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.
This is NOT a woman's health issue. The vast majority of women do not require birth control to maintain good health. It's not mandatory. It's optional.
Unless you have a medical condition for which BC is curative or helps to manage, birth control is not a medical necessity.
With very, very few exceptions, women won't die without BC. They won't get sick without it. Nor will they suffer without it.
'Women's health' is a buzzword with virtually no context related to this case- especially when the only birth control not offered by Hobby Lobby is the kind that terminates pregnancies.
Lots of misnomers, misinformation and empty political rhetoric with NO basis in reality related to the ruling going on!
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. Their suit was bogus to begin with. They invest in emergency contraception.
Insurance coverages change on a fairly regular basis, and not because the employer decides to change it.....We have had several incidences, mostly relating to anti-GERD meds for the DH, where our doc prescribes one med, but the insurer comes back with "you have to try this one or this one first to see if it will do the trick." Neither employer or employee has any control over this, even though both pay into the plan. Doesn't mean the DH has no access to medication to help his GERD, just not the first one on the list.
Last I check, the law does not guarantee subsidy for contraception.
The ruling was based on the Constitution- not feelings or junk science. Your need to reduce it because you don't agree with it is - oh- intellectually dishonest.
You, unless you are elevating yourself to god-like status cannot state emphatically that their beliefs are "in error". That is the same thing you are objecting to in their thinking. The insurance package is a benefit, not a right. No employer should be forced to pay for anything other than agreed upon wages. However, out of the goodness of their hearts, Hobby Lobby pays substantially over the current minimum wage and offers good benefits. This is directly contributing to the empowerment of women to make more money and be responsible for themselves. Why have you not offered praise for their pay rates that are way above the national average? That would certainly cover any out of pocket expense for an unprotected night.
If you are wondering, I am a woman. You seem to be under the delusion that conservative men are standing in front of pharmacies across the nation with pitchforks driving women away from their beloved day after pills. Last I checked, every woman's right to attain these products was still intact.
Lastly, when you open a business, pour your blood sweat and tears into its success, provide HIGH paying jobs to people in need, you should be able to run it as you see fit. This is America, not a socialist nation. If a woman does not like the benefit package she can (gasp ) choose to work elsewhere or buy into Obamacare. Your inflammatory rhetoric is, as you like to put it, "in error".
You, unless you are elevating yourself to god-like status cannot state emphatically that their beliefs are "in error". That is the same thing you are objecting to in their thinking. The insurance package is a benefit, not a right. No employer should be forced to pay for anything other than agreed upon wages. However, out of the goodness of their hearts, Hobby Lobby pays substantially over the current minimum wage and offers good benefits. This is directly contributing to the empowerment of women to make more money and be responsible for themselves. Why have you not offered praise for their pay rates that are way above the national average? That would certainly cover any out of pocket expense for an unprotected night.
If you are wondering, I am a woman. You seem to be under the delusion that conservative men are standing in front of pharmacies across the nation with pitchforks driving women away from their beloved day after pills. Last I checked, every woman's right to attain these products was still intact.
Lastly, when you open a business, pour your blood sweat and tears into its success, provide HIGH paying jobs to people in need, you should be able to run it as you see fit. This is America, not a socialist nation. If a woman does not like the benefit package she can (gasp ) choose to work elsewhere or buy into Obamacare. Your inflammatory rhetoric is, as you like to put it, "in error".
Using science to refute the "belief" (and it is a belief not based on evidence) that hormonal birth control does not cause abortion isn't "elevating yourself to god-like status." I believe that is a point that has been consistently missed here.
I believe that HL is self insured, so your point is moot.
Insurance coverages change on a fairly regular basis, and not because the employer decides to change it.....We have had several incidences, mostly relating to anti-GERD meds for the DH, where our doc prescribes one med, but the insurer comes back with "you have to try this one or this one first to see if it will do the trick." Neither employer or employee has any control over this, even though both pay into the plan. Doesn't mean the DH has no access to medication to help his GERD, just not the first one on the list.
Science has been wrong a plethora of times. Just consider that not too many years ago we thought we were heading for another ice age. Do some research on science and its wrong conclusions.
Also, using your own logic.....If you are claiming to be in the right because prevailing scientific opinion is on your side, then conversely you are admitting Hobby Lobby is well within their rights by law to object to and not pay a dime towards these drugs because prevailing legal opinion (The Supreme Court) sided with them. Legally speaking, according to your own argument, you are in the wrong about who should have to contribute financially.
It is most definitely not a good day and your salutations wont make it a good day Jehovah's Witnesses are Christian and those I have met actually behave that way instead of claiming to be "saved" and turning around making vitriolic statements about their brethren.
Good day:
The precedent would not have to have been set had Obama and the democrats compromised on the issue of payment (as this is not an access issue, and never was an access issue) for contraceptives. Had President Obama and the democrats accepted that paying for 16 contraceptives out of 20 was far more than fair, and provided an exemption on the other 4 (after all, Obama and the democrats have been handing out exemptions left and right to their buddies), then there would never have been a reason for this to go to the Supreme Court to create a precedent.
But let's say you and others who are concerned over this as a precedent are correct. Let's say JW's state they don't have to be forced to pay for blood transfusions. While I personally believe JW's are a cult, guess what... as long as we live in a free country and the money they earn is their money, then they should have the freedom to spend their money as they see fit in so long as it is not criminal. Don't want to work for such a company, since it is a free country, you don't have to do so. Plain and simple.
Prevailing legal opinion sided with them based on their beliefs. Which opens a huge can of worms for any and all belief systems to deny anything to their employees based on how they feel. Personal belief does not a truth make.
Hormonal birth control has been around for a very long time; its mechanism of action is well understood by the scientific community at large.
Besides the fact that you are contradicting yourself, you are obviously not trained in the law or Constitition. You have no expertise in this area yet you caim to know more than all Supreme Court Justices! You must think awfully high of your own intellect. Did you know that the majority are Liberal leaning yet they still rightly interpreted this as a violation of our longstanding freedom in this area? The freedoms we have cannot be trumped just because you have an axe to grind.
For the last time:
You do not have to work for Hobby Lobby.
All women have unrestricted access to all legal forms of contraceptives.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land and you believe you know more than they.
Feminists do not rely on the government or employer to provide for them. That is a victim/entitlement mentality.
You can't do anything about it so if you find it such a human rights crisis, go out and set up a charity on your own hard-worked for dime and offer these drugs/devices for free to these sad downtrodden women. That is how America works. You want to live in Europe.
gypsyd8
1 Article; 276 Posts
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. Their suit was bogus to begin with. They invest in emergency contraception.