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.
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by buster2010
this case is forcing other people to follow the owners religion and that is wrong.
how in the world do you come up with that ??
where, in the case filings, does it insist that all Domino employees be devout Catholics ??
Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
Here's what worries me. The oral contraceptive is part of the law. Under law you have access to them.
So we now have one company not wanting to offer the contraceptive for "Religious Reasons".
But even not offering for some women that may need to be on the medicine for medical reasons.
So what happens when another company wants to deny their employees, for "Religious Reasons", access to a medication or surgical procedure. Because it conflicts with their viewpoint?
Sure I'm for personal freedoms of every American. But your personal freedoms shouldn't keep someone else from receiving a medication if you have a medical condition.
edit on 15-3-2013 by grey580 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
Very well. Christian Scientist believe medical conditions are an illusion. While they do allow their follows to recieve medical treatment, this is not at their core belief. As such, why should they feel a need to pay for something that isn't real? "Caroline Fraser writes that children in pain, or with conditions such as diabetes or deafness, have been told by their Christian Science parents, teachers and nurses that there is nothing wrong with them, or that there is no such thing as pain" Christian Science
Here is another question, which religions can be used to voice dissent against medical treatment in a place of public employment? I know, I know, you will say this is about 'birth control', but you are wrong. This is specifically about denying medical treatment based upon religion. Birth control is just the first salvo. If this medical treatment can be denied, then why not others?
Also, many say that the employees can just go a find another job. Okay, this is America, but then the employer should be upfront and state that by being hired the employee will be subject to the religious beliefs of the owners and that those beliefs may directly affect the employee?
Not forcing at all. Are they enslaved to the business owner? Can they not quit at any time with or without notice? Are they not permitted to purchase their own insurance? The only force involved here is by the government against the business owners and other citizens who believe that it is wrong to be forced to pay for contraception or the murder of children.
Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
Honor93 should have stated "this case is forcing other people to follow the owners 'religious tenets' and that is wrong"
I didn't say civil rights. Rights to medicine under the law.
But it's ok for 1 man to impose his Religious beliefs or point of view upon 100+ Thousand employees?
When other peoples rights are being stepped on. Then hell yes.
Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by buster2010
this case is forcing other people to follow the owners religion and that is wrong.
how in the world do you come up with that ??
where, in the case filings, does it insist that all Domino employees be devout Catholics ??
Honor93 should have stated "this case is forcing other people to follow the owners 'religious tenets' and that is wrong"
Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
reply to post by Helious
So if a doctor prescribes a medication then the employer has the right to say 'I don't believe in that medication so I refuse to have it covered under the insurance I provide to you'?
Originally posted by Foundryman
See, it's this religious dogma that I cannot stand. Following this Judge's "logic" any employer can now deny homosexuals, unmarried couples, unwed mothers and their children, and pagans insurance on religious grounds.
Blanket, opt-out statement: I can't do such and such - it's against my religion.
Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
reply to post by Honor93
You are correct and I was wrong. These companies are not denying medical treatment. They are just playing doctor and saying even though you need that medication I won't cover it for you. How's that?
Tell you what, high blood pressure comes from not believing in FSM, so therefore I do not have to cover ANY hypertension medication. If you have a heart attack it is because you did not eat enough meatballs. And don't expect me to pay any insurance that covers heart attacks. Followers of FSM not not have heart attacks. So say my religious beliefs. While this may be extreme sarcasm, it is definitely treading into the territory of this debate.
Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
reply to post by Helious
So if a doctor prescribes a medication then the employer has the right to say 'I don't believe in that medication so I refuse to have it covered under the insurance I provide to you'?
Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
Very well. Christian Scientist believe medical conditions are an illusion. While they do allow their follows to recieve medical treatment, this is not at their core belief. As such, why should they feel a need to pay for something that isn't real? "Caroline Fraser writes that children in pain, or with conditions such as diabetes or deafness, have been told by their Christian Science parents, teachers and nurses that there is nothing wrong with them, or that there is no such thing as pain" Christian Science
Here is another question, which religions can be used to voice dissent against medical treatment in a place of public employment? I know, I know, you will say this is about 'birth control', but you are wrong. This is specifically about denying medical treatment based upon religion. Birth control is just the first salvo. If this medical treatment can be denied, then why not others?
Also, many say that the employees can just go a find another job. Okay, this is America, but then the employer should be upfront and state that by being hired the employee will be subject to the religious beliefs of the owners and that those beliefs may directly affect the employee?
i haven't seen any employer refuse to employ ppl who use birth control, got any examples ??
Originally posted by ObservingTheWorld
reply to post by Honor93
The tenet against birth control.
the employer isn't forcing anything, that's your error, not theirs.
No, the employer is not forcing the employees to not take birth control,
be that as it may, unless God is prescribing it, what's the problem ??
but they are saying that even if prescribed by your doctor they have no obligation to have it covered under their insurance because their god says so.