Supreme Court hearing Hobby Lobby v Obamacare
 

This case is now at the Supreme Court. Hobby Lobby is a business owned by a Christian family. The family objects to the parts of Obamacare that require them to provide free contraception, especially certain kinds of contraception that can work after conception - a violation of the family's religious beliefs.

Hobby Lobby isn't forbidding their employees from purchasing contraception or abortion on their own dime - the family doesn't want to be forced by law to provide that which violates their religious beliefs.

To the liberals here, what is your argument? The Constitution explicitly says that family has the right to practice their religion. Nowhere does the Constitution say that anyone has the right to free contraception. Case closed, right?

What's the debate? I get that liberal ideology supports free contraception everywhere, but how does the Constitution not end the debate?

doesn't the fact that the case is at the Supreme Court answer your question as to what some think of various "rights", the Constitution and other things ?

The Constitution is outdated and religion is for people who can't think for themselves and need to be told what to do by a bearded guy in the clouds and therefore can't make informed decisions on anything...we all have the right to have sex with whoever and whatever we want whenever and wherever we want(didn't make this up, I heard it in an AIDS testing commercial on the radio recently) and free contraception, abortificents and sex reassignment surgery is essential in maintaining that right...not complicated...no debate...this is progress

I don't disagree, I just want to hear one of them say it. I want one of them to say, "well, I agree that the constitution guarantees the freedom of religion, however, I feel the Constitution doesn't apply because _____________________".

Just my opinion but scott is off base.

The views seem to be " practice your religion, but dont put your values on someone else. Don't discriminate someone else, etc.
The law is the law. If an employee at AC Moore or Michaels crafts is being provided birth control, hobby lobby employees should as well.

Seems pretty simple ? No?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I haven't been following this closely, as things have been a bit hectic lately, but I heard this article cited this morning.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/...ourt-obamacare

take the source for what it is, but IF Hobby Lobby covered some forms of contraception before the ACA, doesn't it seem mildly hypocritical now to be against it purely on religious beliefs?

:rotfl:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"The views seem to be " practice your religion, but dont put your values on someone else"

You could not be more wrong. It is Obamacare, and the liberals who support the contraception mandate, who are forcing their views on the Christian business, not the other way around.

The Christian business owners are NOT telling their employees what to do. They are not telling their employees that they cannot purchase contraception on their own. It is the liberals here, who want to force the Christian business owners to abandon what they believe and purchase that which violates their beliefs.

Pretty simple, no? I'm not sure how you can fail to see that, if you can put yourself in the shoes of the Christian business owner for a second. All he wants to do is operate his business, and do it in a way that doesn't force him to abandon his religion.

"practice your religion, but dont put your values on someone else"

Wrong again. The Christian business owner is in no way putting his values on anyone else. He is asking to be left alone. He isn't trying to convert his employees to Christianity, he isn't trying to teach his employees that contraception is immoral. It is the pro-contraception crowd that is forcing their beliefs upon the Christian business owner.

"The law is the law" Not if it's unconstitutional, it's not. Nebe, at one point in our nation's history, slavery was the law of the land. There are bad laws which deserve to be thrown out. In this country, we are not forbidden from challenging laws. Not yet anyway...

"If an employee at AC Moore or Michaels crafts is being provided birth control, hobby lobby employees should as well. "

What? Every business is required to follow the practices of every other business? So if I open an art studio and pay my cashier $100,00 a year, that means you are required to do the same?

If Hobby Lobby employees are envious of the perks at Ac Moore or Michaels, then lucky for them, they are free to pursue employment there. No one is forcing these people to work at Hobby Lobby.

Constitution, shmonstitution...

From what I heard, Hobby Lobby is specifically objecting to being forced to provide the kinds of contraception that can take effect after conception. That can be considered to be an abortificant, pardon my spelling. I don't think they are objecting to condoms...they are objecting specifically to things that could potentially be used after conception.

