Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
Court decision on Hobby Lobby case
Page <<first <prev 23 of 50 next> last>>
Jul 1, 2014 10:57:35   #
UXOEOD
 
BasqueLady wrote:
I never shop in Walmart, I support local small business when ever I can.


Good for you, because Walmart nevers hires local workers, or support local events or charities?

If life was only so simple, then you with your simple mind could comprehend.

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:01:21   #
mldavis2
 
RichieC wrote:
There is no problem with unwanted babies. This argument is specious and without basis.

Perhaps we should ask the millions of single parents - right after we do a head count of our world-leading prison populations.

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:02:47   #
Croce Loc: Earth
 
Blurryeyed wrote:
Really Croce? It can't be exactly about what the suit alleged it was about? You do know that Hobby Lobby was providing birth control to their employees long before the ACA or the mandate, that they only asked for exclusion for the 4 drugs or devices that terminate the fertilized egg. You also might recognize that they are closed on Sundays forgoing what in their particular line of business should be one of the two largest revenue days of the week in observance of their religious beliefs...

Why does this have to become some dark conspiracy?
Really Croce? It can't be exactly about what the ... (show quote)


You again say it for me. This time you bring up the willingness to prevent pregnancy but stand against abortion. What is the problem? Again, you state they close on Sunday. Why, to forego a lucrative revenue day. NO. Because as you state, observance of religious beliefs. No conspiracy Blurry, but I do feel it is obstinance.

Reply
 
 
Jul 1, 2014 11:03:28   #
Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.
 
Croce wrote:
I think you have made my case Blurry. It is not a matter of as you state, using their assets in a manner contrary to their own financial and mission purposes, it is because they refuse on the basis if their religious beliefs. I think you already know I feel the govt has no right to demand employer provided coverage period. BUT, if they are going to provide it, they should not be allowed to parse that coverage based on their religious beliefs.


Croce, are you an atheist? Does your position on God not inform your thoughts on this case? The fact is that there are religious protections in both our constitution and our laws.... This is what the court corrected based its decision on.

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:04:47   #
Bruno2013 Loc: Fort Myers, Florida
 
Blurryeyed wrote:
Really Croce? It can't be exactly about what the suit alleged it was about? You do know that Hobby Lobby was providing birth control to their employees long before the ACA or the mandate, that they only asked for exclusion for the 4 drugs or devices that terminate the fertilized egg. You also might recognize that they are closed on Sundays forgoing what in their particular line of business should be one of the two largest revenue days of the week in observance of their religious beliefs...

Why does this have to become some dark conspiracy?
Really Croce? It can't be exactly about what the ... (show quote)



http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:05:07   #
Croce Loc: Earth
 
Blurryeyed wrote:
Croce, are you an atheist? Does your position on God not inform your thoughts on this case? The fact is that there are religious protections in both our constitution and our laws.... This is what the court corrected based its decision on.


Please excuse me Blurry. Have to take a piss.

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:06:09   #
Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.
 
Bruno2013 wrote:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers


So what? They also when becoming aware of the same divested. The article means nothing but it does however illustrate that MotherJones has no integrity.

Reply
 
 
Jul 1, 2014 11:09:17   #
bill Wilen
 
Remember Sandra Kay Fluke an attorney and women's rights feminist activist, graduate of Georgetown University Law School. She was whining about the Government (my tax dollar)not buying her birth control. What can I say !

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:11:43   #
venturer9 Loc: Newton, Il.
 
dljen wrote:
Most of that crap you're talking about, I won't even comment on.

What does your wife do for her headaches and how often does she have them?



Have you ever noticed that very very seldom does the left and maybe even the right comment on those things that are posted that do not adhere to their way of thinking..... I honestly did not expect an answer either in agreement or disagreement... and I was not disappointed...

But, as to her headaches, she has had headaches for over 40 years.... about 20 years ago I heard of a headache clinic in Chicago and "FORCED" her to go You would have to know my wife to understand why "Forced".... She was in a Hospital there for a week, multiple tests, etc, etc, etc... The Medicines and diet that they prescribed worked very well for about 10/12 years and then they began to come back (I am referring to Migraines) and although they are much fewer than at their peak (6/7 a week of the go to bed and hide kind) they still are there...

