• 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

americanwoman said:
So why is viagra covered and why is there no moral issue with it?
Click to expand...

You're claiming viagra is covered as a contraceptive in the SCOTUS decision?
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Ockham said:
You answer mine first. But you won't I gather.
Click to expand...
Let's be clear about this and what this is. Hobby Lobby will NOT provide coverage for a Woman who chooses when she want's to become pregnant. But they WILL provide coverage for men who can't get a boner and need some lead in the pencil. And they WILL provide coverage for male employees who decide that THEY wan't to control a woman's pregnancy.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

HenryChinaski said:
Let's be clear about this and what this is. Hobby Lobby will NOT provide coverage for a Woman who chooses when she want's to become pregnant. But they WILL provide coverage for men who can't get a boner and need some lead in the pencil. And they WILL provide coverage for male employees who decide that THEY wan't to control a woman's pregnancy.
Click to expand...

men who want to control a woman's pregnancy?

where did that come form?
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

HenryChinaski said:
Let's be clear about this and what this is. Hobby Lobby will NOT provide coverage for a Woman who chooses when she want's to become pregnant. But they WILL provide coverage for men who can't get a boner and need some lead in the pencil. And they WILL provide coverage for male employees who decide that THEY wan't to control a woman's pregnancy.
Click to expand...

First establish a foundation: Where in the SCOTUS decision was viagra identified?
Second: HL will cover the majority of contraceptives as provided by the FDA, but objected to four.

So instead of your manipulating statement meant to deceive - the truth is HL will provide contraceptives and pay for those contraceptives for their female employees. They will NOT pay for items they see as drugs which provide an early abortion. Those items their female employees will have to pay for themselves or will need to procure elsewhere.

Clear?


And speaking of vagina's, why is it that liberals are so ill informed and so worried about what goes in and or out of women's vaginas and why is it that the government must be involved with women's vaginas? It's very strange.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

LowDown said:
It is often in the nature of religious ideas to be hard for unbelievers to understand. Four contraceptives might not seem like much of anything, and from a practical standpoint it's not, but for the religious it can be a distinction with tons of meaning.

It might not be in your nature to respect religious beliefs, but for legal purposes respect for religious beliefs is mandatory.
Click to expand...

I do respect religious beliefs. I said earlier the better option would have been for the Senate to approve the House 'compromise' which would have allowed what HL got out of the ruling, but many religious employers objected even to that compromise, so I'm not even sure if that would have prevented the uproar we saw, instead of just changed the battle lines.

Frankly, the more principled stance IMO is being taken by employers who don't want to agree to file the statement that makes the contraceptives available through the mechanism recognized by the Court. I think those employers (Catholic employers that I've seen) recognize that if they file the paper, and the same insurer provides the same drugs/devices they object to, to the same employees, for no charge, they've enabled access to the type of abortifacients (in their view) that they're objecting to, and so don't want to sign the form.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

HenryChinaski said:
Let's be clear about this and what this is. Hobby Lobby will NOT provide coverage for a Woman who chooses when she want's to become pregnant. But they WILL provide coverage for men who can't get a boner and need some lead in the pencil. And they WILL provide coverage for male employees who decide that THEY wan't to control a woman's pregnancy.
Click to expand...

This actually isn't even true. Hobby Lobby is willing to pay to cover the pill.

They're simply not willing to cover IUDs or Plan B, as those methods function by causing extremely early term abortions.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Gathomas88 said:
To be fair, I'd argue that it shouldn't be covered either.

However, if one were to make the argument in favor of it, I suppose you could say that Viagra is meant to treat a legitimate medical condition. Birth control really does not.
Click to expand...
Apparently, 60% of women on birth control use it for legitimate health reasons.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

DB20 said:
men who want to control a woman's pregnancy?

where did that come form?
Click to expand...
Usually a vasectomy keeps a woman from getting pregnant. Men get them to keep that ball in their court.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Gathomas88 said:
To be fair, I'd argue that it shouldn't be covered either.

However, if one were to make the argument in favor of it, I suppose you could say that Viagra is meant to treat a legitimate medical condition. Birth control really does not.
Click to expand...

I think I'd avoid making that argument if I were you. Pregnancy is a legitimate medical condition, sometimes fatal, and planning for it a routine element of the medical needs of every woman of childbearing age. Mostly older men not getting a "whatever" is WAY down the list of serious medical conditions compared to pregnancy.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Gathomas88 said:
This actually isn't even true. Hobby Lobby is willing to pay to cover the pill.

They're simply not willing to cover IUDs or Plan B, as those methods function by causing extremely early term abortions.
Click to expand...
Ohhh, the right is still running with the lie that plan B is an "abortion pill" Goody.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

JasperL said:
I think I'd avoid making that argument if I were you. Pregnancy is a legitimate medical condition, sometimes fatal, and planning for it a routine element of the medical needs of every woman of childbearing age. Mostly older men not getting a "whatever" is WAY down the list of serious medical conditions compared to pregnancy.
Click to expand...

