Hobby Lobby Ruling

[patches70]

The only issue I have with your post is this one-

This is silly. There's a difference between a right that is provided by the gov't (free speech and the others outlined by constitutional amendments), and rights which are not and must be obtained by the individual (healthcare, buying property, work, etc.)

In the US, the gov't doesn't "provide" rights, it protects them. The source of our rights are not from the government. The source of our rights aren't even from the Constitution; though the Constitution names some of those rights it is not the source of those rights.

Minor quibble I guess for some, but to me it's an important distinction.

[DaGip]

Since danfrank666's and TA1LGUNN3R's responses are fairly similar and seem to encompass the basic conservative argument that: "What's the big deal? It isn't like abortions and contraceptives are illegal, right?"

Men are born with a sex organ that secretes semen outside the male body. Women have sex organs that are nestled inside the female body. Men can shoot their man-gravy all over the place if they choose, and if a female gets pregnant...so what. "What's the big deal?" However, women do not have the same social freedom as their male counterparts in these circumstances; therefor the need to socially ease the burden of femininity.

I agree with everyone on the subject that people should use condoms and diaphragms and take more reproductive responsibility, but society must take the step forward and offer education and a shameless means for young (usually poor) adults to obtain contraceptives and abortions.

Women not only can get pregnant (which is an extra financial burden), but if they have to go on maternity leave, the employer doesn't have to pay for it:



The United States ranks with Suriname and Papua New Guinea for leaving their female population out to dry! When are we going to join the rest of the world?

Women also have to pay the extra expense in life to buy tampons. We should be HAPPY to provide such things for our female friends in our society!

The thing is is that you guys are thinking with your dicks and not your brains. It's a typical response from men when it comes to women's rights that somehow women should just shut up and deal with their lot in life. Conservative male ignorance on this matter seems to be the proverbial "bliss" when it comes to their stature in society. Well, us "lib-tards" ain't gonna let you get away with it. We will keep pushing the social issues down your throat until you start to choke on your own party's politics.

Okay, did I mention: Let the REAL Revolution begin?

[Metsfanmax]

This ruling shows us that corporations can deny their employees the right to regulate their fertility.

No, this ruling shows us that corporations don't have to pay for some contraceptives when they believe, based on evidence that is somewhere between flimsy and non-existent, that these particular ones abort some fertilized eggs.

On the contrary, how is it that if I am an employer and I do not believe in contraceptives (or even some contraceptives) and I force that belief upon my female (or male) employees not denying them of some basic human right? Why are my employees employed with me? For what purpose?

If they are employed with me because they (like almost all other employees) they are poor and need money, how is my taking away their right to an abortion and regulating the female's own right to their fertility not discrimination of women?

I am afraid you and I have a misunderstanding of the issue.

Yours seems to be bit more shallow, whereas mine seems to support feminism.

Well this is the problem. Everyone's too busy viewing the decision through their personal lens rather than actually reading it to figure out what the Supreme Court actually did. Your "view" might be feminist in nature but that doesn't give you special dispensation to be incorrect. Your statement is not at all an accurate description of the effect of the ruling.

Basically, what happened is:

Congress: Large businesses, you are now required to provide health insurance for your employees
Hobby Lobby: Well I guess we don't have any choice, but I don't like the bit about paying for contraceptives that might result in abortion
SCOTUS: OK, you don't have to participate in that part. The government already has it set up so that religious non-profits do not have to pay for contraceptive coverage, while the insured still get it free of charge courtesy of the USFG, so they should do that for religious for-profit corporations as well.
Left-wing media: HOBBY LOBBY IS TELLING WOMEN WHEN THEY CAN OVULATE

The genius (?) of this strategy is that the left wing seems to have forgotten that they were the ones responsible for the mandate; Hobby Lobby isn't taking anything away, they're just no longer being forced to provide something that they weren't providing in the first place.

Actually, I just looked this up and it turns out Hobby Lobby was providing two of them prior to filing its lawsuit, and then dropped them from the coverage. They claim they weren't aware the policies covered them. Heh.

[Night Strike]

This ruling shows us that corporations can deny their employees the right to regulate their fertility.

No, this ruling shows us that corporations don't have to pay for some contraceptives when they believe, based on evidence that is somewhere between flimsy and non-existent, that these particular ones abort some fertilized eggs.

