Court cases already being impacted by Hobby Lobby ruling

[goldberry]

 

Wheaton, however, along with many other religious not-for-profits, have long objected to this very workaround. They filed lawsuits claiming that the mere fact of signing a form noting their religious objection to contraception coverage triggered third parties to provide the contraception, which triggered women to have access to morning-after pills and IUDs, which in their view were akin to abortions, and thus violated their religious consciences. Signing the form, they said, was the same as actually providing the contraceptives themselves. It’s the butterfly effect of contraception. Any time Wheaton flaps its religious-conscience wings, a woman somewhere ends up with an IUD, and Wheaton’s religious liberties are violated.

 

 

 

:blink:  :blink:  :blink:

 

Thus throwing all arguments out the window that this is about not being personally required to do something repugnant to you...

 

Curious...does this make sense to anyone on here who was in favor of the Hobby Lobby judgment?  If so, I wonder what the reasoning is?

[sunflowerlady]

At least Wheaton admits they just want women not to have access.

[SadieMarie]

Ok, so up thread the same basics I pulled were pulled from Slate. Which side are they on? I am obviously really behind on the news bias. :)

 

My intention was to quote the SCOTUS justice.

Hmmmm, not sure on Slate, but I would guess also liberal bias, but not as much as Salon.

[SadieMarie]

No, they just need women to work for free. Then they wouldn't have to compromise their morals.

I am surprised that hiring women doesn't compromise their morals. But maybe that is me just assuming the worst.

[Lisbeth]

I think holding onto one's prejudices rarely works out well for any of us, religious or not. And getting angry about a democratic society where those prejudices are being progressively challenged seems like misplaced energy to me.

 

 

Seems to me some prejudices are just being replaced by others.

[SadieMarie]

Seems to me some prejudices are just being replaced by others.

I know it. I know all kind of perfectly lovely Christians who don't seem judgmental at all, just going about their business doing the best they can, like everyone. Then I read something written by a Christian "leader" and I start generalizing and expecting the worst. It is very easy to do.

 

ETA: Oops! I thought you were responding to me expecting the worst from Christian organizations.

[flyingiguana]

So if my employer does not believe blood transfusions are allowed under his/her religion, does that mean they can stop paying for them through the health insurance plan they offer?

If an employer has a sincerely held belief that insulin does nothing to treat diabetes, does their lack of understanding of the scientific evidence mean they can avoid paying for insulin treatment? If they believe insulin is being produced by murdering babies, does that belief give them more right to deny that coverage to their employees?  No matter how ridiculous that belief may be in the face of scientific evidence?

I would say yes, except that I notice that both blood transfusions and insulin are used by both men AND women.

The real issue here is whether to pay for sluts to continue with their hedonistic behavior.

[SadieMarie]

I wonder what the difference to the employer is in terms of cost for coverage with contraception and without. If, as it seems from the Wheaton case, insurance companies are willing to do it separately and for free how much could it be costing employers? And I agree with previous posters that benefits are part of compensation for work, along with wages, and not some sort of special extra gift.

[elegantlion]

I wonder what the difference to the employer is in terms of cost for coverage with contraception and without. If, as it seems from the Wheaton case, insurance companies are willing to do it separately and for free how much could it be costing employers? And I agree with previous posters that benefits are part of compensation for work, along with wages, and not some sort of special extra gift.

 

But, honey, you should just be thankful you have a job, don't ask too many questions, you'll hurt your pretty little head.  :coolgleamA:  :smash:  ;)  :mad:

[sunflowerlady]

When I would hear that there was a threat to women's access to contraception, I sort of always thought it was an exaggeration. Then there was the Hobby Lobby case and although I don't really agree with the decision, I still didn't really think there was any real threat. OK, so they don't mind their female employees having access, they just don't want to pay for it.

 

Then I learned about Wheaton. Honestly , I was shocked. There is a way out for them if they honestly don't want to fund it. They won't take it. They honestly DO want to hinder access.

 

It looks like there is a threat and it is not an exaggeration.

[SadieMarie]

But, honey, you should just be thankful you have a job, don't ask too many questions, you'll hurt your pretty little head.  :coolgleamA:  :smash:  ;)  :mad:

Lol and too late, google plus and inquiring mind is a dangerous combination!  It appears to me to be totally and ultimately about trying to roll back access, not about having to pay for it.  

 

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/2012/contraceptives/ib.shtml

[kiana]

But, honey, you should just be thankful you have a job, don't ask too many questions, you'll hurt your pretty little head.  :coolgleamA:  :smash:  ;)  :mad:

 

Pfft, that's what happens when you let them out of the kitchen.

 

/snark

[Caroline]

But, honey, you should just be thankful you have a job, don't ask too many questions, you'll hurt your pretty little head. :coolgleamA: :smash: ;) :mad:

No, we should all just quit our jobs so someone's unemployed husband could have them. The there would be no need for birth control because we could all have 10+ kids. :)

[flyingiguana]

When I would hear that there was a threat to women's access to contraception, I sort of always thought it was an exaggeration. Then there was the Hobby Lobby case and although I don't really agree with the decision, I still didn't really think there was any real threat. OK, so they don't mind their female employees having access, they just don't want to pay for it.

 

Then I learned about Wheaton. Honestly , I was shocked. There is a way out for them if they honestly don't want to fund it. They won't take it. They honestly DO want to hinder access.

 

It looks like there is a threat and it is not an exaggeration.

 

I think this is exactly why the Hobby Lobby case was the first one brought to the Supreme Court.  They wanted that slippery slope.  So many of us would say, yes, I can understand why they wouldn't want to pay for something that was against their beliefs.

 

It played on religious toleration.

 

It also was the "best" case because they were only refusing a couple types of contraception -- and they were types that *might* cause abortion.  Whether they do or not.... I get the impression the science is still out on that.  But I suspect that the rate at which they cause abortion may similar OR LESS than other drugs/devices that don't happen to be prescribed for contraception.  If Hobby Lobby were truly concerned about how some drugs cause abortions, they would be looking into that possibility as well. And they wouldn't carry hangars in their stores.

 

 

But this ruling will open up the doors for things the majority in this country would be opposed to.  And it will be a lot harder to oppose those, now that the Hobby Lobby case has been decided this way.

 

At this point, boycotting the stores and companies that treat their employees this way is probably the best clout anyone will have against these practices.

 

The clientele of Hobby Lobby may not contain many people who will know/care/be offended by this practice, but the people who buy Eden Soy probably will have an impact on that company when they stop buying.

 

The co-op near us is currently being inundated with letters from people who want the store to just stop carrying the brand.

 

(The fact that a lot of their food tends to taste icky is another reason not to buy their stuff)

 

So will this sort of thing further fracture the politics of this country?  Where we'll only buy things from the particular companies that are in line with our views?

 

[poppy]

No, we should all just quit our jobs so someone's unemployed husband could have them. The there would be no need for birth control because we could all have 10+ kids. :)

 

Wow, I never really took it that far mentally, but I think you are right. 

[kiana]

Wow, I never really took it that far mentally, but I think you are right. 

 

Heh, Caroline was being sarcastic, but there are people who genuinely believe this. One of my former friends got quite vituperative when she found out that I wasn't planning on quitting my job as soon as I got married, and started telling me that I was the reason men couldn't find jobs.

[poppy]

Heh, Caroline was being sarcastic, but there are people who genuinely believe this. One of my former friends got quite vituperative when she found out that I wasn't planning on quitting my job as soon as I got married, and started telling me that I was the reason men couldn't find jobs.

 

I know she was being sarcastic, I'm thinking back to posts about glorying in woman's fertility and all that and lightbulbs are going off for me.  Wowza.

[sunflowerlady]

I am not a crafter so Hobby Lobby wouldn't be losing out on much money from me anyway. We go there a couple of times a year and get supplies for a home school project or something. I guess my twice a year shopping could easily be done at Michael's or Joanne's. In my area , they are all three located within a couple minutes drive of each other.