:roll:

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth...
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Liberals, particularly female liberals, are embarrassing themselves horribly the past 24 hours.

Have you so little self control, or a complete inability to access the many free contraceptives available, that you find it necessary to bully your employer into paying for your sexcapades? Do you not find it your responsibility to manage your reproductive organs?

Sadly pathetic.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Ockham said:
First establish a foundation: Where in the SCOTUS decision was viagra identified?
Second: HL will cover the majority of contraceptives as provided by the FDA, but objected to four.

So instead of your manipulating statement meant to deceive - the truth is HL will provide contraceptives and pay for those contraceptives for their female employees. They will NOT pay for items they see as drugs which provide an early abortion. Those items their female employees will have to pay for themselves or will need to procure elsewhere.

Clear?


And speaking of vagina's, why is it that liberals are so ill informed and so worried about what goes in and or out of women's vaginas and why is it that the government must be involved with women's vaginas? It's very strange.
Click to expand...

What FDA approved birth control is best should be decided between the woman and her doctor...not a woman and her employer.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Ockham said:
You're claiming viagra is covered as a contraceptive in the SCOTUS decision?
Click to expand...

No I just wonder if the decision to limit insurance coverage on HL's part is based on religious reasons, why is that not extended to other drugs?
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

LowDown said:
Contraceptives were included in coverage because the Administration considered them to be preventative care (as if pregnancy is a disease). That's where the legal authority to make contraceptives free came from since according to the ACA preventative care is supposed to be free. Viagra can in no way be considered preventative.
Click to expand...

Ahhh spoken like a young man without much experience around women. Substitute preventable 'condition' that hurts the work force and if ill timed, hurts the economic success of a family/female for 'disease' and you start tracking this properly.

Next, having raised a female and spent several decades married to one, I can tell you the pill helps in a few other conditions... in our daughter it helped with her cramps AND regularity of cycle. If you have known many parents of young girls turning into 'functional' women you'd hear horror story after story about that unexpected period. The hormone therapy helps settle the cycle and gives tremendous peace of mind for all involved. (Thank GOD!)

A condition like allergies or prenatal vitamins, ultra sounds and the like. No real threat to my health if I have simple hay fever- no disease involved with pregnancy, but vitamins and ultras help PREVENT certain unwanted CONDITIONS for occurring.

If I understand the decision the Court ruled that only the methods that work AFTER conception are subject to the ruling. BC pills act BEFORE the egg gets fertilized. One type stops ovulation, the other stops sperm from entering the uterus. Those types should still be allowable as they do not 'abort' a fertilized egg.

Will be interesting to see how it all shakes out....
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

notquiteright said:
Ahhh spoken like a young man without much experience around women. Substitute preventable 'condition' that hurts the work force and if ill timed, hurts the economic success of a family/female for 'disease' and you start tracking this properly.

Next, having raised a female and spent several decades married to one, I can tell you the pill helps in a few other conditions... in our daughter it helped with her cramps AND regularity of cycle. If you have known many parents of young girls turning into 'functional' women you'd hear horror story after story about that unexpected period. The hormone therapy helps settle the cycle and gives tremendous peace of mind for all involved. (Thank GOD!)

A condition like allergies or prenatal vitamins, ultra sounds and the like. No real threat to my health if I have simple hay fever- no disease involved with pregnancy, but vitamins and ultras help PREVENT certain unwanted CONDITIONS for occurring.

If I understand the decision the Court ruled that only the methods that work AFTER conception are subject to the ruling. BC pills act BEFORE the egg gets fertilized. One type stops ovulation, the other stops sperm from entering the uterus. Those types should still be allowable as they do not 'abort' a fertilized egg.

Will be interesting to see how it all shakes out....
Click to expand...

Please. Pregnancy is no more a "disease" than the average bowel movement.

It is a natural result of the body's normal sexual function; nothing more, and nothing less.

Drop the hysteria.
 
Last edited:
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Moot said:
I don't think congress meant or intended the RFRA law to include corporate "personhood".

The SCOTUS failed to prove how the ACA burdened or prevented the individual owners of HL from exercising their religion.
Click to expand...
Pssst... the court doesn't have to prove anything, they make the decision. The litigants try and prove their cases.
Instead the SCOTUS seems to have singled out a group of people for corporations to discriminate against.
Click to expand...
Now we're getting hysterical.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

americanwoman said:
So why is viagra covered and why is there no moral issue with it?
Click to expand...

You have to pay a co-pay for Viagra. It's not free. Besides which, it's not a contraceptive. I'ts an anti-contraceptive. :mrgreen:
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Erod said:
Liberals, particularly female liberals, are embarrassing themselves horribly the past 24 hours.

