If Hobby Lobby wins...

[DrDoomNGloom]

It is your coloring book, color it any way you want, but at the end of the day the Christian faith based HL has made it clear it is against abortion and killing of unborn fetus's. They feel their participation in the ACA as mandated by the law and how many employees they have violated their religious right not to participate in said practice of "abortion after conception". Once again comprehension has failed you as it was clearly stated in the article quote I provided.

I will agree discrimination is involved in this issue, those poor christian folks over at HL got folks like you spreading propaganda and telling lies in an attempt to redistribute wealth.

By the way Hobby Lobby is not the only one with a law suit pending

HHS Mandate Information Central -

As it stands now,

47 non-profit lawsuits with a score card of 19 injunctions granted to 1 injunctions denied
47 for-profit lawsuits* Of the 39 cases with rulings touching on the merits, the current scorecard is 33-6.

 

[Redfish]

Do you dislike conservatives?

Do you dislike democrats?.....

The conservative democrats of that era? You betyer ass I do.

Robert KKK Byrd was not a conservative, neither were Bulll Conner or Hughey Long. They were liberal democrats who were bigots.

 

[Redfish]

For generation upon generation, discrimination was justified on biblical grounds --

Perhaps some reading would fill the bill ...

Title: Defence Of Southern Slavery. Against The Attacks of
Henry Clay And Alex'r. Campbell,
In Which Much Of The False Philanthropy And Mawkish Sentimentalism Of

The Abolitionists Is Met And Refuted. In Which

It Is Moreover Shown That The Association Of The White

And Black Races In The Relation Of Master And Slave

Is The Appointed Order Of God, As Set Forth In

The Bible, And Constitutes The Best Social

Condition Of Both Races, And The Only

True Principle Of Republicanism.

By A Southern Clergyman.

You know what a red herring is in debate circles, don't you??

Let's just for one second say I will humor your ill fated logic train, so with that being said, I would beg to ask the 64 million dollar question, Who is being discriminated against??

The employees.

In this case. However, if Corporations gain the right to discriminate on the basis of

'the corporation's religion'

-- it would have a similar effect of what (the ill-fated) SB1062 was meant to do, to ignore federal laws and allow discrimination based on religion against a wide swath of people.

there is no discrimination here, all employees are treated equally. HL's insurance covers all kinds of birth control. Their only objection is to abortion causing drugs after the birth control has either failed or not been used.

Its really a shame that not one of you lib/dems even understands what this suit is about.

 

[driveby]

Do you dislike conservatives?

Do you dislike democrats?.....

The conservative democrats of that era? You betyer ass I do.

Democrats of that era? Democrats have always been about tyranny, Hobby Lobby is fighting against a (soft ) tyranny inflicted upon them by who? ......

 

[NYcarbineer]

You know what a red herring is in debate circles, don't you??

Let's just for one second say I will humor your ill fated logic train, so with that being said, I would beg to ask the 64 million dollar question, Who is being discriminated against??

The employees.

In this case. However, if Corporations gain the right to discriminate on the basis of

'the corporation's religion'

-- it would have a similar effect of what (the ill-fated) SB1062 was meant to do, to ignore federal laws and allow discrimination based on religion against a wide swath of people.

there is no discrimination here, all employees are treated equally. HL's insurance covers all kinds of birth control. Their only objection is to abortion causing drugs after the birth control has either failed or not been used.

Its really a shame that not one of you lib/dems even understands what this suit is about.

The issue is not abortion. The federal government can't fund abortion. The federal government can already pay for IUD's.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do you dislike democrats?.....

The conservative democrats of that era? You betyer ass I do.

Robert KKK Byrd was not a conservative, neither were Bulll Conner or Hughey Long. They were liberal democrats who were bigots.

Then why do most conservatives agree with Byrd in his opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

 

[paperview]

Do you dislike democrats?.....

The conservative democrats of that era? You betyer ass I do.

