptives on the other hand should be covered because if you become pregnant they'll have to pay more to cover the entire pregnancy and everything that comes a long with that AND give the employee months off even after the baby is born.

edit on 25-10-2012 by LightWarrior11 because: (no reason given)


So how many condoms a year should employers be told they have to provide for me every year?



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 03:17 AM
link   
Really? I'm not talking about condoms, you don't need to see a doctor or have a prescription for that.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 03:21 AM
link   


The underwriting agency will sit with the company and go over what is to be covered. Perhaps 80% of the employees are between 20 and 30, so why have viagra? Maybe most are men, so prostate care will be provided. What ever the company decides to fund, the underwriting agency (aka insurance company) will adhere to, when paying the claims that come through. Most are set up with categories and levels of coverage, not so many are ala carte these days, but even then it is to the discretion of the company. Why? Because it is the company, the business, the owner, the employer, (what ever you want to call the money man) that is paying the bill!
reply to post by SourGrapes
 


So your argument is what? Employee should not have a say in what coverage they recieve. The employer holds the right to decide someone's life because he pays part of the insurance with the money he makes off the backs of his employees? You theory works if people are forced to work for someone like you due to the lack of jobs. How many people would work for you if you were upfront and said "Due to my religious beliefs I refuse to cover birth control, blood transfusions ect"? With other options none. You probably believe that the people working for you should be grateful you give them the crumbs they have. Those dirty peasants. I already know your motto " If you don't like it find somewhere else to work". Soon businesses like yours will have to leave this country and find the cheap subservient labor you desire. We don't need your kind. Companies like yours are killing this country.
You can not keep taking and give back nothing. The double standard days are over. You can not claim religion and persecute at the same time.Great companies have always treated their employees with dignity and respect. Not this slavemaster mentality that you appear to have. We the people expect freedom in all aspects of our lives. Freedom should not be a privilege granted by your boss. Because you sign a paycheck does not give you the right to judge or decide someone's life. I perform the job you hired me for that should be your only concern. If insurance is provided as a benefit than let it be a benefit not another tool for the tyrants.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by FreebirdGirl
So your argument is what? Employee should not have a say in what coverage they recieve. The employer holds the right to decide someone's life because he pays part of the insurance with the money he makes off the backs of his employees? You theory works if people are forced to work for someone like you due to the lack of jobs. How many people would work for you if you were upfront and said "Due to my religious beliefs I refuse to cover birth control, blood transfusions ect"?


So you are saying birth control and blood infusions are the same thing? You just lost all credibility. One is elective, one saves lives. So Employers should be forced to cover Botox, Liposuction, and Breast enhancement too?

And before you say birth control can save lives, I stated earlier in the RARE case this can be proven it should be provided as it is necessary for that individual, not elective.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by LightWarrior11
Really? I'm not talking about condoms, you don't need to see a doctor or have a prescription for that.

This is your quote.

Contraceptives on the other hand should be covered because if you become pregnant they'll have to pay more to cover the entire pregnancy and everything that comes a long with that AND give the employee months off even after the baby is born.

Unless you can provide an alternative reasoning condoms fit that description. We now have gender discrimination. Women are allowed contraceptives covered by insurance to prevent pregnancy and men are not.

Just so you know, insurance benefits don't stop at the Dr. office, I am entitled to massages for free from my insurance, and I don't need a prescription.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by LightWarrior11
Really? I'm not talking about condoms, you don't need to see a doctor or have a prescription for that.

This is your quote.

Contraceptives on the other hand should be covered because if you become pregnant they'll have to pay more to cover the entire pregnancy and everything that comes a long with that AND give the employee months off even after the baby is born.

Unless you can provide an alternative reasoning condoms fit that description. We now have gender discrimination. Women are allowed contraceptives covered by insurance to prevent pregnancy and men are not.

Just so you know, insurance benefits don't stop at the Dr. office, I am entitled to massages for free from my insurance, and I don't need a prescription.


If you want condoms to fit into my description so badly then imagine it there. My argument was not based on the need for men's birth-control or over the counter male birthcontrol. If you want to talk about men's birhcontrol feel free to do so but do not try to force it upon me to include or discuss. My earlier comment was focused towards women's non over the counter contraceptive.