Have you so little self control, or a complete inability to access the many free contraceptives available, that you find it necessary to bully your employer into paying for your sexcapades? Do you not find it your responsibility to manage your reproductive organs?

Sadly pathetic.
Click to expand...

I can tell you one thing for sure, the democratic party is hoping the right wing repeats that point over and over and over for the next few months heading into the elections and that every competitive seat has a GOPer making that exact point. ;)
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Erod said:
Liberals, particularly female liberals, are embarrassing themselves horribly the past 24 hours.

Have you so little self control, or a complete inability to access the many free contraceptives available, that you find it necessary to bully your employer into paying for your sexcapades? Do you not find it your responsibility to manage your reproductive organs?

Sadly pathetic.
Click to expand...


Yes, I must find someone to pay for my out of control impulsive consequence free ****ing because I'm just an irresponsible slut like that. :roll:
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

Gathomas88 said:
Defined as?
Click to expand...

Health care as it is defined for anyone who needs or uses medical care. Women are "persons", too....and they probably have more religious beliefs and medical needs than a corporation does. So is their health care any less important than a man's?


Do you think an employee should give up 'their' religious beliefs and individual liberties just because they have to punch a time clock?
 
Last edited:
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

LowDown said:
You have to pay a co-pay for Viagra. It's not free. Besides which, it's not a contraceptive. I'ts an anti-contraceptive. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Most contraceptives have a co-pay. I have to pay one each month for my pills from my insurance through work. I don't really care about paying because I can and do but they don't even offer a co-pay on certain types which does bother me.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

notquiteright said:
Ahhh spoken like a young man without much experience around women. Substitute preventable 'condition' that hurts the work force and if ill timed, hurts the economic success of a family/female for 'disease' and you start tracking this properly.

Next, having raised a female and spent several decades married to one, I can tell you the pill helps in a few other conditions... in our daughter it helped with her cramps AND regularity of cycle. If you have known many parents of young girls turning into 'functional' women you'd hear horror story after story about that unexpected period. The hormone therapy helps settle the cycle and gives tremendous peace of mind for all involved. (Thank GOD!)

A condition like allergies or prenatal vitamins, ultra sounds and the like. No real threat to my health if I have simple hay fever- no disease involved with pregnancy, but vitamins and ultras help PREVENT certain unwanted CONDITIONS for occurring.

If I understand the decision the Court ruled that only the methods that work AFTER conception are subject to the ruling. BC pills act BEFORE the egg gets fertilized. One type stops ovulation, the other stops sperm from entering the uterus. Those types should still be allowable as they do not 'abort' a fertilized egg.

Will be interesting to see how it all shakes out....
Click to expand...

That's not true at all. The court ruled on a set of facts, but the ruling is much broader than the narrow set of facts before it. They don't waste their time resolving issue of which of 20 options must be covered, and in fact conceded that covering all options serves a legitimate purpose. So HL or any of the dozens of others suing, and the thousands or 10s of thousands of other small businesses, could decide to cover 1 or 4 or zero or 19 of the available options and the ruling says that is OK.
 
Re: Supreme Court backs Hobby Lobby in contraceptive mandate challenge

notquiteright said:
Ahhh spoken like a young man without much experience around women. Substitute preventable 'condition' that hurts the work force and if ill timed, hurts the economic success of a family/female for 'disease' and you start tracking this properly.

Next, having raised a female and spent several decades married to one, I can tell you the pill helps in a few other conditions... in our daughter it helped with her cramps AND regularity of cycle. If you have known many parents of young girls turning into 'functional' women you'd hear horror story after story about that unexpected period. The hormone therapy helps settle the cycle and gives tremendous peace of mind for all involved. (Thank GOD!)

A condition like allergies or prenatal vitamins, ultra sounds and the like. No real threat to my health if I have simple hay fever- no disease involved with pregnancy, but vitamins and ultras help PREVENT certain unwanted CONDITIONS for occurring.

If I understand the decision the Court ruled that only the methods that work AFTER conception are subject to the ruling. BC pills act BEFORE the egg gets fertilized. One type stops ovulation, the other stops sperm from entering the uterus. Those types should still be allowable as they do not 'abort' a fertilized egg.

Will be interesting to see how it all shakes out....
Click to expand...

I just find it amusing that contraceptives fall, for the Administration at least, into the category of "disease prevention". A little top heavy with the radical feminists, perhaps?

There are all kinds of medications that prevent missing work due to all kinds of problems. Anti-diarrheal medications, or anti-migraine medications, for example. But none of them are free. You have to pay a co-pay for all of them.

No, the only reason contraceptives were free was because the Administration deemed them disease preventatives. And that, I suspect, was mostly for political, "we're your good buddies, honey pie," sort of pandering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom