|
Post by scraphappyinjax on Jun 30, 2014 15:06:06 GMT
Companies do not have to provide contraception to employees if it goes against their religious beliefs... This is from the AP: The court stressed that its ruling applies only to corporations that are under the control of just a few people in which there is no essential difference between the business and its owners.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 1, 2024 8:19:32 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2014 15:06:47 GMT
Government should not mandate something that goes against deeply held consistant religious beliefs.
I will drive further to shop at Hobby Lobby.
|
|
|
Post by ukfan on Jun 30, 2014 15:09:19 GMT
I am actually surprised the ruling went this way - but I agree with the ruling. I don't have to emotionally agree with "why" Hobby Lobby does not want to pay for certain forms of BC. I do feel they have the right to uphold their personal beliefs within their personal business.
|
|
|
Post by jeremysgirl on Jun 30, 2014 15:10:11 GMT
I have really mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I don't like the government forcing businesses to cover anything. I think it should be up to the business to select a policy that is right for their employees. On the other hand, I don't like the business to be given an exemption based on religious beliefs because I really think religion and business should not mix.
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Jun 30, 2014 15:10:19 GMT
That's terrible.
|
|
caronpea
Shy Member
Posts: 18
Jun 28, 2014 10:58:25 GMT
|
Post by caronpea on Jun 30, 2014 15:10:58 GMT
I feel good about this decision as well, but I am probably in the minority.
|
|
|
Post by peano on Jun 30, 2014 15:13:04 GMT
I thought at least one version of morning after pill was OTC. If that's the case I wouldn't expect HL to pay for that any more than I'd expect them to pay for Benadryl or Ibuprofen.
|
|
|
Post by PeachStatePea on Jun 30, 2014 15:14:13 GMT
I'm thrilled with this decision because it upholds religious liberty, which is a foundation of our country, and is also one of our basic Constitutional rights.
On TV coverage right now some are pushing the idea that Hobby Lobby won't offer any contraceptives. This isn't true! It's only those products that cause abortions that they don't want to cover.
|
|
|
Post by Kelpea on Jun 30, 2014 15:15:29 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dulcemama on Jun 30, 2014 15:16:45 GMT
I think that's terrible. In this society, where we depend on insurance to help pay for our medical needs, it is tantamount to making a woman's medical decisions for her. Now, if wages where high enough that they could reasonable cover medical care, if insurance was more of a perk then a necessity, I would not be so negative about it but that is simply not the case for many, many women.
|
|
|
Post by traceys on Jun 30, 2014 15:20:08 GMT
|
|
katybee
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,378
Jun 25, 2014 23:25:39 GMT
|
Post by katybee on Jun 30, 2014 15:21:57 GMT
So, you know I'm a hippie liberal. But I'm not so upset about this specific decision. I respect the religious rights of Hobby Lobby's owners.
What bothers me is what seems to be a general assault on women's rights over the past few years. Taken individually, they might seem like petty issues: companies not covering birth control, restricted access to women's healthcare (including, but certainly not limited to abortions), voter ID laws that disproportionately affect women, equal pay issues... It seems like we're going backwards, not forwards. I hate the way that women who actively seek birth-control are sometimes characterized as sluts... and I hate terms like "feminazis." And I really hate it when people like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter say horrible things about women and other women defend or support them.
That's what really makes me sad...
|
|
|
Post by *KatyCupcake* on Jun 30, 2014 15:23:10 GMT
a dangerous decision, considering the fact that this could lead to ignorant decisions regarding blood transfusions, vaccinations, etc. It's a domino effect that I would venture many have not considered. This ruling was on contraception. Not blood transfusions. Not vaccinations (BTW, those are still up to parents, as far as I know and can still be refused based on religious beliefs). This is an important decision for 1st Amendment rights. Hobby Lobby wasn't even trying to get out of providing any contraception to employees. Out of over 20 kinds of contraception Obamacare required, they objected to being forced to provide 6 of them based on the method. The entire ACA should have been ruled unconstitutional years ago so I'm pleased with this allowance of continued 1st Amendment rights in spite of the ACA overstepping the 10th Amendment.
|
|
|
Post by keriwest on Jun 30, 2014 15:23:56 GMT
I'm happy with the decision!
|
|
|
Post by Kelpea on Jun 30, 2014 15:28:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jun 30, 2014 15:29:45 GMT
Horrendous. While the decision only covers 4 types of contraception (2 morning after pills and 2 IUDs) the blowback is dangerous. Any attack on the ability of women to control their own reproduction is an attack on all women. How to you think women have gotten as far as they have in this country? It's because of their ability to decide for themselves when they would or wouldn't have a child. I never shop at Hobby Lobby and I never will. This decision is shameful. the company isn't saying the employees can't use birth control, only that they won't pay for ir. My Mirena IUD was not covered the first time I got it, so I paid out of pocket. I was grateful that it is now covered, but if you want bc, there is the option to pay yourself. If price is an issue, talk to your doctor or go to the county health or planned parenthood and see if they can help
|
|
|
Post by Sam on Jun 30, 2014 15:30:03 GMT
I see that someone asked about the cost of contraception earlier in the thread, but couldn't see any answers - so, roughly, how much would it cost monthly? We get the pill etc free on the NHS over here, so it's hard for me to take a guess at the expense. [which I know is not the point of the discussion as such, but I honestly don't know if we're talking a few $ or a lot].
