Hobby Lobby wins Supreme Court Case.

[downzy]

@ downzy - The term "collectivist" (at least in the manner that I use it) characterizes a person's political ideology, and by default it also characterizes that person to some extent (assuming that the person in question is passionate enough about their ideology that it becomes a part of their identity/personality). I have no problem being labeled as a libertarian (little "l", not Libertarian party), or an anarcho-capitalist, etc. Also, "collectivist" is a broad enough category to allow for some variation on your "continuum". And I have already stated that I choose this term in order to stay away from other terms that have more negative connotations, e.g. "fascist". Now...feel free to correct me if I have mis-characterized you as a collectivist, but I just call them as I see them and from what I can tell from your posts on this forum you pretty much go by the standard progressive/liberal/collectivist talking points (at least on the topics we have discussed). Granted that what I can know about you from simply reading your posts is somewhat limited...but again feel free to correct me if I have "labeled" you incorrectly. And if not, then why worry about the label...if that's the ideology that you believe and defend (in most, maybe not all cases)...then wear the "collectivist" badge proudly.

My issue with the term collectivists is that it lumps too many ethos into one term. Moreover, it resides on the one extreme of a continuum where individualism (or libertarianism) resides on the other. So calling someone a "collectivist," in my opinion, is a rather extreme proposition. It's a generalization that doesn't consider that most people are not consistently partial to one particular ethos. One may reside closer to the collectivist extreme than the individualist extreme, but that doesn't render that person a collectivist. Personally, my political ideology varies depending on whether we're discussing national or local politics. There's no room for moderation with such connotations. Unless, of course, you're willing to refer to someone as a "moderate collectivist," but I generally don't see people who label others use such qualifiers.

Personally, I'd be much more comfortable being referred to as a progressive liberal on matters of federal politics. A progressive liberal doesn't subscribe that the government is the solution to all of life's problems, but that when and where warranted, the government has a role to play to facilitate a better polity. Anyone who knows anything about U.S. history between 1870 and 1930 knows the horrible consequences of an absent minded government. Anyone who thinks that less government is a better government needs only travel to countries where there really is indeed no government and tell me how it's working out for them. Hell, I spent nearly a month in India, where each person is left to fend for themselves, and it's absolutely not how I'd want my own federal government to operate. That's not to say that more government is good government, but finding a happy medium is something societies should strive for.

[foghat43]

From George Takei

Also, Hobby Lobby has products made in China, pretty much goes against any Christian values. Maybe they should find someplace else to get their shit from?

How does offering products made in China go against "any Christian values"?

Can't imagine my company imposing that crap onto its employees. We have a ton of employees who are not Christian. But I guess I will be okay because the corporation HQ is in the North East and not backwards bumblefuck South.

You may recall that those folks in the "backwards bumblefuck South" tried to leave once and gain their independence...the Yankees invaded, occupied and forced them back into the union at gunpoint...so you only have the dumbasses in the North East to blame.

[Dazey]

From George Takei

Also, Hobby Lobby has products made in China, pretty much goes against any Christian values. Maybe they should find someplace else to get their shit from?

How does offering products made in China go against "any Christian values"?

It doesn't at all. Christianity clearly advocates slave labour in the bibble.

[Georgy Zhukov]

From George Takei

Also, Hobby Lobby has products made in China, pretty much goes against any Christian values. Maybe they should find someplace else to get their shit from?

How does offering products made in China go against "any Christian values"?

It doesn't at all. Christianity clearly advocates slave labour in the bibble.

Exactly my point.

[Georgy Zhukov]

From George Takei

Also, Hobby Lobby has products made in China, pretty much goes against any Christian values. Maybe they should find someplace else to get their shit from?

How does offering products made in China go against "any Christian values"?

Can't imagine my company imposing that crap onto its employees. We have a ton of employees who are not Christian. But I guess I will be okay because the corporation HQ is in the North East and not backwards bumblefuck South.

You may recall that those folks in the "backwards bumblefuck South" tried to leave once and gain their independence...the Yankees invaded, occupied and forced them back into the union at gunpoint...so you only have the dumbasses in the North East to blame.

We wouldn't have rock and roll if it went the other way.

[Sheri_Rose]

I'm pro choice obviously. No institution no matter how large should be able to tell anyone what will be covered or not covered

as far as reproductive rights are considered. Especially if it is based off of a false ideology, a guise more or less of control.

It's time for organized religion to be dismantled and for the sheep to wake up. I understand we all have certain rights here, but

how would I feel if my company "found" god as one person mentioned and opted to no longer cover such services, or opted out?

Birth control should be mandatory coverage for all women, period no matter what company you work for, or what their "religious" leanings are.

It's basic womens health in my opinion. If I'm forced to have pediatric dental coverage regardless if I have kids or not ( got an e-mail from my company on it )

birth control should be the same. Sure, I'm pissed over that mandatory dental coverage because I've no use for it as I do not have kids thankfully, but if I have another insurance that covers children I can opt out. If I don't have other insurance that covers it then I'm charged a more higher premium now.

I however don't have an issue with birth control being mandatory for those who want or need it. Accidents happen and the morning after pill would come in handy. Dental insurance coverage for

non existent kids? Bullshit. It is unfair to the ones who not follow such silly doctrines. When will enough be enough?

Both corporations -- Conestoga Wood Specialties of Pennsylvania and Hobby Lobby, an Oklahoma-based arts-and-crafts retail giant -- emphasize their conscientious desire to operate in harmony with biblical principles while competing in a secular marketplace.

Edited July 6, 2014 by Sheri_Rose

[Thin White Duke]

No one is forcing you to work in there if you don't like the company, or their principles. When you accept a job, you accept certain conditions, worse or better, and provided they meet the law (as this one meets according to the Supreme Court), it's up to you to take it or not.

If I am vegetarian and I am against killing animals for consumption, maybe a chicken farm or a slaughterhouse is not my place, but I can't pretend them to plant lettuces instead to fulfill my principles and the working conditions I want.

It's called capitalism. And it's called freedom. Both parts freedom.

Edited July 6, 2014 by Thin White Duke

[foghat43]

From George Takei

Also, Hobby Lobby has products made in China, pretty much goes against any Christian values. Maybe they should find someplace else to get their shit from?

How does offering products made in China go against "any Christian values"?

It doesn't at all. Christianity clearly advocates slave labour in the bibble.

Exactly my point.

But the Bible doesn't condone slavery...

http://www.str.org/blog/does-the-bible-condone-slavery#.U7cD4UC_Rkg

From George Takei

Also, Hobby Lobby has products made in China, pretty much goes against any Christian values. Maybe they should find someplace else to get their shit from?

How does offering products made in China go against "any Christian values"?

Can't imagine my company imposing that crap onto its employees. We have a ton of employees who are not Christian. But I guess I will be okay because the corporation HQ is in the North East and not backwards bumblefuck South.

You may recall that those folks in the "backwards bumblefuck South" tried to leave once and gain their independence...the Yankees invaded, occupied and forced them back into the union at gunpoint...so you only have the dumbasses in the North East to blame.

We wouldn't have rock and roll if it went the other way.

Oh, we'd still have rock and roll since the good stuff (like blues based rock...Zeppelin, Stones, Cream, GnR) can be traced back to the blues that originated in the Mississippi Delta (e.g. Robert Johnson)...it doesn't get much more "backwards bumblefuck South" than that! And maybe you've heard of the Allman Bros Band and Skynyrd?

Edited July 6, 2014 by foghat43

[bran]

if you want birth control to stop from having kids it should be your responsibility to pay for birth control not the company you work for.

[downzy]

if you want birth control to stop from having kids it should be your responsibility to pay for birth control not the company you work for.

Well, that's not necessarily how insurance works. Companies are not paying for birth control directly, but health insurance that would cover the medication. Granted, perhaps the price of a policy would decrease (even if it's ever so little) if you remove birth control from said policy. But it's not as though the company is paying directly for birth control.

Let's also clear the confusion regarding what the issue is. If a company is not receiving tax benefits as a result of providing their employees health insurance, they can offer whatever they damn well please so long as it meets a certain basic threshold. Prior to the Hobby Lobby case, companies that do take tax benefits were required to offer coverage that included certain operations/medications, like Plan B and other forms of contraception. But now, as a result of the decision, companies who "find God" can object to such coverage even if they are receiving government subsidies. So when you say it's not the company's responsibility to pay for your contraception, understand that that company is receiving tax benefits, hence it's not really their money.