Furthermore, I don't know that the timing matters. Maybe they just converted to Christianity. I don't know that there is a statute of limitations on claiming tht your constitutional rights are currently being violated.

They aren't objecting to all kinds of contraception. But Obama, naturaly (since Obama is the most rabidly pro-abortion president we will ever have) had to take it to unimaginable levels.

Not exactly, if you bothered to, you know, get the facts from the other side.

Nebe, the Bill Of Rights applies to everyone, even those you happen to disagree with. It's that simple. Whatever these people want, they can get. They cannot force their employer to provide it for them. Christians cannot be forced to pay for what is tantamount to an abortion.

Just because you happen to like the concept of free contraception, doesn't mean you can throw out the constitution to achieve it.

you are not wrong Jim.

and when slavery was legal, the slave owners were not wrong either ;)

You're implying that there is no such thing as an immoral law. In my opinion, you would be wrong about that.

Slave owners were not breaking the laws at the time. Most people would not agree with you, that they "were not wrong".

Rockhound's article says that, in accordance with their beliefs, Hobby Lobby pays far higher than minimum wage. Good for them...

If an employee at Hobby Lobby is not being provided certain types of birth control, AC Moore or Michaels Crafts employees should not as well.

Seems pretty simple? No?

When Bush was president, I recall hearing a fair amount of liberal uproar about the concern of trading "freedom for security". Lots of liberals were concerned about that, and it was an important discussion to have. But those same folks are now rallying around the idea of trading freedom for consequence-free fornication. We've sure come a long way under this administration, what a great cultural leap forward.

How long, O Lord?

So the rights of the 13,000 employees must be mandated by the bosses, huh? No one is MAKING the hobby lobby family use the contraception, just to allow their employees to obtain it under their healthcare.

So it is either the business applying their morals/beliefs to 13,000 employees or the ACA doing it to the owners..


it is not a simple argument either way....

"So the rights of the 13,000 employees must be mandated by the bosses, huh?"

How do you think it works? Do employees get to determine their own wages and benefits, and I missed that announcement? Bosses make the rules.

"just to allow their employees to obtain it under their healthcare. "

Who pays for most of the healthcare costs? The owners of the company. Come on, I think you know this...

"either the business applying their morals/beliefs to 13,000 employees"

Absolutely wrong. The business owners are not forcing their personal beliefs onto their employees. The employees, in this case, are free to do whatever they want, they are free to buy whatever they want, they are free to fornicate however they want. The owners simply want to be left out of it. If the employees want to sleep around, why does the employer have to pay for the safety gear? If I ride motorcycles in my free time, does my employer have to give me a free helmet?

"it is not a simple argument either way"

If you pretend we don't have a Constitution, I suppose it's a complicated argument. If you concede that we have a Constitution and a Bill Of Rights therein, it gets very simple, very quickly. How do you get around that?

Rockhound, please tell me, how is the business owner trying to force his beliefs onto his employees? The business owner doesn't want to personally pay the bill for that which violates his religion, but the employees are free to do as they wish with their own money. The only thing forced upon the employee, is the respobsibility for paying for certain kinds of contraception.

I believe that you are correct but I think the medical view is that it is not abortificant (haven't heard that word before) but rather that it somehow prevents the egg and sperm from bonding (for lack of a better term). Perhaps there is a period of time when the sperm and egg can "bond" after intercourse (like the 24 hour window within which you can take the pill)????

That was the point of my response to Nebe. It was the reverse parallel to his "Seems pretty simple? No?" constsruction. He just had a one-sided simplicity. I merely provided the flip side. Either way, the construction is stupid. And this whole debate on whether something that is so available and not expensive has to be included in all insurance policies (or any for that matter) is ridiculous. What the hell have we come to?

I don't know how it could be explained any simpler.

It's not the employer who is wrong, but the government, for forcing the employer to pay for something they shouldn't.
If an employee wants a "morning after pill", let them pay for it themselves!

Heck,. maybe they won't be covered by the health plan under Obama-scare?

