Now that is a Victory......Congrats Hobby Lobby!
Great job!Anything that barack doesn't like is a good thing for
Guys, calm yourselves.To make the business pay fines while waiting
for a court to decide if they're liable is _not_ a "victory."
It's simple judicial caution and fairness.If a private
for-profit organization decided that it wasn't going to offer health
insurance coverage to its Black, or Mormon, blue-eyed employees because of its
"moral beliefs," would you be OK with that? That's exactly
what's going on here, and the question is fairly being asked, can private
religious beliefs be used as a justification for treating people unfairly? Me
personally, I believe strongly that that the answer is a resounding,
"no." However, that's for the legal system, not me, to decide.So Hobby Lobby, you're being given the benefit of the doubt.
That's not remotely the same thing as a "victory."
As I read the article, it seems that they are saying that Hobby Lobby is using
their religious beliefs in interfering in the medical care of their employees.
what it sounds like to me is that they are just asking that then not be
compelled to pay for their contraceptives. They haven't threatened to fire
anyone who uses them, they just don't want to be forced to pay for them.
what is the issue?
It will be a great day when this ultimately bankrupts Hobby Lobby.
I am happy to hear that Hobby Lobby can challenge the health care law over birth
control .. This is wonderful. God bless your business and employees and family
and may Heaven's light and peace shine upon you !
So, for those who say that Hobby Lobby needs to pay for the medical care of
"birth control", then if I believed that sacrificing a chicken would
heal some illness I have, then why would they not have to pay for the chickens
that I would need to sacrifice for my health.
@WRK.. um if it was scientifically proven that sacrificing a chicken worked,
then yes I would be all for it. Honestly, there are religions out
there that don't believe in blood transfusions, surgeries, faith healing
for diabetes (you remember those stories about how children have died because of
this belief??). We want those people telling their employees what medical care
they can and cannot have? Let common sense rule, thank you very much.
If the courts allowed hobby lobby not to cover contraceptives how long until
there is a religion that doesn't allow any medical treatment at all?
This could be simple, if the federal government would get out of the way. I
work for you, you pay me, I buy whatever I want. No more: I work
for you, you buy stuff for me, then pay me less because you bought me stuff
already. The stuff you bought was against your religion to buy. We argue.
Should your boss be able to determine which prescription medications you take at
home? Should your boss have a say in how many children you have?The
principle of religious liberty protects your right to make moral decisions for
yourself, not others. Obviously, a law that required Hobby Lobby’s owners
to use birth control would be a gross violation of their religious liberty. But
the mandate doesn’t do that. It merely requires that the 22,000 employees
of Hobby Lobby be given the right, if they choose, to access birth control
through a health-insurance plan.Fundamentalist Christians might
refuse to pay for a public school system that teaches evolution. Conservative
Muslims might refuse to pay for public museums that may contain art that offends
them. More to the point, a boss who believes in spiritual healing might refuse
to provide medical coverage at all, arguing that only God, not a doctor, can
make you well.
I hope a group of state governors join forces and try and stop the inclusion of
birth control in the health care system. It is simply wrong to force anyone to
pay the cost. Last time I checked Walmart has a family planning section that for
cash will solve the problem. Wait, that's the issue. Why should we plan and
be responsible when big brother will hand out all we need. This has nothing to
do with religion. The current administration in it's blind desire to give
has again found a way to take money from hard working people and give it to the
"I'm entitled" generation. If you are going to procreate then maybe
it is time to start acting the part of parent and adult.
@Stalwart Sentinel:So you think it would be a wonderful thing if
this issue were to bankrupt this major, national sized company and put many
thousands of people out of work... all because the owners don't share your
political ideologies.Apparently, you want others to try to
understand your point of view and be accepting of it, but then give none of that
back in return. Wow! How narrow minded can an opponent get? I think a new level
has just been reached!
The Church of Corporate America doesn't believe in anything but faith
healing if it adds to their bottom line.Those who believe that
contraceptives are prescribed only for birth control, must have had sex ed in a
Unplanned pregnancies are the leading cause of someone considering abortion.
This healthcare mandate helps prevent abortions. A similar provision in Belgium
is a large part of why they're #1 in the world for lowest abortion rates.
@BlueBased on your analogy I think we need to review our current practices
for teaching critical thinking skills in our public schools. What we're
talking about is being forced to pay for someone to use birth control when you
consider it morally wrong. What you're talking about is discrimination.
