Obama Administration: We Can and Will Force Christians to Act Against Their Faith

Setting aside the Obamacare debate in general, should employers be able to pick and choose which points of (health) insurance they offer? Shouldn't there be a standard?

If an employer doesn't believe in drugs, according to its faith, does it have the right to deny prescription coverage to people (many of them older) who might *need* those drugs daily to survive (such as blood pressure medicine, liver medication, etc). I would argue no.

Does an employer, such as Christian Scientists, arguing (even if true) it's against their faith, that since they do not believe in medicine and going to the doctors that they should not be able to offer hospitalization, or certain types of other coverage? I would argue they do not.

See where this is going?

That biased article and the "forcing people to act against their faith" sensationalism is the same kinda crap that distorts the argument, clouds the facts, and purposefully tries to make this type of a stuff an Obama War Against Christians. Puleeze.

This is getting tedious.

BTW, i love (#sarcasm) this loaded language in the article:

refusing to include abortion-inducing drugs in their employee health plan.

Abortion inducing drugs? That's just sensationalist journalism targeting the very audience they're wanting to rile up. Am i incorrect to presume it's the morning after pill? Because i don't know of any drug that OTC legal for use in late-term abortions.

Wait a second, this means only Christians can be targeted with these new laws, not those other religious groups.
That will get challenged in the supreme court for sure, at has to be all or none. I mean even somebody who isn't religious can see that.

Honestly, I am not sure what bothers me more, the law, or the fact that Christians were singled out.
Just wow. Talk about a total violation of liberty on a epic level.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

There ya go.. Inventing what I said again.. Look, You're deliberately misrepresenting what I said now. Not even gray area on that anymore. You've failed to link a single instance to back what your saying as you've repeatedly stated I'm misreading or misrepresenting this. I've stated 3 times now, in detail, what happened.......yet your opinion to call me wrong is supposed to be worth anything? No... Link a point of basis for your calling me wrong ...again and again and again .... Or drop it.

Accusation is what demands more than opinion for proof.

Is the Disclosure statement that they filed in Bankruptcy good enough for you?

The Debtors have experienced a significant decline in the demand for their branded sweet goods and bread products. According to data from Information Resources Incorporated (the "IRI"), an independent market research concernthat reports sales trends in most supermarkets (excluding mass merchandisers, club stores and discount stores), the Debtors'total unit volume of branded sweet goods declined by 4.3% during the latest 52 weeks ending September 5, 2012, andrevenues from the Debtors' branded sweet good products declined 1.5% during the same period. The Debtors' total unitvolume of branded bread products declined by 9.6% during the latest 52 weeks ending September 5, 2012. Revenuesrelated to the Debtors' bread products declined 5.3% from the comparable period one year ago. Data from IRI alsoindicates that the declining unit trend in branded bread and sweet goods products was evident in the industry during the 52week period ending September 5, 2012. The Debtors believe that they will continue to experience reduced demand for their products based on various factors, including some of the factors discussed in greater detail below.

Hostess Disclosure Statement

Just in case you are unsure what Bankruptcy actually means, you can read about it. Bankruptcy

I don't even understand why you're running clear off on this side trail anyway. My point ..and ONLY point...in citing this example was to note how in this case, like Obama today, the needs of the MINORITY are pushed down the throats of a majority with total disregard and a reckless one at that. In doing so, the entire war is lost to fight one battle.

The MINORITY you speak of are the workers wanting a fair days pay for a fair days work. Not everybody believes businesses have a God given right (pun intended) to receive welfare from it's employees and the state.

You work at Hostess? This Union? Your fighting this ...and from a bad position at that, as if this total side line example is a personal crusade?

Nope. Just clarifying what Bankruptcy actually means.

Oh well.. Links or we're done. I'm sick of being called a fabricator by a different name with nothing but pure opinion offered to support it.

Please see above.

Wow. I leave to do a little shopping (needed scotch and prime rib) and this thread exploded!

So we have a company called Hobby Lobby. Doing well. Minding it's own business. Then comes along Obama and big government saying WE are going to TELL you how to run your business now regardless of your beliefs!

Hobby Lobby says, um, "no."

Government says, "Okay. We'll just fine you 1.3 million dollars a day until you go against your religious beliefs".

People here say, "YAY. RAH"

Others say, "um, the whole 1st Amendment issue."

People reply, "Get over it. Suck it up, baby. Christianity sucks!"

Do I have it right?

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by kthxbai

 

I don't know about any of their supposed waivers, please extrapolate by telling us what those waivers are, what they allow for and what the conditions are.

Someone else can do that.. I think I'm about done here. (The point and info you want was made earlier in the thread, BTW.. We're down to repeating things the 2nd and 3rd times..) I'm sure I'll be called this that and more for disengaging at this point but I've honestly made about all the points I have to legitimately make in a debate forum. I've replied to just about everything as well.

Now, it's moving fast from debate to argument, if not fight. I don't do running fights and I never have ...although I've probably come closer here than I really ever like to.

Take care on the thread all! It's been fun...but I'm getting off the ride before it hits the loops and drops ahead.