Naw, we all know that anything that promotes sexual deviance and promiscuity (particularly with children) will be covered and promoted by Obamacare. How else will they perpetuate the voter base?

I do like the motorcycle helmet comparison. That's pure gold!

I don't like the idea that a for profit corporation has religious beliefs which trump federal law. So if my corporation is run by Scientologists will they deny me my mental health medication? :devil2: :hihi:

But really, best line I read in a comment to an article on the topic. I'll paraphrase...

But this company has no problem selling cheap Chinese crap made by women nearly enslaved and given forced abortions...what hypocrites.

Great point anonymous.

-spence

Spence, corporations are people! You don't remember?

Didn't we go to college with Corperation? man what a party animal..






And that is the reason why hobby lobby should not be exempt from this.. hobby lobby practices no religion.

"I don't like the idea that a for profit corporation has religious beliefs which trump federal law"

You don't have to like it. That's the thing about the constitution, it applies even when you don't like it.

I don't like it whan an artist makes a painting of Jesus covered in feces, but his right to do that is guaranteed by the freedom of speech. Same for flag-burners.

I don't like it when the Westboro Baptist Church stages rallies at military funerals. But their right to do that is guaranteed by the freedom of assembly.

I don't like anything that Rachael Maddow says. But her right to say stupid and hateful things is guaranteed by the freedom of the press.

I don't like it when people send itiotic requests to congressmen. But their right to do that is guaranteed by the right to petition for redress of grievances.

You may not like a Christian business choosing not to pay for their employees to fornicate. LIKE IT OR NOT, their right to do that is guaranteed by the freedom of religion.

Fortunately for us, your personal preferences are not a litmus test for when the constitution applies and when it doesn't. The constutution doesn't only apply when it serves your Bolshevik agenda.

Here's more good news. Not one of the Hobby Lobby employees is forced to work there. They can work elsewhere.

"what hypocrites"...

Let's see the proof that the specific warehouse from which Hobby Lobby buys their stuff, has brutal labor practices. Until you show that proof, your smear is nothing more than ideologically-driven speculation. No one is interested. Figures that your favorite quote of all of this, is a baseless smear. What a shocker.

Finally, mental disease is a legitimate illness recognized by the AMA. Recreational sex is a purely voluntary activity that some people choose to engage in. If one wants safety devices associated with their chosen hobbies, why the f*ck can't they pay for it themselves. I like to SCUBA dive, so can I ask my employer for a free dive computer? Try telling me the difference...

You have a very vivid obsession with sex with it comes to issues of contraception and homosexuality.

As for proof, I've never been in an HL store and don't even know if there's one in the area. That being said, I'd be willing to wager they sell Chinese products...this isn't rocket science.

-spence

"You have a very vivid obsession with sex with it comes to issues of contraception and homosexuality."

More stupid, baseless insults.

I get concerned when your hero decides he can ignore the parts of the constitution he doesn't happen to like. In this case, it has to do with recreational sex. That's not my obsession, that's the specific wrecking ball Obama is taking to the constitution in this case.

I'm obsessed with homosexuality? Hardly.

"I'd be willing to wager they sell Chinese products...this isn't rocket science."

Having trouble with comprehension today? I didn't say they didn't sell Chinese products. What I said was, (1) that doesn't mean the factory they use is exploitative, and (2) it has nothing to do with the issue at hand. The constitution applies to all Americans, even those who sell goods made in China.

The number one line in their charter - even before value for customers!

Do you think the country of China in ANY WAY reinforces biblical principals?

-spence

No I don't. But HL isn't limiting itself to associating with Christians. They have 13,000 employees, many of whom are not Christian.

Again, maybe you can focus on the only thing that matters here...the constitution. Instead of telling us what jerks the people at HL are, please tell me why they don't deserve the same constitutional protections that you enjoy? Try to limit your answer to that topic...

