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 charles1952
reply to post by Katharos62191
You may be making this a little harder on yourself than you need to.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.
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!
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.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.
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!
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.
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)
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.
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)
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)
reply to post by SourGrapes
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!
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"?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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 ...