There are hundreds upon thousands of insurance policies, I realize that insurance benefits don't stop At the "doctors office" in some policies, but not all policies are the same nor does every policy offer anything "free" at all. In regards to the insurance discount Comment earlier, ive experienced where employees receive a discount card for "health" items bought over the counter at grocery stores. I've used one. You have to give the cashier that card at the time of purchase and it deducts a certain amount from certain items in regards to bodily products. I would not be surprised if Condoms were also part of that discount (or could be included) but The evidence is non conclusive since I never bought condoms & used that card.

edit on 25-10-2012 by LightWarrior11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Should have just gone full bore socialist and did single payer. I'm sure people would be complaining then. As for Hobby Lobby being moral, please, you don't get to ship in crap made by workers paid next to nothing in China and then talk about the moral high ground. Their yarn is garbage anyway.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by FreebirdGirl
So your argument is what? Employee should not have a say in what coverage they recieve. The employer holds the right to decide someone's life because he pays part of the insurance with the money he makes off the backs of his employees? You theory works if people are forced to work for someone like you due to the lack of jobs. How many people would work for you if you were upfront and said "Due to my religious beliefs I refuse to cover birth control, blood transfusions ect"?


So you are saying birth control and blood infusions are the same thing? You just lost all credibility. One is elective, one saves lives. So Employers should be forced to cover Botox, Liposuction, and Breast enhancement too?

And before you say birth control can save lives, I stated earlier in the RARE case this can be proven it should be provided as it is necessary for that individual, not elective.



Elective or not? Who are you to make a determination on what coverage I should recieve? Any procedure that is not life threatening is considered elective:


The National Center for Health Statistics of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control noted that over 40 million elective medical procedures are performed every year, and the number seems to be growing. Elective procedures are those surgeries and treatments that are planned, non-emergency procedures that allow for a better quality of life for patients. These elective procedures may make an impact on national health care costs, so it's important to understand which procedures are elective medical procedures and which are medically necessary, spontaneous emergency procedures.

Plastic Surgery
The American Society of Plastic Surgeons noted in its 2008 annual report that 12.1 million elective plastic surgery procedures were completed that year, a three-percent increase from the year before. As Hollywood stars and an increasingly appearance-driven society teaches that if you don't like something about your looks you should simply change them, millions flock to their plastic surgeon's office for breast enhancement, face lifts, liposuction and other alterations in their quest for the perfect face and body.


Refractive Surgery
Those who have less-than-perfect eyesight often choose to get refractive surgery, which is an elective laser eye surgery that they can get in order to improve their sight. While some may have exceptionally bad eyesight, most often it is corrected by lenses, making laser eye surgery a planned, non-emergency procedure that has been undergone by about eight million people in the United States, according to eyesight website AllAboutVision.com.

Gynecological Surgery
While sometimes medically necessary for a woman's reproductive health, gynecological surgery like a hysterectomy or tubal ligation will be performed on a planned basis, with a doctor scheduling the procedure for the woman, either because she hopes to become sterilized or because it will affect her health in some way. These are rarely emergency procedures.

Exploratory Surgery
Often when a doctor or team of doctors needs more information about a condition, they will perform exploratory or diagnostic surgery to retrieve tissue samples, run cameras to have a closer look, or perform a biopsy to determine if a mass is cancerous. These exploratory surgeries are often done on an outpatient basis.

Cardiovascular Surgery
Those who suffer from high blood pressure or have had problems with heart attack or stroke may have a pacemaker put in, or have angioplasty performed to improve the function of their hearts. This type of surgery is usually known about far in advance as a cardiologist can note when a patient might have a heart problem in the future.

Musculoskeletal System Surgery
As humans age, their bones and joints tend to become less functional. After years of use, certain bones and joins, namely the hip and shoulder, can become worn and painful. Hip replacement surgery is fairly common in the United States, with the hip joint being replaced with a metal implant to simulate the function of the hip. This is planned and carried out via a scheduled surgery.



