• 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!

Fischer: God ‘designed’ women to be secretaries so it’s OK to discriminate on gender

Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

At issue here is not only HL but the implications of such a policy and the facts that there are scores of people who are just happy to find employment because they do need to bay bills.

So it's every employer's responsibility to cater to the bottom-feeders in the employment pool who are "just happy to find a job".

Interesting notion...

Compounded by the fact that folks who believe it is our (the employee's) responsibility to actually prepare ourselves for the workforce by developing marketable skills apparently don't "need to pay the bills".

Slackers of the world, unite! I guess.

I'm being flippant, of course.

But just a little.

I doubt the employees of Hobby Lobby get a yearly bonus (calculated as a percentage of their gross yearly wages), as folks who work on higher rungs of the employment ladder might expect.

And I'm sure that the employees of Hobby Lobby would love to receive such a bonus check just before, or shortly after, the holidays.

It sure would help "just pay those bills".

Why should an employer be MANDATED to provide one form of compensation but not another?

Let me ask yo this: Do yo believe that if by some turn of fate the roof collapsed in a HL store and some people died or were seriously injured, would the owners sell all their personal belongings to compensate the victims and their families or they would take the benefit of personal separation, the corporation afforded them?

I'll ask you: How would HL's responsibilities vis a vis the scenario you propose be any different in light of the ACA healthcare insurance angle than it would be in respect to any other work requirement/total compensation issue?

I don''t imagine Hobby Lobby compensates employees for transportation to and from work, or provides a stock option plan, or offers the option of working from home.

Is not including coverage of contraceptives in the group healthcare insurance plan really all that different than any of those things?

So explain to me how not offering stock options impacts the employee/employer relationship in the even of a catastrophic roof collapse.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

They are not selling the insurance coverage.
They are seeking an exemption based on religious grounds where none exist.
They were already covering the very same things in their insurance.
Now they are attempting to deny their employees something that a law mandates to cover.

religious grounds do exist-- they have a religious objection to it.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

I knew Citizens United was going to be bad.....I just never envisioned it becoming the nightmare it is. We are damaging the Constitution.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

So it's every employer's responsibility to cater to the bottom-feeders in the employment pool who are "just happy to find a job".
No, it is every employers responsibility to comply with laws. It is as simple as that.

Slackers of the world, unite! I guess.
You guess wrong just like your belief that irrelevant partisan tripe somehow amounts to intelligent reasoning.

I'm being flippant, of course.
Me too.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

In a free country, people should be allowed to live their lives as they see fit.
Including in business.

Should a Jewish deli store owner be compelled to sell non-Kosher food? Should a Moslem store owner be compelled to sell liquor?

If such is the law of the land in the nation where they live, YES.

Now that your head has finished exploding, remember that it is neither Jewish nor Muslim (or any other significant religion's) belief that one is required to start a business. Since such is not part of their religion, then they are making a SECULAR CHOICE...and secular choices fall under the purview not of religion, but of the laws of the nation in which they live.

Now, do you hold yourself to be 'Christian'? If so, remember that Jesus never, ever implied that one should even resist the laws of the nation. In fact, He said quite the opposite: "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's". Not only that, but when Peter tried to fight for Him when He was being arrested by the Romans, what did Jesus do? He told Peter to put down his sword, and He submitted to government authority as an innocent Man...even unto His death.

But what do you do if your beliefs fly in the face of national law? Got an answer for that one, too. I am a strong Christian, and I belong to the Church of Christ - in Tagalog, "Iglesia ni Cristo". We have many locales in Muslim countries where such are either strictly forbidden or restricted to certain areas (just as Jews were once relegated to ghettos, originally by the Catholic church). If the Muslims find our chapels - which are hidden and outside those restricted areas (I've been to one more than once) - then those who are there will be arrested and the property confiscated and possibly razed. But we would submit to that arrest, because that's just what Jesus did.