I have been respectful and conversational in all of this. I have asked for information to back up statements and that is not fighting at all, it's intelligent discourse.

I would hope it isn't me that you are referring to in your statement about fighting as that is clearly not my purpose here. I opposed the other extremist side as well showing that I'm not here to just argue but to discuss.

If you wish to leave the discussion at this time, that's fine, but please don't make accusations while you do so.

Have a good day and good coming year.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
Wait a second, this means only Christians can be targeted with these new laws, not those other religious groups.
That will get challenged in the supreme court for sure, at has to be all or none. I mean even somebody who isn't religious can see that.

Honestly, I am not sure what bothers me more, the law, or the fact that Christians were singled out.
Just wow. Talk about a total violation of liberty on a epic level.

That isn't what's being done at all, it's just the political slant the original article claimed, far from the actual truth of the matter.

If Hobby Lobby's owners are so adamant about running their business in a Christian manner, exactly how are they dealing with all the money they are obviously making (selling mostly cheap Chinese-made, meaning almost slave-labor made in appalling environmental conditions, craft supplies)?

Do they give almost all of their money to charity, lest they fail to fit through the eye of a needle on their way to heaven?

Exactly how DOES one conduct a business in a Christian manner?

What is their employee maternity and paternity leave policy? How many sick days can an employee take before their job is at risk?

Do they employ people of other faiths or no faiths, or is there subtle or not-so-subtle discrimination?

Originally posted by beezzer
Wow. I leave to do a little shopping (needed scotch and prime rib) and this thread exploded!

So we have a company called Hobby Lobby. Doing well. Minding it's own business. Then comes along Obama and big government saying WE are going to TELL you how to run your business now regardless of your beliefs!

Hobby Lobby says, um, "no."

Government says, "Okay. We'll just fine you 1.3 million dollars a day until you go against your religious beliefs".

People here say, "YAY. RAH"

Others say, "um, the whole 1st Amendment issue."

People reply, "Get over it. Suck it up, baby. Christianity sucks!"

Do I have it right?

No, that's only the slant the article gave to it, a very politicized slant meant to cause controversy.

In truth, a company opposed something based on personal beliefs and chose to ignore the law and were called on it, now they are trying to justify their actions based on the supposed religous views of the people who would have to give employees a fair wage and health coverage preventing them from making more profit at the expense of the employees.

Originally posted by beezzer
Wow. I leave to do a little shopping (needed scotch and prime rib) and this thread exploded!

So we have a company called Hobby Lobby. Doing well. Minding it's own business. Then comes along Obama and big government saying WE are going to TELL you how to run your business now regardless of your beliefs!
Hobby Lobby says, um, "no."
Government says, "Okay. We'll just fine you 1.3 million dollars a day until you go against your religious beliefs".
People here say, "YAY. RAH"
Others say, "um, the whole 1st Amendment issue."
People reply, "Get over it. Suck it up, baby. Christianity sucks!"
Do I have it right?

Got my Scotch yesterday. I'll toast your health at Midnight.

This is about religious freedom infringing on other peoples rights.

If we were part of a religion, say...The Inebriati.

We believe that God commands us to drink a quart of Scotch a day.

When we get pulled over on a DUI. Do we get away with it because of our religious beliefs? Or does the law of the land take precedence?

reply to post by kthxbai


Yet Obamacare does give breaks to people and organisations based on religious beliefs.

Originally posted by TheComte
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Abortion is legal in the United States. The radical Christians have to get over it and move on. That war was fought and lost. There are no more battles.

But the radical Christians will just keep re-opening the abortion debate until they get their way. That's what I mean when I say they are intent on imposing their beliefs on others. It's all they think about. They can't accept the fact that abortions are legal.

Searching through the posts here..... I take it you do not profess Jesus Christ as your Lord?


Murdering babies is wrong. I look at my daughter - I think what if my wife had an abortion behind my back? She would not be here(my daughter lol). She is a living, independent being with intelligence and free will. She deserves to live, same with the other ungodly amount we kill every year.

You chose GOOD or EVIL. I know, MSM made that seem comical, but it's still true.... just ask God.

This is not a mom-and-pop store that's being mistreated by the "evil gubment".

hobbylobby.com...

Hobby Lobby is now considered a leader in the arts and crafts industry. Today, Hobby Lobby has 525 stores across the nation that average 55,000 square feet in size, and offers more than 65,000 crafting

Affiliated companies listed on their own webpage:
hobbylobby.com...

This is not some small business being encroached upon by the federal government, it is a nation-wide chain trying to avoid the laws put forth to protect it's employees. It's not 10 or 12 employees, it's 525 stores in 42 states. It's not a matter of states rights since it's spread out over the whole nation. They don't provide just "american made" products or focus on one section of society as their base. They are a retail store open to the public and are subject to public practices.

The article is trying to portray them as a tiny little company being bullied by the national government, that's not the case at all.

Originally posted by mamabeth
reply to post by pavelivanov22

 

Yes, but remember that the Lord let him be elected and gave
us the type of leader that we deserve!

I think it is less about deserve.... you know there is a common theme in the Gospel.

