Was the Supreme Court right to rule that the Affordable Care Act violated the religio
1024
No - The ruling allows bosses to impose their religious beliefs on their employees. Besides, the Constitution grants religious freedom to individuals, not corporations.
483
Yes - The religious beliefs of company owners take precedence over their employees' right to have access to birth control.
Should religious family-owned companies be required to cover contraceptives under their insurance plans? The high court says no.
I'm curious how you nurses feel about this? Please take a second to vote in our quick poll.
This is a highly political topic, I'd rather not turn this into a hot argumentative subject, so please keep your comments civil :) But please feel free to comment. Thanks
In a 5-4 decision Monday, the Supreme Court allowed a key exemption to the health law's contraception coverage requirements when it ruled that closely held for-profit businesses could assert a religious objection to the Obama administration's regulations. What does it mean? Here are some questions and answers about the case.What did the court's ruling do?
The court's majority said that the for-profit companies that filed suit-Hobby Lobby Stores, a nationwide chain of 500 arts and crafts stores, and Conestoga Wood Specialties, a maker of custom cabinets-didn't have to offer female employeesall Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptivesas part of a package of preventive services that must be covered without copays or deductibles under the law. The companies had argued that several types of contraceptivesviolate their owners' religious beliefs. The ruling also covers a Hobby Lobby subsidiary, the Mardel Christian bookstores.
Because there are too many damn kids. It's interesting how concerned some people are about potential fertilized eggs but are not the least bit concerned when those potentialities become actual human beings with needs. Then their food stamps get cut because "people shouldn't get free stuff"
You know these questions are flawed, right?
First, no one is imposing a religion on anyone. I haven't heard anything about anyone trying to convert employees to evangelical Christianity. Paying for your own birth control because your evangelical boss won't isn't forcing you to do anything other than what you have done all along-pay for your own birth control. Second, the "right to have access to birth control" is an inflammatory couching of the issue, to say the least. It's not as if these employees don't have access to birth control. They won't get FREE birth control of CERTAIN TYPES perhaps, but they can still get it.
Please, please be honest in your arguments and defense of your positions. To deflect possible ad hominums, I voluntarily discolse that I don't care one way or the other about the decision. Getting ANYTHING for free at the expense of others is abhorable in my view. I don't care if its statins, vaccines or ED meds. Enough with the free stuff. I'm not an evangelical, but I am spiritual, and I believe everyone uses birth control too much. Just my view. We seem to have a bigger war on babies than on women. (I'm a woman).
Once again, this is just my view, and I am sure it will make blood boil and heads spin, but I believe that before everyone jumps on any bandwagon, they ought to really do some deep thinking about what the creators of the bandwagon are saying we need to buy into. To me this has nothing to do with religion ultimately. Free birth control? Seriously, why?
Because there are too many damn kids. It's interesting how concerned some people are about potential fertilized eggs but are not the least bit concerned when those potentialities become actual human beings with needs. Then their food stamps get cut because "people shouldn't get free stuff"
Hobby Lobby fundamentally disagrees with that definition of abortion. Their belief is that, once fertilized, whether implanted or not, when cells are rapidly multiplying and if left alone it WOULD develop into a full term baby, you are indeed stopping life. You have every right to disagree with this but from their point of view, you are interfering with a process that is God-ordained. They want to honor their convictions, not hurt women. Women have the right to buy any method they choose but not force someone else to pay for it.
This issue is about who pays for what; it has never been an access issue. Those who DO NOT believe in personal responsibility want to FORCE others to pay for their wants, desires, and needs. Those who believe in personal responsibility are grateful when others pick up the tab, would never force others to pick up the tab, and will pay for it themselves (or do without). Simple.
Hobby Lobby fundamentally disagrees with that definition of abortion. Their belief is that, once fertilized, whether implanted or not, when cells are rapidly multiplying and if left alone it WOULD develop into a full term baby, you are indeed stopping life. You have every right to disagree with this but from their point of view, you are interfering with a process that is God-ordained. They want to honor their convictions, not hurt women. Women have the right to buy any method they choose but not force someone else to pay for it.
The problem with this is that their convictions don't make them scientifically accurate. So anyone can believe anything at odds with science and have it approved based on this precedent, essentially. Read the decision from Judge Alito and you'll see that door is open.