 

Do any of you support the National Organization for Women or Planned Parenthood? As a Christian I was always told these were evil organizations. However, I never thought I would see Christian groups openly and actively trying to limit access the way I am seeing. Wondering what can practically be done, I guess.

[SadieMarie]

 

At this point, boycotting the stores and companies that treat their employees this way is probably the best clout anyone will have against these practices.

 

The clientele of Hobby Lobby may not contain many people who will know/care/be offended by this practice, but the people who buy Eden Soy probably will have an impact on that company when they stop buying.

 

The co-op near us is currently being inundated with letters from people who want the store to just stop carrying the brand.

 

(The fact that a lot of their food tends to taste icky is another reason not to buy their stuff)

 

So will this sort of thing further fracture the politics of this country?  Where we'll only buy things from the particular companies that are in line with our views?

 

 

Consumer boycotts can work for companies that aren't led by zealots.  I will never darken Hobby Lobby's door again lol.  But I have been there a handful of times and so they aren't going to notice the loss of people like me.  But I have bought a lot of Eden Soy, mostly canned beans lol and am done with that, but I hadn't thought of contacting the local coop.  So I am going to start working on that, thank you for the idea.  

[livetoread]

So here's an interesting ethical exercise.

 

The IUD and birth control pills (when used correctly) have the best rate of pregnancy prevention next to abstinence. They almost always - and probably always according to recent research - work by preventing fertilization.

 

Up to 40% of fertilized eggs abort naturally, either before or after implantation.That is an awful lot of abortions.

 

If you are not using birth control or if you are using a less effective method, then you are more likely to have a fertilized egg and more likely to abort it. If you are using an IUD or the pill, it is extremely unlikely that you will have a fertilized egg and thus fewer abortions.

 

If you are attempting to reduce the total number of fertilized eggs aborted, then the

IUD or the pill are your best bets. If you are only trying to reduce the number of fertilized eggs aborted artificially and are willing to trade a significant number of fertilized eggs aborted naturally in return, then you would prefer something else (though that still doesn't include the fact that the pill and IUD probably don't abort after fertilization anyway).

[flyingiguana]

Consumer boycotts can work for companies that aren't led by zealots.  I will never darken Hobby Lobby's door again lol.  But I have been there a handful of times and so they aren't going to notice the loss of people like me.  But I have bought a lot of Eden Soy, mostly canned beans lol and am done with that, but I hadn't thought of contacting the local coop.  So I am going to start working on that, thank you for the idea.  

 

These companies have been given the right to deny medical coverage, but we've always had the right to boycott.

 

Well, up until the Supreme Court decides corporations (being individuals) have a right to free speech and that a boycott infringes on that.

 

(Oh, wait.......)

 

 

[flyingiguana]

 

If you are attempting to reduce the total number of fertilized eggs aborted, then the

IUD or the pill are your best bets. If you are only trying to reduce the number of fertilized eggs aborted artificially and are willing to trade a significant number of fertilized eggs aborted naturally in return, then you would prefer something else (though that still doesn't include the fact that the pill and IUD probably don't abort after fertilization anyway).

 

Well said.

 

But arguing the science or the statistics isn't going to get you anywhere.

 

When arguments like this come up (eg -- see global warming and teaching evolution), the science mainstream is either ignored, or "re-interpreted", or said to be the work of Satan.

 

[flyingiguana]

This conversation can't continue without this little interlude:

[unsinkable]

So here's an interesting ethical exercise.

 

The IUD and birth control pills (when used correctly) have the best rate of pregnancy prevention next to abstinence. They almost always - and probably always according to recent research - work by preventing fertilization.

 

Up to 40% of fertilized eggs abort naturally, either before or after implantation.That is an awful lot of abortions.

 

If you are not using birth control or if you are using a less effective method, then you are more likely to have a fertilized egg and more likely to abort it. If you are using an IUD or the pill, it is extremely unlikely that you will have a fertilized egg and thus fewer abortions.

