Hobby Lobby hypocrisy on display (Page 3): Since when does anyone, in this case workers, have a RIGHT to have someone else pay for their personal choices? But you are right... if they...

Tyster

BoJester wrote:

The rights of a corporation cannot trump the rights of the workers.

if the workers feel strongly enough, they should walk out and shut HL down for a day at a time, until the i***ts realize business is more important than ideology

Since when does anyone, in this case workers, have a RIGHT to have someone else pay for their personal choices?

But you are right... if they don't like it they can fail to report to work. The question is who will cave first... the Company so it can continue in business, or the worker who needs that paycheck?

Are you aware that Hobby Lobby pays its workers better than most of its competitors? Or that they do feel it right to provide health care? But the ADA has forced them to change their policy to one that includes provisions for coverage that goes against the majority shareholder's belief system? If you listened to the liberal SC justices they recommended that HL drop all medical coverage ($2,000/person fine) rather than provide a policy that excluded these particular policies ($36,000/person fine).

Is that even logical? A fine 18 times larger for a good, but ADA based incomplete policy or just dropping everyone's policy.

son of witless

BoJester wrote:

The so-called "christian" owners are so ... (show quote)

BoJester,

Christians do not stop employees from paying for these things themselves.

BoJester

But in this case, they are breaking the law

son of witless wrote:

BoJester,

Christians do not stop employees from paying for these things themselves.

son of witless

BoJester wrote:

But in this case, they are breaking the law

Bojoker,

Awwww come on. You guys on the left have always advocated breaking laws you did not like. I mean look at your mighty hero Obama. If there's a law he doesn't like he just tells his lackey Eric Holder to ignore it. So Hobby Lobby is following the heroic example of our fearless leader. In fact Hobby Lobby could get into the Democrat Party hall of fame for standing up to what it considers an unfair law.

BoJester

Good point, however, nothing you claim the Presdent has done has even had a congressional hearing, let alone a court case that has not been thrown out.

HL on the other hand may lose this case.

son of witless wrote:

Bojoker,

Awwww come on. You guys on the left have always advocated breaking laws you did not like. I mean look at your mighty hero Obama. If there's a law he doesn't like he just tells his lackey Eric Holder to ignore it. So Hobby Lobby is following the heroic example of our fearless leader. In fact Hobby Lobby could get into the Democrat Party hall of fame for standing up to what it considers an unfair law.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

BoJester wrote:

The so-called "christian" owners are so ... (show quote)

You really need to read the brief filed with the SCOTUS. The ACA provides for (think I am correct) twenty one forms of birth control and abortafants. Hobby Lobby is opposed to only three and is willing to cover the others and, in fact, have been providing insurance for the others.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

jimahrens wrote:

There required by law to make those available to there employees thanks to Obama Care. This would all be mute if both men and woman would practice safe sex. There are cases where a******n is a fact of necessity. But to murder because you were more concerned with physical pleasure than using common sense is wrong.

They only oppose either two or three. They have, in fact, have been providing birth control coverage for their employees.

BoJester

During the testimony given, you are correct that HL covered most, wh**ever the actual number is, however when this case reached the SC, they petitioned to withdraw ALL meds.

That is why HL may not prevail in this case.

Decision in June, I think

AuntiE wrote:

You really need to read the brief filed with the SCOTUS. The ACA provides for (think I am correct) twenty one forms of birth control and abortafants. Hobby Lobby is opposed to only three and is willing to cover the others and, in fact, have been providing insurance for the others.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

She Wolf wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong. I pay a reduced rate fo... (show quote)

You people have ZERO idea what you are talking about. If a single one of you have bothered to read the brief filed with the SCOTUS, you would not be so lacking in knowledge on this topic.

As to employers vs employee, every employer hands out a Personnel Handbook and information on insurance, you do not like it get another job. Do you have ANY knowledge relating to this company except what your handlers have given you?

no propaganda please Loc: moon orbiting the third rock from the sun

Tyster wrote:

Hobby Lobby is not preventing their employees from using contraceptives or having an a******n-like procedure. They just don't feel like they should be forced to pay for it. What you do with your body is your business. But when you make me pay for it, you have made it my business.

Tyster,

That is the thing that the left chooses to leave out. Conservatives are not saying stop all forms of contraceptives. We just do not want to have to pay for your drugs that are your decision to take. Once you demand we pay for them, it does become our business. In the same way it is not only liberals but also conservatives who pay for public school educations, even those who do not have children in the system. However, if we dare say"do not teach our children how to perform homosexual acts, or describe condom application to our grade school children. They are our children and we don't want them indoctrinated to accept as equally valid those acts. We are forced to pay for a number of things that we know to be wrong, and we have no say in the matter. If we are paying for a product (contraceptives or education, for instance) we should have a say in it.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

BoJester wrote:

During the testimony given, you are correct that HL covered most, wh**ever the actual number is, however when this case reached the SC, they petitioned to withdraw ALL meds.

That is why HL may not prevail in this case.

Decision in June, I think

They may have put it as part of the petition; however, it is very unlikely they would discontinue all coverage. Their main issue is the morning after medications. My thought is if it is only a particular type (morning after medications) why can the lady not obtain such on her own? I am not current on how often it is used. Missed that stat.

SeniorVerdad

Tyster wrote:

Hobby Lobby is not preventing their employees from using contraceptives or having an a******n-like procedure. They just don't feel like they should be forced to pay for it. What you do with your body is your business. But when you make me pay for it, you have made it my business.

I am personally against a******n but you have made the most accurate response to this entire issue.

son of witless

BoJester wrote:

Good point, however, nothing you claim the Presdent has done has even had a congressional hearing, let alone a court case that has not been thrown out.

HL on the other hand may lose this case.

Now you have a good point. Republicans are very weak in going after our law breaker in chief. If things were reversed, Democrats would have impeached, tarred and feathered, and hung a Republican President for half the crappola President Obama has committed.