Jump to content

SCOTUS

Posted

Specializes in Critical Care,Recovery, ED. Has 40 years experience.

You are reading page 3 of SCOTUS. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

Do you agree with the Hobby Lobby decision of the SCOTUS

  1. 1. Do you agree with the Hobby Lobby decision of the SCOTUS

    • 15
      YES
    • 12
      NO
    • 0
      NO OPINION

27 members have participated

Jillybean48

Specializes in Med/Surg, Peds, Geriatrics, Home Health. Has 16 years experience.

You just made the statement in this very same post (see above) regarding what the government can and can't require you to do, so it would seem to be relevant based on your own arguments.
Actually it means that I have to keep repeating myself because you keep asking the same thing in different ways.

Jillybean48

Specializes in Med/Surg, Peds, Geriatrics, Home Health. Has 16 years experience.

I'm not sure that it's really accurate to compare someone who uses birth control with an alcoholic, but I'll play along.
That's why it says for example. I didn't realize there could be any accurate and not accurate examples.

Men and women who are personally responsible don't need to outright force others to take care of them as if they were victims; real men and real women pave their own way, pay their own way, and earn it. They don't need force involved.

You mean they go and get jobs with health insurance?

Responsible men don't have to worry when they get a job if their healthcare is covered. Responsible women now do.

I personally think that hobby lobby should be able to cover what they want based on the fact that this is America, and my belief that health insurance shouldn't be mandated through the employer. My biggest problem with the ACA is the way it utilized businesses to achieve the mandate. It was obvious that this was going to create endless problems and challenges.

That said, I think allowing the exemption based on religious grounds was dangerous and stupid. What happens when the religious views become more extreme? How do you expect to respect only Christian based beliefs on abortion and not the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses, Muslims, etc.? Don't get me wrong, I know the court will find a way with people like Scalia and Thomas up there since the law and constitution always takes a back seat to their own specific religious ideology.

Let's be real, this was a political stand by Hobby Lobby anyway, not one based on any kind of religious principle. They send hundreds of millions of dollars to a country that funds and encourages abortions and infanticide to control population growth. China is a communist country, so most of the money spent over there goes directly to the government that enforces those policies. How on earth can you reconcile that with your beliefs if a plan B pill disturbs you that much? I have also heard that they invest in the companies whose birth control devices they find so objectionable. Their religious principle ends where the cash flow begins, and that should not be specifically honored by any person or any court.

pmabraham, BSN, RN

Specializes in Hospice, Palliative Care. Has 3 years experience.

Good day:

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.

Thank you.

Good day:

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.

Thank you.

It really is too bad that folks just don't understand the fundamental basis for this case. Too many are confused into thinking that this is about a religious right of a corporation being threatened. It is not. The case didn't even utilize sound medical or scientific criteria to identify the "offensive abortifacients", rather it simply used those things conjured up as offensive by the corporate owners.

Already, others are pushing the edges of the ruling to further impose their religious sensibilities upon employees. Sadly, fearful Christians and hateful partisans are just too blinded and will only realize their folly when it is too late.

Good day:

Those who DO NOT believe in personal responsibility want to FORCE others to pay for their wants, desires, and needs....Simple.

Thank you.

These women have jobs to pay for their needs. How is that NOT personal responsibility? Simple. You're welcome.

tntrn, ASN, RN

Specializes in L & D; Postpartum. Has 34 years experience.

It really is too bad that folks just don't understand the fundamental basis for this case. Too many are confused into thinking that this is about a religious right of a corporation being threatened. It is not. The case didn't even utilize sound medical or scientific criteria to identify the "offensive abortifacients", rather it simply used those things conjured up as offensive by the corporate owners.

Already, others are pushing the edges of the ruling to further impose their religious sensibilities upon employees. Sadly, fearful Christians and hateful partisans are just too blinded and will only realize their folly when it is too late.

And yet in other court cases, Christians are not allowed to run their businesses according to their religious beliefs. Will you (the generic you) not be satisfied until thought control as well as actual physical control over the population is complete?

Hobby Lobby owners covered the contraceptives long before they were enlightened by a right wing legal group with designs on setting an anti-ACA, anti-Obama, anti-contraception precedent. The female employees demanded nothing from their employer, they simply expected that their health insurance coverage would not be unnecessarily affected by political theater. The employees are not free loaders and it is interesting how many posters on AN are demonizing those working women simply because the women want the same rights as men...to make their own health care decisions without interference from their boss.

OC_An Khe

Specializes in Critical Care,Recovery, ED. Has 40 years experience.

Jillybean

Sole Proprietorships, as you describe a business that you start is one thing, business entities e.g. C corporations, S corporations, general and limited partnerships are quite different in their legal construct.

