Page 104 of 129 FirstFirst ... 45494102103104105106114 ... LastLast
Results 1,031 to 1,040 of 1290

Thread: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge[W:513,870]

  1. #1031
    Sage
    gdgyva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Twinsburg Ohio
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    5,942

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    I think the point about HL's case (and it's sort of irrelevant to the big picture) is if providing a basic healthcare package that includes BC poses a 'substantial burden' on you free exercise of religion, and that's what HL claimed, then someone should surely have spent the 5 minutes to check whether their plan pre-ACA covered abortion pills. The fact that they didn't care enough to ASK provides a decent window into how important the BC coverage was to their exercise of religion, not much at all. But post-ACA, what they didn't care enough to ask about is now sufficiently burdensome that they can nullify a law of general applicability because to comply with it poses a substantial burden on their religion? It's tough to believe.

    Like I said it doesn't matter because other employers DID care enough to ask, and they in fact refused to cover ANY, pre and post ACA. So HL are hypocrites, but that doesn't matter - take HL off the list of named parties and insert another and we get the same ruling.

    and if the ACA was never passed, those 4 items would still be available to their employees

    unintended consequences strike again
    “Most of the shadows of this life are caused by standing in one's own sunshine.”

    Ralph Waldo Emerson

  2. #1032
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Your post is an example of why Democratic voters are more geared up for this election than Republicans, especially women.
    Oh yeah, really geared up!

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Please continue with your sarcasm treating women as second-class citizens.
    Meanwhile, your own Republican party is divided on every issue, including this one .
    While going after the IQ of 84 and below might be liberals move now (you wouldn't know obviously because you're a "moderate"....) most people have already heard and are tired of the "war on women". Liberals are much too interested what goes in and around women's vaginas. Perhaps women can think for themselves without looney toon progressives making hysterical chicken little claims about Roe v. Wade.

    Trust me, I'm amused at all the foaming mouths and gnashing teeth. Someone should sell tickets.
    “I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  3. #1033
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,618

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge[W:513,870]

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    Let's concede that HL is a decent employer because by all accounts they really ARE. Good for them!

    But that doesn't matter because the opinion isn't limited to HL and it's not limited to the four types of BC that HL didn't cover. It has a MUCH broader reach than that, covers employers good and bad, who might cover 0 or 3 or 18 of the BC options.
    It wouldn't be a relevant issue AT ALL had the government not passed legislation that imposed this on others.

  4. #1034
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,762

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    Oh yeah, really geared up!
    That's from a Republican pollster--so you bet oh yeah?
    Physics is Phun

  5. #1035
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge[W:513,870]

    give me what I want or your oppressing me.

  6. #1036
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,762

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    While going after the IQ of 84 and below might be liberals move now
    The 84 IQ card from a Libertarian right--ironic.
    (you wouldn't know obviously because you're a "moderate"....)
    and then the "attack the lean" card from a Libefrtarian right--more irony.
    Yes I am a moderate, especially compared to what you bring to the forum .
    Physics is Phun

  7. #1037
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,730

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by gdgyva View Post
    and if the ACA was never passed, those 4 items would still be available to their employees

    unintended consequences strike again
    Actually only two - the old plan covered abortion pills (in their view) but not IUDs.

    And if the ACA never passed, millions of women at 10s of thousands of other employers would have higher copays and less coverage. So I'm not sure the 'unintended consequences' are all that bad with ACA in general.

  8. #1038
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    36,762

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge[W:513,870]

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    It wouldn't be a relevant issue AT ALL had the government not passed legislation that imposed this on others.
    Well now you have a government not passing any legislation so you should be happy.
    Just eliminate the federal gov't altogether since they are completely worthless .
    Physics is Phun

  9. #1039
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,730

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge[W:513,870]

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    It wouldn't be a relevant issue AT ALL had the government not passed legislation that imposed this on others.
    I'm not sure what your point is. The ACA 'imposed' a lot of things. Are we assuming the overall impact on women is bad? You'll have to explain.

  10. #1040
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,504
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Kobie View Post
    Wait, what the actual ****?

    That is far from "as a rule," amigo. Plenty of liberals agree with the right to free speech or to bear arms, and who the hell are you to say we don't?
    I don't think that is what Maquiscat was saying though. But I don't think he went far enough with his thought or he might have phrased it differently.

    Most of the left/liberals for instance have no problem with hitting the taxpayer up for funding for an artist who then produces something offensive to many Americans or for funding the organization that exhibits it. That is, in a sense, forcing others to fund a form of 'free speech'. Many on the left doggedly support federal funding of NPR and PBS, both of whom they approve, but that forces others to finance those organizations that they may never listen to or might dissaprove. The liberal support for government control and criminalization of so-called 'hate speech' is also a way of using everybody's government to suppress the speech of some in the name of political correctness.

    And there is a small but persistent push for Congress to reinstate funding for gun violence research (translation: support for more regulation of guns.) That funding was suspended I believe in 1996.

    The point is that the Founders never intended the federal government to have any say in the regulation or use of guns and that was a matter to be left up to the individual, the states, and local communities.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •