Boycott Hobby Lobby: Trumping Women's Rights

[Tarheeler]

You know, I've been thinking, and there might just be a silver lining here.

The basic argument here is that, although the employer is not actually providing birth control, it's being forced to provide health insurance that does pay for it if the employee needs it, and this is a violation of the company's deeply held beliefs.

Isn't that the same as saying that, while I do not directly fund the current wars or corporate welfare, I am required to pay taxes that is then used to fund those things. Since those things are against some of my deeply held beliefs, then it seems like I have grounds to sue the government to stop paying taxes.

 

[beenie]

You know, I've been thinking, and there might just be a silver lining here.

The basic argument here is that, although the employer is not actually providing birth control, it's being forced to provide health insurance that does pay for it if the employee needs it, and this is a violation of the company's deeply held beliefs.

Isn't that the same as saying that, while I do not directly fund the current wars or corporate welfare, I am required to pay taxes that is then used to fund those things. Since those things are against some of my deeply held beliefs, then it seems like I have grounds to sue the government to stop paying taxes.

Let's try that. I like it!

 

[beenie]

I am too young to look into that stuff.... :run:

I'm too female to look into that stuff. :run:

Alright. Thanks for the info.

You're welcome.

 

[metis]

Are you afraid?

Not afraid, but so many recent decisions based on the five Republican appointees have had the consequence of putting more power into the hands of large corporations and businesses, but at the expense of the typical Joe & Mary Schmoe. Citizens United is a nightmare for the average person because it puts tremendous political influence into the hands of large companies and corporations, and yesterday's 5-4 decision reflects this.

Are we next going to hear "Let them eat cake!".

 

[Koldo]

You know, I've been thinking, and there might just be a silver lining here.

The basic argument here is that, although the employer is not actually providing birth control, it's being forced to provide health insurance that does pay for it if the employee needs it, and this is a violation of the company's deeply held beliefs.

Isn't that the same as saying that, while I do not directly fund the current wars or corporate welfare, I am required to pay taxes that is then used to fund those things. Since those things are against some of my deeply held beliefs, then it seems like I have grounds to sue the government to stop paying taxes.

Since it is the government itself that grants/protects your rights, it doesn't work the same way. Refusing to fund it and, at the same time, expecting it to keep its duty doesn't seem reasonable.

 

[Tarheeler]

:Sigh: Satire is just completely lost on some people.

 

[beenie]

I find this to be interesting, and equally hypocritical:

Hobby Lobby Invests in Numerous Abortion and Contraception Products

Another Article Saying the Same Thing

So... they can invest in these products to make money, but they don't want to pay for their employees to use them? On what basis?

Religion, you say?

Looks like in addition to funding China, a country with one of the highest (often forced) abortion rates in the world, the almighty dollar is another exception to their religious beliefs.

They can deny insurance coverage of abortifacients when they stop investing in them.

 

[Quintessence]

It's kind of sad. I wonder if they worship the Spirit of Money more than their god, because their actions seem to speak to such things on the surface. I wouldn't expect them to be perfectly consistent in matching action with creed because I highly doubt that would be possible, but consistency in the obvious things would be of good character. It make one wonder if the lawsuit was really about religious freedom in the first place.

 

[ChristineES]

I just found out that only 4 of 16 birth control methods are not being covered and the rest are being covered.

 

[atheistsincesix]

Screw you I love hobby lobby

 

[Drolefille]

I just found out that only 4 of 16 birth control methods are not being covered and the rest are being covered.

IUDs and Morning After Pills

Because their science is really really bad.

Regardless the decision opens the door for other companies to go further and block more options.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

IUDs and Morning After Pills

Because their science is really really bad.

Regardless the decision opens the door for other companies to go further and block more options.

I read an interesting breakdown of the SCOTUS decision. This part is especially relevant:

Next question, the majority says that the birth control mandate does place a “substantial burden” on Hobby Lobby’s religious beliefs. And this sentence is crucial: “The owners of the businesses have religious objections to abortion, and according to their religious beliefs the four contraceptive methods at issue are abortifacients.”

Note how carefully Alito worded that sentence, “according to their religious beliefs” these items are abortifacients. He had to word it this carefully because the four contraceptives at issue (Mirena, Paragard, Plan B, and Ella) are NOT, in fact, abortifacients according to the FDA. This is really crucial. The majority allowed Hobby Lobby to define for itself what in fact causes an abortion. There is a difference, you see, between saying “my religious belief is that abortion is immoral” [the religious belief Hobby Lobby has really pushed hard in all its filings] and saying “my religious belief is that Mirena causes abortion.” The first cannot and should not be challenged by a court, if that’s your belief, that’s your belief. The second is a question of fact, which can be proved or disproved via science. Individuals should not be able to declare that anything they dislike causes abortion and therefore avoid any laws relating to that item. Because there is no steady, safe line to draw between those who think IUDs cause abortions and those who think Tylenol causes abortion. Both are scientifically incorrect statements. For a court to accept the first and throw out the second because it’s “ludicrous” is picking and choosing favorites among religious beliefs, an extremely dangerous path. I think Hobby Lobby got as far as it did with this Court because 1) these old men have no idea how contraception works and 2) most Americans who support Hobby Lobby wrongly believe this is a case about abortion coverage.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/carmen-green/hobby-lobby-summary-explanation/10152208739966009

 

[ChristineES]

IUDs and Morning After Pills

Because their science is really really bad.

Regardless the decision opens the door for other companies to go further and block more options.

True, one thing usually leads to another.

 

[Drolefille]

I read an interesting breakdown of the SCOTUS decision. This part is especially relevant:


https://www.facebook.com/notes/carmen-green/hobby-lobby-summary-explanation/10152208739966009

Yep. I just.. ugh.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yep. I just.. ugh.

Apparently, Senator Moynihan's quote "everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" is no longer true.

 

[Drolefille]

Apparently, Senator Moynihan's quote "everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" is no longer true.

I actively disbelieve in this supreme court decision. So it doesn't exist.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I actively disbelieve in this supreme court decision. So it doesn't exist.

It only doesn't exist if you disbelieve in it religiously.

 

[Revoltingest]

Apparently, Senator Moynihan's quote "everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts" is no longer true.

What facts are in dispute?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What facts are in dispute?

That Mirena, Paragard, Plan B, and Ella are or are not abortifacients.

Edit: Hobby Lobby says they are. The FDA says they aren't.

 

[Revoltingest]

That Mirena, Paragard, Plan B, and Ella are or are not abortifacients.
Edit: Hobby Lobby says they are. The FDA says they aren't.

Did the USSC ruling hinge on these being abortifacients?
(I'm finding it slow going to find specific & reliable info on such aspects of the decision.)