There's not much similarity between the two.This may seem like
no big deal to many people. It's just birth control after all. What if
instead we were talking about forcing companies to cover abortions? No one
should be forced to pay for their employees to do something they consider
I absolutely agree that we ought to let common sense rule. The first step would
be to repeal the law requiring employers to provide health insurance to their
employees. There is no right to access birth control through a health insurance
plan and there is certainly no right to demand that your employer pay for it.
If an employer claims that spiritual or faith healing is the only way and
refuses to pay for an employee health plan than so be it. People can choose
whether or not they want to work for an employer and one of the criteria would
be what kind of health insurance, if any, was offered. That is called freedom
and it ought to work for the employer as well as the employee. Equally absurd
is the assertion that Hobby Lobby's argument is similar to denying health
insurance to blacks or Mormons or any other such group. Hobby Lobby
doesn't want to pay for contraception for any of its employees, not just
certain groups of their employees. If a person wants health insurance that pays
for contraception, then they shouldn't work for Hobby Lobby.
@ Happy Valley HERETIC:If a person or company (owners) have
religious reasons for not believing in contraceptives (and yes, the vast
majority of contraceptives are used for birth control), why is it so difficult
for you or anyone else to respect their right to believe as they see fit?
Isn't that part of what religious freedom stands for in our country?When democrats tout how wonderful diversity is, does that mean only as
long those diversities are in total agreement with your political and religious
ideologies?With all your many online comments, isn't that
basically what you keep asking for and trying to promote... for others to try to
understand your liberal viewpoints and allow you the right to believe as you see
fit? Is it asking too much of you to give the same consideration in return?
Anti contraception = pro abortion.Not an opinion, just a cold fact.
Think about this; my wife can't use birth control pills for health reasons
and I'm allergic to latex, so I have to go to the store and get the really
expensive condoms to have any type of birth control. Shouldn't my employer
have to pay for that? And yes I think it would be insane to try to foist that
expense on the taxpayer or my employer, but if you think logically you will come
to the conclusion that a case just like this will end up in courts eventually if
the law continues as it is. So does the government use this as an opportunity
to go in and "regulate" condom manufacturers? And if the owner of the
company I work for is opposed to condom use for religious reasons,
shouldn't he be able to oppose it?
"...for-profit businesses — not just currently exempted religious
groups — should be allowed to seek an exception if the law violates their
religious beliefs...".It's against my corporate religious
beliefs to spend any more money on my employees then absolutely necessary, in
order to keep as much money as possible for myself...Sounds
good...I'm in...Let's do this thing.
Hobby Lobby has my business because of their christian Beliefs, not forcing
their employees to work on Sunday's, and many other plusses. I am happy to
say that they are are an example to all other merchants. I pray that their
business shows a large profit and puts the others to shame.
Tators Incorrect, this is not about someone sharing my political
ideology - they can do as they please in the privacy of their own home. Rather,
this is concerning a private, for profit business refusing to operate under the
established rule of law. The owners chose, of their own volition, to enter the
free market and they must now operate under the rubric set out for all for
profit companies. Hobby Lobby is not special, they will not get a "free
pass." As noted numerous times above, there is quite literally no legally
recognized right for the owners of Hobby Lobby to take this action and I
can't wait for the fine to start, for all the conservatives out there to
"support" Hobby Lobby by shopping there for a week, they'll start a
Facebook page to "support" Hobby Lobby, then they'll lose interest,
and Hobby Lobby will go belly-up and serve as a reminder that Christian
exceptionalism is coming to an end in the US - as it should.
Re: "Anti contraception = pro abortion."Actually,
that's not a fact.Contraception is nearly as likely to cause an
early abortion [failure of a fertilized egg to implant itself in the
endometrium], as it is to prevent fertilization from occurring.So,
the appropriate equation would be -- "anti-contraception = pro-life."Not an opinion, just a cold fact.
apparently there are some people here that actually believe the rest of us are
responsible to pay for their recreational sex decisions. No one is stopping
them from doing it, but it shouldn't be our responsibility to pay for their
fun. Especially if it violates the religious conscience of those being coerced
into paying.Good grief, how did we get to this point? Honestly,
sometimes I believe I am not living in the country in which I was born.
We need health care by and for all. End this silliness involving employers.
Pa. ReaderHarrisburg, PA"Anti contraception = pro abortion.Not an opinion, just a cold fact."Seriously? Seriously? Um,
no. Not a 'cold fact'. How about pro-responsible choice when deciding
to have sex?
i shop hobby lobby for many reasons but the best reason is their family values
and their religous stand. i support hobby lobby and am sickened by the court
systems for bending with the liberals screaming
to Stalwart sentinel"hobby Lobby will go belly-up and serves as a
reminder that Christian exceptionalist is coming to an end in the U.S. - as it
should."Spoken like a faithless hopeful - only in your dreams
Re:procuradorfiscal"Contraception is nearly as likely to cause an
early abortion [failure of a fertilized egg to implant itself in the
endometrium], as it is to prevent fertilization from occurring."Sources?Pure and utter nonsense.Contraceptives work by
preventing ovulation OR by preventing fertilization.By 2002, studies
produced evidence that Plan B did not interrupt implantation.By
2007, scientific consensus was building that morning-after pills did not block
implantation. In 2007, 2009 and 2010, researchers gave Plan B to
women after determining with hormone tests which women had ovulated and which
had not.None who took the drug before ovulation became pregnant.
Women who had ovulated became pregnant at the same rate as if they had taken no
drug at all. Erica Jefferson, an F.D.A. spokeswoman: "The
emerging data on Plan B suggest that it does not inhibit implantation. Diana Blithe, a biochemist who oversees contraception research for the
National Institutes of Health, said the possibility of an effect on implantation
should not be cited on the labels.
What is to keep corporations like Coca Cola / Pepsi, General Motors / Ford,
McDonalds / Burger King, etc. from having religious objections. Courts have
ruled that Corporations are people too. Can Corporations get religion?
All of these particular debates could have been avoided if we had done the
sensible thing and established universal healthcare coverage with a single-payer
system (i.e., the federal government). Then no employer would directly pay for
health insurance, so no employer could object to what is covered in the policy.
"This court has taken a huge step toward handing bosses and company owners a
blank check to meddle in the private medical decisions of their workers,"
executive director Barry Lynn said in a statement. "This isn't
religious freedom; it's the worst kind of religious oppression."What a joke of a comment by attorney for the AUSCS. That's pure
entitlement mentality. No one is stopping anyone from seeking birth control
solutions. They just aren't going to pay for it. How does that meddle in
the affairs of others? If my car insurance won't pay for oil changes, does
that "oppress" me? Guess I'm forced to never change my oil. Of
course that would be ridiculous. It's the typical liberal argument. If a
liberal disagrees with a conservative, the liberal is more enlightened, but if a
conservative disagrees with a liberal the conservative is a bigot, homophobe,
oppressive, etc., whatever the issue happens to be. Then it's off the
Congress/courts to force people to do what liberals want.What if we
had civil dialogue and worked towards solutions, really trying to understand
each other? Outcomes would be better for both points of view.
TruthseekerA person can prove the earth is flat if they are selective
enough in their choice of facts. Your post raises valid points as usual - but
you ignore the most salient fact: You can acquire your own birth control and
abortofacients completely independent of any action by Hobby Lobby or the
Catholic Church.The fact is; The earth is not flat AND the idea that
those who cannot get other people to pay for their free stuff constitute some
sort of victim class is laughably pathetic, highly offensive and morally
Hobby Lobby here is what you do. Spin off each of your stores into
their own entity. Turn your store into a franchise. That way Each store can have
below the 50 required employees so you don't have to give your employees
health insurance and you don't have to pay for the contraception. Problem
I see misunderstanding of the issue in the comments. Let's see if I can
explain:1-- In the USA, jobs must be open to people of all backgrounds who
are qualified.2-- Many entry level jobs attract poor women3-- Most
women in the US use birth control4-- Poor women must sometimes choose
between shoes for the kids and bc pills5-- Society benefits if women do
not have extra, unwanted kids. These are the people who end up in the Emergency
Room for the flu. Employers benefit due to less maternity leave.6-- If
Maria gets a job working for A, who provides bc, and Alicia finds a job only
with B, who does not, does Alicia deserve to get pregnant, because she cant
afford pills.CHURCHES ARE NOT FORCED TO PAY FOR BIRTH CONTROL, but
non-church jobs need to be equal for all Americans
If this were about abortion Hobby Lobby would be right, but there is no logical
reason to oppose birth control other than some religion has said not to do it
it, is an arbitrary rule as such as such Hobby Lobby has no right to force this
practice or viewpoint on other people.
The most surprising thing about this to me is that I didn't realize birth
control was still so frowned upon my mainstream Christians. Multiple studies
have shown that people given free access to birth control have an almost 0% rate
of abortions. Personally I would much rather see people use birth control than
see them getting abortions.....and please don't pull out the
birth control is an abortion argument, that's not backed by any credible
I'm always amazed at the control people claim an employer has over their
lives. If I don't like my employer's point of view, I always have the
option to get employment elsewhere. For pity sake, employees are not slaves and
are not compelled to keep a job if they don't like the terms of employment.
With way too high unemployment rates, it seems like there are probably other
people who would like those jobs. Fringe benefits are part of a total
compensation package and should be considered when taking a job. Don't like
the terms? Look elsewhere. In this case, nobody is telling somebody they
can't have birth control; the employer just doesn't feel that they
should have to pay for it if it violates their sense of morality. If an employer
fires an employee because they choose not to have children, then they are
violating an employee's rights and should be penalized for overstepping an
employee's freedom of choice in a private matter. The decision to have or
not have children is a private choice and is neither the prerogative nor the
duty of an employer.
Bob KI see misunderstanding too: Under the Obama imposition of the
HHS mandate (which can easily be reinterpreted without legislative action),
church owned businesses are required to provide birth control and abortofacient
drugs (simply yelling that churches are not required is dishonestly
misleading)If I worked for the Human Rights Campaign (or their
wholly owned business) would you make them pay for my ex-gay psychotherapy?
(never mind the obvious irrationality of me working for someone whom I
grotesquely disagree with)So why do expect a Catholic University to
pay for something that violates Catholic teachings - then have the audacity to
complain that you are somehow the aggrieved party?
@procuradorfiscal"Contraception is nearly as likely to cause an early
abortion [failure of a fertilized egg to implant itself in the endometrium], as
it is to prevent fertilization from occurring."Then why is your
church fine with contraception but not okay with abortion (outside of the
Joan WatsonI have to note that you did not address the subject
matter so I must assume you have no valid response. Further, I am
not a "faithless hopeful"; I attend my ward all three hours every Sunday
just like the majority of other LDS. I simply don't need to push my
personal moral convictions onto others to sleep at night. Counter
Intelligence Your point is a non sequitur. Under the law, there is
no such thing as a for profit "church-owned business," there is just a
business. If a Church happens to own a for profit company, they receive no
special treatment and are afforded the exact same rights as any individual
business owner. Sorry, as I noted above, it's time for Christian
exceptionalism to come to an end in the American public sphere.
I'd rather Hobby Lobby go out of business than give into demands they feel
are immoral. It's not easy to 'Stand for Something.' Do I have a
problem with birth control? No, but I believe I had to pay for it myself. I was
able to 'handle' the financial hardship on a new teacher's
salary. Believe me, it wasn't much.
So if the employer is responsible for the employees birth control, does that
mean they have to have a robo-caller reminding them to take their pill every
day? Or perhaps the employer needs to hand them out at work, like at lunch, or
when they clock in, or something, and make sure it was swallowed. What about barrier methods? What is the employers responsibility there?
(It's a rhetorical question. Don't answer. It would get screened out
anyway)Seriously, if you can't afford a movie and popcorn,
don't go. If you can't afford birth control, don't...It is not your boss's responsibility. It is an individual responsibility,
as in your responsibility.
Obama and the left would have Obamacare become the new Edmunds-Tucker Act, only
its target is not just the LDS, but ALL people of faith, requiring them to adopt
the left's amorality. I just hope the ruling is confirmed on
I find it interesting that the Americans United for Separation of Church and
State don't realize that simply having the Government issue a decree that
is against any particular religion enforces the concept of the State controlling
the religion. The idea that prayers in schools is an example. Because the
Government disallows this then it promotes the beliefs a a particular group of
people. The idea that the Government can force individuals to purchase products
and consider it a tax on the individuals is crazy. What the Government has
accomplished is to change the working conditions of Americans to Part-Time
Employment with no benefits rather than some benefits. Wait and See what
happens in the coming years. Already Public Institutions (Granite School
District and others) are doing this with Non-Contract Employees, Substitute
teachers, Etc.)What Hobby Lobby is doing may provide their employees
with benefits that would be unavailable if the majority of the workforce was
reduced to Part-time Status. Look At Walmart and its employment
practices, resulting in substandard income and the need for Government subsidies
to their employees. All of these factors are adding to the need of the
government for increased revenue (TAXES).
Stalwart Sentinel Your point is a non sequitur. Under the law,
freedom of religion applies to all faiths, which has nothing to do with
Christian exceptionalism. Furthermore, you are the one with your hand in someone
else's pocket demanding special treatment because you believe you are more
informed on how to live other peoples lives. That is called secular
exceptionalism and blaming the victim (and simply - hate)