And that's the great error of mainstream "Christianity" in America - they want to fight the government, force it to their own beliefs...but that's not what Jesus wanted by His word or His example.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

They are not selling the insurance coverage.
They are seeking an exemption based on religious grounds where none exist.
They were already covering the very same things in their insurance.
Now they are attempting to deny their employees something that a law mandates to cover.
there's something else people seem to be turning upside down and that is the fact that the ACA mandates to insurance companies the minimum requirements for any policy sold.... not what specific coverage employers must provide. Basically this whole situation can be avoided by the SC ruling in favor of HL but not allowing insurance companies to sell policies that don't meet the minimum requirements. In other words HL would have every right to go out and shop for a policy that essentially won't exist thus throwing them into the position of either just providing the care they object to or not providing insurance and pay the mandated fine.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

Nor should the first person's lack of religion ever govern someone else's life.


Right?

I bet that sounded better in your head.

1. Person 1 believes A
2. Person 2 believes B
3. Person 3 believes neither A or B
4. If order to keep the above from fighting over their beliefs (see Europe pre-USA) we just dont go there in the Government.

So when I talk to a person that believes A and I disagree then I avoid talking about A and I also dont force that person to believe whatever I believe.

I am sure at this point you will be saying but, but, atheists! Atheism isnt secularist government. Clearly a secular government is made up of people of all beliefs no matter what anyone tries to claim otherwise. The point of secular government is to make sure that no one is favored because of their beliefs. Because what if some strange religion gained the majority of seats in the government.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

No they do not. People have religion not corporations.

The owners have religious objections
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

If such is the law of the land in the nation where they live, YES.

Now that your head has finished exploding, remember that it is neither Jewish nor Muslim (or any other significant religion's) belief that one is required to start a business. Since such is not part of their religion, then they are making a SECULAR CHOICE...and secular choices fall under the purview not of religion, but of the laws of the nation in which they live.

Now, do you hold yourself to be 'Christian'? If so, remember that Jesus never, ever implied that one should even resist the laws of the nation. In fact, He said quite the opposite: "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's". Not only that, but when Peter tried to fight for Him when He was being arrested by the Romans, what did Jesus do? He told Peter to put down his sword, and He submitted to government authority as an innocent Man...even unto His death.

But what do you do if your beliefs fly in the face of national law? Got an answer for that one, too. I am a strong Christian, and I belong to the Church of Christ - in Tagalog, "Iglesia ni Cristo". We have many locales in Muslim countries where such are either strictly forbidden or restricted to certain areas (just as Jews were once relegated to ghettos, originally by the Catholic church). If the Muslims find our chapels - which are hidden and outside those restricted areas (I've been to one more than once) - then those who are there will be arrested and the property confiscated and possibly razed. But we would submit to that arrest, because that's just what Jesus did.

And that's the great error of mainstream "Christianity" in America - they want to fight the government, force it to their own beliefs...but that's not what Jesus wanted by His word or His example.

In the USA there is free "exercise of religion." I am quite certain the folks in your church would be happier if their country had such guarantees and did not have to pray in secret, and live their Christian lives in secret.
Its why people came, at least some people, to America. To escape all that religious nonsense- to live their lives as they wish.
That is what Hobby Lobby is asking for-- that their rights under the law of the nation which guarantees their free exercise of religion, is respected.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

Religious freedom is correctly limited to behavior that does not harm others. That is why the courts have allowed some religions to use peyote but no religion is allowed to do human sacrifices. Even parental rights are limited, with parents prosecuted for failing to give their children medical treatment despite claims of a religious belief that medicine should not be used. Allowing a business to limit the health coverage their employees receive for religious reasons is not acceptable because it does harm to the employes. If the employees were involved with religious duties, ie. monks, priests, ministers, nuns etc., then adhering to the religious beliefs is essential to their jobs and it would be acceptable to require them to follow the religion's rules. For other types of employees, the owners should not have a right to control their off-work behavior or access to health care.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

Religious freedom is correctly limited to behavior that does not harm others. That is why the courts have allowed some religions to use peyote but no religion is allowed to do human sacrifices. Even parental rights are limited, with parents prosecuted for failing to give their children medical treatment despite claims of a religious belief that medicine should not be used. Allowing a business to limit the health coverage their employees receive for religious reasons is not acceptable because it does harm to the employes. If the employees were involved with religious duties, ie. monks, priests, ministers, nuns etc., then adhering to the religious beliefs is essential to their jobs and it would be acceptable to require them to follow the religion's rules. For other types of employees, the owners should not have a right to control their off-work behavior or access to health care.