It should be of note that the insurance policy Hobby Lobby has in place for its employees covers vasectomies and viagra. It's rather telling that companies that "find God" seem to have few issues with contraceptive and sexual performance medications for men.

Edited July 6, 2014 by downzy

[Sheri_Rose]

if you want birth control to stop from having kids it should be your responsibility to pay for birth control not the company you work for.

Well, that's not necessarily how insurance works. Companies are not paying for birth control directly, but health insurance that would cover the medication. Granted, perhaps the price of a policy would decrease (even if it's ever so little) if you remove birth control from said policy. But it's not as though the company is paying directly for birth control.

Let's also clear the confusion regarding what the issue is. If a company is not receiving tax benefits as a result of providing their employees health insurance, they can offer whatever they damn well please so long as it meets a certain basic threshold. Prior to the Hobby Lobby case, companies that do take tax benefits were required to offer coverage that included certain operations/medications, like Plan B and other forms of contraception. But now, as a result of the decision, companies who "find God" can object to such coverage even if they are receiving government subsidies. So when you say it's not the company's responsibility to pay for your contraception, understand that that company is receiving tax benefits, hence it's not really their money.

It should be of note that the insurance policy Hobby Lobby has in place for its employees covers vasectomies and viagra. It's rather telling that companies that "find God" seem to have few issues with contraceptive and sexual performance medications for men.

Thank you!

[bran]

if you want birth control to stop from having kids it should be your responsibility to pay for birth control not the company you work for.

Well, that's not necessarily how insurance works. Companies are not paying for birth control directly, but health insurance that would cover the medication. Granted, perhaps the price of a policy would decrease (even if it's ever so little) if you remove birth control from said policy. But it's not as though the company is paying directly for birth control.

Let's also clear the confusion regarding what the issue is. If a company is not receiving tax benefits as a result of providing their employees health insurance, they can offer whatever they damn well please so long as it meets a certain basic threshold. Prior to the Hobby Lobby case, companies that do take tax benefits were required to offer coverage that included certain operations/medications, like Plan B and other forms of contraception. But now, as a result of the decision, companies who "find God" can object to such coverage even if they are receiving government subsidies. So when you say it's not the company's responsibility to pay for your contraception, understand that that company is receiving tax benefits, hence it's not really their money.

It should be of note that the insurance policy Hobby Lobby has in place for its employees covers vasectomies and viagra. It's rather telling that companies that "find God" seem to have few issues with contraceptive and sexual performance medications for men.

i honestly did not know that the company had a plan that covered vasectomies and viagra. that is fucked up to cover those things but not contraception. you cant have it both ways. you cant offer things like that for men and then deny women the same type of service. my comment was more on the belief that it should be a personal responsibility to buy contraception, without knowing about the vasectomies and the viagra. i can really see why this would piss women off, especially with the company receiving tax benefits.

so yeah my comment was stupid and fucked up, and i can see where sheri was coming from.

Edited July 6, 2014 by bran

[foghat43]

Just to set the record straight….

“The Green family has no moral objection to the use of 16 of 20 preventive contraceptives required in the mandate, and Hobby Lobby will continue its longstanding practice of covering these preventive contraceptives for its employees. However, the Green family cannot provide or pay for four potentially life-threatening drugs and devices. These drugs include Plan B and Ella, the so-called morning-after pill and the week-after pill. Covering these drugs and devices would violate their deeply held religious belief that life begins at the moment of conception, when an egg is fertilized.”

So…what the Green family is opposed to is the taking of human life…many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder. You can’t really expect a man to pay for something that he believes is murder.

[Dazey]

many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder.

These people are morons though.

[luciusfunk]

many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder.

These people are morons though.

[downzy]

So…what the Green family is opposed to is the taking of human life…many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder. You can’t really expect a man to pay for something that he believes is murder.

And again, Hobby Lobby isn't directly paying for something that their female employees want. If they truly do not want to receive government subsidies to contribute to their employees' healthcare plan, then they can pay their employees higher wages so they can buy their own healthcare plans. But if the family wishes to incorporate their business, and thereby receive all the tax benefits and limited liability of such a legal structure, all the while not paying their employees enough so they can purchase their own health insurance on the individual market, then their religious objections should be considered irrelevant. They're trying to have it both ways: take all the benefits of corporate legal status, not pay their employees a fair wage so as to allow them to buy their own health insurance, but still demand their right as a corporation to have their religious beliefs observed by their employees.

it's all kinds of bullshit.

