Hobby Lobby ruling. Where's the male oral contraceptive? Where's the justice? The equality?

God loves Viagra. Discuss.

But in all seriousness… oral contraceptives are for men, too. Don’t tell me they receive no benefit. Well… ok, gay men don’t.

Corporations are people… that are exempt from personal responsibility.

Ironically, they get most of their stock from China; a country where government pays for abortions. Yet, us taxpayers have to subsidize churches….

I have many thoughts, but haven’t found the words.

Well, I just hope Hobby Lobby provides hellacious maternity leave. If the women working for them have the same beliefs, they’re going to be getting pregnant every year. Remember when you would see a huge family with a dozen kids. You could say “They’re Catholic,” and 99% of the time you’d be right.

The ruling is in regards to coverage for the morning after pill and IUDs which two companies (Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties of Pennsylvania) argued was tantamount to abortion and should therefore not be covered. The argument being that the morning after pill does not prevent fertilization, as BC pills/shots/hormone implants do.

Let’s make sure we know the whole story before jumping up and down saying they are refusing all birth control.

@dappled_leaves

Tell me how Viagra has anything to do with contraception. In fact isn’t Viagra and the like effectively the opposite of birth control?

Like it says in my topics: apples and oranges.

Hobby Lobby only has a problem with “post fertilization” abortion medication. Their employees can still get regular birth control. The abortion or post fertilization pills can be acquired by regular insurance, on obama care and many other women’s organizations. I think the ruling was good. You would think this medication costs hundred of dollars instead of the actual small amount they cost.

This privately owned company employes thousands of people. They happen to like their employment with Hobby Lobby. They get a better starting pay than most, good benefits and even aid for school. sick days, paid holidays and vacation pay.

< I wish people would educate themselves about political topics before they start shooting from the hip>

To answer your question I think the whole big deal is because of the voting block of women. apparently in this day and age no one gives a crap about men’s issues. To put it simply, the Democrats care about women not so much men. Viagra is the least of their worries.

Another step on the road to theocratic fascism.
Congratulations.

“Where’s the male oral contraceptive? Where’s the justice? The equality?”

In my heads.

@SecondHandStoke An IUD is a device used solely by women; it is a product whose use relates only to sex. Viagra is a drug used solely by men; it is a product whose use relates only to sex. The analogy is not about their exact function. You’re a smart guy. We both know I didn’t have to explain that to you.

Anyone who has heard of the “personhood amendment” knows that this ruling threatens coverage of the pill, because in the event of fertilization, the pill can prevent an embryo from attaching to the womb (random story for illustration). This is not just about IUDs and the morning after pill.

Just another example of why we shouldn’t allow private health insurance in this country.

@BeenThereSaidThat “You would think this medication costs hundred of dollars instead of the actual small amount they cost.” IUDs can cost between $500 – $1000.

This ruling sets a very dangerous precedent. As Justice Ginsberg said in her dissent: “Would the exemption…extend to employers with religiously grounded objections to blood transfusions (Jehovah’s Witnesses); antidepressants (Scientologists); medications derived from pigs, including anesthesia, intravenous fluids, and pills coated with gelatin (certain Muslims, Jews, and Hindus); and vaccinations[?]…Not much help there for the lower courts bound by today’s decision.”

Damn, missed my edit window.

Here’s the ultimate question. You’re a responsible adult, paying your own way through life, working hard, paying your health insurance premiums…you know, for your health… do you want you and your doctor to make decisions about your medical care, or do you want your boss making decisions, taking options away from you? Medically approved, legal options?

@syz I work in a hospital with a hospitalist group. They are already doing that, making decisions on your health according your insurance.

@chyna I think the point is, shouldn’t you be able to choose what you’re covered for, instead of your employer deciding for you? Or rather, shouldn’t your employer be choosing a plan according to the needs of the employees, rather than their own, personal desires?

I’ll be honest: I don’t understand why American health insurance is so closely tied to employment. I think it’s great that the ACA is providing other options, and that those options are improving. In the end, I suspect this ruling will be a huge blow to Republicans, both because it will send more clients to ACA insurers, and because women (and men who give a shit about women) will be even more strongly inclined to vote Democrat.

@chyna Yes, they are. Does that mean that it’s ok for even less qualified individuals (bosses) to also make those decisions for me?

@syz I am not saying it’s right or ok. I’m just telling you what is.

According to SCOTUS, fetuses are people, corporations are people, women – not so much.

