Quantcast
Faith

Hobby Lobby finds way to avoid daily $1.3 million fines

Comments

Return To Article
  • elisabeth American Fork, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 10:51 a.m.

    "Hobby Lobby discovered a way to shift the plan year for its employee health insurance, thus postponing the effective date of the mandate for several months." its really not a loop-hole, its just delaying the inevitable.

  • Richard Larson Galt, CA
    Jan. 15, 2013 11:02 a.m.

    So, what was/is the loop-hole??????

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 11:09 a.m.

    Re: ". . . delaying the inevitable."

    You mean delaying the inevitable attempt at unconstitutional infringement of religion by this lawless regime?

    Yeah, that's inevitable. In fact, the Obama regime will probably try to use some illegal executive order to skirt the Judicial Branch, as it has with the Legislative.

    But is it inevitable that the Third Branch will go along?

    Not at all.

    And, when it doesn't, the question will become, does Congress have the guts to impeach and remove from office a guy who has done more to destroy America than any other President since Franklin Roosevelt?

    We'll see.

  • vern001 Castle Rock, CO
    Jan. 15, 2013 11:37 a.m.

    I for one will no longer shop at Hobby Lobby. Healthcare is a private and individual matter. Why should an employer have a right to decide what kind of treatment you take? Shouldn't that be up to you and your doctor? And for all those who think Hobby Lobby is in the right, would you be o.k. if your employer decided, for religious reasons, not to pay for the blood transfusions you need? Or maybe they oppose psychiatric treatments or psychotropic medicines? Or maybe they don't believe in vaccines, so they refuse to pay for that. It's a slippery slope when your employer starts putting their nose in your business.

  • Noodlekaboodle Poplar Grove, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 11:46 a.m.

    @ProceduroFiscal
    If the court says is constitutional, it is. Even if you don't like it.

  • Grover Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 12:13 p.m.

    Vern, I'm sure procurador has an airtight reason why the employee has no right to contest the employers beliefs as being more important than his/her own. Why healthcare is tied up with employment at all, is a mystery of history without application today. Similarly I am sure that pro would be happy to accept national health care as a reasonable solution to this "religious" dilemma foisted on us all by this "lawless regime". Finally, ask yourself if pro would object if someone came between the patient and their doctor (say perhaps...the government)? He would scream for relief from oppression, but not if an employer came between doctor and patient. Hope he gets a job with a Christian Scientist for a boss and is told to "pray for a cure" instead of seeing a doctor.

  • mcdugall Layton, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 12:26 p.m.

    @procuradorfiscal

    Obama was elected democratically and won both the electoral and popular vote by substantial margin. The contemporary interpretation of regime does not apply to the Obama administration, you may not agree with their politics but they won a fair election. Also, the Supreme Court has upheld that Obama Care does not infringe on Religious Freedoms, again you can disagree, but so far the Federal Court System has upheld the controversial parts of Obama Care (aka Romney Care)as not infringing on religious freedoms.

  • kishkumen American Fork, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 12:49 p.m.

    I used to buy my art supplies from hobby lobby, but stopped after I found out that they don't value our nation's efforts to make sure everyone has healthcare, and our initiatives to make sure women's medical needs are covered.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 12:55 p.m.

    Re: "If the court says is constitutional, it is. Even if you don't like it."

    And, if the Supreme Court says it's not, I'm sure you'll acquiesce in the same respectful manner?

    And, since we have so much respect for the Courts, can we also agree that an executive order by the President that skirts the Third Branch is also unconstitutional?

    And, if skirting the Third Branch is unconstitutional, how about agreeing that an executive order that replaces Congress by legislating from the Oval Office is also illegal?

    . . . .

    Hey, what kind of liberal are you, anyway?

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 1:11 p.m.

    They should just cover contraception for their staff, and trust them as adults to make the choices they need to for themselves without the moralizing from on high.

  • bdckpakccd Plano, TX
    Jan. 15, 2013 1:12 p.m.

    When a company offers employment, they choose what salary they offer for what positions. They may or may not choose to offer extra benefits, like healthcare coverage. NOWHERE in the constitution does it say the federal government can impose the terms of an employment contract. The federal government has no business in this business. Yes, the Supreme Court has ruled this constitutional---and all kinds of reprehensible things have previously been deemed constitutional that were wrong.

    Over-reaching by the federal government will not stop until citizens are courageous enough to fight back. We should be thankful to Hobby Lobby for having the courage to stand up for their rights---and ours. We will all be better off if Hobby Lobby wins because it will be one less kid cowering to the federal bully!

  • Midwest Mom Soldiers Grove, WI
    Jan. 15, 2013 1:16 p.m.

    Hobby Lobby's claim is not legitimate. It is the equivalent of an atheist employer telling their religious employees that they could not make donations to their churches, because it violated the employer's belief. A benefit, once earned, is the property of the employee. By imposing their religious convictions on their employees, Hobby Lobby is doing the very thing that they accuse the Obama administration of doing; violating the religious rights of others.