[31illusions]

So happy Hobby Lobby won. Standing up and fighting against government requiring others to pay for people to kill their own

babies is the best thing to happen since Obama took office. If you want to murder your own child you should pay for it yourself.

[foghat43]

many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder.

These people are morons though.

They disagree with you…so, yes, clearly they must be morons. And because it’s so moronic to equate the taking of innocent life and the killing of humans with murder. The Greens believe that life begins at the moment of conception. This is not even debatable. Scientifically, there is no debate over whether the fetus is alive and human - if not killed, it will eventually be born as a human being. It’s that simple. So maybe the morons are those who come up with some arbitrary timeline of when they consider a fetus to be “human”. Or maybe the morons are those “pro-choice” Leftists who go completely nuts over a sea turtle’s nest being damaged or the eggs of some endangered bird being destroyed, and yet they have no regard whatsoever for a human life in it’s mother’s womb. Or maybe the morons are those who think that in a free society (so-called) a man with deeply held religious beliefs should be forced to pay for someone else’s irresponsible decisions and promiscuous lifestyle (or that taxpayers should be forced to subsidize it)?

[Dazey]

many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder.

These people are morons though.

They disagree with you…so, yes, clearly they must be morons. And because it’s so moronic to equate the taking of innocent life and the killing of humans with murder. The Greens believe that life begins at the moment of conception. This is not even debatable. Scientifically, there is no debate over whether the fetus is alive and human - if not killed, it will eventually be born as a human being. It’s that simple. So maybe the morons are those who come up with some arbitrary timeline of when they consider a fetus to be “human”. Or maybe the morons are those “pro-choice” Leftists who go completely nuts over a sea turtle’s nest being damaged or the eggs of some endangered bird being destroyed, and yet they have no regard whatsoever for a human life in it’s mother’s womb. Or maybe the morons are those who think that in a free society (so-called) a man with deeply held religious beliefs should be forced to pay for someone else’s irresponsible decisions and promiscuous lifestyle (or that taxpayers should be forced to subsidize it)?

A MAN isn't being forced to pay for anything. A company however ..............................

[foghat43]

So…what the Green family is opposed to is the taking of human life…many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder. You can’t really expect a man to pay for something that he believes is murder.

They're trying to have it both ways: take all the benefits of corporate legal status, not pay their employees a fair wage so as to allow them to buy their own health insurance, but still demand their right as a corporation to have their religious beliefs observed by their employees.

it's all kinds of bullshit.

Yes, those evil capitalist Christian bastards only pay their employees almost double the national average for minimum wage. They also opened more than 30 new stores throughout the U.S. last year, which created more than 1,000 new jobs (even in Obama’s shitty economy). And the last time I checked they still don’t demand a confession in Christ as lord and savior as a requirement of employment.

Edited July 6, 2014 by foghat43

[foghat43]

A MAN isn't being forced to pay for anything. A company however ..............................

OK...is this better...Or maybe the morons are those who think that in a free society (so-called) a company owned by a man with deeply held religious beliefs should be forced to pay for someone else’s irresponsible decisions and promiscuous lifestyle (or that taxpayers should be forced to subsidize it)?

[downzy]

So…what the Green family is opposed to is the taking of human life…many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder. You can’t really expect a man to pay for something that he believes is murder.

They're trying to have it both ways: take all the benefits of corporate legal status, not pay their employees a fair wage so as to allow them to buy their own health insurance, but still demand their right as a corporation to have their religious beliefs observed by their employees.

it's all kinds of bullshit.

Yes, those evil capitalist Christian bastards only pay their employees almost double the national average for minimum wage. They also opened more than 30 new stores throughout the U.S. last year, which created more than 1,000 new jobs (even in Obama’s shitty economy). And the last time I checked they still don’t demand a confession in Christ as lord and savior as a requirement of employment.

You mean that shitty economy that added nearly 300k jobs last month, and over 300k jobs in April?

And it's great they pay double the national average for minimum wage, but that still wouldn't be enough to pay for health insurance. Otherwise, Hobby Lobby wouldn't be applying for federal subsidies to help pay for its employees health insurance.

A MAN isn't being forced to pay for anything. A company however ..............................