The implications of today’s ruling go far beyond birth control. Today’s ruling has effectively made, as Justice Scalia said in Employment Division v Smith (1990), “the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.”

When I was a young mother with two children by the age of 23 I qualified for Medicaid. Medicaid paid for my birth control. When I had health insurance when my children were older, but our family was still considered working poor, Planned Parenthood provided affordable birth control for me based on our income.

Is birth control that expensive that people with a living wage can’t afford it? I don’t understand the controversy, but I’ll admit I don’t have all of the facts. I do understand the implications that @Darth_Algar mentiioned.

It’s not the birth control that has me worried so much as how much more power it gives to corporations. At this point, one must question the relevance of government. Like Shadowrun, we already have corporations making laws, private military (Blackwater), for-profit prisons… is government (and our Constitution) obsolete?

And, truth is, Hobby Lobby actually covered Plan B and the other disputed forms of birth control with no qualms right up until they the challenged the contraceptive mandate. This had nothing at all to do with sincere religious beliefs, but rather was a callous political move.

Are all of the products, packaging materials, lighting fixtures, faucets, doorknobs, etc etc etc in every Hobby Lobby in America made in countries with laws that are compliant with the religious convictions of the Hobby Lobby owners? (I honestly don’t know, as I have never shopped there). Are there no “made in PRC” stickers/labels on products? I doubt SCOTUS took those things into account when the decision was made (or did they?) which smacks of some serious hypocrisy.

I don’t think everything is a slippery slope, by any means, but I definitely think that this is.

Read somewhere that they get a lot of their stuff from China, where the government encourages, and pays for, abortions.

@Dutchess_III : Not just “encourages” but coerces with serious strong-arm tactics, and has in place emotionally punitive measures for non-compliance. (Hence my question above about “made in PRC” labels.)

@canidmajor Re: China

@syz : which is why I am seriously concerned. I can vote with my dollars re: Hobby Lobby. I can’t (not me personally) re: SCOTUS. Frustrating.

It’s interesting that we live in a time where things like freedom and justice are determined by how much free stuff you get.

That’s not the issue @Jaxk.

@Jaxk – I think you may have posted this comment in the wrong thread. This thread is about private health insurance and the concept of religious exemption. Relevant discussion might take us to the concept of universal health insurance and the limitations of leaving such things to private entities. It might also be relevant to discuss what might happen if we had a private police force or fire services, and what religious exemptions might mean in that context.

Health insurance is not “free stuff”, it’s a contract agreement that you pay for.

Not the issue, huh? The only thing that has been affected by this decision is who has to pay for the morning after pill or the IUD. Hobby Lobby won’t be a party to that transaction. You can still buy it yourself or maybe get it from Planned Parenthood. So if we aren’t interested in getting it free, what is the issue?

In the past it seems most of us were more interested in what we could do for ourselves, how much control we had over our own lives. It seems we have gravitated to a society where we are more interested in how much we deserve to be given..

Do you have insurance @Jaxk?
_

@Jaxk: “So if we aren’t interested in getting it free, what is the issue?”

Are you really not following? I don’t want to assume you’re intentionally missing the whole thing.

@Jaxk What is your definition of free? I’m paying $433/month for my health insurance (and have been paying for it for 8 years), and if my doctor recommends a completely legal medical treatment, why can some jerk in an office upstairs say no?

I’m waiting for babies to be left on Hobby Lobby’s door. And also, for the bagel, jewellery and finance corporation to impose Halakha laws on their employees, and assorted businesses, school and community groups to impose Sharia Law. After all, if they incorporate, that gives them the right to impose their beliefs. Well done Supreme Court…Well done.

Work for the bagel corporation and want a divorce? Sorry….. You can’t keep your job if your husband doesn’t grant you a Get. Did you get raped? Oh man…. I guess that was your fault and you need to be whipped or stoned.

@Jaxk : I see you bought right into the rebuttal propaganda. I’ll bet they’re glad to know it works. This is, in no way, about the cost of such contraception. This is about the Supreme Court buying into the same thing as you did. If this is about “religious” concerns, the hypocrisy is a much bigger factor than who pays for the contraceptives.
Which aren’t free, don’t know why you think so.

@Jaxk Corporate personhood and boundaries are the issue. How much right does your employer have to interfere with your life? What next, having your manager in your bedroom making sure you don’t use a sexual position not authorized by corporate guidelines?