Our country was founded on freedom - freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. We broke from England because England was demanding we pay for their stuff (sound familiar). This issue with Hobby Lobby, Conestoga Wood, and others had to deal with forcing them and others (like the Nuns) to pay for items and services they believe kills and harms so that others who refuse to take personal responsibility for their personal decisions and pay for it themselves.
Why? Because you think all women should feel like you do? Does it make you angry and upset because you feel every woman should have the right to murder her unborn child but other women do not feel that way? Well unfortunately we live in a country that says it's okay for you to do just that. It makes me angry and upset too, but for different reasons. Maybe as a woman's health nurse you should teach women not to have sex if they don't want children instead of expecting taxpayers to support them or just pointing them toward the nearest baby killer clinic. Yeah, makes my head explode too!
In post 274 you stated that sex is a basic human need according to Maslow's hierarchy. But in this one, you suggest that the PP should advocate for abstinence for women looking to avoid pregnancy. Let's also not fall into the fallacy that all women who get pregnant do so consensually.
Our country was founded on freedom - freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. We broke from England because England was demanding we pay for their stuff (sound familiar). This issue with Hobby Lobby, Conestoga Wood, and others had to deal with forcing them and others (like the Nuns) to pay for items and services they believe kills and harms so that others who refuse to take personal responsibility for their personal decisions and pay for it themselves.
Thank you.
Yes, I understand their position, but respectfully, believing something does not make it so. They believe something kills something, but that is not the case.
Hobby Lobby fundamentally disagrees with that definition of abortion. Their belief is that, once fertilized, whether implanted or not, when cells are rapidly multiplying and if left alone it WOULD develop into a full term baby, you are indeed stopping life. You have every right to disagree with this but from their point of view, you are interfering with a process that is God-ordained. They want to honor their convictions, not hurt women. Women have the right to buy any method they choose but not force someone else to pay for it.
However, by paying a health care premium and a co-pay one IS paying for it, not asking anyone else to.
Which can not be said for women in less than ideal circumstances who, for whatever reason, carry multiple (or even one) pregnancy to term and we DO pay for those children.
Yes, we do pay premiums but that is a fraction of the employer contribution. The employer is still paying for the drug. All the woman need do is foot the bill for these 4 drugs out of 20 that Hobby Lobby objects to. We should all be doing that anyway. If we want to have everyone out of our business and bedroom practices then we should not expect them to contribute financially to our choices in that area.
Emergency contraception does not terminate pregnancy. If Hobby Lobby allows their employees to procure most forms of hormonal birth control, they will have emergency contraception, anyway
"There are nearly two dozen brands of pills that can be used for emergency contraception in the United States today..you can also use a different dose of a number of brands of regular birth control pills. While these are not sold specifically as emergency contraceptive pills, they have been proven safe and effective for preventing pregnancy in the few days after sex. These daily birth control pills contain two hormones, progestin and estrogen, and are taken in two doses. You take the first dose as soon as possible (up to 120 hours after you have sex without using birth control, your birth control failed, or you were made to have sex against your will. You take the second dose 12 hours later (although being an hour or two early or late probably won’t make a difference in how effective the pills are)...The table below lists all of the brands of oral contraception available in the U.S. which you can use to prevent pregnancy in the few days after sex. For information about how to use a specific pill as an emergency contraceptive, click on the brand name in the table."
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Yes, we do pay premiums but that is a fraction of the employer contribution. The employer is still paying for the drug. All the woman need do is foot the bill for these 4 drugs out of 20 that Hobby Lobby objects to. We should all be doing that anyway. If we want to have everyone out of our business and bedroom practices then we should not expect them to contribute financially to our choices in that area.
Nobody is asking them to contribute to anything but a comprehensive health insurance policy that allows the woman the same autonomy that a man has in the matter. Nobody is asking them to do anything unusual or odd or crazy (unless minding your own business rises to any of those levels). The women affected are gainfully employed in a society where the employer provides health insurance as a portion of compensation. Now, suddenly, that benefit seems to have elevated the employer to a level where they may now dictate certain religious notions to their female employees. It is important to note that those certain religious notions are IN ERROR based upon feelings rather than fact.
And then we have lots of "conservative" men who see no problem with the notion that corporations can impose religious restrictions upon the female employees. Perhaps they believe it will translate into some chaste christian workplace.
gypsyd8
1 Article; 276 Posts
Because there are too many damn kids. It's interesting how concerned some people are about potential fertilized eggs but are not the least bit concerned when those potentialities become actual human beings with needs. Then their food stamps get cut because "people shouldn't get free stuff"