I used to support Obama. If he would just stop with the gun control baby killing (before his time I know) and burning our constitution, I think we are better off than most.

Originally posted by jimmyx

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by Tw0Sides

 

I wonder how far this administration will have to go, or what atrocity Obama will have to do, to wake up his SUPPORTERS, to the fact he is a tyrant.

You know, its OK as long as it is happening to the other guy, it isn't until they come after you that it will matter.

For the LOVE of GOD, is there anything about this guy Obama supporters disagree with?

Oh sorry and this part.

We should be in Syria though if you ask me. Israel seems to be handling themselves quite well.

yes...i disagree with obama on the NDAA, on keeping the war in afghanistan going on longer than it should, on outlawing semi-automatics, on NOT prosecuting the bankers for the 2008 debacle [/qoute]


Oh yeah and that part.

Coulda been worse though. Coulda been Mitt gasp.

edit on 31-12-2012 by NarrowGate because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by kthxbai

 

Yet Obamacare does give breaks to people and organisations based on religious beliefs.

Which people and what breaks according to what religious beliefs? I don't know of any specifically but people are mentioning them. I'd be happy to discuss them if I knew what they were. I may disagree with them totally, but it still wouldn't justify giving even more to others, it would justify those being taken away if they aren't not within the law to give.

Originally posted by beezzer
Wow. I leave to do a little shopping (needed scotch and prime rib) and this thread exploded!

So we have a company called Hobby Lobby. Doing well. Minding it's own business. Then comes along Obama and big government saying WE are going to TELL you how to run your business now regardless of your beliefs!

Hobby Lobby says, um, "no."

Government says, "Okay. We'll just fine you 1.3 million dollars a day until you go against your religious beliefs".

People here say, "YAY. RAH"

Others say, "um, the whole 1st Amendment issue."

People reply, "Get over it. Suck it up, baby. Christianity sucks!"

Do I have it right?

not really..
how do you define the beliefs of a corporation or business?
is it the beliefs of the ceo, is it the beliefs of the stockholders, the beliefs of the owners, the beliefs of the employees? what about other laws that have been in effect uncontested for some time now that challenges the belief system for many businesses and individuals, I can think of many!!
so, my question to you is this...
with the gov't actually challenging the belief system of many, why are so many singling out this one issue?? why should some christians idea that birth control is wrong, don't force me to participate in anyway more important to preserve than someone's belief that bombing people in far away lands into oblivion is wrong?? and most importantly, why is it wrong to force businesses to participate in obama care in this area, but not the individuals members of society?? I mean, ya your church will be protected from having to providing insurance to their employees for birth control...but....
you as an individual will still have to participate in the insurance scam which will provide birth control to anyone and everyone who wants it?? even the pastor of your church will...
if this is sinful in the eyes of god for businesses, then it most certainly is for individuals!!!

Originally posted by kthxbai

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by kthxbai

 

Yet Obamacare does give breaks to people and organisations based on religious beliefs.

Which people and what breaks according to what religious beliefs? I don't know of any specifically but people are mentioning them. I'd be happy to discuss them if I knew what they were. I may disagree with them totally, but it still wouldn't justify giving even more to others, it would justify those being taken away if they aren't not within the law to give.

Linky from page 1 of this thread.

reply to post by NarrowGate


It's wonderful that you cherish your family. May you have a wonderful 2013 with them. But that has little to do with what federally mandated health care a company has to offer to it's workers. Chances are, if you were employed by them, you would never use that particular coverage, but someone else who was employed by them might. It's not up to you or me to take that away from them since it is legislated and required that it be available to them.

Hobby Lobby loves and walks the path of Christ about as much as Hitler walked the path of Ghandi.

This is a joke. This is nothing more than a political ploy hidden behind the fake war or Christians. I'm quite sure Hobby Lobby was very much enjoying all the profits from the now not religious holiday of Chritmas.
If Hobby Lobby is so steadfast Christian, perhaps they should give all their capitalist earnings to the hungry like Jesus would have done.

They only love Jesus when it fits with the Obama is a Muslim Kenyan agenda.

Let's all celebrate the birth of the King! Come on down to Hobby Lobby! Half off all items for the birth of Jesus! Yay!



Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by kthxbai

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by kthxbai

 

Yet Obamacare does give breaks to people and organisations based on religious beliefs.

Which people and what breaks according to what religious beliefs? I don't know of any specifically but people are mentioning them. I'd be happy to discuss them if I knew what they were. I may disagree with them totally, but it still wouldn't justify giving even more to others, it would justify those being taken away if they aren't not within the law to give.

Linky from page 1 of this thread.

First, thank you for providing the link.

That link is stating that an individual is exempt from the healthcare requirement, not that a company owned by that individual doesn't have to provide it for his employees. There is a very big difference there.
If the owner of Hobby Lobby does not want insurance for himself, he too can get a waiver based on his religious beliefs. However, he cannot deprive it from his employees based on those beliefs just as any muslim in question cannot.

If, at some point in time, a waiver is given to a business saying they don't have to provide the required health insurance to their employees because the owner is muslim and it's against his religious beliefs, I will be right beside you in fighting against it. That just isn't the case in this particular circumstance.