Corporations have the right to do anything they want. Citizens have no rights beyond what corporations grant, and their policies trump law.

And if you want to complain about “free stuff”, then where is your outrage against corporations and churches? They take far more tax dollars than food stamps, yet you seem to actively support corporate welfare.

@hominid No, probably not following. The real question is whether that lack of comprehension is intentional; at times, I suspect it is.

Let’s see.

@Dutchess_III – Yes.

@hominid – I’m following

@syz – He can’t say no, he can only say he won’t pay for it.

@cazzie – Too convoluted to follow let alone respond.

@canidmajor – It may be difficult for many on the left to understand but some consider abortion to be murder. The only contraceptives in this ruling were ones that dispose of a fertilized egg which some think equates to abortion. If you want those kinds, you can get them elsewhere but Hobby Lobby would rather not be involved in what they consider murder.

@jerv – As always, it is difficult to follow your logic but let me try and make the connection. If your employer is paying fpr your sex, he has the right to limit the type of sex he’s willing to pay for. If you don’t want your manager to dictating the positions, don’t have sex in the office or don’t expect him to pay for it. See how simple this is.

You’re not actually evading anyone’s posts, are you @Jaxk . It makes responding to you pointless.

You have insurance, ergo, you get a lot of stuff for free.

@Jaxk Are you being intentionally obtuse?

“He can’t say no, he can only say he won’t pay for it.” If I paid for it, he shouldn’t be able to say no. Even if Hobby Lobby pays 100% of the premiums, it’s a benefit that I earned, i.e., I paid for it.

He is inflicting his religious view on me. That is not “freedom of religion”.

Crap. “Reading” anyone’s posts. Damn you, autocorrect!

@Jaxk By that logic, customers have the right to dictate corporate policy. Full transparency, veto power, and all. After all, who pays for the company to even exist? Again, inconsistent.

@Dutchess_III

That’s not really my point but since you choose to frame it that way, I don’t get it for free. I have what is called Catastrophic coverage. In the 10 years I’ve had it my insurance hasn’t paid for anything. Not a doctors visit, not a prescription, not a treatment of any kind. Of course the up side is that it is fairly cheap. The down side is that I pay for the insurance and I pay for medical as well.

@Jaxk

Thank you so for the voice of reason some of us have nearly come to take for granted.

@syz – Not really. Hobby Lobby buys the group policy and you can join if you wish (regardless of the split between the company and employee). If you don’t like the policy they offer, you can choose not to take it and get your own. Or you can take it and buy the IUD yourself. Or you can take it and go to one of the many places that offered those specific contraceptives. You don’t get to decide what group policy they offer, however. Oh yah, you can not take the job as well.

@jerv

I hate to encourage you but there is some wisdom in what you say. The customers do get a vote on both products and corp policy. They vote with their dollars. If they don’t like what your doing, they don’t buy. It should be interesting in the days ahead as we see if the customer base of Hobby Lobby abandons them or continues to support them. My guess is that the customer base is primarily women so it should be a good test.

@Jaxk There are already lists of alternative suppliers for what Hobby Lobby sells… but not all of them are available in all areas. Many places have a virtual monopoly in a particular area. I am fortunate enough to live in a metropolitan area where there’s plenty of options for everything, but about half of Americans lack that luxury. When your “choices” are to buy someplace you don’t want to or drive an hour and spend the money you would’ve spent on whatever on gas instead, well, having lived in such an area is why I’m skeptical of the alleged “Free” market.

I’m not entirely unsympathetic to your view, I merely feel the door swings both ways.

While I would like to go further into how some people have odd (to me) definitions of “choice”, that’d be a digression, and one that I don’t have time for during my break at work.

@jerv

Sounds like an opportunity. If you (or anyone) has the courage of their convictions, they can steal away the customer base of Hobby Lobby. Of course government regulation doesn’t make it easy but the cost of entry on a business like that is about as low as any. Personally I doubt their is enough outcry from real customers to make a go of it. Most of the noise is from the hardcore left picketing rather than participating.

“Hardcore left”. lol. This country wouldn’t know hardcore left if it molotov’ed them right in the face.

@Jaxk While most who are successful got that way through hard work and risk-taking, it would be a logical fallacy to assume that those lead to prosperity. As most people are reluctant to bet more than they can afford to lose, and the odds of a business even surviving it’s first year are not great, it’s not nearly as easy as you try to make it sound.
As for the cost of entry being low, those that aren’t even sure they’ll make rent would beg to differ with your notion on that.