 

If you are attempting to reduce the total number of fertilized eggs aborted, then the

IUD or the pill are your best bets. If you are only trying to reduce the number of fertilized eggs aborted artificially and are willing to trade a significant number of fertilized eggs aborted naturally in return, then you would prefer something else (though that still doesn't include the fact that the pill and IUD probably don't abort after fertilization anyway).

Abort naturally = miscarriage, AKA spontaneous abortion.

 

A miscarriage is a naturally occuring incident. It is believed that most occur because of chromosomal abnormalities and that the fetus is non-viable. 

 

An abortion to end a viable pregnancy is not the same as a miscarriage.

 

I think mixing miscarriage and the commonly understood definition of abortion isn't helpful.

[elegantlion]

I have to insert my favorite Hobby Lobby story. When ds was about 4 I took him there, the latest visit in a long line of visits. He screamed all the way to the door and once put into a cart right by the front door, he screamed loudly, "I don't want to be here." Hurriedly and embarrassed I scooted to the right where they keep the current holiday decor. As we rounded the corner a young male employee, probably 17 or 18, looked straight at ds and said, "It's okay, I don't want to be here either."  :lol:  :lol:  

 

We still joke about it. 

[Ipsey]

I am not a crafter so Hobby Lobby wouldn't be losing out on much money from me anyway. We go there a couple of times a year and get supplies for a home school project or something. I guess my twice a year shopping could easily be done at Michael's or Joanne's. In my area , they are all three located within a couple minutes drive of each other.

 

Do any of you support the National Organization for Women or Planned Parenthood? As a Christian I was always told these were evil organizations. However, I never thought I would see Christian groups openly and actively trying to limit access the way I am seeing. Wondering what can practically be done, I guess.

 

I do support Planned Parenthood.

 

I began doing so three years ago when our current state government began stripping away their funding. Since then, four clinics have closed--and they did NOT provide abortion services, but provided only women's health care screenings, treatment, and birth control. 

 

Another non-abortion related clinic in a rural area is set to close this fall in our state. 

 

Had I known, I would have supported them sooner. 

 

 

 

 

[Halftime Hope]

 Many things are a product of people's beliefs and ethics. That's why I think the best way to deal with things is to grant you your freedom right up to the point it infringes on mine ( and vice versa ).

 

Nobody should coerce (general) you into using contraception against your will. And (general) you shouldn't prevent others obtaining contraception in line with their beliefs.

 

It's difficult for me to understand why that isn't a point of consensus, since it works for both of us.

 

From what I've read, HL is NOT preventing anyone from getting any contraception they want.  The folks who want W, X, Y or Z contraception are free to get scrips for them from the doctor they see or to go anywhere else where they might like to get them, but they will have to pay for them on their own dime.  W-Z will not be paid for by the insurance that HL has contracted for.   Again, HL is NOT preventing any employee from obtaining those forms of contraceptions.

 

We've been insured corporately for 25 years, 6 or 7 plans.  It has ALWAYS been at the discretion of the employer what they contract with the insurances company.  Our plans have not covered contraception until the last couple of years; before then the best you could hope for was to get it reimbursed out of your Flex Spending Account.  And then the rules for FSA's changed, so now it is much harder to get them to cover items from the drug store, thanks to the ACA. But that's a different issue.

 

[Mrs Mungo]

I think mixing miscarriage and the commonly understood definition of abortion isn't helpful.

A fertilized egg not implanting and being expelled by the womb is neither considered an abortion nor a miscarriage in common vernacular or in medicine. It isn't considered anything.

[SadieMarie]

A fertilized egg not implanting and being expelled by the womb is neither considered an abortion nor a miscarriage in common vernacular or in medicine. It isn't considered anything.

 

How would one even know if this had happened?  You would not even miss a period would you?  

[unsinkable]

.

