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)
 
Old 07-04-2014, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,387,886 times
Reputation: 4190

Advertisements

“ … employers can impose their religious beliefs on their employees, and, of course, denying women the right to contraceptives as part of a health care plan is exactly that,” she said. “I find it deeply disturbing that we are going in that direction.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-04-2014, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Palo Alto
12,149 posts, read 8,387,886 times
Reputation: 4190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Middling Swordsman View Post
Unless you can provide a source to your claim, I find it hard to believe HHS expected SCOTUS's ruling (the first case of its kind regarding the religious expression of for-profit businesses) in favor of Hobby Lobby, and that the implementation was a political ploy.
I believe it was the Blunt Amendment in 2012. I'm drinking beer and tending the grill and don't have time to research now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2014, 01:09 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 43,959,063 times
Reputation: 17189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Middling Swordsman View Post
Strawman argument. Again, no one is saying the ruling would deny women access to these contraceptives, but would instead limit it by restricting the comprehensiveness of the ACA policy.
The administration has limited the comprehensiveness of it over and over.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2014, 01:43 PM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,402 posts, read 7,022,426 times
Reputation: 11652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Middling Swordsman View Post
I didn't say access would be limited by vendors, but limited in the context of the comprehensiveness of the policy.
And that is the mole hill that the left is trying to build a mountain out of.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2014, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Inyokern, CA
1,609 posts, read 1,075,559 times
Reputation: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambler123 View Post
1) Bull. In case you missed it, the Supreme Court is basically saying companies don't have to play by the rules if they can find "religious" grounds not to. If you can't extrapolate that to it's logical conclusion, then you shouldn't be commenting on this topic. I look forward to the hypocritical outrage from the right-wing lunatics the moment some non-Christian company uses this court ruling to its favor.

2) Bull. The entire premise of Hobby Lobby's ludicrous claim was that they were "special, Christian people, and thus shouldn't have to follow the rules." They are not Christians - they are cheap, corporate "Christians" who only follow their religion when it is convenient, such as saving money via reduced health care costs... and yet, their "religious convictions" go right out the window when it comes to saving money via exploiting slave labor overseas, including from China, the land of forced abortions.

Since the company, by it's actions, is clearly NOT Christian, the Supreme Court should have laughed at them and told them to come back after looking up the definition of "hypocrisy."

3) Bull. Corporations are not people. Corporations are not followers of a religion. They are nothing but legal constructs created to shield individuals from losing everything in the case of lawsuits, bankruptcy, etc. It is the height of insanity to claim that a corporation is "religious" and thus able to violate the law based on religious grounds while individuals are forbidden from doing the same thing. This is doubly true since corporations are rarely held accountable for their actions and individuals are increasingly using "the corporation" as a shield against all accountability. Now, we've just taken that to the next level and are allowing religious hypocrites and bigoted nuts to hide behind their "corporate faith" as an excuse to disobey the law and indulge in backward thinking and bigotry.

Clearly, there's no reasoning with you or any of the other people who are so blinded by their hatred of Obama, "liberals," and the ACA that you are unable to see just how terrible a ruling this is. Remember - the lunatics overseas that indulge in all sorts of barbaric acts are able to skirt the law based on "religion." Our worthless Supreme Court just allows corporations the SAME privilege. There is NO way that ends well.
Ya know what? Get rid of the ACA, aka Obama Care, and this whole mess goes away. Then there is the fact that the Federal Government needs to stay the he!! out of private lives and this health-care screw up is the perfect example of why. Oh, don't forget this is unconstitutional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2014, 04:54 PM
 
170 posts, read 133,166 times
Reputation: 357
Quote:
Originally Posted by lorrysda View Post
Ya know what? Get rid of the ACA, aka Obama Care, and this whole mess goes away. Then there is the fact that the Federal Government needs to stay the he!! out of private lives and this health-care screw up is the perfect example of why. Oh, don't forget this is unconstitutional.
Why is it that right wingers always want the government out of private lives when it is convenient but fanatically support the gov't telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies? Decisions that should be between a woman and her doctor are continuously being infringed by the nut cases on the right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2014, 04:59 PM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
25,826 posts, read 20,624,829 times
Reputation: 14818
And so, as predicted by Justice Ginsberg, the flood gates have opened:

Birth-Control Coverage Disputes Revived by Supreme Court - Bloomberg
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2014, 05:11 PM
 
139 posts, read 85,154 times
Reputation: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24 View Post
And so, as predicted by Justice Ginsberg, the flood gates have opened:

Birth-Control Coverage Disputes Revived by Supreme Court - Bloomberg
Unfortunately, I can't say that I'm surprised. While the owners of Hobby Lobby may have been sincere, albeit misguided, in their objection to certain contraceptives being covered on religious grounds, SCOTUS's decision has the potential to significantly boost business owners' influence over their employees' ACA policies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2014, 05:12 PM
 
Location: Houston
26,979 posts, read 15,818,152 times
Reputation: 11259
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24 View Post
And so, as predicted by Justice Ginsberg, the flood gates have opened:

Birth-Control Coverage Disputes Revived by Supreme Court - Bloomberg
That is great news. The fight for religious freedom advances despite liberals who believe the right to free stuff trumps the 1st Amendment and religious freedom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-04-2014, 05:18 PM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,710,797 times
Reputation: 10789
Quote:
Originally Posted by joev11 View Post
And they COVER 16 types. Quit whining, liberal! Why are ANY contraceptives covered after women have been paying for them for 50 (FIFTY) years without complaint? Preventative birth control can be purchased for less than $5.00 per month.

You liberals are the biggest bunch of whiners on the planet and are se easily manipulated it is a joke.


“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child — miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.”-PJ O'Rourke
You just don't get it do you? Basically, those who cannot afford birth control, cannot afford a baby. Covering for contraception is a whole lot cheaper than paying for welfare and Medicaid. But hey, have it your way.
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