As Jim in CT says, Hobby Lobby is not limiting itself to associating only with Christians--neither as employees or customers, nor even with only Christian manufacturers. That would be nearly impossible since all the materials that comprise the products they sell come from diverse and unknown sources. Nor could they actually sell those products without using currencies which are produced by secular agencies which do not reinforce, or operate on, Christian principles.

The owners of Hobby Lobby can only hold themselves responsible for "Honoring the Lord in all we do by operating the company in a manner consistent with biblical principles."

Even Christ himself, in his teaching, had to use resources which were produced by non-Christians. He did not prohibit others from doing the same, but required only that they personally led their life according to his teaching.

By that logic, what substantial burden is there on Hobby Lobby to comply with Federal law? The company is using resources (i.e. employees) which may not share the same religious convictions. Then...According to Jesus Christ, as long as the owners of the Hobby Lobby lead their life according to his teaching everything should be all hunky dory…

-spence

The owners of Hobby Lobby are providing a means for people who wish to participate with them in their enterprise and be compensated for their work, which helps the employees to have the things they wish to have. They are not forced to share in the enterprise, nor forced to worship or live as the owners do. How should it be that the employees should be able to force the owners to bend to their will? Is there some sort of suicide pact which must be signed in order to hire employees? If the compensation is not enough, the would be employee need not take the job. If the employer wishes to provide health insurance, must that insurance have clauses which violate the principles by which they personally live? If employees wish to have an assisted suicide, must the employers be compelled to provide the means to do so if it is against their conscience?

Those things employers create including what they provide in compensation are done in respect to who they are and what they believe? Those things are a reflection and a result of who they are. The resources they use are mostly out of their ability to control and not a result or reflection of who they personally are. They don't create or control the lives of the employees. They don't create the coin of the realm. They don't create the products which they sell. If the products they choose to sell are useful and beneficial, that is a reflection on who they are. If those products are harmful and against the principles by which they live, that is also a reflection of who they are.

Jesus Christ, I assume, would approve of them living their life and operating their business in a way which reflects his teachings. If they sold, or provided, in a way which is counter to his teaching, he would probably disapprove.

"By that logic, what substantial burden is there on Hobby Lobby to comply with Federal law?"

Of course they have to obey the law. But Congress, and the Courts, must make sure that the laws do not violate the Constitution.

"The company is using resources (i.e. employees) which may not share the same religious convictions."

Correct, the company does not require employees to share their religious views. Hence, the employees are free to fornicate all they want, and get as many abortions as they want. The employees, the way I read the Constitution, are not allowed to force the owners to pay for their choice to engage in recreational sex.

"According to Jesus Christ, as long as the owners of the Hobby Lobby lead their life according to his teaching everything should be all hunky dory"

More simple-minded, petty mockery of that which you disagree with.

That is actually a point that adresses the constitutionality of the issue, instead of attacking the character of the owners. I respect that.

Unfortunately for you, your assumption that there is no correlation between corporations and the people who own them, has been settled by the Supreme Court, and not in your favor. In the recent and famous "Citizens United" case, the Supreme Court ruled that corporations, like people, have a first amendment right to free speech, and can exercise that right in the form of campaign contributions.

If business owners, via the companies they own, have the right to free speech...by what logic would they not also have the right to freedom of religion?

Spence or Nebe, please answer this question...

If Obamacare provides free contraception to those who choose to engage in recreational sex...why everyone aho chooses to engage in a recreational pursuit, get the associated safety gear free as well?

If I ride a motorcycle, why can't I get a free helmet?
If I SCUBA dive, why can't I get a free dive computer?

Why do only fornicators get free stuff associated with their chosen 'hobby'?

This entire topic is titillating to you isn't it :hihi:

-spence

What answer do I have to give to your question, to get you to answer my question?

If people who choose to sleep around get free contraception from Obamacare, why don't people who choose to ride motorcycles get free helmets from Obamacare?

Please answer the question. Or admit that you cannot.

There you go. Off the rails.