    That's the funny thing about Constitutional rights; if we believe in them, then we must protect those freedoms for everyone, especially those with whom we disagree.

  • lowtherb1 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 1:18 p.m.

    Thank you vern. I wish more people understood the issue in that way. Religious rights are fundamental, but ones religious rights do not trump the personal rights of others. Should an employer withhold compensation because they think an employee will use it in a way that runs counter to the employers religious sensitivities? Absolutely not! They can't fire a person for being gay, having an abortion, or committing adultery, why should they be able to withhold my insurance because I MAY use it for something they don't like?

  • dutgut Saint George, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 1:22 p.m.

    My insurance doesn't cover dental so I have to buy a separate dental insurance policy. Why can't someone buy separate birth control insurance? I am sure if enough people want it, someone will make money providing it.
    I love how Liberals want the everyone to stay out of their bedroom (ie. gay rights, abortion etc.), until someone actually does stay out (ie. Hobby Lobby leaving contraception, abortion, etc up to the individual).

  • Midwest Mom Soldiers Grove, WI
    Jan. 15, 2013 1:30 p.m.

    The problem with "the moral issue of abortion," is that it is not so black and white, as people would like it to be.

    An hydatidiform pregnancy, which occurs one in 1,000, can become cancerous and will never result in a living child. Without termination, the mother could die. Without effective contraception for 2 years afterward, the mother's life could also be threatened.

    A rape victim should have the option of termination, especially given the right to access to "morning after" care. Some of these victims are children themselves.

    Other health issues make it imperative that women not become pregnant. It is outrageous that Hobby Lobby should be making decisions for their employees about their personal relationships. Many are married. Effectively, Hobby Lobby is attempting to decide how and when they can share intimacy with their spouses.

    Hobby Lobby's employees are not well paid. For some of them, access to these services is a matter of life or death. In my book, that's a moral issue.

  • bdckpakccd Plano, TX
    Jan. 15, 2013 1:57 p.m.

    The employees of Hobby Lobby can do whatever they want! Hobby Lobby is NOT prohibiting anyone from doing anything. They are just not offering to pay for certain things as benefits of employment with their company. There is nothing immoral about only offering certain benefits.
    This attitude is the ultimate of lazy, entitled thinking. "Oh poor me. I can only do what someone else will pay for. I shouldn't improve myself to earn what I want, I should demand that the people who have already worked hard enough to be independent in their choices HAVE TO PAY FOR MINE."

    Not supported anywhere in the constitution!

  • djc Stansbury Park, Ut
    Jan. 15, 2013 2:04 p.m.

    I too try not to support companies that refuse to treat their employees with respect. If I need a blood transfusion can my employer deny it. If I want a vasectomy can my employer deny it.

    If any sort of reproductive services are supported, shouldn't all reproductive services be supported. Perhaps my employer supports zero population growth, so he wants to prohibit maternity care. These are all possibilities that can come up due to different religious beliefs.

    My employer should have no control over my health benefits. I don't want employer mandated death panels. I want my employer to give me a paycheck for hours worked and I want him/her to keep his blasted nose out of my personal business. If he provides some form of health insurance, it should be fairly standardized across the board.

  • jttheawesome Scranton, PA
    Jan. 15, 2013 2:04 p.m.

    If what any court declares "constitutional" - even the Supreme Court of the United States - goes against biblical principles, then Hobby Lobby, or any other Christian-owned business, or any Christian individual, is honor-bound to obey the Higher Law of God. If the Supreme court declared child abuse to be a constitutional right, it would still be wrong. Our court systems are only as good, moral, and ethical as the men and women who make up the judgeship, and it's readily apparent that more and more of our courts are becoming liberal, activist courts with their own agenda, thereby sacrificing real justice and law.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 2:16 p.m.

    Re: ". . . you may not agree with their politics but they won a fair election."

    So did the National Socialists.

  • lars Pittsburgh, PA
    Jan. 15, 2013 2:39 p.m.

    Indeed, healthcare is a private matter. Why do employers even provide health insurance at all? Why not just give employees a base salary, and let the employees purchase their own individual coverage, with or without birth control coverage (or no coverage at all, and pay the ObamaCare fine) as they see fit?

  • Gunner South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 2:58 p.m.

    DJC: "If I want a vasectomy can my employer deny it. " Uh YES! Many healthcare plans don't cover that. Is it right to force a company to pay to have it added? NO! HL isn't telling anybody what they can and can't do. They are just saying they aren't paying for it. If you don't like it get a job somewhere that does!

  • Snack Pack Lehi, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 3:01 p.m.

    Not everything that is legal is ethical. Suck on that for a bit - @kishkumen

  • Sting Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 3:15 p.m.