OK...is this better...Or maybe the morons are those who think that in a free society (so-called) a company owned by a man with deeply held religious beliefs should be forced to pay for someone else’s irresponsible decisions and promiscuous lifestyle (or that taxpayers should be forced to subsidize it)?

Appears somebody doesn't understand why people incorporate. If a man truly wants to live by his religious convictions, why incorporate?

And you do know that there are women out there who aren't compatible with most forms of birth control, that they must rely on condoms that are known to break?

But sure, let's just generalize to prove a point.

[foghat43]

So…what the Green family is opposed to is the taking of human life…many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder. You can’t really expect a man to pay for something that he believes is murder.

They're trying to have it both ways: take all the benefits of corporate legal status, not pay their employees a fair wage so as to allow them to buy their own health insurance, but still demand their right as a corporation to have their religious beliefs observed by their employees.

it's all kinds of bullshit.

Yes, those evil capitalist Christian bastards only pay their employees almost double the national average for minimum wage. They also opened more than 30 new stores throughout the U.S. last year, which created more than 1,000 new jobs (even in Obama’s shitty economy). And the last time I checked they still don’t demand a confession in Christ as lord and savior as a requirement of employment.

You mean that shitty economy that added nearly 300k jobs last month, and over 300k jobs in April?

Yes, that is exactly the shitty economy I was referring to….But sure, let's just generalize, quote bogus numbers, and only look at the surface to prove a point.

“In reality, the desperation in which these tenuous data straws were grasped is a testament to our chronic economic weakness. Far more significant than the number of jobs that were created in April were the far greater number of jobs that were lost (806,000) because chronically unemployed Americans gave up on their fruitless quests to find work. This trend has been ongoing for years. The latest exodus of workers pushed the labor force participation rate down from 63.2% to 62.8%, an unusually sharp monthly drop. “

“What should have been of particular concern, but was not even mentioned, was that more than 80% of the 288,000 jobs came from birth/death assumptions the government makes about the net number of new companies that formed during the month and the number of people those companies would have been expected to hire. For some reason the statisticians always assign a disproportionally high number of these assumed jobs to April and May.”

“The story even gets worse when you consider the types of jobs that are being added. As has been the case for years, the new hires are heavily weighted to the lower end of the spectrum, particularly in low-paying service sector and retail jobs. The drop in the labor participation rate would not be so alarming if those who remained working were finding jobs that could support families. But that is not what is happening. We are replacing good jobs with bad jobs and getting poorer with each passing month.”

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/05/peter-schiff/a-musical-lesson-for-your-money/

Edited July 6, 2014 by foghat43

[foghat43]

So…what the Green family is opposed to is the taking of human life…many folks (not just the Greens) equate abortion (morning/week after pills included) with murder. You can’t really expect a man to pay for something that he believes is murder.

They're trying to have it both ways: take all the benefits of corporate legal status, not pay their employees a fair wage so as to allow them to buy their own health insurance, but still demand their right as a corporation to have their religious beliefs observed by their employees.

it's all kinds of bullshit.

Yes, those evil capitalist Christian bastards only pay their employees almost double the national average for minimum wage. They also opened more than 30 new stores throughout the U.S. last year, which created more than 1,000 new jobs (even in Obama’s shitty economy). And the last time I checked they still don’t demand a confession in Christ as lord and savior as a requirement of employment.

You mean that shitty economy that added nearly 300k jobs last month, and over 300k jobs in April?

And it's great they pay double the national average for minimum wage, but that still wouldn't be enough to pay for health insurance. Otherwise, Hobby Lobby wouldn't be applying for federal subsidies to help pay for its employees health insurance.

A MAN isn't being forced to pay for anything. A company however ..............................

OK...is this better...Or maybe the morons are those who think that in a free society (so-called) a company owned by a man with deeply held religious beliefs should be forced to pay for someone else’s irresponsible decisions and promiscuous lifestyle (or that taxpayers should be forced to subsidize it)?

And you do know that there are women out there who aren't compatible with most forms of birth control, that they must rely on condoms that are known to break?

But sure, let's just generalize to prove a point.

So what's your point? Are you saying that because condoms aren't 100% effective that justifies the taking off a human life and that the Green family's company (or me as a taxpayer) should be forced to pay for that taking of an innocent human life?

[arnold layne]

I think we should instill a one child max law in the United States regardless of income. That way we'd have less stupid people taking up resources.

Everyone can go fuck themselves. Literally.