Boycott Hobby Lobby: Trumping Women's Rights

[TheScholar]

Theoretically, any company that's closely held by religious owners could use this to try to get out of anything that costs the company extra money, since they could argue that the extra expense diverts money from things like tithing or funding missionary work.

:yes:

I agree.

Let me explain that I am an Christian and have conservative personal views that are my own, but I understand the role of government enough to know that it needs to leave people alone in certain areas. Some Christians don't understand this.

 

[Revoltingest]

Theoretically, any company that's closely held by religious owners could use this to try to get out of anything that costs the company extra money, since they could argue that the extra expense diverts money from things like tithing or funding missionary work.

In the balancing of competing interests, to argue that if one side wins a legal battle that
they could win every legal battle (no matter how extremely different) is unconvincing.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

And how exactly are factual misunderstandings being legally protected?

They're not, AFAICT. Freedom of speech protects the right to say incorrect things, but nothing gives a person the right to be exempt from laws because of misunderstandings of the facts.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Hurting your self is not equal to sexing yourself and we don't pay for cigarettes and have made the manufacturers pony up a lot of money for cancer. So that would equal to people pony up their fair share for the dangers of sex. What exactly are the dangers of sex? Is pregnancy a danger or a goal?

This goes to show that sex ed is sorely needed at an early age in the US....The fact that you don't realize that contraception do more for women than simply guarding against unwanted pregnancy, that sexual intercourse can indeed be harmful and dangerous and the obvious scientific medical fact that pregnancy can be dangerous shows that education is a must.....

 

[Revoltingest]

Has there been any other case where a person's incorrect belief was protected because it was religious? For instance, can people who believe that the power of their god protects them from drunkenness get out of DUI charges?

Going back to the military draft, conscientious objectors believed that all war is wrong.
This is demonstrably false, & yet the law allowed them to avoid service. It's not a perfect
example, but it's the best I could think of.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

In the balancing of competing interests, to argue that if one side wins a legal battle that
they could win every legal battle (no matter how extremely different) is unconvincing.

It's not different. The RFRA requires that government not burden religion any more than strictly necessary. Anything that might reduce the revenue of a church is a "burden" to some degree.

There is no balancing of competing interests in the RFRA.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Going back to the military draft, conscientious objectors believed that all war is wrong.
This is demonstrably false, & yet the law allowed them to avoid service. It's not a perfect
example, but it's the best I could think of.

Is it demonstrably false? IMO, opinions about the morality of war hinge on subjective value judgements that cannot be proven wrong.

Edit: the Quakers generally hold that God has not given humanity the authority to commit violent acts. Exactly how was that demonstrated to be false?

 

[Revoltingest]

They're not, AFAICT. Freedom of speech protects the right to say incorrect things, but nothing gives a person the right to be exempt from laws because of misunderstandings of the facts.

Much of religion is about misunderstanding facts though, eg, genetics, probability,
biology, evolution, cosmology, the scientific method, thermodynamics. Naturally,
there will be some tolerance & leeway regarding such beliefs when deeply held.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Much of religion is about misunderstanding facts though, eg, genetics, probability,
biology, evolution, cosmology, the scientific method, thermodynamics. Naturally,
there will be some tolerance & leeway regarding such beliefs when deeply held.

But how often do those misunderstandings come into conflict with the law?

And what happens when they do? As I touched on, it's not a defense to a DUI charge that you sincerely believe that God protects you from drunkenness.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's not different. The RFRA requires that government not burden religion any more than strictly necessary. Anything that might reduce the revenue of a church is a "burden" to some degree.
There is no balancing of competing interests in the RFRA.

You say there is no such balancing, but I & a majority on the USSC disagree.
(I was still surprised by the decision though.)

 

[Dirty Penguin]

The morning after pill is easily obtainable from free clinics or available over the counter for $25 to $50.

So in this case, the religious freedom is not really an inconvenience nor prevents access.

Versus say, denying life saving surgery because of religious belief.

So how is the owner's religion causing any harm? If no real harm is being caused by his religious belief, then what is the problem?

Better yet...How is providing contraception that merely ("prevents") pregnancy causing harm to the business owner? It's not like the ones they have a problem with cause abortion.

 

[Revoltingest]

But how often do those misunderstandings come into conflict with the law?

I've no statistics on the subject. But I have an example:
Allowing the teaching of 'facts' which are demonstrably false in home schooling
is allowed, & not treated as child abuse. Why? because the harm is not so harmful,
& because to disallow it would cause great social strife & religious conflict.

And what happens when they do? As I touched on, it's not a defense to a DUI charge that you sincerely believe that God protects you from drunkenness.

