Abortion Helps Keep Hobby Lobby Profitable
If a store brags of their discount merchandise brought to you with this primary goal in mind:
Honoring the Lord in all we do by operating the company in a manner consistent with Biblical principles,
…it makes you wonder which Biblical principles they are referencing. You would think they would produce their goods in a state or country with the strictest adherence to “Biblical Principles.” This is far from the case. Most of their merchandise is imported from China: where female infanticide and forced abortion is the highest in the world. China truly is the most egregious abuser of this form of population control.
It’s true, millions of companies import goods from China and other nations who impose slave labor on their inhabitants. But this is Hobby Lobby, a company founded on Old Testament values. Values like those found in the Book of Numbers, 5: 11-13, where “God” gives instructions on how to make an unfaithful wife have an abortion.
Never before has a corporation, a perpetual entity, been given the human construct of religion. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in her amazing dissent added this:
“The absence of such precedent is just what one would expect, for the exercise of religion is characteristic of natural persons, not artificial legal entities.”
China, a Communist nation, has little regard for any “religious values,” and this doesn’t seem to concern the folks at some privately held corporations, which are far more numerous than you can imagine.
Never did the founding fathers intend for a religious book, written by Bronze Age desert-dwellers to determine corporate policy which affects the most marginalized workers in this free country. Ironically, their 401K retirement fund includes companies that produce “unacceptable” forms of contraception. Once it was part of the dreaded liberal plot (invented by conservatives) with the ACA, it all of a sudden became contentious. Yet the issue of abortion truly can’t be that important if they tacitly support China’s government.
What could be the worst part of this decision is the devotion to these “Biblical principals,” which are open to interpretation. Christopher Hitchens said it best:
Click here for reuse options!The Bible may, indeed does, contain a warrant for trafficking in humans, for ethnic cleansing, for slavery, for bride-price, and for indiscriminate massacre, but we are not bound by any of it because it was put together by crude, uncultured human mammals.
Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: VegasJessie
A resident of Las Vegas Nevada, a graduate of the University of Oklahoma as a Political Science major. Very motivated to get people to participate in the electoral process.
174 responses to Abortion Helps Keep Hobby Lobby Profitable
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Roctuna July 1st, 2014 at 14:48
Ownership and abuse of slaves, women and other property of kings and men is a common thread in the bible so the hypocrisy of HL should be of no surprise to anyone.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 15:13
No one is forced to work for Hobby Lobby. Companies have always had written policies that governed those who worked there. You make your decision to join a firm based on the polices and/or benefits they offer.
Just how many employees do you think are affected by this ruling? My guess would be few to none since the only issue was abortion drugs, not contraceptives. If that is such a big deal to the “Sandra Flukes” out there, they can buy Plan B One-Step and Next Choice which are available over the counter at many pharmacies for women over 17. It may cost anywhere from $10 to $50. – See more at: http://asktheexperts.plannedparenthood.org/?p=294#sthash.eAFv00AC.dpuf
As for the bible reference,
“What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was based more on economics; it was a matter of social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters.”
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html#ixzz36FGe18Ns
Judgeforyourself37 July 1st, 2014 at 16:31
You have every right to express your views. HL has every right to practice their religion as they see fit, every one of the Green family has that right, What they do not have, however, is make everyone who works for them practice the religion or adhere to the tenets of the Green Family’s religion or religious tenets.
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 17:28
Hobby lobby pays $14 per hour to full time and $9.50 to part time employees. Way better than most stores, Hobby Lobby employees still have access to 14-16 of the 20 FDA approved pregnancy preventative medications.
Obewon July 1st, 2014 at 19:22
Hobby Lobby’s “rock-bottom wages” pay “$8.68/hr for stockman” and “$9.40/hr for cashiers” per Glass Door meaning their workers rely on public Medicaid & SNAP food stamps, unless they become the few managers paid above $15/Hr except for the: -“Custom Frame Shop Manager – Hourly $13.50/hr, 5 Hobby Lobby Salaries.
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 19:57
Seeing how Glass Door doesn’t post how recent those salaries are, I’m gonna guess that one of those 15 stockman salaries listed at $6 was posted some time ago…
Are they paying costco hourly wages? No, but they are almost paying the magical $15 per hour to full time employees that fast food workers are asking for.
Obewon July 1st, 2014 at 20:39
“how recent”-? HL managers await your call ASAP to fill those spots. That slave shop always needs new low paid workers. You’l be coached on how to milk the system in servitude to your oligarchs requiring government subsidies for their benefit at the expense of your wellbeing.
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 20:55
I’ll break it down a little more then, you cited the Glass Doors 15 user entries for stockman salary. The range of those 15 salaries was $6 to $11, how do we know that those sub $9.50 wages aren’t from 2007 instead of post-2013 when HL’s new minimums went into effect?
And I happily employed and have no desire to learn about picture framing, thanks though
Obewon July 1st, 2014 at 21:09
You should read HL’s jobs links, quit your job(s) & support your oligarchs until your deathbed can no longer be wheeled in. Note “Updated Jun 23, 2014” e.g. “Updated Jun 23, 2014
(HL) Salaries in USD Avg. Salary $20k Cashier – Hourly 40 Hobby Lobby Salaries $9.40/hr $8 to $14”
“See What Hobby Lobby Employees Are Saying. Employees are “Dissatisfied” Lol these slaves want to revolt! http://www.glassdoor.com/Job/Hobby-Lobby-Jobs-E7537.htm
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 23:57
“Updated Jun 23, 2014 (HL) Salaries in USD Avg. Salary $20k Cashier – Hourly 40 Hobby Lobby Salaries $9.40/hr $8 to $14” Only means the most recent user submitted salary was on Jun 23rd.
I searched Glassdoor for this Custom Framing Shop Manager job opening you speak so lowly of, but they’re not offering that job right now. Now I can see where some users reviewed their time as the Framing Manager and posted salaries and
the pros and cons of that position. I’d also guess that if HL was
such a terrible and medieval place to work they would have gone out of business by now.
I do see an offer for a cashiers job that starts out at $15 an hour but from what you say it must be a lie.
http://www.glassdoor.com/job-listing/cashiers-fabric-needlework-floral-design-crafts-JV_IC1143236_KO0,47_IE7537.htm?jl=1097261059&paoIdKey=MA==
And its not just Fox reporting the pay bump at HL
http://www.demos.org/blog/hobby-lobby-boosts-minimum-hourly-wage-14
Obewon July 2nd, 2014 at 00:45
All Hobby Lobby $8 to $9 jobs, rate ranges to $13.50 for Manager I quoted & linked were active on 7/1/14. Search later for your dream jobs. “Glassdoor is currently down for planned maintenance”
TeapartyCrasher July 1st, 2014 at 20:25
Amazing how these “closely held corporations” aren’t quite so philanthropic as they depict themselves.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 09:42
You keep promoting your socialist propaganda all you want. Those who work hard and developed good work skills get paid more. That’s how it works in a capitalist country. I bet you wouldn’t hire someone with no experience and pay them $15.00 an hour to work at your make believe company, which you often boast about.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:05
This is not a capitalist country – hasn’t been for years. Get over it. We are being taken over by religious zealots. Unfortunately there isn’t another place to sail to, to get away from them.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 19:43
What country are you living in? You have some evidence to prove the US is not a capitalist country? Last I heard, we were number 2 behind Germany.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 19:47
I’m not sure what country you live in, but the USA is the number two capitalist country behind Germany.
If you’re being taken over by religious zealots, you must live in an Islamic country.
Obewon July 2nd, 2014 at 22:26
The US is the only top 40 OECD nation without Universal HC: Germany “Co-payments: 10 euros ($15) every three months; some patients, like pregnant women, are exempt.” The EU’s top Socialist economy with a much higher standard of living doesn’t deny any women HC, they embrace it. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/
Carla Akins July 1st, 2014 at 21:01
Those are their top figures for part and full time employees, not starting or even average.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:04
I’m sorry – I just don’t see how it is the business of an employer what physician prescribed medication an employee takes.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 18:20
The Green family doesn’t force their employees to be practicing Christians. They just operate their business the same way the live their lives; serving God. They’re closed on Sunday so their employees have a day of rest.
If someone is forced to work somewhere in order to pay food, rent, etc. then that is a decision they have to make based on the work rules by the company that hires them. An employee can’t expect a company to change their policies because they don’t like certain parts of the employee policy manual. Can you name one company that does that?
This whole thing is nothing but a false accusation by a bunch of feminist activists and the liberals are jumping on board to support it only because it may help them get votes; nothing more.
Roctuna July 1st, 2014 at 20:41
Do they serve god by buying products produced by 21st century forced labor? I think not, but hey, profit’s involved so serving god comes second, or third.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 09:36
I guess that pertains to just about every company in America today. It is all about the global economy.
You say “profits” like it is a bad thing. Show me a company that provides stable employment without making a profit. I think you’re confusing it with the governments business model of tax and spend.
Roctuna July 2nd, 2014 at 14:30
Profit is a fine thing. When I ran my own sole proprietorship it was particularly important to me. I have no problem being a reasonably regulated capitalist. That being said, I didn’t make my money on the backs of forced labor, abused children in sweat shops, and underpaid employees that need welfare to make ends meet. Furthermore I didn’t proclaim to the nation what a fine upstanding religious role model I was while hypocritically enriching my “religious” family. And BTW Bob, there are thousands of legitimate nonprofit corporations in this country that provide stable employment and benefits. Here’s the top 100
http://topnonprofits.com/lists/best-nonprofits-on-the-web/
I’m going to start calling you Dodger-Bob, you rarely, if ever, address the comments of people who debate with you. You much prefer to throw out distractions and the mandatory anti-govm’t or anti-Obama diatribe. You really need to elevate your posting-game.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 19:31
Dodger? You have me confused with Obewon.
Are you accusing Hobby Lobby of forced labor, or abused children working in sweatshops?
Roctuna July 2nd, 2014 at 21:26
You know exactly what I’m accusing HL of, don’t be deliberately obtuse. Also don’t take my word for it. You might think about these three perspectives on the story
http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2014/06/17/russell-moore-hobby-lobby-china/
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/leslie-marshall/2014/03/26/hobby-lobbys-china-hypocrisy
http://www.christianpost.com/news/christians-question-hobby-lobbys-defense-biblical-stance-against-obamacare-lawsuit-87935/
Bob Waas July 3rd, 2014 at 00:04
Most companies in the USA import products from China, so I’m not sure what your issue is with Hobby Lobby doing the same.
Are you saying Hobby Lobby knowingly purchases products from companies who engage in the practice of forced labor and abused children?
It is ironic that the long list of companies who have operations in China does not include Hobby Lobby.
Roctuna July 3rd, 2014 at 07:48
My last response. First: I did not claim HL had operations in China. Good googling, but not pertinent. Second: purchasing products made by forced labor in China is a very unfortunate aspect of the globalized economy. Many companies and consumers take advantage of it. If you’ve looked at this long thread and all the content and don’t realize that people have a huge problem with HL’s hypocrisy, than I can’t make it any clearer. Can you possibly be that dense?
Bob Waas July 3rd, 2014 at 12:22
I apologize if my denseness offends you. I will try to explain why I find your assertion absurd; and factually incorrect.
The articles you posted lack an understanding of the regulatory environment in which 401(k) plan sponsors operate. The disconnect is how the US retirement systems operates.
1. It is individual employees, not the owners of Hobby Lobby, who make the portfolio allocation decisions. The Hobby Lobby retirement plan is a 401(k), which the IRS defines as “a defined contribution plan where an employee can make contributions from his or her paycheck either before or after-tax, depending on the options offered in the plan. The contributions go into a 401(k) account, with the employee often choosing the investments based on options provided under the plan.” (Emphasis added). In other words, it is the workers who participate in the plan – not Hobby Lobby owners or managers – that make investment allocations.
2. The 401(k) plan assets are held in broadly diversified mutual funds, not in direct holdings of the companies that make contraceptive devices. Through rather artful wording, some commentators have left the impression that the owners or managers of Hobby Lobby have actively invested millions in the companies at issue. In fact, Hobby Lobby – presumably working with independent investment plan consultants like most large companies do – chose a set of mutual funds that invest in hundreds of companies. The funds selections should be based on risks, returns and expenses and other investment-related factors, as any plan sponsor is requiredto do under federal law.
3. Those who choose the investment options can be held personallyliable for ensuring that the investment options on the 401(k) menu are selected in the exclusive best interest of the participant. Although the owners of Hobby Lobby do have the ultimate responsibility to select investment options for their plan, they must select options based solely on a set of criteria that are related to the retirement outcomes of the participants. They may not sacrifice returns or take on more risk, for example, just to pursue their personal religious preferences.
Hobby Lobby (Photo credit: m01229)
4. Although plan sponsors are permitted to include some investment options that “negatively screen” companies with certain characteristics, it would be nearly impossible to construct an entire plan menu in this way. Long before the debate over Hobby Lobby took center stage, a range of companies have offered “socially responsible investment” funds that drop from their portfolio stocks in companies that engage in certain activities or fail to meet certain environmental or labor standards. The Department of Labor, which is charged with policing compliance with fiduciary obligations of plan sponsors, ruled that: “The plan’s fiduciaries may not simply consider investments solely in green companies. They must consider all investments that meet the plan’s prudent financial criteria.”
Attorney Fred Reish, a national recognized expert on fiduciary law, has noted that, in practice, a plan can restrict investment choices based on social screens, but only after an investment has first met the criteria that “an investment alternative is prudent for participant direction based on an analysis of only the investment considerations.”
Richard Wilberg, Vice President of Benefit Planning Consultants, notes that “in theory, one might be able to construct a limited investment menu that meets social goals and does not violate fiduciary standards, but I think it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to ever do it in practice.” Because adding additional filters to the investment menu could negatively affect returns, Wilberg says that “doing so could be a recipe for disaster.”
Envision 401(k) Advisors suggests on their website that “best practice” for firms that want to screen investments based on social or other factors is to offer a non-restricted choice in each asset class for which the plan is offering a restricted choice.
In short, even if Hobby Lobby were to offer employees the option to invest in mutual funds that did not include contraceptive companies, it seems nearly impossible for them to avoid offering at least some funds that include them.
5. Hobby Lobby could not tell employees to invest in “contraception-free” mutual funds even if they were offered. Although companies are permitted to provide general financial education to employees, they cannot advise participants how to specifically allocate their portfolio. Indeed, were a plan fiduciary – such as a company owner or a human resource officer – to give such advice to an employee, he or she could be held personally liable for any investment losses resulting from such advice.
Regardless of your personal views about the outcome of this week’s SCOTUS case, we should all at least acknowledge that the Hobby Lobby’s 401(k) plan does not reflect hypocrisy so much as it reflects the company’s efforts to comply with U.S. pension law.
Indeed, the more intriguing question is why Hobby Lobby’s owners did not also choose to challenge U.S. pension fiduciary standards on the basis of religious freedom. Or maybe such challenges are yet to come?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreybrown/2014/07/02/is-hobby-lobby-hypocritical-or-just-complying-with-u-s-pension-law/
Roctuna July 3rd, 2014 at 17:02
Sigh. If you give us the link you really don’t have to cut-n-paste the article too. At least you’re close to on-topic this time. What you posted is true except for the last part. Employees or HL could not negatively screen for contraceptives but could screen for pharmaceuticals. Just as HL could screen for suppliers who don’t use near-slaves. That’s the hypocrisy we’ve all be writing about. Geez-luise Bob, don’t you get it?, BTW apology accepted.
Bob Waas July 3rd, 2014 at 19:06
I have to post the whole article for some on this site. Even the facts presented by an expert in pension plans is not enough to convince some that the two issues are mutually exclusive.
You said the last part. Is it this part: “Regardless of your personal views about the outcome of this week’s SCOTUS case, we should all at least acknowledge that the Hobby Lobby’s 401(k) plan does not reflect hypocrisy so much as it reflects the company’s efforts to comply with U.S. pension law.”
Roctuna July 3rd, 2014 at 19:17
A wise man once observed that we have the sum knowledge of mankind at our disposal on the internet yet we use it for kitten videos and arguing with strangers. What strange compulsions we humans have and I’m as compulsive as any.
I was referring to Jeffrey Brown’s Point 4 about screening mutual funds. This is it. The end. Finito. No more.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 11:04
How would you feel about this ruling if the Green’s were Muslim?
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 16:59
You mean like forcing Muslims to serve pork sandwiches in their cafeterias because their employees were too cheap to buy their pork themselves. I would support the Muslims religious rights.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 17:13
What you describe is a requirement of their job, not part of their compensation package that doesn’t allow a women & her Dr decide which method of BC is best for her. Yeah, yeah, I realize she could pay $1000 for the IUD herself but at that point her employer supplied insurance has failed her.
That said, no I don’t think Muslims should be forced to handle pork but I don’t understand the example you provided, could you clarify?
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 19:21
What is a requirement of their job? The ruling has nothing to do with the employees and their doctors. I’m sure from the list of BC’s provided by the Hobby Lobby the doctor could choose one for most patients.
My wife needs a procedure, but our insurance won’t pay for it because they say there are alternative treatments. We now have the option of paying for it ourselves, or getting a different policy. No one owes us anything.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:02
They are closed on Sunday but they apparently never EVER EVER go to any type of religious ceremony?
Hmmm .. smells funny doesn’t it there old Bob?
This is not company policy. This is not offering insurance that they have continually offered consistently in the past. So all those people will no longer have the insurance they have had for years .. to satisfy the religious enlightment of the Green family?
How dumb.
Em Bob – is that you implying those of us who actually have and enjoy sex are SLUTS?
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 17:05
How do you know whether or not the Greens go to church.
They are still offering the same insurance with the same contraceptive benefits as they had before. They only took exception to those items written into the ACA law by Kathleen Sebelius which were not part of the law passed by Congress.
Why do you keep bringing up the issue of sluts? Nowhere did I ever allude to that term for any of the women who are making a big deal out of nothing. You on the other hand seem to be fixated on it.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:59
Yes they have a right to practice (the operative word being practice) their religion (which they apparently do not do and have never done until now).