Read more: www.livestrong.com...




So according to you none of these procedures should be covered? Or is it only the ones that you choose that are acceptable?


Deny Ignorance.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Sour Grapes is the closest to spot on. And as she said, you don't have tp belong to the employers plan. I know the below for a fact and am betting that it has not been changed drastically within the past 10 years.

Hobby Lobby's health plan is what is known as a self insured plan (as are about 90% of the large employer - 100 employees or more - in the US today) made possible under the ERISA Act of 1974. Basically this means that HOBBY LOBBY is the "insurance" company. They put a boatload of money into an account(s) that is/are used to pay employees health claims under the "Plan". Employees also put monies (deducted from their checks in most cases) into this account. In some instances (I do not know if this applies to this particular company), the employee contributions are paid by the employer for employee only coverage and the employee only pays for a portion of spouse/dependents coverage. Believe me when I say that the employer puts a lot more money into this than the employee in either circumstance. The only time this is untrue is that situation of COBRA coverage.

The actual processing of these health claims is done by what is known as a third party administrator which also with information from the client tracks the eligibility of members under the "Plan".

One of the major selling points of a self-insured plan has been that the employer gets to choose the level of coverage for their employees. These are custom tailored plans.

I have a background in this field. After performing claims adjutication and customer service associated with claims under self funded plans, I was part of a team that met with employers and discussed what the employer wanted to cover and how it was to be covered. We went through all sorts of different scenarios that an examiner might see in a normal day. Most plans that I dealt with (either self insured or fully insured) in my experience did not cover abortion (unless the life of the mother was in danger or unless in cases of incest or rape; and sometimes not even then). Some did not cover birth control. The things that are covered and to what level they are covered and the things that aren't covered are spelled out in the group's "Plan Document" which is a legally binding contract. (I wrote those too.) Things that aren't covered are called Exclusions.

The plan approved by the client is sent to a re-insurance company along with eligibility information where it is underwritten as stop loss/catastophic both group wide and individually to protect the money in the account that the employer set up so that the "Plan" doesn't go bust in the case of a bad experience (ie...high dollar claims such as premature quintuplets or a bad catastrophy (like a tornado)). The reinsurance carrier can look at the plans level of coverage and what is included or excluded and set the reinsurance premiums for the plan. The "richer" the plan is benefit wise (meaning more payout of benefits) the steeper the reinsurance premium. This affects the bottom line of cost of coverage (ie..premiums paid by the employer and/or the employee).

Again in my experience, the cost to the employer was much greater than that of the employee. As a good standard business practice, the employer usually wants to provide (in addition to a competetive wage) a benefit for the employee that is equal to or better than that of the competition as a way to decrease employee turnover with as little cost as possible. Some employers don't offer anything, Some employers offer indemnity policies like AFLAC that aren't close to major medical coverage.

I worked for one of the first TPA's in Oklahoma. Like Hobby Lobby, it was started by a man with vision, My former employer sold his business. The family was thinking about doing such back when Slick Willie and Hillary were in the White House. Why? Perhaps they had vision to see what was to come to pass even back then.

In my professional acquaintance with the Green family, I found them all to be of outstanding character and generous to their employees. They are good people.

If you want to know how I feel about Obamacare personally, you can read my post history.

Thanks for reading.



posted on Oct, 25 2012 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by liejunkie01
To own religious folks think that the law does not apply to them.

I used to like hobby lobby. Now they will not be getting any business from liejunkie.

The law is the law folks, religious people are no better than anyone else, even though deep down they really think that they are. Even if they do not want to admit it. That is one reason I am not religous.

Fair is fair and this is why we have a court system.


The law is the law, that's funny since it has NEVER been the law. It was only done recently as propaganda to gain votes. Way to obfuscate the issue, which is not the law is the law, it is that the law was changed in an unconstitutional manner. What if a law came out that said all 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th children must be aborted. The law is the law right ...


Is there a law that says one must abort any child?

We can play the what If's all day long.

Are they not going to get fined by not obeying the law? You see it as a vote getter. Others see it as a law.

Your entire reply to mine was moot.





top topics
 
17
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join