OC_An Khe

Specializes in Critical Care,Recovery, ED. Has 40 years experience.

Employer paid health insurance is a misnomer, the employee is paying for all of it. Health insurance is a cost of the employees total compensation package to the employer. It is part of your overall compensation package. Enough off topic.

Should corporations have more rights as defined in the Bill of Rights then human beings.

Robert.CFRN

Specializes in Critical Care, Flight Nursing. Has 23 years experience.

This is a very good discussion. I agree with the Hobby Lobby decision. I don't see anywhere in the Constitution, which enumerates the powers of the government, where the government has the power to force a person to buy something for another person. People say that a corporation can't have a religious view, but many have correctly pointed out that it's not a corporation's view, but the OWNER'S view. Also correctly pointed out is that women's choice isn't limited. They'll simply have to purchase the 4 of 20 birth control methods not covered out of their own pockets.

It's the power of the free market in a free nation. Don't like an employers benefits or the owners views? Don't work for them. An employer that has crappy benefits won't draw the best employees, and thus won't do well. HL pays their employees well, has good benefits, and is a good place to work based on what I've read from their employees.

I worry at the growth in power of the federal government and all of the bureaucracies that create regulations without legislation. One, our individual freedoms are in grave danger, and two our children are already bankrupt before they're born. It's not sustainable.

The Supreme Court upheld the mandate last year, this was about exemptions based on religion. While i think hobby lobby should be able to cover what they want as you do, the religious exemption was dangerous and wrong. I don't agree with a bad court decision to remedy the situation because it opens the door to more nonsense and abuse. Hobby Lobby is not consistent with their religious objections. When it means higher profits, their objections to supporting abortion or those birth control methods are suddenly out the window. If you have religious objections honored by a court, you should not be able to pick and choose when you object and when you don't. You should have to prove like a conscientious objector that you truly mean what you say before it is even considered. There needs to be a standard that you are consistent with, otherwise, I don't buy your objections or offense.

Should corporations have more rights as defined in the Bill of Rights then human beings.

In a way, they already have more rights, our government works for them, not for the people.

Robert.CFRN

Specializes in Critical Care, Flight Nursing. Has 23 years experience.

Kaley, unfortunately I have to agree. I'm a strong believer in free market capitalism. In this system, those who work hard and provide a good service or product succeed. Those who don't will fail. The competition creates superior products and services. What we have with government, and it's both Reps and Dems, is crony capitalism, where large businesses lobby and have competition legislated out of existence.

And that's where we find government incompetence as well. Government doesn't have to provide excellence because they don't have to compete with anyone. You buy their product, or you're fined and/or jailed. The government can be wasteful and inefficient without consequence. If they don't have enough money, they just tax more or borrow more. Don't agree with them? The NSA and IRS will target you again without consequence.

We live in very dangerous times.

Robert.CFRN

Specializes in Critical Care, Flight Nursing. Has 23 years experience.

Another question. How is it than many businesses and unions were able to opt out of the ACA? Shouldn't the law apply to all equally?

MunoRN, RN

Specializes in Critical Care. Has 10 years experience.

Another question. How is it than many businesses and unions were able to opt out of the ACA? Shouldn't the law apply to all equally?

They aren't actually able to opt out of the ACA. The lifetime limit rule was delayed until an adequate alternative kicked in (until 2014).

The 'unions exempted from the ACA' claim actually earned "pants on fire" status:

Unions don't have to comply with Obamacare, says Crossroads GPS | PolitiFact

MunoRN, RN

Specializes in Critical Care. Has 10 years experience.

This is a very good discussion. I agree with the Hobby Lobby decision. I don't see anywhere in the Constitution, which enumerates the powers of the government, where the government has the power to force a person to buy something for another person. People say that a corporation can't have a religious view, but many have correctly pointed out that it's not a corporation's view, but the OWNER'S view. Also correctly pointed out is that women's choice isn't limited. They'll simply have to purchase the 4 of 20 birth control methods not covered out of their own pockets.

It's the power of the free market in a free nation. Don't like an employers benefits or the owners views? Don't work for them. An employer that has crappy benefits won't draw the best employees, and thus won't do well. HL pays their employees well, has good benefits, and is a good place to work based on what I've read from their employees.

I worry at the growth in power of the federal government and all of the bureaucracies that create regulations without legislation. One, our individual freedoms are in grave danger, and two our children are already bankrupt before they're born. It's not sustainable.

Based on the rest of your post I sort of doubt you really agree with the court's decision. What they ruled is that Hobby Lobby and other businesses shouldn't be required to cover contraception (not just the 4 that HL opposed) because we can instead just have the costs absorbed the public. So instead of HL covering their labor costs, now you are.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.