I honestly believe the Greens are the biggest bunch of hypocrites I’ve ever heard of. They buy all their garbage from a country that FORCES abortion onto women (is that next in the good old Califate of America?) and sells their chap crap to stupid people in this “country”….and people buy their junk.
OrdinaryBloke July 1st, 2014 at 17:20
Wow, lies about “abortion drugs” and slavery apologetics all rolled in one nauseating post.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 23:15
If you paid attention, you would have seen that my post was an accurate response to a previous post.
OrdinaryBloke July 2nd, 2014 at 10:44
Only if by accurate you mean full of lies.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:57
I don’t know you but I think I love you.
OrdinaryBloke July 2nd, 2014 at 19:53
Aww shucks ma’am.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 16:56
Refute my statement with facts.
OrdinaryBloke July 2nd, 2014 at 19:50
Fact, you’re lying about “abortion pills.”
Done. GTFO.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 22:46
I’m not the one who designated which drugs were classified as abortion pills, the SCOTUS apparently knows which ones were in question; so I guess your disagreement is with them.
God bless you.
OrdinaryBloke July 2nd, 2014 at 22:49
Ah that sciency stuff too hard? Well, try out your reading skills, and read that ruling again. The SCOTUS did not rule that they were “abortion pills.”
Stop embarrassing yourself.
Roctuna July 1st, 2014 at 20:39
Hate to tell you this Bob, but that’s not a bible ref, that’s a lame-a$$ rationalization of slavery and indentured servitude in the bible and the ancient world. Not gonna fly. As an Ordinary Bloke pointed out, you don’t understand what an abortion is either, but that’s never stopped you from pontificating about it.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 23:21
Read the bible in the proper context.
Oh, I know what abortion is, legalized murder.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:57
Ahhhhh – context.
Numbers 5: 11-31 – God gave DIRECTIONS on how to force a woman to have an abortion .. evidently your God thought it important to provide a “how to” guide.
Roctuna July 2nd, 2014 at 14:33
Really? I missed that one. I wonder why we never hear ’em quoting that passage.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 18:15
God didn’t give a woman directions on how to have an abortion.
God was going to punish a woman for being unfaithful to her husband; not advocating abortion at will. Disobedience has consequences!
Roctuna July 2nd, 2014 at 14:37
I went to that link you shared. By “proper context” I guess you mean a fundamentalist-approved software package that tells you what to think eh? I feel sorry for you Dodger-Bob.
Carla Akins July 1st, 2014 at 20:59
Not abortion drugs.Scientifically, medically proven. They simply interfere with ovulation. The Green’s can believe whatever they choose about these medication but that does not make it fact. It was even addressed in the ruling.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 23:10
Are you saying the SCOTUS got it wrong?
Did their ruling make it illegal for someone to get the drugs in question? No, so there are no victims.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 05:05
Yes, Bob there are a lot of victims in this ruling, half of the population. When the religious rights of a corporation trump the rights of women – we are all victim.
The Sandra Fluke types? You mean sluts, right? Women that enjoy sex, are not entitled to the same rights as those god-fearing Greens? A woman has the right to make her healthcare decisions based on her doctors advice.
At the risk of repeating myself, this is not about having sex. Women that don’t or can’t manage their pregnancies live shorter lives. Too many pregnancies, or too close together shorten women’s lives and contribute to infant mortality. Hormonal therapy is used to manage, treat and prevent diabetes, heart disease and cancer.
Birth control is medication, it cannot be interchanged with other options or even brand. Doctors prescribe this specific method based on the individuals health needs, drug interaction and efficacy and what works for this specific woman.
The employer has no place in these decisions. These are to be made between the woman and her doctor. No one is preventing the Green’s from practicing their religion and they are not being forced to pay – they are providing insurance as part of the employees compensation, (and getting a nice tax break while keeping their corporate shield) they don’t get a say in how that compensation is spent.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 09:07
Corporations are entitled to decide what policies they will have. The SCOTUS agreed with that decision.
It’s not about birth control medication, those medications are provided!
The ruling does not harm half the population! First of all, the ruling only applies to employees of Hobby Lobby, and then only to the female employees. Second, it only pertains to 4 out of 20 contraceptives the company already pays for and those drugs are available for purchase on their own; and if they can’t afford it, they can get them free through a government funded program.
That is why I stated there are no victims. Religious freedom is why our fore fathers fled England and came to America, and why they felt it necessary to include specific language regarding peoples protection to freely practice a religion of their choice.
Hobby Lobby does not force their employees to practice any particular religion and they certainly don’t force anyone to work at their stores.
When I refer to Pelosi, Clinton, and Fluke I am speaking about them promoting a false narrative about women’s rights being violated. I find this especially troubling with Hillary since it was her husband who signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
As for name calling to those whom which I disagree, I find it has no place in a civilized society to do so; I leave that up tp the likes of Bill Maher and others like him.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 11:02
Okay Bob, you do know the ruling applies to all BC, and all closely held corporations. More than 50% of all US corps meet this standard. Changing birth control is not like changing your shoes, it’s medication prescribed by a doctor for a reason. This is how women manage their health care. Its preventative care, improving health and reducing costs. As for the name calling, you brought up Fluke and made it clear how you felt.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:55
50% of public corps and 51% of private corporations. The estimate is that, if the companies decide to follow this, it will impact over 62 MILLION people.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 14:47
And this: The Supreme Court on Tuesday confirmed that its decision a day earlier extending religious rights to closely held corporations applies broadly to the contraceptive coverage requirement in the new health care law, not just the handful of methods the justices considered in their ruling. http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2014/07/hobby_lobby_supreme_court_ruli.html
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 17:21
The ruling only applies to small companies with religious objections to provide controversial birth control devices for employees. It does not interfere with a patient/doctor decisions.
You’re listening to misinformation propagated by those who are deliberately choosing to deliver a false narrative for their own political purposes. You may want to reconsider your news source.
While many are accusing Hobby Lobby of restricting women’s rights to contraception, consider that the company has covered and plans to continue covering 16 of the Food and Drug Administration’s 20 approved forms of contraception.
National Review has provided a list of all of the drugs and procedures that Hobby Lobby employees can still take advantage of free of charge — including oral birth control:
Male condoms
Female condoms
Diaphragms with spermicide
Sponges with spermicide
Cervical caps with spermicide
Spermicide alone
Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)
Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)
Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
Contraceptive patches
Contraceptive rings
Progestin injections
Implantable rods
Vasectomies
Female sterilization surgeries
Female sterilization implants
There were four types of birth control at the center of Hobby Lobby’s contentions, though: Plan B, which is also known as the “morning after pill,” Ella, another emergency contraceptive, Copper Intrauterine Device and IUD with progestin — forms of birth control that some believe can cause or are akin to abortion.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 17:32
I have provided you a supportive link regarding the science on the opposed forms of birth control are in no way abortion causing drugs. They do not eject an implanted fertilized egg or even prevent implementation. Regardless, SCOTUS clarified yesterday that it applies to all contraceptives for those who morally oppose. Hobby Lobby is not a small company, it’s a closely held corporation – for heavens sake the have 500 HL stores alone. More than half of all corporations in the US are closely held. The ruling has no criteria for how long they may have held these beliefs and there are no requirements for a standard of proof.
Regardless, many woman have to use an IUD due to allergies, weight, and other pre-existing conditions. They also cost $100-1500. This is why people have insurance, to cover these costs for managing their health. For someone that makes minimum wage to $15 an hour, this is more than just inconvenient. Abortion is cheaper –
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:52
If you believe what you are saying, you are probably the most singularly idiotic person I have ever seen. Do you know how much it costs to have Mirena implanted? Over $1000. The ruling clearly FORBID “long term” IUD payment. Why? Why would Hobby Lobby be against placement of a device that would prevent pregnancy for 5 years? It is highly cost effective – safe – easy to use.
WHAT government program gives you these free? Or even at cost? Tell us Bob.
Let me guess. You leave “protection” up to us sluts right?
And incidentally, religious freedom includes freedom FROM religion Bob. Especially one that hates women like evidently you do.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 17:55
Many companies put restrictions on certain drugs or procedures that have less expensive alternative solutions. A company is not required to provide for your every need. And, you’re not forced to work for a company whose benefit package is not to your liking.
I worked for some large corporations who were generous with their benefits, but they didn’t provide everything. We are not “entitled” to receive everything we want or think we need for free. The company provides employment so we can earn a paycheck to pay for those things that are not part of the benefit package.
You can get birth control pills for free if you can’t afford them from Planned Parenthood for one. You can purchase birth control pills for about $10.00 a month; hardly a budget buster.
You call the IUD safe? I would not take any medicine which lists possible side affects such as these:
1. severe cramps or pelvic pain;
2. extreme dizziness, feeling like you might pass out;
3. heavy or ongoing vaginal bleeding, vaginal sores, vaginal discharge that is watery, foul-smelling discharge, or
otherwise unusual;
4. severe pain in your side or lower stomach;
5. pale skin, weakness, easy bruising or bleeding; fever, chills, 6. or other signs of infection;
7. pain during sexual intercourse;
8. sudden numbness or weakness, especially on one side of the body;
9. sudden or severe headache, confusion, problems with vision, sensitivity to light;
10. jaundice (yellowing of the skin or eyes); or signs of an
allergic reaction: hives; difficulty breathing; swelling of your face, lips, tongue, or throat.