    Vern001, the employer sponsored healthcare offered by Hobby Lobby is not the only healthcare available to its employees. Until Obamacare changes things it is an optional benefit to its employees. The employee is not forced to participate and Hobby Lobby is in no way deciding its employees treatments. The employee can still select whatever treatment he or she wants. Whether its covered under the plan is a different story. Once Obamacare is fully implemented, if Hobby Lobby does have to pay for its employee's healthcare, then employees still aren't forced to stay with the company if they don't like the plan. Nobody is forcing anyone to stay at a job. We all have the opportunity to look for a job where we're comfortable and agree with the benefits.

  • cindyacre Shelley, ID
    Jan. 15, 2013 3:17 p.m.

    "When a company offers employment, they choose what salary they offer for what positions. They may or may not choose to offer extra benefits, like healthcare coverage. NOWHERE in the constitution does it say the federal government can impose the terms of an employment contract. The federal government has no business in this business. Yes, the Supreme Court has ruled this constitutional---and all kinds of reprehensible things have previously been deemed constitutional that were wrong."

    I was under the impression that the Supreme Court had bolstered the Commerce clause in its decision, doesn't that mean that Hobby Lobby has a case in that section of the decision?

  • Red Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 3:30 p.m.

    Hobby Lobby shouldn't even have to use Religion as an excuse.

    They should be able to say "nope" we don't want to cover that "just because".

    If employees don't want to work there or if customers don't want to shop there than that is the result.

    Our Rights are being eroded.

    We have a government trying to control us way too much!

    Amazing that America voted for obama.

  • Belching Cow Sandy, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 3:35 p.m.

    @vern001
    "Why should an employer have a right to decide what kind of treatment you take?"

    Hobby Lobby is not telling their employees what kind of treatment they can have. If their employees want contraception they still have the right to reach into their wallet and pay for it. If the employee does not like Hobby Lobbies benefit package the employee has the right to go find an employer who does.

    "And for all those who think Hobby Lobby is in the right, would you be o.k. if your employer decided, for religious reasons, not to pay for the blood transfusions you need?"

    I would be perfectly ok with that. My employer has every right to provide whatever benefits they want. If I don't like it I'll go find an employer who I do like.

  • jpjazz Sandy, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 4:38 p.m.

    Hobby Lobby customers mirror those of Chick Fil A and will experience a net gain in business growth from this publicity.

  • NedGrimley Brigham City, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 4:43 p.m.

    Well said, djc: "My employer should have no control over my health benefits. I don't want employer mandated death panels. I want my employer to give me a paycheck for hours worked and I want him/her to keep his blasted nose out of my personal business."

    I agree completely. Too bad that isn't really what you meant.

  • suzyk#1 Mount Pleasant, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 5:40 p.m.

    It is within their right to choose what they will cover...afterall, they are paying for it. I think they would be at a terrible risk if they covered contraception - there would always be employees that abuse it.

  • namfan Layton, UT
    Jan. 15, 2013 7:00 p.m.

    vern001, if health care is a private matter, why are you expecting your employer to pay for it?

  • Harley Rider Small Town, CT
    Jan. 15, 2013 7:02 p.m.

    I applaud Hobby Lobby for standing up to that Tyrant in the WhiteHouse
    Obama's Health Care Bill will be one of the absolute worst piece of legislation ever passed - all 3,000 pages. No doubt the Health Care was lacking in this country , but we needed something more like Ron Paul's 12 page Health Care Bill. Sadly the people of this country are going to find out just how horrible this bill truly is.

    The Federal Government is long long over due for a radical reduction in size. All decision making needs to be returned to the States as per the law of the land - "The Constitution of The United States "

    How's that change working out for you ? As your civil liberties & freedoms rapidly disappear.

    I believe that more and more companies are going to start defying the regime currently in power and rely on their individual states for direction. The states for now are united - for how much longer shall be interesting to see

  • Donal Pearce Murrieta, CA
    Jan. 16, 2013 7:42 a.m.

    I, for one, have never been in a Hobby Lobby store. From now on, when seeking items sold by such a store, I will seek them out for my purchases! (That should cancel out the opposite reaction of vern001 and others who seem to miss the point.)

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 4:18 a.m.

    vern001
    Castle Rock, CO

    I for one will no longer shop at Hobby Lobby. Healthcare is a private and individual matter. Why should an employer have a right to decide what kind of treatment you take? Shouldn't that be up to you and your doctor?

    ===================================

    I agree. Healthcare is a private matter between you and your doctor. So if you want contraceptives, Hobby Lobby employees should not get Hobby Lobby insurance.

  • mattrick78 Cedar City, UT
    Jan. 19, 2013 4:19 a.m.

    kishkumen
    American Fork, UT

    I used to buy my art supplies from hobby lobby, but stopped after I found out that they don't value our nation's efforts to make sure everyone has healthcare, and our initiatives to make sure women's medical needs are covered.

    ================================

    They also don't value or assume responsibility to ensure people have car insurance either. But I would hold that against them.