Hobby Lobby Still Covers Vasectomies And Viagra

Christian Theocracy vs. Sharia Law: What's the difference?

One is a fiction that people who want to eliminate religious freedom are using to deceive people and the other actually exists.

Well, what is the difference? A threat one will go to hell vis a vis honor killing? Psychological terror and physical violence are branches of the same tree.
 
Hobby Lobby -- now free to drop emergency "morning after" pills and intrauterine devices from its workers' health insurance plans -- has given no indication that it plans to stop helping its male employees obtain erectile dysfunction treatments.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the craft store chain, owned by evangelical Christians, doesn't have to pay for health care coverage of contraceptives prohibited by its owners' religion.

But pills and pumps that help a man stiffen his penis in preparation for sex are perfectly acceptable.

Evangelical Christians have long argued that life begins at conception, and therefore that medical procedures that disrupt the first stages of pregnancy amount to murder. In the case of Hobby Lobby, this extends to a woman taking pills such as Plan B, Next Choice or Ella, any of which would prevent her ovaries from releasing an egg that could be fertilized after unprotected sex.

Perhaps taking a note from Catholic Church's opposition to sterilization, Hobby Lobby also objected to long-term birth control methods such as IUDs, which can cost women up to $1,000.

But that does not explain why Hobby Lobby doesn't object to covering the cost of its male employees' vasectomies.

MORE: Hobby Lobby Still Covers Vasectomies And Viagra

This seems like extreme hypocrisy to me.


Still a stupid motherfucker, I see. HOBBY LOBBY STILL COVERS CONTRACEPTION you fucking idiot.


Give it a rest you fool before you stroke out.....on second thought....keep screaming.

I simply can NOT believe that you are as stupid as you act here......
 
Had Obama not lied about "Keeping your plan" this would not have been an issue

It would not be an issue if they didn't force a mandate no one wanted on the people and fail to give the same exemption they give to others for Hobby lobby and the others in the case.
 
Had Obama not lied about "Keeping your plan" this would not have been an issue

It would not be an issue if they didn't force a mandate no one wanted on the people and fail to give the same exemption they give to others for Hobby lobby and the others in the case.


The problem with the Hobby Lobby thing was simple. THIS was not part of the law. It was a directive issued by the idiot Kathleen Sebiellus (on the orders of the Thug). It was never part of the "Obamacare fiasco". That's why the SCOYUS struck it down so easily.

This was a clear cut case of (yet again) Obama overstepping his bounds by "re-writing" a law that had already been passed. Obama (the good "Constitutional Attorney) has never figured out that the president does not pass legislation. So much for HIS college education...
 
Hobby Lobby -- now free to drop emergency "morning after" pills and intrauterine devices from its workers' health insurance plans -- has given no indication that it plans to stop helping its male employees obtain erectile dysfunction treatments.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the craft store chain, owned by evangelical Christians, doesn't have to pay for health care coverage of contraceptives prohibited by its owners' religion.

But pills and pumps that help a man stiffen his penis in preparation for sex are perfectly acceptable.

Evangelical Christians have long argued that life begins at conception, and therefore that medical procedures that disrupt the first stages of pregnancy amount to murder. In the case of Hobby Lobby, this extends to a woman taking pills such as Plan B, Next Choice or Ella, any of which would prevent her ovaries from releasing an egg that could be fertilized after unprotected sex.

Perhaps taking a note from Catholic Church's opposition to sterilization, Hobby Lobby also objected to long-term birth control methods such as IUDs, which can cost women up to $1,000.

But that does not explain why Hobby Lobby doesn't object to covering the cost of its male employees' vasectomies.

MORE: Hobby Lobby Still Covers Vasectomies And Viagra

This seems like extreme hypocrisy to me.


Still a stupid motherfucker, I see. HOBBY LOBBY STILL COVERS CONTRACEPTION you fucking idiot.


Give it a rest you fool before you stroke out.....on second thought....keep screaming.

I simply can NOT believe that you are as stupid as you act here......
They are whipping up faux-outrage for the votes of low-information voters. That's why they refuse to listen to facts.
 

Do you even bother to think about the propaganda you post before you share it? Shouldn't the fact that the article can't even be honest about what the Hobby Lobby decision say tell you that they have no freaking clue.

And your opt out laws, please tell me what law compels public nudity or why it would be wrong for a religious person to want to wear clothing? You seriously think being free to wear clothes violates some non-existent law? You're seriously scared of this? You've got to be freaking insane if you think this is some end to religious freedom because *gasp!* the first amendment gives people the freedom to wear clothes and trumps a non-existent law to force them to be naked. The horror!

Why the heck is it so difficult for you people to use your freaking brain and educate yourself? Why are you so willing and eager to swallow and spread propaganda and not take a single thought for yourself?
 