Robert KKK Byrd was not a conservative, neither were Bulll Conner or Hughey Long. They were liberal democrats who were bigots.

Right, they were flaming libs.

Like George Wallace was.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Does this help clarify HL's stance??

Hobby Lobby pays their employees cash also, which can be used to buy any birth control including outright abortion.

Why don't they object to that?

Logic would ensue that where an employee spends their own money the company has no problems with. It is about taking part of the companies profits and ear marking them for insurance which has the four mentioned articles.

All employers pay their employees in one form or another, besides for FICA and SS I know of no other mandatory deductions. When a company / the government gets to the point where they have the right to tell an individual how to spend an earned paycheck we will all be screaming bloody murder!!

I mean really can you get behind someone telling YOU where or how to spend your money??

The company does not have to buy any employee contraception. They only have to compensate the employee, for his work, in part, with an insurance policy.

That insurance policy CAN be used for contraception, just like the employee's paycheck CAN be used for contraception.

To object to one and not the other is absurd.

Of course they can't object to actually paying the employee, because that would be even more absurd. In short they've chosen the lesser of two absurdities.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Uh, it's pretty easy to figure out if someone is being truthful or lying about their religious beliefs. Also, that belief has to pass the smell test...someone can't claim their religion opposes people with long hair, etc.

If their religion opposes an "action" and their well documented book (the Bible) speaks on the subject being discussed, then you are violating their Christian beliefs forcing them to go against the Bible.

See how that works, twit.

The Bible dictates that a Christian who operates a business cannot compensate his employees with anything that could be used as payment for an IUD??

Cite that passage.

Perhaps some pro life reading would fill the bill :

Abortion - Pro Life - The Bible's Teaching Against Abortion

Cite the passage I requested.

 

[dblack]

Hobby Lobby pays their employees cash also, which can be used to buy any birth control including outright abortion.

Why don't they object to that?

Logic would ensue that where an employee spends their own money the company has no problems with. It is about taking part of the companies profits and ear marking them for insurance which has the four mentioned articles.

All employers pay their employees in one form or another, besides for FICA and SS I know of no other mandatory deductions. When a company / the government gets to the point where they have the right to tell an individual how to spend an earned paycheck we will all be screaming bloody murder!!

I mean really can you get behind someone telling YOU where or how to spend your money??

The company does not have to buy any employee contraception. They only have to compensate the employee, for his work, in part, with an insurance policy.

Which is the entire problem, in a nutshell. The state has no business dictating how a company compensates employees.

 

[paperview]

You know what a red herring is in debate circles, don't you??

Let's just for one second say I will humor your ill fated logic train, so with that being said, I would beg to ask the 64 million dollar question, Who is being discriminated against??

The employees.

In this case. However, if Corporations gain the right to discriminate on the basis of

'the corporation's religion'

-- it would have a similar effect of what (the ill-fated) SB1062 was meant to do, to ignore federal laws and allow discrimination based on religion against a wide swath of people.

there is no discrimination here, all employees are treated equally. HL's insurance covers all kinds of birth control. Their only objection is to abortion causing drugs after the birth control has either failed or not been used.

Its really a shame that not one of you lib/dems even understands what this suit is about.

I'll repeat this as many times as it needs to get through.

Plan B, Ella or IUD's are NOT abortifacients.


Hobby Lobby also used to include Plan B & Ella, for years - in their health insurance coverage.

Up until they were obliged to treat their employees the same as all others in large corporations had to in their position.

 

[paperview]

Logic would ensue that where an employee spends their own money the company has no problems with. It is about taking part of the companies profits and ear marking them for insurance which has the four mentioned articles.

All employers pay their employees in one form or another, besides for FICA and SS I know of no other mandatory deductions. When a company / the government gets to the point where they have the right to tell an individual how to spend an earned paycheck we will all be screaming bloody murder!!

I mean really can you get behind someone telling YOU where or how to spend your money??