In this case, we have competing rights of the drunken fundie & the potential victim
of his errant driving. The safety of others outweighs the desire to drive drunk.
There is no clear & simple rule for ruling on the balance of rights & desires,
so different people will draw the line in different places.

 

[Revoltingest]

There seems to be an underlying expectation that atheists agree on far more things than they usually do.

No kidding! I've had posters be amazed that I'm a capitalist, but not a Xian.
All we really share is disbelief in gods. Everything else is up for grabs.
And I'm an expert on not believing....been doing it for almost 61 years continuously.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

If few do indeed boycott Hobby Lobby and thay makes into the news, where do you think all the Christian Fundamentalists and Conservatives are going, Michael's or Hobby Lobby. And belive me there are more Christian Conservatives than Feminists.

Americans, Including Catholics, Say Birth Control Is Morally OK

Next talking point please...because as the stats show...this isn't an issue with the majority of Americans. The poll shows that women in every party is ok with contraception. It's only a small minority and some in the fringe that are fuming over a company paying for birth control.....

 

[Revoltingest]

This is why we need contraception education. Contraception for women is much more than simply about sex, preventing pregnancy.

Doubt it considering condoms, even the most expensive ones, are way cheaper than birth control.....:areyoucra

Condoms are a form of birth control.
Types of Contraception
Moreover, birth control is not an issue just for females, since the male also has
great interest in whether she becomes pregnant or not. This is why many males
also take responsibility for the outcome of the boink.

 

[Koldo]

They're not, AFAICT. Freedom of speech protects the right to say incorrect things, but nothing gives a person the right to be exempt from laws because of misunderstandings of the facts.

Which is not what happened, as far as I know.
It seems like you want to dictate what they believe in as if they were solely against abortion ( as legally and medically defined ), but you can't do that.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Apparently, Hobby Lobby is complicit in the mistreatment of workers in China, but since they're against birth control, this makes them a "Christian" organization? I find this telling.

Or this here.....


Hobby Lobby's Hypocrisy: The Company's Retirement Plan Invests in Contraception Manufacturers | Mother Jones

Documents filed with the Department of Labor and dated December 2012—three months after the company's owners filed their lawsuit—show that the Hobby Lobby 401(k) employee retirement plan held more than $73 million in mutual funds with investments in companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and drugs commonly used in abortions. Hobby Lobby makes large matching contributions to this company-sponsored 401(k).

These companies include Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, which makes Plan B and ParaGard, a copper IUD, and Actavis, which makes a generic version of Plan B and distributes Ella. Other stock holdings in the mutual funds selected by Hobby Lobby include Pfizer, the maker of Cytotec and Prostin E2, which are used to induce abortions; Bayer, which manufactures the hormonal IUDs Skyla and Mirena; AstraZeneca, which has an Indian subsidiary that manufactures Prostodin, Cerviprime, and Partocin, three drugs commonly used in abortions; and Forest Laboratories, which makes Cervidil, a drug used to induce abortions. Several funds in the Hobby Lobby retirement plan also invested in Aetna and Humana, two health insurance companies that cover surgical abortions, abortion drugs, and emergency contraception in many of the health care policies they sell.

 

[Revoltingest]

Americans, Including Catholics, Say Birth Control Is Morally OK
Next talking point please...because as the stats show...this isn't an issue with the majority of Americans. The poll shows that women in every party is ok with contraception. It's only a small minority and some in the fringe that are fuming over a company paying for birth control.....

Is being in a minority significant here?
Consider us heathens. We're a minority in a country full of the faithful.
Should this diminish our standing in court.
Btw, I was recently deposed, & the court officer gave a prior witness a religious oath
(the one ending in "so help me God"). I requested a secular oath, & was given one.
Of course, this is a minor accommodation, but my minority status didn't reduce a right
I consider important (freedom of religion...or in this case, from religion).

 

[Sunstone]

Or this here.....


Hobby Lobby's Hypocrisy: The Company's Retirement Plan Invests in Contraception Manufacturers | Mother Jones

You have failed to realize those are Christian profits they're making. While paying for their employees use of some of the same items are not Christian profits, but rather Satanic expenses. There's a world of difference. I'm shocked you don't recognize that.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Condoms are a form of birth control.
Types of Contraception

:areyoucra...

Moreover, birth control is not an issue just for females

Never said it was...

since the male also has great interest in whether she becomes pregnant or not. This is why many males also take responsibility for the outcome of the boink.

While all of this is true this wasn't the point I was making. Many women who use birth control use it for various medical reasons which go beyond preventing unwanted pregnancies.