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.
Really ???
Your job is to ensure that I have a safe environment in which to do my job and to pay me for it. In our society part of that payment is in healthcare.
you are really reaching with condoms or any over-the-counter contraceptive that can be provided sans a dr.
Unless you can provide an alternative reasoning condoms fit that description.
the target is religious practices (which are universal and protected), not corporations or any specific church.
Originally posted by Taiyed
Hobby Lobby is a Corporation, not a Church.
Sorry, but they have to follow the law.
Originally posted by Honor93
the target is religious practices (which are universal and protected), not corporations or any specific church.
Originally posted by Taiyed
Hobby Lobby is a Corporation, not a Church.
Sorry, but they have to follow the law.
so, according to you, religiously affiliated corporations (both for and non-profit) shouldn't be exempt either, right ?? they are corporations too ya know.
fyi, if one gets an exemption, all should.
separation of church and state is a figment of your imagination, nothing more.
The law doesn't force any individual to partake in any practices.
Seperation of Church and State goes both ways, meaning that the Church shouldn't be trying to influence US law just as much as the US government shouldn't be influencing official Church doctrine.
Originally posted by Ahabstar
reply to post by generik
No. It doesn't even cover needed things like dental, optical or psychological needs for personal well being. Odd that it would cover abortions and not glasses, fillings for cavities or gender reassignment surgery for those so inclined.
personally, regardless of the religious argument, i am more dismayed that PARENTS aren't in a complete tizzy over their minors receiving said procedures without parental consent ... and, employers are paying for it !!!
??? let me get this straight before i answer, ok ?
How are employers paying for a minor to receive procedures without parental consent? As far as I know minors aren't eligible to receive health insurance benefits from an employer and should still be on their parents health coverage.
Most companies don't offer health insurance coverage until the employee reaches the age of 19 and are full time employees.
But someone can prove me wrong.
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by olliemc84
??? let me get this straight before i answer, ok ?
How are employers paying for a minor to receive procedures without parental consent? As far as I know minors aren't eligible to receive health insurance benefits from an employer and should still be on their parents health coverage.
Most companies don't offer health insurance coverage until the employee reaches the age of 19 and are full time employees.
But someone can prove me wrong.
parent obtains health insurance via employer = employer pays majority expense.
minor child receives care (abortion for example) without parental consent (with assistance of school nurse - see PPACA for details)
bill for care is submitted for payment by employer provided insurance company.
if we're good so far, then ... the employer is paying for both the insurance and the care (treatment) and the eventual increases along the way ... all without parental/employee consent.
[when such care/treatment causes an increase in premiums, yes, the employer pays again)
as for employer offerings, i was offered coverage at age 17 with a one year waiting period. (effective at 18+)
yes, that was a long time ago, but, if minors are to be covered by parental insurance until age 26, no offerings should be made to any minor or adult prior to age 25.
however, that's another topic for another thread
ETA --> just in case someone wants to start the thread, i am curious ... how are the parents to be treated with relation to providing insurance for adult children ??
can they be fined, forced, jailed or denied their own coverages ???
i don't recall reading anything about such in the Act itself.
*** perhaps it is one of those "yet to be determined" decisions made by the IPAB ?edit on 26-10-2012 by Honor93 because: ETA
Romans 13:7
Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
1 Timothy 6:10
For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.
The Obama administration filed legal papers today in an attempt to stop the lawsuit the Christian craft store Hobby Lobby brought against the HHS mandate, which violates the consciences of Christian companies.
The Justice Department asked a federal judge to deny Hobby Lobby’s request to block the pro-abortion HHS mandate, which requires companies to pay for birth control and abortion-causing drugs.
The Obama administration claims Hobby Lobby is wrongly using religious to get around a federal law and U.S District Judge Joe Heaton will hold a hearing on the lawsuit and [color=gold]request for injunction on November 1.
lifenews.com (random blog)
An Oklahoma-based evangelical Christian-led business will present arguments in federal court regarding a preliminary injunction against the HHS Mandate [color=gold] next Thursday.
christianpost.com