The company does not have to buy any employee contraception. They only have to compensate the employee, for his work, in part, with an insurance policy.

Which is the entire problem, in a nutshell. The state has no business dictating how a company compensates employees.

The above post shall be titled^ : Why I hate minimum wage laws, and other Depression Era laments.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Logic would ensue that where an employee spends their own money the company has no problems with. It is about taking part of the companies profits and ear marking them for insurance which has the four mentioned articles.

All employers pay their employees in one form or another, besides for FICA and SS I know of no other mandatory deductions. When a company / the government gets to the point where they have the right to tell an individual how to spend an earned paycheck we will all be screaming bloody murder!!

I mean really can you get behind someone telling YOU where or how to spend your money??

The company does not have to buy any employee contraception. They only have to compensate the employee, for his work, in part, with an insurance policy.

Which is the entire problem, in a nutshell. The state has no business dictating how a company compensates employees.

Well, it's pretty well established in law that yes, the government has such right, so your pissing up that rope is rather futile at this point.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Uh, it's pretty easy to figure out if someone is being truthful or lying about their religious beliefs. Also, that belief has to pass the smell test...someone can't claim their religion opposes people with long hair, etc.

If their religion opposes an "action" and their well documented book (the Bible) speaks on the subject being discussed, then you are violating their Christian beliefs forcing them to go against the Bible.

See how that works, twit.

The Bible dictates that a Christian who operates a business cannot compensate his employees with anything that could be used as payment for an IUD??

Cite that passage.

Perhaps some pro life reading would fill the bill :

Abortion - Pro Life - The Bible's Teaching Against Abortion

Jesus said render unto Caesar what is Caesar's; not render unto Caesar what is Caesar's unless you don't like what Caesar might do with it...

 

[dblack]

The company does not have to buy any employee contraception. They only have to compensate the employee, for his work, in part, with an insurance policy.

Which is the entire problem, in a nutshell. The state has no business dictating how a company compensates employees.

The above post shall be titled^ : Why I hate minimum wage laws, and other Depression Era laments.

Title it however you like, but it is the core of the problem.

 

[paperview]

Which is the entire problem, in a nutshell. The state has no business dictating how a company compensates employees.

The above post shall be titled^ : Why I hate minimum wage laws, and other Depression Era laments.

Title it however you like, but it is the core of the problem.

Now we're getting to the crux if it.

Vamoose! Minimum wage laws.

Vamoose! Worker protections.

Begone ye! The Corporation shall reign immortal.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Hobby Lobby pays their employees cash also, which can be used to buy any birth control including outright abortion.

Why don't they object to that?

Logic would ensue that where an employee spends their own money the company has no problems with. It is about taking part of the companies profits and ear marking them for insurance which has the four mentioned articles.

All employers pay their employees in one form or another, besides for FICA and SS I know of no other mandatory deductions. When a company / the government gets to the point where they have the right to tell an individual how to spend an earned paycheck we will all be screaming bloody murder!!

I mean really can you get behind someone telling YOU where or how to spend your money??

The company does not have to buy any employee contraception. They only have to compensate the employee, for his work, in part, with an insurance policy.

That insurance policy CAN be used for contraception, just like the employee's paycheck CAN be used for contraception.

To object to one and not the other is absurd.

Of course they can't object to actually paying the employee, because that would be even more absurd. In short they've chosen the lesser of two absurdities.

True.

Paying the premiums for health insurance is nothing more than compensation, the same as a wage or salary.

And as with a wage or salary the employee is at liberty to use the compensation any way he wishes, free from interference by the employer, where the relationship exists between the employee and his healthcare provider alone. That the employee may or may not use the insurance to purchase contraceptive therapies is not the concern of the employer, and in no way interferes with the religious practice of the employer.

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

The employees.