Hobby Lobby -- now free to drop emergency "morning after" pills and intrauterine devices from its workers' health insurance plans -- has given no indication that it plans to stop helping its male employees obtain erectile dysfunction treatments.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the craft store chain, owned by evangelical Christians, doesn't have to pay for health care coverage of contraceptives prohibited by its owners' religion.

But pills and pumps that help a man stiffen his penis in preparation for sex are perfectly acceptable.

Evangelical Christians have long argued that life begins at conception, and therefore that medical procedures that disrupt the first stages of pregnancy amount to murder. In the case of Hobby Lobby, this extends to a woman taking pills such as Plan B, Next Choice or Ella, any of which would prevent her ovaries from releasing an egg that could be fertilized after unprotected sex.

Perhaps taking a note from Catholic Church's opposition to sterilization, Hobby Lobby also objected to long-term birth control methods such as IUDs, which can cost women up to $1,000.

But that does not explain why Hobby Lobby doesn't object to covering the cost of its male employees' vasectomies.

MORE: Hobby Lobby Still Covers Vasectomies And Viagra

This seems like extreme hypocrisy to me.

Thing is though, I'm not gonna run to the federal government and try to force Hobby Lobby or any other company to pay for my erections or a vasectomy. If they chose not to cover these things, I would try something really novel and foreign to liberals.

I would pay for it myself !

Oh the horror! You poor oppressed person! The right has brainwashed you into thinking you are responsible for your actions. Can't someone else do it?
 
Hobby Lobby -- now free to drop emergency "morning after" pills and intrauterine devices from its workers' health insurance plans -- has given no indication that it plans to stop helping its male employees obtain erectile dysfunction treatments.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the craft store chain, owned by evangelical Christians, doesn't have to pay for health care coverage of contraceptives prohibited by its owners' religion.

But pills and pumps that help a man stiffen his penis in preparation for sex are perfectly acceptable.

Evangelical Christians have long argued that life begins at conception, and therefore that medical procedures that disrupt the first stages of pregnancy amount to murder. In the case of Hobby Lobby, this extends to a woman taking pills such as Plan B, Next Choice or Ella, any of which would prevent her ovaries from releasing an egg that could be fertilized after unprotected sex.

Perhaps taking a note from Catholic Church's opposition to sterilization, Hobby Lobby also objected to long-term birth control methods such as IUDs, which can cost women up to $1,000.

But that does not explain why Hobby Lobby doesn't object to covering the cost of its male employees' vasectomies.

MORE: Hobby Lobby Still Covers Vasectomies And Viagra

This seems like extreme hypocrisy to me.

Of course it is. They hate women and want to control them.

Because clearly, unless you oppress other people and force them to buy you things, you hate women.

Most women I know don't want to kill their young.
 
So I guess when the Little Sisters of the Poor case gets to the Supreme Court you Hobby Lobby defenders won't be defending them?

Because they don't want to cover ANY birth control. Period.
 
Hobby Lobby -- now free to drop emergency "morning after" pills and intrauterine devices from its workers' health insurance plans -- has given no indication that it plans to stop helping its male employees obtain erectile dysfunction treatments.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that the craft store chain, owned by evangelical Christians, doesn't have to pay for health care coverage of contraceptives prohibited by its owners' religion.

But pills and pumps that help a man stiffen his penis in preparation for sex are perfectly acceptable.

Evangelical Christians have long argued that life begins at conception, and therefore that medical procedures that disrupt the first stages of pregnancy amount to murder. In the case of Hobby Lobby, this extends to a woman taking pills such as Plan B, Next Choice or Ella, any of which would prevent her ovaries from releasing an egg that could be fertilized after unprotected sex.

Perhaps taking a note from Catholic Church's opposition to sterilization, Hobby Lobby also objected to long-term birth control methods such as IUDs, which can cost women up to $1,000.

But that does not explain why Hobby Lobby doesn't object to covering the cost of its male employees' vasectomies.

MORE: Hobby Lobby Still Covers Vasectomies And Viagra

This seems like extreme hypocrisy to me.

Of course it is. They hate women and want to control them.

Because clearly, unless you oppress other people and force them to buy you things, you hate women.

Most women I know don't want to kill their young.

So public education is oppression?
 

Do you even bother to think about the propaganda you post before you share it? Shouldn't the fact that the article can't even be honest about what the Hobby Lobby decision say tell you that they have no freaking clue.

And your opt out laws, please tell me what law compels public nudity or why it would be wrong for a religious person to want to wear clothing? You seriously think being free to wear clothes violates some non-existent law? You're seriously scared of this? You've got to be freaking insane if you think this is some end to religious freedom because *gasp!* the first amendment gives people the freedom to wear clothes and trumps a non-existent law to force them to be naked. The horror!