How does wanting contraception covered under insurance relate to sleeping around?

Did you use contraception when you were dating your now wife? Were you sleeping around? I wasn't then. I don't think my wife was. Her contraception was covered by her insurance.

This is ignoring the fact that there can be medical reasons to take contraception.

"How does wanting contraception covered under insurance relate to sleeping around?"

I assume that if someone isn't engaging in recreational sex, they have no need for contraception. I also don't like people who want someone else to pay for the tools involved for consequence-free sex. If you want to have consequence-free sex, you have that right, just please leave me, and my wallet, out of it.

"Did you use contraception when you were dating your now wife? "

I did. I paid for it myself.

"Were you sleeping around?"

Maybe you could call it that. I was certainly fornicating, which was my choice, and I didn't see that it was anyone else's responsibility to be involved. It was between the 2 of us. My language is not a complimentary way of describing it, I'll admit.

"Her contraception was covered by her insurance"

But her employer was not forced by law to provide it for free. Apples and oranges.

"This is ignoring the fact that there can be medical reasons to take contraception"

That's true. I don't know what Hobby Lobby's position is on that. The Catholic Church, for example, is not opposed to contraception that's prescribed for medical conditions. Maybe (I'm purely speculating) HL's plan provides for contraception when there is a ned. In any event, HL's concern is with the abortificants, and there is almost never a legitimate medical need for an abortion.

I think I tried to answer your questions. Maybe you can answer one of mine...regardless of how you personally feel about this, how do you get past the constitution?

As I said, the constitution allows many people to do things that I find morally repugnant, like holding a non-violent Klan rally. It makes me sick that anyone would listen to the Klan. But I would not be in favor of a law that made it illegal to listen to them.

Personal ideology has no absolutely place whatsoever in the discussion of whether or not someone has a constitutional right to do something.

Ultimately, there can be "medical reasons" for regulating everything we do. Including wearing helmets when motorcycle riding.

Ignoring that fact by including a select list of items which must be insured makes it appear that there is an agenda beyond "health" reasons for including contraception and not everything else. Even more so when so much of the other things not included are far more expensive than contraceptives. If we don't include daily meals of adequate nutritional value, proper housing and clothing, restful bedding, physically refurbishing vacations and pastimes, etc. as part of an adequate health insurance policy, why include contraception? And if we believe that individuals must provide for their own of the above, why not individuals providing their own contraceptives?

How about this plan? Since just about everything we do affects our health, instead of being compensated with a paycheck for work, how about we are provided with an insurance plan which covers all available expenses we are capable of accruing? Everything we purchase will be paid for with our insurance card. We must all work at some employment, either in businesses created by others, or those created by ourselves, or by being independent contractors. We must be able to prove, on a yearly basis (or some lesser interval), that we are productively employed, and, if so, will be issued by federal government authorities the overall insurance card. How diversified our opportunities are will depend on the initiative of entrepreneurs, for whatever personal reason, to provide them. If a social crisis occurs because there are not enough inventers to provide us with basic needs or diverse needs for recreation and emotional well being, government selected experts who have been educated with abilities to create new games and ideas for society to enjoy will do so. And the compulsory schools will be able to determine the aptitudes of students for entrepreneurship, etc. So if not enough businesses are created, those who have the aptitudes will be ordered to create them or relinquish their insurance cards.

You see it as the government restricting Hobby Lobby's religious beliefs. I see it as Hobby Lobby imposing their religious beliefs on their employees. Reproductive issues should be covered by healthcare, IMHO. Period. I also see it as HIGHLY hypocritical that they covered it before the ACA, but don't cover it now, by splitting hairs with 'aborticant's? was the term.

I truly believe, they disagree with the law politically, and are using this as an excuse. Maybe it is financially motivated, as I think there are a large number of companies looking for excuses to cut benefits and doing so under the guise of the the ACA.

I still commend them for paying above minimum wage.

I'm sure they appreciate your commendation. What do you think of my above "insurance plan"?