U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-01-2014, 11:50 AM
 
25,454 posts, read 23,266,873 times
Reputation: 15308

Advertisements

I think the justices did good on this one....

but

there are always people who will abuse that legal right, just as in anything else...but we the people still get to decide on where we wish to work....

the only thing wrong here, is that work in the U.S. right now is hard to come by, so there are some that will preach to their employees....but that might not be a bad thing, espeically the way things are going today.

I'm not an advocate of orgainized religions....however, in moderation, everything works out...it's when someone crosses that line, and what's worse, is who decides where to draw that line?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-01-2014, 11:58 AM
 
Location: DC area
1,669 posts, read 2,154,990 times
Reputation: 621
I suspected they were going to rule this way (based on the court makeup) but I loathe the ruling all the same. The only good I really see in it is it makes a fantastic argument for ending all employeer offered insurance. Beyond that one good argument, I hate corporations being extended the same human rights and freedoms as people, with the passion of a thousand fiery suns. It started with Citizens United and now this. Heck, you could now make a fairly good argument that corporations now have more rights than actual people.

Bah.

That said, I'm not going to go screaming, crying and gnashing my teeth over 'activist judges'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 12:15 PM
 
5,645 posts, read 3,192,670 times
Reputation: 6627
Quote:
Originally Posted by PJA View Post
Are Hobby Lobby employees being forced to use their wages to this insurance? If not then they can do whatever they want with their wages including going out and buying the birth control themselves if its not available.
Put aside just Hobby Lobby and THINK this. Catholic employer who believes ALL birth control is immoral. A woman with 5 kids, and her HUSBAND, with minimum wage jobs want NO MORE KIDS. So they must use condoms until Menopause? Condoms can break. Is the woman absolutely SURE that she is post-menopasual? So this couple decide that sterilization is the best guarantee. Yep, because they have rings on their fingers means they have a few thousand dollars sitting around that she can have this procedure? The decision "opens the legal door" to keep religious employers from including tubals in their health insurance. Oh, these babies won't be DYING because of sterlizations?


Keep your legs crossed wifey dear, or your pants zipped hubby honey. We cannot afford more CHILDREN. This decision goes far beyond Hobby Lobby and their view of "abortificiants" because in some religions every sex act must be "open" to procreation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 12:55 PM
 
3,974 posts, read 5,531,265 times
Reputation: 4007
Quote:
Originally Posted by PJA View Post
And if they do you can go work somewhere else. It is a free country after all and no one would be forcing you to have that job, like you would be forcing someone to try to conform to your views.
In the interim, let's hope that's exactly what their workers do. However, that doesn't even begin to address the company's meddling in what is a personal and private matter. As a matter of fact, it's a severe violation of the HIPAA legislation enacted in 1996.

I just wish these right-winged "Christians" weren't so damned hypocritical. They don't seem to care that they are profiting off of child and sweat shop, slave labor given that 90% of the crap in that place comes from ****-hole factories in China. If you profess to care about humanity so much that you are willing to meddle in the sexual choice of your employees, the least you could do is buy all of your trinkets from reputable, fair trade vendors. In the end, it's all about the dollars, isn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:05 PM
PJA
 
2,387 posts, read 2,376,414 times
Reputation: 1123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo48 View Post
Put aside just Hobby Lobby and THINK this. Catholic employer who believes ALL birth control is immoral. A woman with 5 kids, and her HUSBAND, with minimum wage jobs want NO MORE KIDS. So they must use condoms until Menopause? Condoms can break. Is the woman absolutely SURE that she is post-menopasual? So this couple decide that sterilization is the best guarantee. Yep, because they have rings on their fingers means they have a few thousand dollars sitting around that she can have this procedure? The decision "opens the legal door" to keep religious employers from including tubals in their health insurance. Oh, these babies won't be DYING because of sterlizations?


Keep your legs crossed wifey dear, or your pants zipped hubby honey. We cannot afford more CHILDREN. This decision goes far beyond Hobby Lobby and their view of "abortificiants" because in some religions every sex act must be "open" to procreation.

Or they could get another job, one that offers these benefits. Or better yet they could decide not buy insurance through their employer and use that money to get insurance elsewhere. After all this is a country based on freedom so they have the freedom to get these services by any means that they are available.....but forcing a company to offer these services in infringing on the people running the company's is infringing on someone else's freedom just to satisfy you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:06 PM
 
3,974 posts, read 5,531,265 times
Reputation: 4007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Juram View Post
How are they doing that exactly?
By meddling in decisions that should be between the employee and their doctor, period.

Quote:
Well, you're right, it is a private, for-profit business and as long as they aren't violating any laws, you have nothing to say about it outside of not patronizing the business. If I have a private business and I want to run it with religious tenets in mind, that is my choice to do so.
They are violating statutes of HIPAA. The corporation has no right to information about what transpires between the employee and his or her doctor.