She now HAS a medicine that does not Prevent, but stops them in progress... For the most part she refuses to take her pill when she feels the Migraine coming on ..." Oh, it will go away on its own" but finally when it is beginning to force her into bed.. she will finally take the pill.... THIS might give you an idea of why I used the word "FORCED"

Regular Headaches, she has to one degree or another every day, all day.....

As a person who never had headaches (and only have them now very minimally due to M/C Wreck) I did not understand the problem for a long time.

Mike

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:23:43   #
venturer9 Loc: Newton, Il.
 
steve03 wrote:
do you really want a corporation or a boss to decide what medication you can take and not a women and her doctor? let's say I'm a Jahova Witness and you work for me. is it right for me not to cover blood transfusion? or I'm a Jew can I say that I won't cover medication because the cap is made out of gel that uses pig in manufacturing. There are always groups of people who will try to Inforce their beliefs on others or will use religion as an excuse to cut expenses and obligations.



Can any of you people that continue to bring up these silly "What If's" actually understand what has gone on in this ruling. In all cases, and in this case particularly NOTHING has been done to keep you/them from getting the pills they want,, Only that their insurance will not pay for it..

My wife goes to a Chiropractor and as part of her treatment she receives acupuncture. Our insurance does not pay for acupuncture, only the "manipulation" BUT she still gets Acupuncture...we just pay for it out of pocket...

If you believe that this one very simple ruling will begin a horrible land slide of Pro Christian/Religious rulings, you are a bit more simple minded that I supposed.....

You were not upset when Prayer was taken out of schools, You are apparently not upset when you see where some school has halted the football team having a prayer before the game. You are apparently not upset when the Valedictorian has his/her speech torn up because "God" was mentioned. Yet your panties are on fire over this very small victory of Religious Belief over PC....

Mike

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:27:04   #
LLucas Loc: Upstate South Carolina, USA
 
'Saw this post earlier:
"When your Jehovah's Witness boss refuses to let you have a blood transfusion, when your Scientologist boss refuses to cover psychiatric medication, and when your Christian Scientist boss refuses to cover anything, thank your wonderful Supreme Court! The floodgates have been opened to allow an individual boss to dictate your healthcare choices. And people say 'ObamaCare' is an intrusion on your freedoms? Wake up, America!"
-Ryan Denson

Reply
 
 
Jul 1, 2014 11:35:06   #
venturer9 Loc: Newton, Il.
 
Gnslngr wrote:
My point exactly. The Court says that this religious view (about the 4 contraceptive methods) has to be honored, but that the religious views of other religions or sects (like blood transfusions) don't. That elevates one kind of religion over another, and that's dangerous for any citizen and any government.

Of course, since Hobby Lobby covered those four contraceptive methods for their employees for years and years and didn't interpose an objection until Obamacare, I doubt the case is about religious "freedom" in the first place.
My point exactly. The Court says that this religi... (show quote)



Wasn't the ruling specifically about the payment of and for a birth control method that actually killed the fertilized egg....

And I believe that Hobby Lobby did NOT cover those 4 types of "abortion" previously, OBAMACARE was forcing them to do so and that is why they fought in the courts...

Mike

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:41:43   #
Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.
 
LLucas wrote:
'Saw this post earlier:
"When your Jehovah's Witness boss refuses to let you have a blood transfusion, when your Scientologist boss refuses to cover psychiatric medication, and when your Christian Scientist boss refuses to cover anything, thank your wonderful Supreme Court! The floodgates have been opened to allow an individual boss to dictate your healthcare choices. And people say 'ObamaCare' is an intrusion on your freedoms? Wake up, America!"
-Ryan Denson


Again total BS and specifically addressed in the SCOTUS decision.

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:44:18   #
SwedeUSA2
 
[quote=Blurryeyed] ...
Or if you can't do that please tell me where it is in the constitution that informs you that your birth control is a right granted to you under our constitution?
...

That's the old Prussian rule: Everything that isn't expressly permitted is forbidden.
Do you really believe in that, Blurryeyed, or is that what you really are - blurryeyed?

Reply
Jul 1, 2014 11:45:04   #
marblclear Loc: Sacramento CA
 
Yes, they can, but I'll bet if you wanted your Viagra Hobby Lobby would pay for it. The ruling is completely hypocritical and again is a bunch of old men making decisions for women. It's disgusting and I hope reasonable women stick together and boycott Hobby Lobby and hurt them on the bottom line, that is what will get their attention.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 23 of 50 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-photography talk)
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.