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 1, 2024 8:19:32 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 30, 2014 15:31:23 GMT
It's because of their ability to decide for themselves when they would or wouldn't have a child. . No one has taken any part of that away from a single woman. A woman can still pay for certain uncovered choices herself. When I was using BC it was $35 a month without insurance. Liberty cuts both ways.
|
|
|
Post by keriwest on Jun 30, 2014 15:33:48 GMT
I just don't understand why anyone would think that any company should be held responsible for paying for your morning after pill.
|
|
|
Post by shevy on Jun 30, 2014 15:35:43 GMT
There are women like me, who cannot use certain types of birth control. This will certainly impact this part of the population. There are other options than IUD, but they are less effective or I cannot use them based on other health issues. My IUDs have been covered by my healthcare in full for the last 15 years and if suddenly it wasn't it would be a financial impact.
Whether it's the right decision or not, it will have an impact on women.
|
|
quiltz
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,714
Location: CANADA
Jun 29, 2014 16:13:28 GMT
|
Post by quiltz on Jun 30, 2014 15:37:05 GMT
<<<I'm thrilled with this decision because it upholds religious liberty, which is a foundation of our country, and is also one of our basic Constitutional rights.>>>
Agree
|
|
|
Post by dulcemama on Jun 30, 2014 15:42:09 GMT
This has zilch to do with religious freedom. Hobby Lobby would not be paying for anyone's birth control. They would be providing people with insurance. If they don't believe in using birth control, they don't have to use it.
|
|
|
Post by *KatyCupcake* on Jun 30, 2014 15:43:33 GMT
Horrendous. While the decision only covers 4 types of contraception (2 morning after pills and 2 IUDs) the blowback is dangerous. Any attack on the ability of women to control their own reproduction is an attack on all women. How to you think women have gotten as far as they have in this country? It's because of their ability to decide for themselves when they would or wouldn't have a child. I never shop at Hobby Lobby and I never will. This decision is shameful. This was NOT about preventing women from controlling their reproduction. By the time those 4 types of contraception would need to work, the women had ALREADY "reproduced" and created the start of another human life. There are plenty of ways women can still be in control of their reproductive rights without ending a growing life. And the best way to control your own reproduction is to choose your sexual partners wisely and use a PREVENTATIVE form of birth control. It's about PERSONAL responsibility. It's not the job of any government or employer to do that for you. That's the opposite of being in control or empowered. My opinions are in line with those of Matt Walsh. Abortion Doesn't Empower Women
|
|
RosieKat
Drama Llama
PeaJect #12
Posts: 5,401
Jun 25, 2014 19:28:04 GMT
|
Post by RosieKat on Jun 30, 2014 15:43:41 GMT
There are women like me, who cannot use certain types of birth control. This will certainly impact this part of the population. There are other options than IUD, but they are less effective or I cannot use them based on other health issues. My IUDs have been covered by my healthcare in full for the last 15 years and if suddenly it wasn't it would be a financial impact. Whether it's the right decision or not, it will have an impact on women. Just as an FYI, it's only certain IUDs that would not be covered. Some still would. (Different types work in different ways.)
|
|
|
Post by MonkeysInk on Jun 30, 2014 15:43:45 GMT
I hope they have good maternity coverage. :/
|
|
|
Post by traceys on Jun 30, 2014 15:44:03 GMT
This has zilch to do with religious freedom. Hobby Lobby would not be paying for anyone's birth control. They would be providing people with insurance. If they don't believe in using birth control, they don't have to use it. They are paying for everyone's birth control. That's what the whole mandate was about. That birth control must be provided free.
|
|
~Lauren~
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,876
Jun 26, 2014 3:33:18 GMT
|
Post by ~Lauren~ on Jun 30, 2014 15:45:42 GMT
Women's right to sex and reproductive chooses does not translate into someone else paying for those chooses. Period. I don't understand the idea some of you have that women are "entitled" to have prescription meds to prevent pregnancy or to terminate it paid for by someone other than their spouses/SOs.
With choice comes responsibility and one of the responsibilities is paying for your choices.
ETA...IMO, the whole "war on women" is a bogus claim by liberals to try to rally female voters to Democrat candidates.
|
|
chico
Junior Member
Posts: 77
Jun 28, 2014 4:03:03 GMT
|
Post by chico on Jun 30, 2014 15:45:56 GMT
Good decision. No business should be forced to pay for something that goes against their morals and values.
As as long as the company is privately owned, the CHOICE should be theirs.
After that, the CHOICE becomes the consumers, whether they want to shop there or not. Or, the employees, if they want to work there or not.
|
|
|
Post by Outspoken on Jun 30, 2014 15:47:16 GMT
I must admit that I'm torn on my feelings about this. As a Christian, I don't believe that God would want us to FORCE our beliefs on others. I believe we are supposed to share His love and His word through our words and our actions. I believe we are supposed to tell others about God's sacrifice and His gift of eternal life when ever the opportunity arises. I also believe that we will be held accountable for our own actions - or inactions.
I do not believe in abortion. But, I am guilty of sin just like anyone else. But, no one is in charge of my sins but me.
So, while I am glad that HL won't be closing, I still wonder if this is what Jesus would do.
|
|
|
Post by shevy on Jun 30, 2014 15:47:30 GMT
There are women like me, who cannot use certain types of birth control. This will certainly impact this part of the population. There are other options than IUD, but they are less effective or I cannot use them based on other health issues. My IUDs have been covered by my healthcare in full for the last 15 years and if suddenly it wasn't it would be a financial impact. Whether it's the right decision or not, it will have an impact on women. Just as an FYI, it's only certain IUDs that would not be covered. Some still would. (Different types work in different ways.) There are only 2 types of IUD, unless there are some new ones in the last couple of months. The Mierna, which has a small amount of hormones released along with the T device, and the copper/paraguard which is just the T device and no hormone and a small amount of copper. So neither are covered.
|
|