Quote:
Once again, your mentality seems to be that the business owner is working for the employee and not the other way around. If I want to open a business centered around my religious beliefs or non-beliefs, that is my decision. If someone else disagrees, they are more than welcome to go elsewhere. If my decisions are bad, then I will go out of business, simple as that. If someone thinks that my business model is faulty, they can go ahead and start one of their own.
My mentality is that they are exactly that: a FOR PROFIT business owner. They aren't a parent, a priest, a bishop, a minister, a charity, or any other person. They have absolutely no right to dictate anyone's medical affairs by any sort of action. They have no right to select which kind of care a patient can receive. If a doctor prescribes birth control, that is the medical professional's decision.

If they are really so against it, they should either not supply insurance (along with forfeiting the write off) or provide a stipend for where the employee can purchase the plan of their choosing. They should not be dictating what type of care a patient receives. Even a free-marketeer simpleton can see the danger inherent, no?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:10 PM
PJA
 
2,387 posts, read 2,376,414 times
Reputation: 1123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland_Collector View Post
By meddling in decisions that should be between the employee and their doctor, period.



They are violating statutes of HIPAA. The corporation has no right to information about what transpires between the employee and his or her doctor.



My mentality is that they are exactly that: a FOR PROFIT business owner. They aren't a parent, a priest, a bishop, a minister, a charity, or any other person. They have absolutely no right to dictate anyone's medical affairs by any sort of action. They have no right to select which kind of care a patient can receive. If a doctor prescribes birth control, that is the medical professional's decision.

If they are really so against it, they should either not supply insurance (along with forfeiting the write off) or provide a stipend for where the employee can purchase the plan of their choosing. They should not be dictating what type of care a patient receives. Even a free-marketeer simpleton can see the danger inherent, no?

They aren't dictating anyone's medical affairs, unless I missed the part where they said if they find out that any such woman has taken those pills then they will be fired. Their employees are perfectly capable to do what I did when one of my previous jobs cut out vision insurance (which I need much more than someone needs some bc pills).....go work somewhere else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:41 PM
 
13,472 posts, read 9,593,751 times
Reputation: 17427
IMHO, employer based insurance is what has held this economy back for many years.

They should have instituted Medicare for everyone and been done with it.

I've been saying this since Hillary whiffed the ball on this the first time. Obama tried to do the right thing, but appeasing the multi-billion dollar healthcare payment machine proved too much, so he whiffed it, too.
I've worked in medicine since 1992, so I am pretty familiar with how bad it is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:50 PM
 
398 posts, read 359,862 times
Reputation: 780
Another "Christian" organization hiding behind biblical values to disguise their sexism and misogyny.

No thanks. I'll be shopping elsewhere now. I hope they go bankrupt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:58 PM
 
5,645 posts, read 3,192,670 times
Reputation: 6627
Quote:
Originally Posted by PJA View Post
Or they could get another job, one that offers these benefits. Or better yet they could decide not buy insurance through their employer and use that money to get insurance elsewhere. After all this is a country based on freedom so they have the freedom to get these services by any means that they are available.....but forcing a company to offer these services in infringing on the people running the company's is infringing on someone else's freedom just to satisfy you.
Maybe they can FIRE them because they are using their employer',s wages to buy contracpetives. As Justice Scalia said, which is CATHOLIC teaching, facilitating in immoral practices in preventing conception, "abortifacient" or not, is immoral and a "grave sin". Pehaps these Catholic justices should have recused themselves from this case because THEIR religion forbids all contraceptives and they are prejudiced in this case? Kuddos to FEMALE, and ALL female Justices on the Court, Catholic Justice Soltomayer who dissented. EXCOMMUNICATE her for not not ruling what her religion teaches?

DECLARE you religion, companies. Put up a cross on your building so women can choose not only your employment, but also patronize your business, and give THEIR money, for your PROFITS. Not fair?????

I do not work for Chik Fil A or Barilla Pasta. I do not agree with their RELIGIOUS views on gays either. I will not darken the doorway of a Chik Fil A. I threw in the garbage every box of Barilla pasta I had. I have that RIGHT as a Consumer. Ditto for Hobby Lobby, Domino's, Papa John's, etc., etc.

While their poor employees are under their religious thumbs, the CONSUMER certainly ISN'T. Again, tell me you are a religious company so I can refuse your services and products.

BTW, there are lists going up right now on the Net on other religious for profit companies opposing contraceptive coverage. I bookmarked that one. Last I looked it is up to 300 companies bringing suit on the contraceptive mandate. Thank you, as a consumer. I have that right to know, and refuse to give you my business based on MY religous views.

.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top