Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-26-2013, 03:34 PM
 
34,278 posts, read 19,362,934 times
Reputation: 17261

Advertisements

This is complicated. But I suspect that hobby lobby is going to lose. There are competing arguments here, BOTH of which have merit. In the end this is the kind of question that the supreme court is designed around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-26-2013, 03:37 PM
 
Location: San Diego, CA
10,581 posts, read 9,780,810 times
Reputation: 4174
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
This is complicated. But I suspect that hobby lobby is going to lose. There are competing arguments here, BOTH of which have merit. In the end this is the kind of question that the supreme court is designed around.
Indeed.

Who are the Hobby Lobby people, to think they can go against the Democrats' desire that they violate their own religion's commands?

What country do they think they are living in, anyway?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2013, 03:42 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,866,625 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Nothing has stopped any woman who works at Hobby Lobby from getting birth control pills.
Obamacare mandated that Hobby Lobby pay for it. That is the issue here.
mandated that Hobby Lobby's insurance provide for it (something insurance companies actually want to do, as the cost of birth control is miniscule compared to the cost of pregnancy and giving birth)...

Fixed that for you!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2013, 03:45 PM
 
10,545 posts, read 13,582,024 times
Reputation: 2823
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
The owner of the corporation, in the act of corporation, has severed himself legally from the business. Doing so in order to protect himself legally and financially from actions of the corporation. He cannot legally separate to protect himself, but legally connect to impose his personal beliefs on the corporation. He chooses to legally separate himself, and the separation is complete and legal. The corporation does not go to church, the corporation does not pray, does not practice a religion. Whether it pays taxes or makes political contributions
That's a very good argument. I hadn't thought about it that way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2013, 03:50 PM
 
Location: California
37,131 posts, read 42,196,846 times
Reputation: 35012
It's an interesting case but logic does dictate that Hobby Lobby looses. Once you see that you can't unsee it no matter how faithful and religious you are.

And in the end it won't matter as health insurance/employment are going to be separated sooner rather than later anyway. Stuff like this will hurry that up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2013, 03:51 PM
 
Location: Stuck in NE GA right now
4,585 posts, read 12,362,958 times
Reputation: 6678
I'll bet their insurance did cover woman's healthcare prior to this suit until it was brought up about the ACA, insurance companies have been covering this for decades but all of a sudden there is a snit about it.

I believe if companies can all of a sudden pick and choose what they will or will not cover...what's next?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2013, 03:55 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,380,865 times
Reputation: 8672
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
This is complicated. But I suspect that hobby lobby is going to lose. There are competing arguments here, BOTH of which have merit. In the end this is the kind of question that the supreme court is designed around.
I agree, I can make arguments for and against.

I'm interested in this case
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2013, 04:22 PM
 
3,599 posts, read 6,782,004 times
Reputation: 1461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
What could possibly be the justification for medical insurance to be connected to your EMPLOYMENT?

The Fed govt should get rid of the tax breaks offered for employer-sponsored medical insurance.

A lot of these ridiculous problems would vanish quickly.
Actually what will really happen is employers will still get tax break. (I know cause I am an S Corp). By law and most people just cheat.

By law. Whatever is deducted for health insurance must be added back to W2 wages.

This sounds fair doesn't it? Be careful what you wish for with ending tax breaks for corporations. You as employee will end up paying for those same health benefits like we S Corp owners.

"Heath and accident insurance premiums paid on behalf of the greater than two percent S corporation shareholder-employee are deductible and reportable by the S corporation as wages for income tax withholding purposes on the shareholder-employee’s Form W-2."


S Corporation Compensation and Medical Insurance Issues
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2013, 04:41 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,454,776 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
mandated that Hobby Lobby's insurance provide for it (something insurance companies actually want to do, as the cost of birth control is miniscule compared to the cost of pregnancy and giving birth)...

Fixed that for you!
This is specifically about the Plan B pill which is after the fact of having unprotected sex.
Over the counter, no prescription and cost is $30 and it's not supposed to take the place of birth control.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-26-2013, 04:52 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
37,960 posts, read 22,139,830 times
Reputation: 13795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little-Acorn View Post
The bad news is, it will be scrutinized by the entity that uses up one-half the U.S. economy: The government.

Last time the Supremes got hold of Ocare, they announced it was flatly unconstitutional... unless certain sections were rewritten. And then they re-wrote those sections themselves, without having Congress or the people vote on the changes, and announced it was now "all good"!

(If Ocare had said people who didn't participate, would be taxed instead of penalized, would it have been passed by the House and Senate in the first place? Only way it got through, was by the Obamanites swearing up and down it didn't contain any new taxes or increases)

I wonder what part of Obamacare they will change next?
Roberts will rewrite the law and change "oral contraceptive pills" into "jelly beans," and off to the races we shall go.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top