Nobody is controlling somebody else's "off-work behavior." Nor is "access to health care" being denied.

What is occurring is that Hobby Lobby is being told they cannot freely "exercise" their religion.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

The owners have religious objections
Good for them, I am sure they will include that in their prayers, but the corporations must comply with the law.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

That is what Hobby Lobby is asking for-- that their rights under the law of the nation which guarantees their free exercise of religion, is respected.
HL has to comply with a law, the owners are free to pray as they please.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

Nobody is controlling somebody else's "off-work behavior." Nor is "access to health care" being denied.

What is occurring is that Hobby Lobby is being told they cannot freely "exercise" their religion.
HL is a corporation and as such has no religion.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

HL is a corporation and as such has no religion.

The owners do and have been clear they have run their business according to their religious values.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

HL has to comply with a law, the owners are free to pray as they please.

"free exercise of religion" is law as well.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

"free exercise of religion" is law as well.
Yes it is that is why the owners are free to pray as they please and the corporation has to comply with the laws as it is a separate entity.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

The owners do and have been clear they have run their business according to their religious values.
Yes to the extent that the corporation complies with applicable laws.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

1. Hobby Lobby should in good conscience grandfather existing employees and their families in their insurance coverage. That is the right thing to do. Following that the - after a specific date - they should be free to deny insurance coverage (day after meds, as I understand it) to future employees and the conditions should be stated clearly in the employee contract i.e. if you are raped we won't pay a penny to provide insurance coverage for day after meds. If you want to work for them sign the contract and live with it.

2. Businesses that don't support behaviors on the basis of religion should man up and post it on their web sites and public portals. Examples, "We abhor pre-marital sex, mixed marriages, post marital sex, same sex marriages, birth control, bastard children, people involved in marital affairs and unmarried people living together, masturbation and recreational sex." Let patrons decide where they want to spend their money. That's fair. No one is duped.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

Yes it is that is why the owners are free to pray as they please and the corporation has to comply with the laws as it is a separate entity.

The free exercise of religion doesn't just happen on a Sunday. People are allowed to live this way and their govern their lives this way.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

1. Hobby Lobby should in good conscience grandfather existing employees and their families in their insurance coverage. That is the right thing to do. Following that the - after a specific date - they should be free to deny insurance coverage (day after meds, as I understand it) to future employees and the conditions should be stated clearly in the employee contract i.e. if you are raped we won't pay a penny to provide insurance coverage for day after meds. If you want to work for them sign the contract and live with it.

They can't grandfather anyone. The ACA doesn't allow.

2. Businesses that don't support behaviors on the basis of religion should man up and post it on their web sites and public portals. Examples, "We abhor pre-marital sex, mixed marriages, post marital sex, same sex marriages, birth control, bastard children, people involved in marital affairs and unmarried people living together, masturbation and recreational sex." Let patrons decide where they want to spend their money. That's fair. No one is duped.

Hobby Lobby have made no comment about employees behavior. They also apparently have always covered contraceptives. They object however to covering the "morning after pill" as they believe it complicit with abortion.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

Hobby Lobby have made no comment about employees behavior. They also apparently have always covered contraceptives. They object however to covering the "morning after pill" as they believe it complicit with abortion.
Bullshat distinction. Some contraceptives do not prevent fertilization of the egg and only prevent implantation of the zygote... Just as the mourning after pill does.
The distinction of "after the act" has nothing to do with the science of pregnancy prevention.
 
Re: Religious Objection to Minimum Wage

Bullshat distinction. Some contraceptives do not prevent fertilization of the egg and only prevent implantation of the zygote... Just as the mourning after pill does.
The distinction of "after the act" has nothing to do with the science of pregnancy prevention.

Apparently they refuse to cover four contraceptives. Perhaps the above makes up the other three.
 
Back
Top Bottom