On the contrary, how is it that if I am an employer and I do not believe in contraceptives (or even some contraceptives) and I force that belief upon my female (or male) employees not denying them of some basic human right? Why are my employees employed with me? For what purpose?

If they are employed with me because they (like almost all other employees) they are poor and need money, how is my taking away their right to an abortion and regulating the female's own right to their fertility not discrimination of women?

I am afraid you and I have a misunderstanding of the issue.

Yours seems to be bit more shallow, whereas mine seems to support feminism.

You can easily shrug off this issue as meaningless and "what's the big deal" because by the "luck of the draw" you were born with a cock between your legs; but women are the ones to bare the burden of getting pregnant and caring for bastard children (all the while disallowing the female the same financial footing as the male who can run away and live his life as he sees fit).

Hobby Lobby is telling women they can't get abortions or use contraceptives?? When did that happen?? Refusal to pay for someone else's choices is now equal to completely banning them from making those choices??

[TA1LGUNN3R]

The only issue I have with your post is this one-

This is silly. There's a difference between a right that is provided by the gov't (free speech and the others outlined by constitutional amendments), and rights which are not and must be obtained by the individual (healthcare, buying property, work, etc.)

In the US, the gov't doesn't "provide" rights, it protects them. The source of our rights are not from the government. The source of our rights aren't even from the Constitution; though the Constitution names some of those rights it is not the source of those rights.

Minor quibble I guess for some, but to me it's an important distinction.

True. Wrong choice of word on my part.

Since danfrank666's and TA1LGUNN3R's responses are fairly similar and seem to encompass the basic conservative argument that: "What's the big deal? It isn't like abortions and contraceptives are illegal, right?"

Men are born with a sex organ that secretes semen outside the male body. Women have sex organs that are nestled inside the female body. Men can shoot their man-gravy all over the place if they choose, and if a female gets pregnant...so what. "What's the big deal?" However, women do not have the same social freedom as their male counterparts in these circumstances; therefor the need to socially ease the burden of femininity.

I agree with everyone on the subject that people should use condoms and diaphragms and take more reproductive responsibility, but society must take the step forward and offer education and a shameless means for young (usually poor) adults to obtain contraceptives and abortions.

Women not only can get pregnant (which is an extra financial burden), but if they have to go on maternity leave, the employer doesn't have to pay for it:



The United States ranks with Suriname and Papua New Guinea for leaving their female population out to dry! When are we going to join the rest of the world?

Women also have to pay the extra expense in life to buy tampons. We should be HAPPY to provide such things for our female friends in our society!

The thing is is that you guys are thinking with your dicks and not your brains. It's a typical response from men when it comes to women's rights that somehow women should just shut up and deal with their lot in life. Conservative male ignorance on this matter seems to be the proverbial "bliss" when it comes to their stature in society. Well, us "lib-tards" ain't gonna let you get away with it. We will keep pushing the social issues down your throat until you start to choke on your own party's politics.

Okay, did I mention: Let the REAL Revolution begin?

You don't seem to be getting it.

I have to pay the added expense in life to buy glasses. Is my employer responsible for these? At what point does my employer cease to be responsible for everything I need to buy? Are they financially obligated to buy everything I need? Pay my rent? My food? This on top of wages that I'm already being paid.

Are you forgetting that the whole purpose of employment is to draw wages, which are used to buy or secure assets?

-TG

[DaGip]

You don't seem to be getting it.

I have to pay the added expense in life to buy glasses. Is my employer responsible for these? At what point does my employer cease to be responsible for everything I need to buy? Are they financially obligated to buy everything I need? Pay my rent? My food? This on top of wages that I'm already being paid.

Are you forgetting that the whole purpose of employment is to draw wages, which are used to buy or secure assets?

-TG

I get it. You're a greedy, capitalistic pig.

As far as your glasses go, there are employers that do such; and I (and most likely you too) would love there to be some federal mandate that employers are responsible for eye glasses.

The problem is is that the majority of people look at the world with past notions, they are unable to see the steam rolling future that is only a generation away. Socialism will take over as the predominant system, and eventually most of everything will be provided for. The question becomes: "Who is going to pay for all this?"

Don't worry your little pants about it, there are bigger fish in the world that are buggerin' it all out (probably behind some closed door conference).