[*Lulu*]

From what I've read, HL is NOT preventing anyone from getting any contraception they want. The folks who want W, X, Y or Z contraception are free to get scrips for them from the doctor they see or to go anywhere else where they might like to get them, but they will have to pay for them on their own dime. W-Z will not be paid for by the insurance that HL has contracted for. Again, HL is NOT preventing any employee from obtaining those forms of contraceptions.

 

We've been insured corporately for 25 years, 6 or 7 plans. It has ALWAYS been at the discretion of the employer what they contract with the insurances company. Our plans have not covered contraception until the last couple of years; before then the best you could hope for was to get it reimbursed out of your Flex Spending Account. And then the rules for FSA's changed, so now it is much harder to get them to cover items from the drug store, thanks to the ACA. But that's a different issue.

 

Hobby Lobby may cut the check to the insurance company, but that money has been EARNED by the employees. It is NOT HL's money, it is part of the comp. package and is part of the individual employee's earnings.

 

If HL so sincerely desires to not trouble thier cooperate conscience with the birth control methods of thier employees and spouses they could make a different choice. They could pay the employees what would be a comparable amount and allow them to purchase individual policies. It would mean possibly paying a fine and lowering the company's bottom line, but if it weighs so heavily on them as a spiritual issue than the profit should be secondary.

[SadieMarie]

deleted 

 

[unsinkable]

.

[Mrs Mungo]

But how would you know?

They wouldn't. None of us would. The cell in question is smaller than a grain of rice and doesn't affect your body.

 

People who have trouble getting pregnant due to implantation problems may be sad about their fertility struggles, but they can't really be sad over a specific egg not implanting because they wouldn't know.

[SadieMarie]

Could you delete my post?

 

Thanks.

Done and you are welcome.

[flyingiguana]

Course, all this discussion about birth control and abortion and women's rights is really just a red herring.

 

The reason Hobby Lobby was encouraged to continue in their suit was to get the Supreme Court to attribute more personhood to corporations.

 

Corporations can now hold religious beliefs and have those protected AS IF THEY WERE A PERSON.

 

Hobby Lobby is as much a stooge in this whole fiasco as all the rest of us. They were encouraged in this suit as a way to create a chink in the constitutional rights of individuals by taking them from individuals and giving them to corporations who have more money and clout and can therefore exercise their now-constitutional rights more effectively and at the expense of individuals.

 

And we the people aren't noticing because we're busy having petty arguments about what's an abortion and what's a miscarriage and whether we'd want to make cakes for gay weddings.

 

It's really a perfect move. Years from now, historians will wonder why no one noticed what was being taken away from them.

[Aelwydd]

Yep. Long live the oligarchy.

[SadieMarie]

Course, all this discussion about birth control and abortion and women's rights is really just a red herring.

 

The reason Hobby Lobby was encouraged to continue in their suit was to get the Supreme Court to attribute more personhood to corporations.

 

Corporations can now hold religious beliefs and have those protected AS IF THEY WERE A PERSON.

 

Hobby Lobby is as much a stooge in this whole fiasco as all the rest of us. They were encouraged in this suit as a way to create a chink in the constitutional rights of individuals by taking them from individuals and giving them to corporations who have more money and clout and can therefore exercise their now-constitutional rights more effectively and at the expense of individuals.

 

And we the people aren't noticing because we're busy having petty arguments about what's an abortion and what's a miscarriage and whether we'd want to make cakes for gay weddings.

 

It's really a perfect move. Years from now, historians will wonder why no one noticed what was being taken away from them.

 

The United Corporations of America   :patriot:

 

So, if corporations are eventually able to actually run for office, who would you support?

[Wheres Toto]

Anyone watch the show Continuum?  That's what it's about - a future with the "Corporate Congress" and everything run by corporations, including the police, government, etc.

[livetoread]

Abort naturally = miscarriage, AKA spontaneous abortion.

 

A miscarriage is a naturally occuring incident. It is believed that most occur because of chromosomal abnormalities and that the fetus is non-viable.

 

An abortion to end a viable pregnancy is not the same as a miscarriage.

 

I think mixing miscarriage and the commonly understood definition of abortion isn't helpful.

I agree, they aren't the same thing. I'm not trying to mix them up, I'm just pointing out that if someone thinks that a fertilized egg is a human life, and the human life is snuffed out before its time which is not good and needs to be prevented if it can be, then the IUD or the pill would do a better job of preventing human life from being extinguished (whether that was through intentional or unintentional means). Using the pill or the IUD means fewer lives lost, assuming a fertilized egg is a human life.

[*Lulu*]

The United Corporations of America :patriot:

 

So, if corporations are eventually able to actually run for office, who would you support?

Hershey.

 

But only if they run on a platform that includes a strong stance on Dark chocolate as a medicinal aid and make it clear they are anti-white chocolate. (Which we all know is just fat and sugar looking for some hips to stick to.)

[Caroline]

Hershey.

 

But only if they run on a platform that includes a strong stance on Dark chocolate as a medicinal aid and make it clear they are anti-white chocolate. (Which we all know is just fat and sugar looking for some hips to stick to.)

Maybe they can make insurance companies cover dark chocolate...

[*Lulu*]

Maybe they can make insurance companies cover dark chocolate...

When you put the word "cover" next to "dark chocolate" I feel the need to find some strawberries and get to work.......

 

Mmmmmmm

[FaithManor]

Hershey.

 

But only if they run on a platform that includes a strong stance on Dark chocolate as a medicinal aid and make it clear they are anti-white chocolate. (Which we all know is just fat and sugar looking for some hips to stick to.)

I would happily work for this campaign platform!

[Farrar]

Would the Hershey platform be literally built from chocolate?  Because if so, I'm in.  A giant chocolate platform sounds yummy.  Let's just make sure it's not left out in the sun to melt.

[umsami]

Back in business school, I did a speech on Milton Hershey.  Fascinating guy, really. He and his wife couldn't have children so they set up a residential school for orphans.  The school inherited Milton's share of the company.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Hershey_School

 

 

While Hershey would definitely make a good candidate, I would also support Ben & Jerry if they would promise a flavor for each state.

 

Georgia could have peach cobbler ice cream,  Michigan could have something with Mackinac Island Fudge and cherries…etc.

 

Sadly, I think that McDonald's, Walmart, or Koch Industries would win, though.  Maybe Google or Amazon on a long shot.  

 

 

[SadieMarie]

Anyone watch the show Continuum? That's what it's about - a future with the "Corporate Congress" and everything run by corporations, including the police, government, etc.

No! I am going to have to look for this one. Where would I find it?

 

I think Starbucks would get my vote. Chocolate may make life worth living, but coffee makes life possible. Maybe Starbucks and Hershey's could be running mates. I think they would be formidable.

[SadieMarie]

Back in business school, I did a speech on Milton Hershey. Fascinating guy, really. He and his wife couldn't have children so they set up a residential school for orphans. The school inherited Milton's share of the company. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Hershey_School

 

 

While Hershey would definitely make a good candidate, I would also support Ben & Jerry if they would promise a flavor for each state.

 

Georgia could have peach cobbler ice cream, Michigan could have something with Mackinac Island Fudge and cherries…etc.

 

Sadly, I think that McDonald's, Walmart, or Koch Industries would win, though. Maybe Google or Amazon on a long shot.

Iowa could have bacon lol.

[Farrar]

No! I am going to have to look for this one. Where would I find it?

 

I think Starbucks would get my vote. Chocolate may make life worth living, but coffee makes life possible. Maybe Starbucks and Hershey's could be running mates. I think they would be formidable.

 

The first season is on Netflix.  Light SyFy cop show, but the corporate future element is interesting, especially since she's fighting for the corporations.

 

Realistically, I think Costco might get my vote.  They can supply the nation.  The food will be fresh.  There will be interesting seasonal items.  They'll make sure we have good benefits and the president won't be overpaid.

[SadieMarie]

I could get behind Costco.

 

And thanks! We have Netflix. I started googling it and thought I was going to have to pay per episode.