11. irregular menstrual periods, changes in bleeding patterns or flow;
12. breakthrough bleeding, or heavier menstrual bleeding
during the first few weeks after device insertion;
back pain;
13. headache, nervousness, mild dizziness;
14. nausea, vomiting, bloating;
15. breast tenderness or pain;
16. weight gain, acne, changes in hair growth;
17. mood changes, loss of interest in sex;
18. mild itching, skin rash; or puffiness in your face, hands,
ankles, or feet.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted: “And incidentally, religious freedom includes freedom FROM religion Bob. Especially one that hates women like evidently you do.”
Who is forcing you to be religious? You already have freedom from religion. The 1st Amendment protects those who choose to practice their religion from interference by the government; not the other way around.
What evidence do you have to accuse me of hating women?
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:50
Yes Bob – lots of victims – you just choose to not see them. For example, did you know that SCROTUS just proved that if they don’t like YOU, they can/will legislate some stupid law against you? That judges on the Court can be bought by corporations to do their bidding?
This is an anti-woman vote. Just the first one.
And of course SCROTUS got it wrong. They do the bidding of their masters and the almighty dollar.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 18:10
That is very funny. The SCOTUS only gets it right when they rule according to your beliefs. Otherwise they operate on bribes and hate towards woman. I say we get rid of the SCOTUS and we let everyone do as they please.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 18:16
I disagree, I was not happy about striking down the clinic barrier but I understand why. The 1st amendment is sacred in my opinion, even if I disagree. Of course something has to happen to keep people from harassing patients from entering a clinic but restricting free speech is and was not the way to do it. Most of us take time to consider the different aspects of these rulings/laws/issues before taking a stance or voicing an opinion. I personally have changed my mind on a number of issues recently after considering the information other readers provided. I don’t like feeling foolish or being embarrassed because I didn’t do my homework.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:48
Actually you are incorrect. Hobby Lobby insists they are abortifacients. They are not. Like most good little GOP idiots, they don’t believe in science.
The “Sandra Flukes” out there? Were you referring to us SLUTS?
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 18:06
You make bold accusations, but fail to provide any evidence to back it up. What science don’t they believe in?
“The Supreme Court’s protections for religious freedom apply to those who object to all of the HHS Mandate, not just to those who object to some of it.” Hobby Lobby did not object to 16 of the 20 mandated contraceptives. The Catholic church objects to all of them based on religious grounds.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 18:11
Here is the amicus brief filed by the American Association of OB & GYN’s. on the science behind these options: http://prh.org/iPaper/hobby-lobby-amicus-curae-brief-responding-to-lawsuits-challenging-contraception-coverage/
M D Reese July 1st, 2014 at 17:32
I’m sure not surprised, at Hobby Lobby or the current SCOTUS. I NEVER expect “christians” like them to actually walk the walk. They just want to make sure that they keep the women who work for them in their place. It’s ridiculous that 5 religious zealots can decide the health care for 13,000 employees. And though they say this is a limited ruling, Justice Ginsburg nailed it. It’s the camel’s nose under the tent. I’d like to see atheists and religious people who do NOT consider hormone therapy to be murder to start suing these employers for infringing on THEIR religious freedom. And of course never mind that women and girls are prescribed hormones for a lot of issues besides preventing unwanted pregnancies and that abortion is legal.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:46
It isn’t a limited ruling .. it was SUGGESTED that other rabid ideas would not fall under the same ruling, and SCROTUS knows full well that is what they are after.
This was religious overreach. By a group of bought and paid for angry old white guys. I wonder how much money went under the table to Roberts for this?
M D Reese July 2nd, 2014 at 16:18
Roberts does seem to be smirking wider these days.
Debby's July 1st, 2014 at 18:53
Republicans….it is time to stop your evil ways baby! This is about nothing more than control and forcing religious beliefs on others regardless of their own actions of hypocrisy. I would be willing to bet the owners of Hobby Lobby, these evil right wing justices, and others supporting this ruling and crying religious beliefs of protecting the unborn also support corporations and policies that poison our water, land, air and food resulting in illness of many children and their future survival of life on this planet. Do they also support destroying education and welfare assistance while claiming this moral high ground?
Roctuna July 1st, 2014 at 14:48
Ownership and abuse of slaves, women and other property of kings and men is a common thread in the bible so the hypocrisy of HL should be of no surprise to anyone.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 15:13
No one is forced to work for Hobby Lobby. Companies have always had written policies that governed those who worked there. You make your decision to join a firm based on the polices and/or benefits they offer.
Just how many employees do you think are affected by this ruling? My guess would be few to none since the only issue was abortion drugs, not contraceptives. If that is such a big deal to the “Sandra Flukes” out there, they can buy Plan B One-Step and Next Choice which are available over the counter at many pharmacies for women over 17. It may cost anywhere from $10 to $50. – See more at: http://asktheexperts.plannedparenthood.org/?p=294#sthash.eAFv00AC.dpuf
As for the bible reference,
“What many fail to understand is that slavery in biblical times was very different from the slavery that was practiced in the past few centuries in many parts of the world. The slavery in the Bible was not based exclusively on race. People were not enslaved because of their nationality or the color of their skin. In Bible times, slavery was based more on economics; it was a matter of social status. People sold themselves as slaves when they could not pay their debts or provide for their families. In New Testament times, sometimes doctors, lawyers, and even politicians were slaves of someone else. Some people actually chose to be slaves so as to have all their needs provided for by their masters.”
Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html#ixzz36FGe18Ns
Judgeforyourself37 July 1st, 2014 at 16:31
You have every right to express your views. HL has every right to practice their religion as they see fit, every one of the Green family has the right to practice the religion of their choice. What they do not have, however, is the right to make everyone who works for them practice the religion or adhere to the tenets of the Green Family’s religion or religious tenets.
No, no one “has” to work for HL, but in areas where that company is the only one hiring, some people may be forced to work there to try to pay for food, rent, clothing, etc. Furthermore, what makes this scenario more unsettling is that the low wages they pay force many of their employees use your tax dollars and my tax dollars so that they can access SNAP, or possibly Section 8 Housing.
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 17:28
Hobby lobby pays $14 per hour to full time and $9.50 to part time employees. Way better than most stores, Hobby Lobby employees still have access to 14-16 of the 20 FDA approved pregnancy preventative medications.
Obewon July 1st, 2014 at 19:22
Hobby Lobby’s “rock-bottom wages” pay “$8.68/hr for stockman” and “$9.40/hr for cashiers” per Glass Door meaning their workers rely on public Medicaid & SNAP food stamps, unless they become the few managers paid above $15/Hr except for the:
-“Custom Frame Shop Manager – Hourly $13.50/hr, 5 Hobby Lobby Salary openings”-Apply now NC89!
Your Govt subsidized scam artist Green Family are despicable hypocrites investing more than $73 million in funds with stakes in companies producing intrauterine devices (IUDs) and emergency contraceptive pills via their firms 401 K’s!
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 19:57
Seeing how Glass Door doesn’t post how recent those salaries are, I’m gonna guess that one of those 15 stockman salaries listed at $6 was posted some time ago…
Are they paying costco hourly wages? No, but they are almost paying the magical $15 per hour to full time employees that fast food workers are asking for.
Obewon July 1st, 2014 at 20:39
“how recent”-? HL managers await your call ASAP to fill those spots. Their slave shops always need new low paid workers, replacing their DOA KIA bodycount. You’l be coached on how to milk the system in servitude to your oligarchs requiring government subsidies for their benefit at the expense of your wellbeing.
“$15 per hour”-Isn’t magic. That’s Seattle Tacoma’s current Minimum Wage that a single person raising 1 child can live on without ‘Requiring Govt-Taxpayer Subsidies of their Employers Wages.’
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 20:55
I’ll break it down a little more then, you cited the Glass Doors 15 user entries for stockman salary. The range of those 15 salaries was $6 to $11, how do we know that those sub $9.50 wages aren’t from 2007 instead of post-2013 when HL’s new minimums went into effect?
And I happily employed and have no desire to learn about picture framing, thanks though
Obewon July 1st, 2014 at 21:09
You should read HL’s jobs links, quit your job(s) & support your oligarchs until your deathbed can no longer be wheeled in. Note: “Updated Jun 23, 2014 (HL) Salaries in USD Avg. Salary $20k Cashier – Hourly 40 Hobby Lobby Salaries $9.40/hr $8 to $14”
“See What Hobby Lobby Employees Are Saying. Employees are “Dissatisfied” Lol these slaves want to revolt! http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Employee-Review-Hobby-Lobby-RVW4483594.htm “Cons. Ordering done with pencil and paper.” “Outdated POS”
-Bronze & stone age skills required may include an abacus:) Papyrus & stone chisels.
See your entertainers lied to you again about H-L slum lords: “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor’-10 commandments, but that’s pre-Fox News & Limbaugh.
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 23:57
“Updated Jun 23, 2014 (HL) Salaries in USD Avg. Salary $20k Cashier – Hourly 40 Hobby Lobby Salaries $9.40/hr $8 to $14” Only means the most recent user submitted salary was on Jun 23rd.
I searched Glassdoor for this Custom Framing Shop Manager job opening you speak so lowly of, but they’re not offering that job right now. Now I can see where some users reviewed their time as the Framing Manager and posted salaries and
the pros and cons of that position. I’d also guess that if HL was
such a terrible and medieval place to work they would have gone out of business by now.
I do see an offer for a cashiers job that starts out at $15 an hour but from what you say it must be a lie.
http://www.glassdoor.com/job-listing/cashiers-fabric-needlework-floral-design-crafts-JV_IC1143236_KO0,47_IE7537.htm?jl=1097261059&paoIdKey=MA==
And its not just Fox reporting the pay bump at HL
http://www.demos.org/blog/hobby-lobby-boosts-minimum-hourly-wage-14
Obewon July 2nd, 2014 at 00:45
All Hobby Lobby $8 to $9 jobs, rate ranges to $13.50 for Manager I quoted & linked were active on 7/1/14. Search later for your dream jobs. “Glassdoor is currently down for planned maintenance”
TeapartyCrasher July 1st, 2014 at 20:25
Amazing how these “closely held corporations” aren’t quite so philanthropic as they depict themselves.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 09:42
You keep promoting your socialist propaganda all you want. Those who work hard and developed good work skills get paid more. That’s how it works in a capitalist country. I bet you wouldn’t hire someone with no experience and pay them $15.00 an hour to work at your make believe company, which you often boast about.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:05
This is not a capitalist country – hasn’t been for years. Get over it. We are being taken over by religious zealots. Unfortunately there isn’t another place to sail to, to get away from them.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 19:43
What country are you living in? You have some evidence to prove the US is not a capitalist country? Last I heard, we were number 2 behind Germany.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 19:47
I’m not sure what country you live in, but the USA is the number two capitalist country behind Germany.
If you’re being taken over by religious zealots, you must live in an Islamic country.
Obewon July 2nd, 2014 at 22:26
The US is the only top 40 OECD nation without Universal HC: Germany “Co-payments: 10 euros ($15) every three months; some patients, like pregnant women, are exempt.” Germany’s EU top Socialist economy has a much higher standard of living & doesn’t deny any women HC. And the UK provides free universal “Socialist” HC. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/countries/
All EU nations provide free HC for those who can’t afford it. All birth control is covered by Universal HC-free from the interference of fundamentalist snake handlers, talking snake believers & scientific illiterates trying to shove their impossible 6,000 year old Earth, 4004 B.C.E. Universal age & Bronze-Age book beliefs up everyone else’s daughters dresses.
Carla Akins July 1st, 2014 at 21:01
Those are their top figures for part and full time employees, not starting or even average.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:04
I’m sorry – I just don’t see how it is the business of an employer what physician prescribed medication an employee takes.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 18:20
The Green family doesn’t force their employees to be practicing Christians. They just operate their business the same way the live their lives; serving God. They’re closed on Sunday so their employees have a day of rest.
If someone is forced to work somewhere in order to pay food, rent, etc. then that is a decision they have to make based on the work rules by the company that hires them. An employee can’t expect a company to change their policies because they don’t like certain parts of the employee policy manual. Can you name one company that does that?
This whole thing is nothing but a false accusation by a bunch of feminist activists and the liberals are jumping on board to support it only because it may help them get votes; nothing more.
Roctuna July 1st, 2014 at 20:41
Do they serve god by buying products produced by 21st century forced labor? I think not, but hey, profit’s involved so serving god comes second, or third.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 09:36
I guess that pertains to just about every company in America today. It is all about the global economy.
You say “profits” like it is a bad thing. Show me a company that provides stable employment without making a profit. I think you’re confusing it with the governments business model of tax and spend.
Roctuna July 2nd, 2014 at 14:30
Profit is a fine thing. When I ran my own sole proprietorship it was particularly important to me. I have no problem being a reasonably regulated capitalist. That being said, I didn’t make my money on the backs of forced labor, abused children in sweat shops, and underpaid employees that need welfare to make ends meet. Furthermore I didn’t proclaim to the nation what a fine upstanding religious role model I was while hypocritically enriching my “religious” family. And BTW Bob, there are thousands of legitimate nonprofit corporations in this country that provide stable employment and benefits. Here’s the top 100
http://topnonprofits.com/lists/best-nonprofits-on-the-web/
I’m going to start calling you Dodger-Bob, you rarely, if ever, address the comments of people who debate with you. You much prefer to throw out distractions and the mandatory anti-govm’t or anti-Obama diatribe. You really need to elevate your posting-game.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 19:31
Dodger? You have me confused with Obewon.
Are you accusing Hobby Lobby of forced labor, or abused children working in sweatshops?
Roctuna July 2nd, 2014 at 21:26
You know exactly what I’m accusing HL of, don’t be deliberately obtuse. Also don’t take my word for it. You might think about these three perspectives on the story
http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2014/06/17/russell-moore-hobby-lobby-china/
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/leslie-marshall/2014/03/26/hobby-lobbys-china-hypocrisy
http://www.christianpost.com/news/christians-question-hobby-lobbys-defense-biblical-stance-against-obamacare-lawsuit-87935/
Bob Waas July 3rd, 2014 at 00:04
Most companies in the USA import products from China, so I’m not sure what your issue is with Hobby Lobby doing the same.
Are you saying Hobby Lobby knowingly purchases products from companies who engage in the practice of forced labor and abused children?
It is ironic that the long list of companies who have operations in China does not include Hobby Lobby.
Roctuna July 3rd, 2014 at 07:48
My last response. First: I did not claim HL had operations in China. Good googling, but not pertinent. Second: purchasing products made by forced labor in China is a very unfortunate aspect of the globalized economy. Many companies and consumers take advantage of it. If you’ve looked at this long thread and all the content and don’t realize that people have a huge problem with HL’s hypocrisy, than I can’t make it any clearer. Can you possibly be that dense?
Bob Waas July 3rd, 2014 at 12:22
I apologize if my denseness offends you. I will try to explain why I find your assertion absurd; and factually incorrect.
The articles you posted lack an understanding of the regulatory environment in which 401(k) plan sponsors operate. The disconnect is how the US retirement systems operates.
1. It is individual employees, not the owners of Hobby Lobby, who make the portfolio allocation decisions. The Hobby Lobby retirement plan is a 401(k), which the IRS defines as “a defined contribution plan where an employee can make contributions from his or her paycheck either before or after-tax, depending on the options offered in the plan. The contributions go into a 401(k) account, with the employee often choosing the investments based on options provided under the plan.” (Emphasis added). In other words, it is the workers who participate in the plan – not Hobby Lobby owners or managers – that make investment allocations.
2. The 401(k) plan assets are held in broadly diversified mutual funds, not in direct holdings of the companies that make contraceptive devices. Through rather artful wording, some commentators have left the impression that the owners or managers of Hobby Lobby have actively invested millions in the companies at issue. In fact, Hobby Lobby – presumably working with independent investment plan consultants like most large companies do – chose a set of mutual funds that invest in hundreds of companies. The funds selections should be based on risks, returns and expenses and other investment-related factors, as any plan sponsor is requiredto do under federal law.
3. Those who choose the investment options can be held personallyliable for ensuring that the investment options on the 401(k) menu are selected in the exclusive best interest of the participant. Although the owners of Hobby Lobby do have the ultimate responsibility to select investment options for their plan, they must select options based solely on a set of criteria that are related to the retirement outcomes of the participants. They may not sacrifice returns or take on more risk, for example, just to pursue their personal religious preferences.
Hobby Lobby (Photo credit: m01229)
4. Although plan sponsors are permitted to include some investment options that “negatively screen” companies with certain characteristics, it would be nearly impossible to construct an entire plan menu in this way. Long before the debate over Hobby Lobby took center stage, a range of companies have offered “socially responsible investment” funds that drop from their portfolio stocks in companies that engage in certain activities or fail to meet certain environmental or labor standards. The Department of Labor, which is charged with policing compliance with fiduciary obligations of plan sponsors, ruled that: “The plan’s fiduciaries may not simply consider investments solely in green companies. They must consider all investments that meet the plan’s prudent financial criteria.”
Attorney Fred Reish, a national recognized expert on fiduciary law, has noted that, in practice, a plan can restrict investment choices based on social screens, but only after an investment has first met the criteria that “an investment alternative is prudent for participant direction based on an analysis of only the investment considerations.”
Richard Wilberg, Vice President of Benefit Planning Consultants, notes that “in theory, one might be able to construct a limited investment menu that meets social goals and does not violate fiduciary standards, but I think it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to ever do it in practice.” Because adding additional filters to the investment menu could negatively affect returns, Wilberg says that “doing so could be a recipe for disaster.”
Envision 401(k) Advisors suggests on their website that “best practice” for firms that want to screen investments based on social or other factors is to offer a non-restricted choice in each asset class for which the plan is offering a restricted choice.
In short, even if Hobby Lobby were to offer employees the option to invest in mutual funds that did not include contraceptive companies, it seems nearly impossible for them to avoid offering at least some funds that include them.
5. Hobby Lobby could not tell employees to invest in “contraception-free” mutual funds even if they were offered. Although companies are permitted to provide general financial education to employees, they cannot advise participants how to specifically allocate their portfolio. Indeed, were a plan fiduciary – such as a company owner or a human resource officer – to give such advice to an employee, he or she could be held personally liable for any investment losses resulting from such advice.
Regardless of your personal views about the outcome of this week’s SCOTUS case, we should all at least acknowledge that the Hobby Lobby’s 401(k) plan does not reflect hypocrisy so much as it reflects the company’s efforts to comply with U.S. pension law.
Indeed, the more intriguing question is why Hobby Lobby’s owners did not also choose to challenge U.S. pension fiduciary standards on the basis of religious freedom. Or maybe such challenges are yet to come?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreybrown/2014/07/02/is-hobby-lobby-hypocritical-or-just-complying-with-u-s-pension-law/
Roctuna July 3rd, 2014 at 17:02
Sigh. If you give us the link you really don’t have to cut-n-paste the article too. At least you’re close to on-topic this time. What you posted is true except for the last part. Employees or HL could not negatively screen for contraceptives but could screen for pharmaceuticals. Just as HL could screen for suppliers who don’t use near-slaves. That’s the hypocrisy we’ve all be writing about. Geez-luise Bob, don’t you get it?, BTW apology accepted.
Bob Waas July 3rd, 2014 at 19:06
I have to post the whole article for some on this site. Even the facts presented by an expert in pension plans is not enough to convince some that the two issues are mutually exclusive.
You said the last part. Is it this part: “Regardless of your personal views about the outcome of this week’s SCOTUS case, we should all at least acknowledge that the Hobby Lobby’s 401(k) plan does not reflect hypocrisy so much as it reflects the company’s efforts to comply with U.S. pension law.”
Roctuna July 3rd, 2014 at 19:17
A wise man once observed that we have the sum knowledge of mankind at our disposal on the internet yet we use it for kitten videos and arguing with strangers. What strange compulsions we humans have and I’m as compulsive as any.
I was referring to Jeffrey Brown’s Point 4 about screening mutual funds. This is it. The end. Finito. No more.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 11:04
How would you feel about this ruling if the Green’s were Muslim?
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 16:59
You mean like forcing Muslims to serve pork sandwiches in their cafeterias because their employees were too cheap to buy their pork themselves. I would support the Muslims religious rights.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 17:13
What you describe is a requirement of their job, not part of their compensation package that doesn’t allow a women & her Dr decide which method of BC is best for her. Yeah, yeah, I realize she could pay $1000 for the IUD herself but at that point her employer supplied insurance has failed her.
That said, no I don’t think Muslims should be forced to handle pork but I don’t understand the example you provided, could you clarify?
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 19:21
What is a requirement of their job? The ruling has nothing to do with the employees and their doctors. I’m sure from the list of BC’s provided by the Hobby Lobby the doctor could choose one for most patients.
My wife needs a procedure, but our insurance won’t pay for it because they say there are alternative treatments. We now have the option of paying for it ourselves, or getting a different policy. No one owes us anything.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:02
They are closed on Sunday but they apparently never EVER EVER go to any type of religious ceremony?
Hmmm .. smells funny doesn’t it there old Bob?
This is not company policy. This is not offering insurance that they have continually offered consistently in the past. So all those people will no longer have the insurance they have had for years .. to satisfy the religious enlightment of the Green family?
How dumb.
Em Bob – is that you implying those of us who actually have and enjoy sex are SLUTS?
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 17:05
How do you know whether or not the Greens go to church.
They are still offering the same insurance with the same contraceptive benefits as they had before. They only took exception to those items written into the ACA law by Kathleen Sebelius which were not part of the law passed by Congress.
Why do you keep bringing up the issue of sluts? Nowhere did I ever allude to that term for any of the women who are making a big deal out of nothing. You on the other hand seem to be fixated on it.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:59
Yes they have a right to practice (the operative word being practice) their religion (which they apparently do not do and have never done until now).
I honestly believe the Greens are the biggest bunch of hypocrites I’ve ever heard of. They buy all their garbage from a country that FORCES abortion onto women (is that next in the good old Califate of America?) and sells their chap crap to stupid people in this “country”….and people buy their junk.
OrdinaryBloke July 1st, 2014 at 17:20
Wow, lies about “abortion drugs” and slavery apologetics all rolled in one nauseating post.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 23:15
If you paid attention, you would have seen that my post was an accurate response to a previous post.
OrdinaryBloke July 2nd, 2014 at 10:44
Only if by accurate you mean full of lies.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:57
I don’t know you but I think I love you.
OrdinaryBloke July 2nd, 2014 at 19:53
Aww shucks ma’am.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 16:56
Refute my statement with facts.
OrdinaryBloke July 2nd, 2014 at 19:50
Fact, you’re lying about “abortion pills.”
Done. GTFO.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 22:46
I’m not the one who designated which drugs were classified as abortion pills, the SCOTUS apparently knows which ones were in question; so I guess your disagreement is with them.
God bless you.
OrdinaryBloke July 2nd, 2014 at 22:49
Ah that sciency stuff too hard? Well, try out your reading skills, and read that ruling again. The SCOTUS did not rule that they were “abortion pills.”
Stop embarrassing yourself.
Roctuna July 1st, 2014 at 20:39
Hate to tell you this Bob, but that’s not a bible ref, that’s a lame-a$$ rationalization of slavery and indentured servitude in the bible and the ancient world. Not gonna fly. As an Ordinary Bloke pointed out, you don’t understand what an abortion is either, but that’s never stopped you from pontificating about it.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 23:21
Read the bible in the proper context.
Oh, I know what abortion is, legalized murder.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:57
Ahhhhh – context.
Numbers 5: 11-31 – God gave DIRECTIONS on how to force a woman to have an abortion .. evidently your God thought it important to provide a “how to” guide.
Roctuna July 2nd, 2014 at 14:33
Really? I missed that one. I wonder why we never hear ’em quoting that passage.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 18:15
God didn’t give a woman directions on how to have an abortion.
God was going to punish a woman for being unfaithful to her husband; not advocating abortion at will. Disobedience has consequences!
Roctuna July 2nd, 2014 at 14:37
I went to that link you shared. By “proper context” I guess you mean a fundamentalist-approved software package that tells you what to think eh? I feel sorry for you Dodger-Bob.
Carla Akins July 1st, 2014 at 20:59
Not abortion drugs.Scientifically, medically proven. They simply interfere with ovulation. The Green’s can believe whatever they choose about these medication but that does not make it fact. It was even addressed in the ruling.
Bob Waas July 1st, 2014 at 23:10
Are you saying the SCOTUS got it wrong?
Did their ruling make it illegal for someone to get the drugs in question? No, so there are no victims.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 05:05
Yes, Bob there are a lot of victims in this ruling, half of the population. When the religious rights of a corporation trump the rights of women – we are all victim.
The Sandra Fluke types? You mean sluts, right? Women that enjoy sex, are not entitled to the same rights as those god-fearing Greens? A woman has the right to make her healthcare decisions based on her doctors advice.
At the risk of repeating myself, this is not about having sex. Women that don’t or can’t manage their pregnancies live shorter lives. Too many pregnancies, or too close together shorten women’s lives and contribute to infant mortality. Hormonal therapy is used to manage, treat and prevent diabetes, heart disease and cancer.
Birth control is medication, it cannot be interchanged with other options or even brand. Doctors prescribe this specific method based on the individuals health needs, drug interaction and efficacy and what works for this specific woman.
The employer has no place in these decisions. These are to be made between the woman and her doctor. No one is preventing the Green’s from practicing their religion and they are not being forced to pay – they are providing insurance as part of the employees compensation, (and getting a nice tax break while keeping their corporate shield) they don’t get a say in how that compensation is spent.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 09:07
Corporations are entitled to decide what policies they will have. The SCOTUS agreed with that decision.
It’s not about birth control medication, those medications are provided!
The ruling does not harm half the population! First of all, the ruling only applies to employees of Hobby Lobby, and then only to the female employees. Second, it only pertains to 4 out of 20 contraceptives the company already pays for and those drugs are available for purchase on their own; and if they can’t afford it, they can get them free through a government funded program.
That is why I stated there are no victims. Religious freedom is why our fore fathers fled England and came to America, and why they felt it necessary to include specific language regarding peoples protection to freely practice a religion of their choice.
Hobby Lobby does not force their employees to practice any particular religion and they certainly don’t force anyone to work at their stores.
When I refer to Pelosi, Clinton, and Fluke I am speaking about them promoting a false narrative about women’s rights being violated. I find this especially troubling with Hillary since it was her husband who signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
As for name calling to those whom which I disagree, I find it has no place in a civilized society to do so; I leave that up tp the likes of Bill Maher and others like him.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 11:02
Okay Bob, you do know the ruling applies to all BC, and all closely held corporations. More than 50% of all US corps meet this standard. Changing birth control is not like changing your shoes, it’s medication prescribed by a doctor for a reason. This is how women manage their health care. Its preventative care, improving health and reducing costs. As for the name calling, you brought up Fluke and made it clear how you felt.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:55
50% of public corps and 51% of private corporations. The estimate is that, if the companies decide to follow this, it will impact over 62 MILLION people.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 14:47
And this: The Supreme Court on Tuesday confirmed that its decision a day earlier extending religious rights to closely held corporations applies broadly to the contraceptive coverage requirement in the new health care law, not just the handful of methods the justices considered in their ruling. http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/2014/07/hobby_lobby_supreme_court_ruli.html
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 17:21
The ruling only applies to small companies with religious objections to provide controversial birth control devices for employees. It does not interfere with a patient/doctor decisions.
You’re listening to misinformation propagated by those who are deliberately choosing to deliver a false narrative for their own political purposes. You may want to reconsider your news source.
While many are accusing Hobby Lobby of restricting women’s rights to contraception, consider that the company has covered and plans to continue covering 16 of the Food and Drug Administration’s 20 approved forms of contraception.
National Review has provided a list of all of the drugs and procedures that Hobby Lobby employees can still take advantage of free of charge — including oral birth control:
Male condoms
Female condoms
Diaphragms with spermicide
Sponges with spermicide
Cervical caps with spermicide
Spermicide alone
Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)
Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)
Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
Contraceptive patches
Contraceptive rings
Progestin injections
Implantable rods
Vasectomies
Female sterilization surgeries
Female sterilization implants
There were four types of birth control at the center of Hobby Lobby’s contentions, though: Plan B, which is also known as the “morning after pill,” Ella, another emergency contraceptive, Copper Intrauterine Device and IUD with progestin — forms of birth control that some believe can cause or are akin to abortion.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 17:32
I have provided you a supportive link regarding the science on the opposed forms of birth control are in no way abortion causing drugs. They do not eject an implanted fertilized egg or even prevent implementation. Regardless, SCOTUS clarified yesterday that it applies to all contraceptives for those who morally oppose. Hobby Lobby is not a small company, it’s a closely held corporation – for heavens sake the have 500 HL stores alone. More than half of all corporations in the US are closely held. The ruling has no criteria for how long they may have held these beliefs and there are no requirements for a standard of proof.
Regardless, many woman have to use an IUD due to allergies, weight, and other pre-existing conditions. They also cost $100-1500. This is why people have insurance, to cover these costs for managing their health. For someone that makes minimum wage to $15 an hour, this is more than just inconvenient. Abortion is cheaper –
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:52
If you believe what you are saying, you are probably the most singularly idiotic person I have ever seen. Do you know how much it costs to have Mirena implanted? Over $1000. The ruling clearly FORBID “long term” IUD payment. Why? Why would Hobby Lobby be against placement of a device that would prevent pregnancy for 5 years? It is highly cost effective – safe – easy to use.
WHAT government program gives you these free? Or even at cost? Tell us Bob.
Let me guess. You leave “protection” up to us sluts right?
And incidentally, religious freedom includes freedom FROM religion Bob. Especially one that hates women like evidently you do.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 17:55
Many companies put restrictions on certain drugs or procedures that have less expensive alternative solutions. A company is not required to provide for your every need. And, you’re not forced to work for a company whose benefit package is not to your liking.
I worked for some large corporations who were generous with their benefits, but they didn’t provide everything. We are not “entitled” to receive everything we want or think we need for free. The company provides employment so we can earn a paycheck to pay for those things that are not part of the benefit package.
You can get birth control pills for free if you can’t afford them from Planned Parenthood for one. You can purchase birth control pills for about $10.00 a month; hardly a budget buster.
You call the IUD safe? I would not take any medicine which lists possible side affects such as these:
1. severe cramps or pelvic pain;
2. extreme dizziness, feeling like you might pass out;
3. heavy or ongoing vaginal bleeding, vaginal sores, vaginal discharge that is watery, foul-smelling discharge, or
otherwise unusual;
4. severe pain in your side or lower stomach;
5. pale skin, weakness, easy bruising or bleeding; fever, chills, 6. or other signs of infection;
7. pain during sexual intercourse;
8. sudden numbness or weakness, especially on one side of the body;
9. sudden or severe headache, confusion, problems with vision, sensitivity to light;
10. jaundice (yellowing of the skin or eyes); or signs of an
allergic reaction: hives; difficulty breathing; swelling of your face, lips, tongue, or throat.
11. irregular menstrual periods, changes in bleeding patterns or flow;
12. breakthrough bleeding, or heavier menstrual bleeding
during the first few weeks after device insertion;
back pain;
13. headache, nervousness, mild dizziness;
14. nausea, vomiting, bloating;
15. breast tenderness or pain;
16. weight gain, acne, changes in hair growth;
17. mood changes, loss of interest in sex;
18. mild itching, skin rash; or puffiness in your face, hands,
ankles, or feet.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You posted: “And incidentally, religious freedom includes freedom FROM religion Bob. Especially one that hates women like evidently you do.”
Who is forcing you to be religious? You already have freedom from religion. The 1st Amendment protects those who choose to practice their religion from interference by the government; not the other way around.
What evidence do you have to accuse me of hating women?
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:50
Yes Bob – lots of victims – you just choose to not see them. For example, did you know that SCROTUS just proved that if they don’t like YOU, they can/will legislate some stupid law against you? That judges on the Court can be bought by corporations to do their bidding?
This is an anti-woman vote. Just the first one.
And of course SCROTUS got it wrong. They do the bidding of their masters and the almighty dollar.
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 18:10
That is very funny. The SCOTUS only gets it right when they rule according to your beliefs. Otherwise they operate on bribes and hate towards woman. I say we get rid of the SCOTUS and we let everyone do as they please.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 18:16
I disagree, I was not happy about striking down the clinic barrier but I understand why. The 1st amendment is sacred in my opinion, even if I disagree. Of course something has to happen to keep people from harassing patients from entering a clinic but restricting free speech is and was not the way to do it. Most of us take time to consider the different aspects of these rulings/laws/issues before taking a stance or voicing an opinion. I personally have changed my mind on a number of issues recently after considering the information other readers provided. I don’t like feeling foolish or being embarrassed because I didn’t do my homework.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:48
Actually you are incorrect. Hobby Lobby insists they are abortifacients. They are not. Like most good little GOP idiots, they don’t believe in science.
The “Sandra Flukes” out there? Were you referring to us SLUTS?
Bob Waas July 2nd, 2014 at 18:06
You make bold accusations, but fail to provide any evidence to back it up. What science don’t they believe in?
“The Supreme Court’s protections for religious freedom apply to those who object to all of the HHS Mandate, not just to those who object to some of it.” Hobby Lobby did not object to 16 of the 20 mandated contraceptives. The Catholic church objects to all of them based on religious grounds.
Carla Akins July 2nd, 2014 at 18:11
Here is the amicus brief filed by the American Association of OB & GYN’s. on the science behind these options: http://prh.org/iPaper/hobby-lobby-amicus-curae-brief-responding-to-lawsuits-challenging-contraception-coverage/
M D Reese July 1st, 2014 at 17:32
I’m sure not surprised, at Hobby Lobby or the current SCOTUS. I NEVER expect “christians” like them to actually walk the walk. They just want to make sure that they keep the women who work for them in their place. It’s ridiculous that 5 religious zealots can decide the health care for 13,000 employees. And though they say this is a limited ruling, Justice Ginsburg nailed it. It’s the camel’s nose under the tent. I’d like to see atheists and religious people who do NOT consider hormone therapy to be murder to start suing these employers for infringing on THEIR religious freedom. And of course never mind that women and girls are prescribed hormones for a lot of issues besides preventing unwanted pregnancies and that abortion is legal.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:46
It isn’t a limited ruling .. it was SUGGESTED that other rabid ideas would not fall under the same ruling, and SCROTUS knows full well that is what they are after.
This was religious overreach. By a group of bought and paid for angry old white guys. I wonder how much money went under the table to Roberts for this?
M D Reese July 2nd, 2014 at 16:18
Roberts does seem to be smirking wider these days.
Debby's July 1st, 2014 at 18:53
Republicans….it is time to stop your evil ways baby! This is about nothing more than control and forcing religious beliefs on others regardless of their own actions of hypocrisy. I would be willing to bet the owners of Hobby Lobby, these evil right wing justices, and others supporting this ruling and crying religious beliefs of protecting the unborn also support corporations and policies that poison our water, land, air and food resulting in illness of many children and their future survival of life on this planet. Do they also support destroying education and welfare assistance while claiming this moral high ground?
R.J. Carter July 1st, 2014 at 14:52
And I invest in Halliburton and Raytheon. Obviously I can’t say that war in Iraq is bad.
This is just concern trolling at a higher level.
arc99 July 1st, 2014 at 17:58
Certainly you can say that war in Iraq is bad. Then you divest yourself of your financial interests in those companies.
Arguably, Hobby Lobby would not be in business were it not able to sell merchandise imported from a country which has laws on mandatory abortion.
That inconvenient truth highlighting the owners’ hypocrisy is not concern trolling by any sense of the phrase. Their steadfast opposition to abortion quickly disappears when it comes to their profit margins.
R.J. Carter July 2nd, 2014 at 13:02
And I have no wish to divest myself of those shares. So I am not allowed to have an opinion.
You know what country has laws protecting and promoting abortion? The United States. So I guess they can’t buy domestic either under the new rules?
R.J. Carter July 1st, 2014 at 14:52
And I invest in Halliburton and Raytheon. Obviously I can’t say that war in Iraq is bad.
This is just concern trolling at a higher level.
arc99 July 1st, 2014 at 17:58
Certainly you can say that war in Iraq is bad. Then you divest yourself of your financial interests in those companies.
Arguably, Hobby Lobby would not be in business were it not able to sell merchandise imported from a country which has laws on mandatory abortion.
That inconvenient truth highlighting the owners’ hypocrisy is not concern trolling by any sense of the phrase. Their steadfast opposition to abortion quickly disappears when it comes to their profit margins.
R.J. Carter July 2nd, 2014 at 13:02
And I have no wish to divest myself of those shares. So I am not allowed to have an opinion.
You know what country has laws protecting and promoting abortion? The United States. So I guess they can’t buy domestic either under the new rules?
Bunya July 1st, 2014 at 19:32
Now that’s just the kind of behavior I’d expect from a company who’s trying to make a political statement. Condemn abortion while at the same time buying crap from a country that condones forced abortion.
Yep. Whine about how your religious freedumbs are being infringed upon, but make damn sure your bottom line doesn’t suffer. Looks like HL lives by the good old capitalistic mantra “money trumps God”.
Bunya July 1st, 2014 at 19:32
Now that’s just the kind of behavior I’d expect from a company who’s trying to make a political statement. Condemn abortion while at the same time buying crap from a country that condones forced abortion.
Yep. Whine about how your religious freedumbs are being infringed upon, but make damn sure your bottom line doesn’t suffer. Looks like HL lives by the good old capitalistic mantra “money trumps God”.
uzza July 1st, 2014 at 20:20
The Greens claim to be religious, but they’ve never indicated any specific religion that they belong to. They are simply claiming their personal opinion is “Religious”, and the SCROTUS buys it. Why?
What religion is this? If it’s not a religion that has any members besides the Greens, then it’s no more religious than my opinion, that Mr. Green should get kicked in the balls.
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 20:32
Well known that they’re Pentecostal, not some rogue church with 40 followers, well over 200 million followers
Obewon July 1st, 2014 at 20:54
5% of US religious are Pentecostal -21%. Snake handlers squeaking in tongues seem to be croaking 4+ times as fast as kids can run away from the old timers cults. http://www.pewforum.org/2006/10/05/spirit-and-power/
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:06
It is my fervent wish that the snake wins.
uzza July 1st, 2014 at 21:28
Not so well known that I’ve ever seen a reference to it. Pentacostal, hmph; Wikipedia says there are over 700 denominations of Pentecostals.
IMHO they all sound like a rogue church, with no established doctrine, and whenever one of them disagree about even the most trivial matter, he gets to go start his own church. So by what criterion are any of them “religious”—-as opposed to say, “claiming to be religious so as to get benefits”?
Maybe they’re Loopholians, with a firmly held belief in fucking people over.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:39
Agree – aren’t the Palin Dominionists considered Pentacostal? After all, she already speaks in tongues.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:38
It’s easy – IF you shop there, quit.
We all knew that Citizens United was going to cause huge problems when the SCROTUS decided corps were people. Now several years down the road, we can see just how awful that insane rationale was.
You ain’t seen nothing yet.
Hobby Lobby will take us back to 1850. It opens the door to every possible type of discrimination you can even imagine. Let’s start with “the gays”. Let’s enact hate laws based upon Freedom of Religion. They’ve already gone after women and girls with Hobby Lobby – I’m sure they have more up their sleeves to attack us and our daughters with.
Welcome to the Caliphate of America – no longer the United States of America. It is now the land of sex starved, Viagra enhanced elderly angry white guys who will use religion to get what they want – including the authority to take our rights away and scream “religious freedom” at us.
This is just the beginning. The Greens buy all their cheap crap from China- doesn’t their hypocrisy burn yet?
uzza July 1st, 2014 at 20:20
The Greens claim to be religious, but they’ve never indicated any specific religion that they belong to. They are simply claiming their personal opinion is “Religious”, and the SCROTUS buys it. Why?
What religion is this? If it’s not a religion that has any members besides the Greens, then it’s no more religious than my opinion, that Mr. Green should get kicked in the balls.
NC89 July 1st, 2014 at 20:32
Well known that they’re Pentecostal, not some rogue church with 40 followers, well over 200 million followers
Obewon July 1st, 2014 at 20:54
5% of US religious are Pentecostal -21%. Snake handlers squeaking in tongues seem to be croaking 4+ times as fast as the baby snake handlers survive to run away from the old timers cults. http://www.pewforum.org/2006/10/05/spirit-and-power/
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:06
It is my fervent wish that the snake wins.
uzza July 1st, 2014 at 21:28
Not so well known that I’ve ever seen a reference to it. Pentacostal, hmph; Wikipedia says there are over 700 denominations of Pentecostals.
IMHO they all sound like a rogue church, with no established doctrine, and whenever one of them disagree about even the most trivial matter, he gets to go start his own church. So by what criterion are any of them “religious”—-as opposed to say, “claiming to be religious so as to get benefits”?
Maybe they’re Loopholians, with a firmly held belief in fucking people over.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:39
Agree – aren’t the Palin Dominionists considered Pentacostal? After all, she already speaks in tongues.
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 11:38
It’s easy – IF you shop there, quit.
We all knew that Citizens United was going to cause huge problems when the SCROTUS decided corps were people. Now several years down the road, we can see just how awful that insane rationale was.
You ain’t seen nothing yet.
Hobby Lobby will take us back to 1850. It opens the door to every possible type of discrimination you can even imagine. Let’s start with “the gays”. Let’s enact hate laws based upon Freedom of Religion. They’ve already gone after women and girls with Hobby Lobby – I’m sure they have more up their sleeves to attack us and our daughters with.
Welcome to the Caliphate of America – no longer the United States of America. It is now the land of sex starved, Viagra enhanced elderly angry white guys who will use religion to get what they want – including the authority to take our rights away and scream “religious freedom” at us.
This is just the beginning. The Greens buy all their cheap crap from China- doesn’t their hypocrisy burn yet?
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:41
MORE on the contraceptive issue – Kaiser Health Reports:
More than half the states have “contraceptive equity” laws on the books that require most employers whose health insurance covers prescription drugs to also cover FDA-approved contraceptives as part of that package. Unlike the ACA, those laws do not require that coverage to be available without deductibles or co-pays. […]
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which the court used to say the closely held companies don’t have to abide by the federal mandate, “doesn’t supersede state law,” said Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women’s Law Center. “They stand as independent protections.”
More (a big OOPS) as its been found they are “singling out women”:
But [self-insuring companies] are still likely subject to a ruling issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in the year 2000 that employers that fail to cover contraception as part of their health insurance benefit package are discriminating against women in violation of the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act. That law was itself an amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
This little goody:
The employees of Hobby Lobby and other companies that take advantage of the exemption could sue their employers, charging gender discrimination. The litigating is far from over on this one.
R.J. Carter July 2nd, 2014 at 12:59
I would question if being required to cover FDA-approved contraceptives means covering all FDA-approved contraceptives.
If it does, and that issue gets pushed, I look forward and see Hobby Lobby leading the way of dropping insurance altogether and forcing their employees onto the Obamacare exchange. (Hey, that means more enrollees, so that’s a GOOD thing, right?)
BanditBasheert July 2nd, 2014 at 12:41
MORE on the contraceptive issue – Kaiser Health Reports:
More than half the states have “contraceptive equity” laws on the books that require most employers whose health insurance covers prescription drugs to also cover FDA-approved contraceptives as part of that package. Unlike the ACA, those laws do not require that coverage to be available without deductibles or co-pays. […]
The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which the court used to say the closely held companies don’t have to abide by the federal mandate, “doesn’t supersede state law,” said Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women’s Law Center. “They stand as independent protections.”
More (a big OOPS) as its been found they are “singling out women”:
But [self-insuring companies] are still likely subject to a ruling issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in the year 2000 that employers that fail to cover contraception as part of their health insurance benefit package are discriminating against women in violation of the 1978 Pregnancy Discrimination Act. That law was itself an amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
This little goody:
The employees of Hobby Lobby and other companies that take advantage of the exemption could sue their employers, charging gender discrimination. The litigating is far from over on this one.
R.J. Carter July 2nd, 2014 at 12:59
I would question if being required to cover FDA-approved contraceptives means covering all FDA-approved contraceptives.
If it does, and that issue gets pushed, I look forward and see Hobby Lobby leading the way of dropping insurance altogether and forcing their employees onto the Obamacare exchange. (Hey, that means more enrollees, so that’s a GOOD thing, right?)