It won't be long until the work force is replaced with automation and factories are attached directly to peoples' computers. When factories are no longer part of the reality of this new world, where will everyone work? If no one is working, where do they get money from and what becomes the real need for money?

Do you realize that China has invested in Meat/Leather printers for computers? No longer do you need to buy beef from the market, you can just print yourself a replicated version of a steak!

If you want to maintain the conservative way of the world, you should probably support outlawing 3d printers.

I think we are getting a little off topic here, but it is relevant to the point that both of us are trying to surmise. It seems the issue with Hobby Lobby and ObamaCare go a bit deeper than some "night after" pills.

[muy_thaiguy]

You don't seem to be getting it.

I have to pay the added expense in life to buy glasses. Is my employer responsible for these? At what point does my employer cease to be responsible for everything I need to buy? Are they financially obligated to buy everything I need? Pay my rent? My food? This on top of wages that I'm already being paid.

Are you forgetting that the whole purpose of employment is to draw wages, which are used to buy or secure assets?

-TG

I get it. You're a greedy, capitalistic pig.

As far as your glasses go, there are employers that do such; and I (and most likely you too) would love there to be some federal mandate that employers are responsible for eye glasses.

The problem is is that the majority of people look at the world with past notions, they are unable to see the steam rolling future that is only a generation away. Socialism will take over as the predominant system, and eventually most of everything will be provided for. The question becomes: "Who is going to pay for all this?"

Don't worry your little pants about it, there are bigger fish in the world that are buggerin' it all out (probably behind some closed door conference).

It won't be long until the work force is replaced with automation and factories are attached directly to peoples' computers. When factories are no longer part of the reality of this new world, where will everyone work? If no one is working, where do they get money from and what becomes the real need for money?

Do you realize that China has invested in Meat/Leather printers for computers? No longer do you need to buy beef from the market, you can just print yourself a replicated version of a steak!

If you want to maintain the conservative way of the world, you should probably support outlawing 3d printers.

I think we are getting a little off topic here, but it is relevant to the point that both of us are trying to surmise. It seems the issue with Hobby Lobby and ObamaCare go a bit deeper than some "night after" pills.

Well, the US is founded on a capitalistic economy to begin with, so there is that...

[DaGip]

You don't seem to be getting it.

I have to pay the added expense in life to buy glasses. Is my employer responsible for these? At what point does my employer cease to be responsible for everything I need to buy? Are they financially obligated to buy everything I need? Pay my rent? My food? This on top of wages that I'm already being paid.

Are you forgetting that the whole purpose of employment is to draw wages, which are used to buy or secure assets?

-TG

I get it. You're a greedy, capitalistic pig.

As far as your glasses go, there are employers that do such; and I (and most likely you too) would love there to be some federal mandate that employers are responsible for eye glasses.

The problem is is that the majority of people look at the world with past notions, they are unable to see the steam rolling future that is only a generation away. Socialism will take over as the predominant system, and eventually most of everything will be provided for. The question becomes: "Who is going to pay for all this?"

Don't worry your little pants about it, there are bigger fish in the world that are buggerin' it all out (probably behind some closed door conference).

It won't be long until the work force is replaced with automation and factories are attached directly to peoples' computers. When factories are no longer part of the reality of this new world, where will everyone work? If no one is working, where do they get money from and what becomes the real need for money?

Do you realize that China has invested in Meat/Leather printers for computers? No longer do you need to buy beef from the market, you can just print yourself a replicated version of a steak!

If you want to maintain the conservative way of the world, you should probably support outlawing 3d printers.

I think we are getting a little off topic here, but it is relevant to the point that both of us are trying to surmise. It seems the issue with Hobby Lobby and ObamaCare go a bit deeper than some "night after" pills.

Well, the US is founded on a capitalistic economy to begin with, so there is that...

That disappeared beneath the Bush Doctrine. Bush was the greatest ally to the Socialist cause.

[warmonger1981]

Sounds like DaGip is in favor of no personal responsibility, employee pays for nothing, business/insurance pays for everything, government controls your every move and emotion. You must be a huge fan of Hunger Games and the society in which it projects? Your probably poor or a leech. You think you don't have to pay for shit. Suppose a car/transportation is a right not a privledge. Are you not the one who also would like a microchip in your brain? Why even think for yourself? Its people like you who will bring upon your own destruction because you cant critically think or see past your own nose. You would be a great follower of Hitler, Stalin or Mao. Support the man made God you worship and watch the institutions created by said man turn on you. Zyclon B showers ahead if you get my drift.