In this case. However, if Corporations gain the right to discriminate on the basis of

'the corporation's religion'

-- it would have a similar effect of what (the ill-fated) SB1062 was meant to do, to ignore federal laws and allow discrimination based on religion against a wide swath of people.

there is no discrimination here, all employees are treated equally. HL's insurance covers all kinds of birth control. Their only objection is to abortion causing drugs after the birth control has either failed or not been used.

Its really a shame that not one of you lib/dems even understands what this suit is about.

I'll repeat this as many times as it needs to get through.

Plan B, Ella or IUD's are NOT abortifacients.


Hobby Lobby also used to include Plan B & Ella, for years - in their health insurance coverage.

Up until they were obliged to treat their employees the same as all others in large corporations had to in their position.

The Green family has no moral objection to the use of 16 of 20 preventive contraceptives required in the mandate and will continue its longstanding practice of covering these preventive contraceptives for its employees. However, the Green family cannot provide or pay for four possible life-threatening drugs and devices. These drugs include Plan B and Ella, the so-called morning-after pill and the week-after pill. Covering these drugs and devices would violate their most deeply held religious belief that life begins at conception, when an egg is fertilized.

Plan B
Emergency contraception

Levonorgestrel is used in emergency contraceptive pills (ECPs), both in a combined Yuzpe regimen which includes estrogen, and as a levonorgestrel-only method. The levonorgestrel-only method uses levonorgestrel 1.5 mg (as a single dose or as two .75 mg doses 12 hours apart) taken within 3 days of unprotected sex, with one study indicating that beginning as late as 120 hours (5 days) after intercourse could be effective.

There are many brand names of levonorgestrel-only ECPs, including: Escapelle, Plan B, Levonelle, Glanique, NorLevo, Postinor-2, i-pill, "Next Choice" and 72-HOURS.[3]

The primary mechanism of action of levonorgestrel as a progestogen-only emergency contraceptive pill is, according to FIGO, to prevent fertilization by inhibition of ovulation.[4][5][6][7] The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) has issued a statement that: "review of the evidence suggests that LNG [levonorgestreol] ECPs cannot prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. Language on implantation should not be included in LNG ECP product labeling."[8][9] In June 2012, a New York Times editorial called on the FDA to remove from the label the unsupported suggestion that levonorgestrel emergency contraceptive pills inhibit implantation.[10] In November 2013, the European Medicines Agency approved a change to the label for HRA Pharma's NorLevo saying it cannot prevent implantation of a fertilized egg.[11]

Levonorgestrel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Critics are also concerned about the lack of research about how ella might affect the development of an embryo of a woman who didn't know she was already pregnant when she took the drug. "RU-486 acts in the body in the same way [that ella does] and can abort a pregnancy," says Donna Harrison, president of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists. "This drug has not been tested in pregnant women. We know that two out of 100 women who take ella will become pregnant. That's two babies who will be exposed to this toxic drug. It's completely unethical." Dr. James Trussell, director of the Office of Population Research at Princeton, who also was a consultant for ella's manufacturer, pointed out that the handful of women who were discovered to be pregnant after taking ella didn't appear to suffer from ill effects. He adds that a woman would have to take "many, many, many times" the amount of the drug to induce an abortion. "And where is someone going to get it?"

Is ella birth control or abortion?

 

[driveby]

The above post shall be titled^ : Why I hate minimum wage laws, and other Depression Era laments.

Title it however you like, but it is the core of the problem.

Now we're getting to the crux if it.

Vamoose! Minimum wage laws.

Vamoose! Worker protections.

Begone ye! The Corporation shall reign immortal.

Moonbat hyperbole is awesome......

 

[dblack]

The above post shall be titled^ : Why I hate minimum wage laws, and other Depression Era laments.

Title it however you like, but it is the core of the problem.

Now we're getting to the crux if it.

Vamoose! Minimum wage laws.

Vamoose! Worker protections.

Begone ye! The Corporation shall reign immortal.

If the day ever comes when people like you realize that crap like that is exactly what keeps corporations dominant, maybe things will change.