• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Wrong again. I accept the SCOTUS ruling though I disagree with it. There's other means of providing this needed service that the owners of HL will be denying their employees.


"Needed service " ?

Haven't people been taking care of this " service on their own prior to ObamaCare ?

Yea I'm pretty sure they have
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

To say that this ruling will not result in an increase in abortions defies logic.

???
you are joking, aren't you?

Thom Paine
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

To say that this ruling will not result in an increase in abortions defies logic.

Hobby Lobby is causing people to abort their children ?
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

A company is a "person" for taxation........ You have a better solution besides socialism?
That's fine. Just let me take the same percentage of tax exemptions as they get. :shrug:
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

So now every abortion is the doing of Hobby Lobby. :roll:

Where do you get that? Follow along with the conversation. The point is, this ruling will now allow businesses owned by religious groups to refuse to cover contraceptives. The rest that flows is logic 101.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Wrong again. I accept the SCOTUS ruling though I disagree with it. There's other means of providing this needed service that the owners of HL will be denying their employees.

What needed service?
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Because I don't think more abortions is a good thing.

The drugs that are now eliminated from Hobby Lobby's plan are abortion-causing drugs, so are you contradicting yourself?
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Where do you get that? Follow along with the conversation. The point is, this ruling will now allow businesses owned by religious groups to refuse to cover contraceptives. The rest that flows is logic 101.

I get it from the hubbub of idle chatter on this thread.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Where do you get that? Follow along with the conversation. The point is, this ruling will now allow businesses owned by religious groups to refuse to cover contraceptives. The rest that flows is logic 101.

Does the ruling state that all employees of Hobby Lobby may not purchase a Box of Condoms on their way home for work ?
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Totally agree. The lack of the 4 forms of BC in the total offering won't even affect the cost of their insurance.

1) Hobby Lobby just objected to those four, but I see no reason why another employer can't object and refuse to pay for any and all forms of birth control.

2) The fact that the cost is small is just another argument that covering birth control didn't impose a substantial burden on the employers. In fact, the SC says, basically, "Employers who refuse to cover BC won't burden women who work for them because we assume some other mechanism will be provided to give the same employees free contraception." In other words, according to the ruling, Hobby Lobby et al get to make an empty gesture that will have no effect on the use of contraception by their employees.

The whole ruling just seems odd to me. They say over and over that it was a very narrow ruling, only on contraception, that doesn't apply to other parts of ACA, etc. That seems to indicate the ruling was just an exercise to get to the answer the majority wanted, but that they might find differently if they want to get to a different answer, hence the emphasis from the early going that the ruling is VERY limited, to only these facts, etc.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Does the ruling state that all employees of Hobby Lobby may not purchase a Box of Condoms on their way home for work ?

I'm sure they can, and along with that buy the predictably high failure rate of condoms in preventing pregnancy.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

C'mon. If they REALLY believed that god does not want them to pay for contraception and abortion, they simply wouldn't own a business in China, period. Is it suddenly not sin for them to pay for abortion and contraception because they want to own a business in China and the law there requires businesses to pay for it? You REALLY think that their theology would be consistent and permit this?

You seem to be fully aware of business practice/law in China so it shouldn't be any bother for you to provide links to help the rest of us out. Specifically, I'd like some proof that Hobby Lobby actually owns business enterprises in China and specific proof that the Chinese government requires them to provide the forms of birth control that Hobby Lobby actually sued the US government over.

If you can't, I'll just assume that you're making stuff up.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

"Needed service " ?

Haven't people been taking care of this " service on their own prior to ObamaCare ?

Yea I'm pretty sure they have

There were no unintended pregnancies prior to ACA? Gosh, that's good news, cause I thought one reason for abortions is women got pregnant when they didn't want to have a baby. I guess I was wrong and abortions were at zero prior to ACA. Interesting.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge


Sure will keep the lawyers and courts busy. Hell, I'd push for not only indecency laws to be applied if they go through with something like that, but EPA charges --- spreading their bio-hazard fluids in a public space. :lol:
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge


I thank you for the links, but they don't however prove your point.

1. An affiliated enterprise is not necessarily an enterprise owned by Hobby Lobby. I'm not saying they aren't the owners, just that it's a strange way to identify an owned company. I believe the proper term would be "a wholly owned subsidiary of Hobby Lobby located in Hong Kong" were the ownership issue as clear as you contend.

2. The health care provision you noted actually, from my reading, indicates that the employee was/is to pay for the costs associated with the government run plan, not the employer. It also indicated that the plan was not fully implemented as of 1997 - I don't know if it is or isn't now. As an employee funded plan, basically a payroll tax dedicated to health care, the system would be somewhat similar in funding to Canada's in that our income taxes go to cover universal healthcare.

Personally, my only objection to Obamacare is that it's a bastardized combination of the worst of private and public healthcare systems. I can only assume it was created to be a monster that would have to be replaced by universal healthcare somewhere down the line.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

To say that this ruling will not result in an increase in abortions defies logic.

Because American women are too stupid to purchase their own contraceptives?
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

I made the mistake of opening her Twitter page. Now I feel like vomiting. She's one sick person. God help her children.

Was just saying the same thing to a friend. Disheartening doesn't cover it.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge


This is of a piece with some on the abortion threads who were claiming people should arm themselves and simply mow down abortion clinic protestors if they get in their way following the Supreme Court's ruling on buffer zones. Remarkable that those bleating about taking away guns from law abiding citizens now want to arm themselves so they can murder protestors they don't like.

A spurned liberal is truly a dangerous animal.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Was just saying the same thing to a friend. Disheartening doesn't cover it.

She is vulgar, crass, disgusting, and perverse. I'm not a prude, but even I had to draw the line at her garbage.

She acts like someone was killed. And her hysterics over this ruling are pathalogically sick.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

This is of a piece with some on the abortion threads who were claiming people should arm themselves and simply mow down abortion clinic protestors if they get in their way following the Supreme Court's ruling on buffer zones. Remarkable that those bleating about taking away guns from law abiding citizens now want to arm themselves so they can murder protestors they don't like.

A spurned liberal is truly a dangerous animal.

Spurned people can be dangerous.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

I'm sure they can, and along with that buy the predictably high failure rate of condoms in preventing pregnancy.

More unwanted babies and more abortions, seems like cutting off ones nose to spite there face.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom