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.
Specializes in Med/surg, ER/ED,rehab ,nursing home.
I am concerned that such companys will more than take advantage of it. Do they provide Viagra and the like? Perhaps that should be considered forcing you to have sexual reproduction. I highly doubt you are given a year of wages just to have a child and raise it till ready for day care. Maybe Hobby Lobby will do so. Yeah. Now what about doctors who refuse to provide a script based on their faith? That happens, too. they infringe on my rights as well when they do that. I believe if you are against birth control or abortion, you should also sign yourself up to pay for that child. Huh? You don't want to do that?
It's really immaterial whether the issue is four specific (legal, FDA-approved, widely available and utilized) forms of contraception rather than all rx forms of contraception. How is it "not completely true" to wonder whether the next step might be a JW-owned company refusing to cover blood transfusions, or an Orthodox Jewish-owned company refusing to cover organ transplants, in the name of the business owners' religious beliefs? The principle is the same.
I don't think so.
This is about whether someone should be forced to offer insurance for what they believe to be the killing of a human being.
When there are a whole boatload of contraceptives still available and are part of Hobby Lobby's health insurance plan and have been for a long time.
This is specific to abortifacients.
I hate to use the overused phrase here in debates but in my opinion, those are straw-man arguments.
Two of the liberal arguments against the corporations looking for an exemption from the HHS mandate requiring companies offering insurance to cover a range of forms of birth control rely on slippery-slope arguments. If companies can offer insurance that doesn’t cover certain birth-control methods, what’s stopping them from not covering, say, vaccines or blood transfusions? And if Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties can get an exemption, what’s stopping, say, Apple from claiming some kind of religious belief?
But these arguments aren’t very compelling, not least because they are largely hypothetical, as the majority opinion notes:
Where to begin: Hobby Lobby doesn’t just “say” it’s not about those cases, it specifically explains why it’s not and admits that an issue like vaccinations present a different moral calculus than insurance coverage of contraception did, and notes that, in any case, there is no empirical basis for suggesting that such claims will be brought, either. (As they have not been in 20 years of our having the statutes we do on religious liberty.)
As a Women's Health Nurse Practitioner my education on the topic of mechanism of action of morning after contraception is it PREVENTS conception. The IUD is a reliable long acting reversible contraceptive that sets up a sterile inflammatory response in the uterus that inhibits sperm action and prevents conception. this is the patient information I provide to allow women to make their choices on their most acceptable way to prevent pregnancy. It is horrifying to me that Hobby Lobby's Belief system trumps established science.
I am concerned that such companys will more than take advantage of it. Do they provide Viagra and the like? Perhaps that should be considered forcing you to have sexual reproduction. I highly doubt you are given a year of wages just to have a child and raise it till ready for day care. Maybe Hobby Lobby will do so. Yeah. Now what about doctors who refuse to provide a script based on their faith? That happens, too. they infringe on my rights as well when they do that. I believe if you are against birth control or abortion, you should also sign yourself up to pay for that child. Huh? You don't want to do that?
I love this! YES!!! This is partly the essence of this...forget the bogus religious mumbo jumbo...sadly that still exists in our "enlightened" society...Using the corporation/power argument: Of course they want poor people having more babies...it is the cheap labor of the future to keep their machine running and their pockets full...That is it...it has nothing to do with anything else...and a pregnant woman or one with multiple kids...scared and w/o resources is vastly more easily "controlled" than a free-thinking person! Wow...how are we still arguing about conception?
I agree 100%. No doubt these same people are against abortion due to their religious beliefs, not mine or many of their employees.
I would like to make the owners responsible for the children who are born but never had to be because of this ruling. There will be a lawsuit against them. Many are writing letters and inundating the white house regarding this decision. There is a reason for separation of church and state and this is one of them.
I'm Jewish and pro-choice. this is a hot button for me. My religion teaches nothing that would lead me to reject the 4 contraception methods that the owners of Hobby Lobby find objectionable. Assume that I work for Hobby Lobby. Why do my employers religious beliefs trump my religious beliefs? Why did the court choose the interests of a corporation over the interests of individuals? We have embarked on a slippery slope that leads to a master/serf economy. The United States is not really Democracy anymore. We have been heading down the road towards a plutocratic society for some time. This decision takes us one step closer.
I'm Jewish and pro-choice. this is a hot button for me. My religion teaches nothing that would lead me to reject the 4 contraception methods that the owners of Hobby Lobby find objectionable. Assume that I work for Hobby Lobby. Why do my employers religious beliefs trump my religious beliefs? Why did the court choose the interests of a corporation over the interests of individuals? We have embarked on a slippery slope that leads to a master/serf economy. The United States is not really Democracy anymore. We have been heading down the road towards a plutocratic society for some time. This decision takes us one step closer.
Agreed...in many respects we are already there...sad. We need Christopher Hitchens back!!!
I agree with the court ruling. In addition, people who are commenting that the "don't like the ruling" probably don't know (or choose to ignore) the fact that Hobby Lobby has NOT refused to pay for ALL contraceptives. Only certain ones/types, and those they will not pay for DO NOT include typical oral contraceptives. Go check!
Often ignored, too, is the fact that Hobby Lobby employees are not obligated to work there. They have the full free choice to work elsewhere. Just as applies to nearly all of us: Don't like your employer's policies? Quit griping and go work somewhere else.
And as Spidey'smom said: This ruling could very well begin the dismantling of the ACA. My though on that? If only it were true.
And another thing - there are many sites on the Internet offering Ruth Bader Ginsberg T shirts. I just bought one and I'm considering buying a few more styles to allow me to wear one every time I work out. I just read her dissent in this case. It is the only Supreme Court opinion I have ever read in full. It's brilliant.
bradleau
146 Posts
I am concerned that such companys will more than take advantage of it. Do they provide Viagra and the like? Perhaps that should be considered forcing you to have sexual reproduction. I highly doubt you are given a year of wages just to have a child and raise it till ready for day care. Maybe Hobby Lobby will do so. Yeah. Now what about doctors who refuse to provide a script based on their faith? That happens, too. they infringe on my rights as well when they do that. I believe if you are against birth control or abortion, you should also sign yourself up to pay for that child. Huh? You don't want to do that?