[a6mzero]

don't worry fella's Hobby (hypocritical) Lobby still covers vasectomies and Viagra. Provides a pill to men that drives them to have sex and then tells women good luck.

[DaGip]

Sounds like DaGip is in favor of no personal responsibility, employee pays for nothing, business/insurance pays for everything, government controls your every move and emotion. You must be a huge fan of Hunger Games and the society in which it projects? Your probably poor or a leech. You think you don't have to pay for shit. Suppose a car/transportation is a right not a privledge. Are you not the one who also would like a microchip in your brain? Why even think for yourself? Its people like you who will bring upon your own destruction because you cant critically think or see past your own nose. You would be a great follower of Hitler, Stalin or Mao. Support the man made God you worship and watch the institutions created by said man turn on you. Zyclon B showers ahead if you get my drift.

Zyclon B is so...1940-ish. If Hitler were alive today, he would have to kill no one...or at least have anyone put the blame on him.

Car transport in the future will be all Google-fied. Your little kids will jump in their own little cars and...ZOOOOM! Off to preschool.

Don't let Hollywood get to you or taint your vision of a beneficial future. The future won't be like Hunger Games, Running Man, or Death Race 2000. It will be closer to Star Trek, if not better. I mean, what negative things do you ever hear about Star Trek and The Federation? Those fabricated ideas seem fine with the populace, and Star Wars seems to dwell well in our vision of things to come. And driving a car should be my right, as I pay taxes already on the highway infrastructure in this country. It's just a matter of getting the human out of the driving I am giddy about.

Unlike the elitist visionaries that talk behind closed doors, I will tell you to your face. Things are a changing, and religious people (Christians in particular) aren't going to like it because it flies in the face of their tenant beliefs of Armageddon and the End of the World. People refuse getting microchipped, even though it would make their lives easier. Not only for themselves but for the society around them. The reasoning they refuse this path...because an old story book told them so and magically predicted "The Mark of The Beast"...oooo! Scary!

The Bible is crap and Christian-based thinking is holding the nation's progress back. Why is it so bad to let your female employees have contraceptive access through your insurance? When is religion and state really going to be separate? Well, when the "Man-God" appears and cleanses the earth of religious zealots; your children will be much happier for it.

You don't have to like it, you just can't stop it.

You had your chance to stop it some 6 years ago...you and your grandpappies failed. And now you must either assimilate to progress or disappear with the dinosaurs and the Romans.

[Night Strike]

don't worry fella's Hobby (hypocritical) Lobby still covers vasectomies and Viagra. Provides a pill to men that drives them to have sex and then tells women good luck.

Tells women good luck while providing 16 of the 20 mandated forms of birth control? Sounds like it's the woman's fault if she chooses not to use birth control, not the company's fault.

Besides, I thought progressives always say that we're supposed to stay out of the bedrooms of other people. Shouldn't that mean we don't have to pay for their activities also?

[Metsfanmax]

Besides, I thought progressives always say that we're supposed to stay out of the bedrooms of other people. Shouldn't that mean we don't have to pay for their activities also?

The contraceptive mandate exists because access to contraceptives is important for women's health. There are benefits to being on the pill, for example, that are irrelevant to the birth control aspects, such as reduced chance of certain cancers or effects from endometriosis. Additionally, being pregnant obviously has side effects on the health of a woman. Paying for contraception does not mean paying for people to have sex; it means paying for them to be protected from debilitating/unwanted ailments as a result of having sex.

[DaGip]

Besides, I thought progressives always say that we're supposed to stay out of the bedrooms of other people. Shouldn't that mean we don't have to pay for their activities also?

The contraceptive mandate exists because access to contraceptives is important for women's health. There are benefits to being on the pill, for example, that are irrelevant to the birth control aspects, such as reduced chance of certain cancers or effects from endometriosis. Additionally, being pregnant obviously has side effects on the health of a woman. Paying for contraception does not mean paying for people to have sex; it means paying for them to be protected from debilitating/unwanted ailments as a result of having sex.