George Takei is calling for a Hobby Lobby boycott.

Oh my.

also, it says alot about how far right someone is, when he calls centrists, “hardcore left”

“Centrists.”

LOL.

Laugh. Laugh at your own ignorance.

^ That’s it?

@SecondHandStoke I have to respectfully disagree; if you and @Jaxk were Centrists, then the rest of the world would be a lot further to the Right. In fact, even our Left is mostly to the right of where much of the rest of the world has their Right. If you and @Jaxk truly were Centrists, you would be more like me, a guy with more European views on many things.

You would believe in human rights. You would not support cutting a few million in public assistance, especially not in favor of giving a few billion to an industry that already makes enough profits to pay their executives 8/9-figure bonuses. You wouldn’t allow millions to starve in the streets just so that a small handful could get a twelfth mansion and a Bugatti to put in it’s garage. You wouldn’t be Robin Hood, but you would treat the national economy the same as a household budget by making sure the basics are taken care of before you splurge on luxuries.

You would believe in the “greater good” at least to the extent of seeking to end the sort of behavior that passes costs on to taxpayers (including small business owners) solely for the purposes of making a profit when you are already filthy fucking rich. (I’m looking at you, Walmart!) I’m not against anybody getting rich, mind you; I’m just against them doing things that harm others to do so. And given how many people have gotten rich without causing great harm to others, or driving up the taxes that only us honest people pay, there’s no excuse for it.

You would be more even-handed, and support reciprocity. If corporations are allowed to determine our healthcare because they pay for it, then we get to determine their corporate policy as well. I’m not talking “voting with your dollars”, partly for reasons previously mentioned. I’m talking giving consumers the same power to make rules and attach conditions as corporations have. Just as many don’t have as much of a choice in employment or health insurance as you guys think, many don’t have the shopping options either, refuting any delusions you guys hold of “free markets”. So, the next best thing is to let the door swing both ways.

No, you guys aren’t Centirists. You two are right-leaning compared to other people who are to the right. Last I checked, being to the right of something on the right put you at least two steps away from the center.

It never ceases to amaze me that liberals can’t seem to admit they’re liberal. I always admit to being conservative. Hell, I’m proud of it.

Just for the record, Carl Marx is not the center.

@Jaxk
Karl (that is how it is spelt) Marx advocated the common ownership of the means of production and distribution by the workforce itself.
There is not a. single. democrat that advocates that.

To claim that “liberals” are following Marx showcases one of 2 things:
1. That you are ignorant of what Marxism is and what “liberals” want. Or
2. That you are deliberately dishonest.

I am a communist. And I can tell you without a sliver of a doubt that so called american “liberals” are nowhere close to Marx and Engels.

@Jaxk

I’ve often stated that I’m “left of liberal”, however what you call “liberal” or “hardcore left” (ie: Democrats) is so far to the right of what the rest of the world understands as “left” as to barely qualify as centrist.

@Jaxk It never ceases to amaze me how you seem to think that you’re in the middle and 99% of everyone is to your left. You think that the number number halfway between 0 and 10 is 2 instead of 5. You have yet to show that you’ve really looked beyond our own borders, and if you’ve ever actually left the country, you’ve forgotten your experiences abroad (assuming you even observed anything in the first place). I thought you were joking; if you’re serious then I weep for humanity.

Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin are not the center either, nor is Rand Paul, or Ted Cruz. But it is telling that you’re so ashamed of the Right that you would rather call EVERYONE “Liberal” rather than just concede that you’re right-of-center.

…Just because I don’t get my convictions from Jon Stewart or Russel Brand…

@SecondHandStoke By American standards, those two are left-leaning. By European standards, not so far from center. It’s relative, just as my 7’2” friend calls everyone short.

Besides, we need some opposition to the Democrats. I just wish we had some opposing views that understood things like spending millions to save billions, and were secular enough to actually support Democracy over Theocracy. I’m also skeptical of those who support that which has proven to fail.

Shouldn’t you and I be fighting poverty and unemployment rather than fighting each other? Think of it as cost-cutting; reduced requirements for government assistance lowers taxes, but doing so in a way that is fair to employers is complex enough to only be possible through bipartisan efforts. Just because you’re more conservative than me, that doesn’t automatically mean I think you’re wrong.

@jerv from over here, Russel Brand is an idiot on any scale, but Jon Stewart makes sense. Common sense.