Why the heck is it so difficult for you people to use your freaking brain and educate yourself? Why are you so willing and eager to swallow and spread propaganda and not take a single thought for yourself?

Trust me - it's not "difficult". This is about whipping up sentiment among low information women voters by using "War" and "Women". They will continue down this path until they get their collective asses kicked in November.

It's actually the death rattle of a group that knows they have lost. They are using the Hobby Lobby decision by lying about it constantly in an attempt to gin up their "feminine" base.

Hell, take a couple of hours and watch the democrat propaganda network MSNBC. My God - you'd think that the world had come to an abrupt end the other day. They will use this for two reasons:

(1) It takes their bases' eyes off the train wreck that is Obama and this JOKE of a presidency

(2) it will keep the low information women voters frothing at the mouth.


That's it folks. That's ALL the liberal pussies have left.
 
Does a woman ever have an unwanted pregnancy from a man on Viagra who couldn't otherwise have an erection?

Perhaps she should have had him use a condom. Why exactly do you pretend like she is an unwilling victim in your hypothetical scenario? Or that either of them should be allowed to avoid responsibility for the life they've created?

Domestic Violence is something ignorant people like you ought to research. You post things about issues you don't know a damn thing about and regularly make a fool of yourself.

Considering you think the topic is domestic violence, you really aren't in a position to accuse anyone of making a fool of themselves.

The topic is whether you have the right to force other people to buy a specific type of birth control. No one is stopping anyone from getting the other birth control or paying for it themselves.

BTW they aren't obligated to buy condoms for you either. Totally unfair to men.
 
So I guess when the Little Sisters of the Poor case gets to the Supreme Court you Hobby Lobby defenders won't be defending them?

Because they don't want to cover ANY birth control. Period.


I will defend them all day every day. They should NOT have to provide contraception. They are a Religious institution, you twit.
 
Christian Theocracy vs. Sharia Law: What's the difference?

One is a fiction that people who want to eliminate religious freedom are using to deceive people and the other actually exists.

Well, what is the difference? A threat one will go to hell vis a vis honor killing? Psychological terror and physical violence are branches of the same tree.

I already told you what the difference is. If you are so illiterate you can't figure that out, there is nothing I can do to help you. But I'll try one more time.

There is no movement for a Christian theocracy. And supporting the free exercise of religion is not a Christian theocracy. It doesn't exist. So stop lying to yourself. It makes you look incredibly foolish.
 
Christian Theocracy vs. Sharia Law: What's the difference?

One is a fiction that people who want to eliminate religious freedom are using to deceive people and the other actually exists.

Why couldn't a mostly Muslim community in this country choose to impose Sharia Law, locally, or even just a set of laws similar to Sharia, and claim them as an exercise of their religious rights under the 1st amendment - even if their laws were contrary to current US laws -

in the same manner as Hobby Lobby has done?

How do you argue against that? Or do you concede that you'd have to side with the Muslims?
 
Had Obama not lied about "Keeping your plan" this would not have been an issue

It would not be an issue if they didn't force a mandate no one wanted on the people and fail to give the same exemption they give to others for Hobby lobby and the others in the case.


The problem with the Hobby Lobby thing was simple. THIS was not part of the law. It was a directive issued by the idiot Kathleen Sebiellus (on the orders of the Thug). It was never part of the "Obamacare fiasco". That's why the SCOYUS struck it down so easily.

This was a clear cut case of (yet again) Obama overstepping his bounds by "re-writing" a law that had already been passed. Obama (the good "Constitutional Attorney) has never figured out that the president does not pass legislation. So much for HIS college education...

What is truly messed up about all this is the administration already provided a religious exemption for this to other types of businesses and non-profits. As if somehow someone running a non-profit has a right to religious exercise and those who run a business don't.

But as people refuse to actually read the decision, they don't know this.

If you can't even bother to take the time to read what you are criticizing, you have no credibility in complaining about it.
 
One is a fiction that people who want to eliminate religious freedom are using to deceive people and the other actually exists.

Well, what is the difference? A threat one will go to hell vis a vis honor killing? Psychological terror and physical violence are branches of the same tree.

I already told you what the difference is. If you are so illiterate you can't figure that out, there is nothing I can do to help you. But I'll try one more time.

There is no movement for a Christian theocracy. And supporting the free exercise of religion is not a Christian theocracy. It doesn't exist. So stop lying to yourself. It makes you look incredibly foolish.

Any decision to allow a Christian belief to be exercised legally, over a secular law to the contrary,

is theocratic by definition.
 

Forum List

Back
Top