Those dirty sluts! It's there own fault dressin' up like filthy WHORES! Smearin' that lipstick all over there purty, faces! (Pwtooy!...DING!)

Yep, t'ain't my fault some flirty little tart cain't keep her legs closed!

MA! You got those vittles ready yet! (Pwtooy!...DING!) We gotta get ready for church!

My uncle's marrying Julie Pie, one of our long lost cousins! (Pwtooy!...DING!)

[TA1LGUNN3R]

I get it. You're a greedy, capitalistic pig.

1. Yes, I'm greedy. I believe greed is admirable.
2. Even given the above, that is not a valid criticism. Who's the one getting all read in the face demanding that somebody else foot the bill for something that should be the responsibility of the individual? Oh, right, the big bad corporations can afford it and therefore they are obligated to do so. It sounds to me like you're the greedy one.

Let me ask you this: let's say you went to dinner with somebody well off. Not a millionaire necessarily, but richer than you. Are you going to demand that he pay for your food and then call him an immoral capitalist pig when he doesn't?

If you want to maintain the conservative way of the world, you should probably support outlawing 3d printers.

No, that just means I should probably invest in a company that makes 3d printers. Quit being a John Henry.

-TG

[danfrank666]

Additionally, being pregnant obviously has side effects on the health of a woman. Paying for contraception does not mean paying for people to have sex; it means paying for them to be protected from debilitating/unwanted ailments as a result of having sex.

This is nonsense. Your suggesting .... A women on birth control is healthier than a pregnant women ...

[Night Strike]

Besides, I thought progressives always say that we're supposed to stay out of the bedrooms of other people. Shouldn't that mean we don't have to pay for their activities also?

The contraceptive mandate exists because access to contraceptives is important for women's health. There are benefits to being on the pill, for example, that are irrelevant to the birth control aspects, such as reduced chance of certain cancers or effects from endometriosis. Additionally, being pregnant obviously has side effects on the health of a woman. Paying for contraception does not mean paying for people to have sex; it means paying for them to be protected from debilitating/unwanted ailments as a result of having sex.

Non-contraceptive uses of birth control were already covered under health care plans. 16 forms of birth control area already paid for by Hobby Lobby. Obamacare decided that women needed handouts and can now get all form of birth control for free without any copay. What other drugs are mandated to be provided for free? It was a completely political move that had nothing to do with improving access to birth control in the US. And there's not a shortage of access to birth control anyway in this country....progressives just don't want to pay for their own choices anymore.

[AndyDufresne]

And there's not a shortage of access to birth control anyway in this country....progressives just don't want to pay for their own choices anymore.

--Andy

[a6mzero]

Hey any of u Jehovah witness business owners out there now u can refuse to cover blood transfusions and insulin for diabetics cause it would infringe on your beliefs.

[GabonX]

Its sad that we've come so far that people believe not having someone else provide them things somehow violates their rights.

[notyou2]

Can we refuse to pay taxes for road work if we don't have a car?

[a6mzero]

Im gonna sue to not have to pay school taxes in my property tax cause I don't have a child in school.

[a6mzero]

Its sad that we've come so far that people believe not having someone else provide them things somehow violates their rights.

The coverage was part of the employees health insurance plans. Most decent companies put money toward their employes health insurance. Is any portion of your health insurance covered by the company u work for? How would u feel if they said we are not going to cover any prescription drugs because they don't believe u should take meds. All these freaking tea partiers chanting about socialism I don't see any of their old asses sending back their social security checks or refusing medicare and Medicaid benefits. Hobby Lobby sure doesn't mind filling their shelves full of Chinese goods for the public to purchase. Hummm whats the Chinese record on abortion.

[Phatscotty]

The morality of your boss should define your world
and the insurance they provide workers should not
include your sexual health.
sarcasm
Of course their moral imposition over employees
should exclude the conditions and situations of the
workers who produce the products they sell in
their store, IF it improves the profit margin.

It's Official: We live in a country where corporations
have more rights than women.

How does forcing a corporation to provide contraceptions support women's rights?

Contraception is a negative right, i.e. go and get your own.

-TG

Yeah, don't get how people can say such things. Too much cable news perhaps.

To say the opposite is the employee dictates the values to the boss? WTF

Remember, corporations are not people, right?