Democrats Fast-Track Bill To Override Hobby Lobby Decision

[jillian]

It doesn't become law till it passes all of the hurdles.

Simply proposing something stupid doesn't make it a law.

there is nothing stupid in the proposed law. it's what the Court should have held.

but no, it isn't law until its passed. and even then, if the Court has already ruled on an issue, I don't think new legislation will get around it.... unless of course scalia takes his much needed retirement.

Just can't wait for some conservative justices retire, so you can crush dissent and all forms of self freedom for the glory of the State and the Party.....

i can't wait for the loons to retire so the court does its job again. there seems to be a total and complete breakdown since the wingers came up

it isn't about "dissent"....it's about getting theocrats out of the law since they have no right to be there.

 

[JoeB131]

What part of "congress shall make no law abridging the free exercise of religion" is difficult to understand?

That wording isn't in the constitution.

The wording is...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Which does not apply to corporate entities. Corporations are not people.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Psst! The word "people" isn't in there.

True enough. ANd the word "Corporations" isn't there, either.

ANd since Hobby Lobby isn't an "establishment of religion", it can't claim a religious privilage.

 

[g5000]

DIPSHIT: Force my employer to buy me stuff.

UNCLE SAM: Here you go. I will fine them if they don't buy you this stuff.

EMPLOYER: I should not be forced to buy someone else stuff.

DIPSHIT: He's intruding into my life!!! WAAAAAAH!

You see, this is where I have to disagree.

Your employer is not "buying you stuff", you are earning health coverage as part of your compensation for labor performed.

It is a perq, not a right.

All ACA did was standardize what constituted a valid insurance policy.

No. ACA is forcing employers to provide that perq, and it is dictating the terms of that perq.

You idiots have now made every worker hostage to the government and their employers.

You should be getting nothing more than a paycheck from your employer. If you morons want birth control, then NO ONE CAN TAKE THAT FROM YOU IF YOU BUY YOUR OWN INSURANCE.

Instead, you are demanding the government decide what you need, and to force employers to provide what the government decides you need. Jesus Christ, you people are dumbasses.

And now the government has decided your employer doesn't have to provide you a particular perq. You dumbasses are too stupid to realize this is a "be careful what you ask for" life lesson!

You are too stupid to know how stupid you are.

 

[Avatar4321]

This thread is a freaking mind bender. Left wing whackos have gone off the deep end.

What's cracking me up thru this debate is that feminazis are demanding to be taken care of. I'm an old school feminist.

The last thing on the planet I fought for when the movement first started was to have someone else take care of me. Good grief. That's what we fought against.

We wanted equality so we could make our own way. Unreal.

^^^^

insane rightwing nutcase ranting.

If fighting for the right to govern yourself is insane, then you are in the wrong country

 

[g5000]

Waaaaaah! Make someone else buy me the stuff I want! Waaaaaah!

 

[g5000]

Isn't the real issue at it's most basic whether religious beliefs should trump the law of the land?

You got it exactly backwards.

 

[g5000]

Isn't the real issue at it's most basic whether religious beliefs should trump the law of the land?

The free practice of religious beliefs is guaranteed by the Constitution...the law of the land.

SCOTUS upheld that.

No one was denying the owners of HL the freedom to practice their religion.

The ACA was forcing them to violate their religious beliefs.

 

[Avatar4321]

W

That wording isn't in the constitution.

The wording is...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Which does not apply to corporate entities. Corporations are not people.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Psst! The word "people" isn't in there.

True enough. ANd the word "Corporations" isn't there, either.

ANd since Hobby Lobby isn't an "establishment of religion", it can't claim a religious privilage.

No one has claimed it was an establishment of religion. What a ridiculous straw man.

The owners of hobby lobby, however, have the right to religious expression. The fact that you seem to think the federal government has the power to rob then of that right.

 

[JoeB131]

Your employer is not "buying you stuff", you are earning health coverage as part of your compensation for labor performed.

It is a perq, not a right.

It's neither a perq nor a right. it's compensation. That's what it was designed for, to be additional compensation to attract talent in a time period where the government froze wages when unemployment was low.

All ACA did was standardize what constituted a valid insurance policy.

No. ACA is forcing employers to provide that perq, and it is dictating the terms of that perq.

You idiots have now made every worker hostage to the government and their employers.

You should be getting nothing more than a paycheck from your employer. If you morons want birth control, then NO ONE CAN TAKE THAT FROM YOU IF YOU BUY YOUR OWN INSURANCE.

Instead, you are demanding the government decide what you need, and to force employers to provide what the government decides you need. Jesus Christ, you people are dumbasses.

And now the government has decided your employer doesn't have to provide you a particular perq.

You are too stupid to know how stupid you are.

Well, namecalling aside. (Again, I usually like your posts, compared to other people) Health Insurance is essentially a form of compensation.

Here's the thing. as I pointed out earlier and everyone avoided, in most Employer provided plans, you and your employer pay a certain amount in for the plan. Usually about $5000 a person or $10,000 for a family. Said amount is calculated into your cost of employment and the value you bring to the company is expected to offset your pay, your insurance and other benefits, and then create enough additional revenue to make the company a profit.

But most of us are not running up $5000 a year in medical expenses, most years. In between 1992 and 2006, I doubt I went to the doctor more than once or twice a year, usually for something petty like a cold that wouldn't go away a shot for a sore shoulder. So I was paying/earning more to go into that coverage than was being paid out for my benefit.

Then I had 2007, the year that cured me of Republicanism. I ran up $50,000 in medical expenses between two operations and subsequent therapy and after treatments. And oddly, the company was in a big hurry to get rid of me after that.

So in my case, I paid more in than I got out, up until I didn't.

Now, if we ran health insurance like car insurance, this wouldn't be an issue. A 25 year old woman could easily get a policy for a lot less than $5000.00 that covered every kind of birth control she wanted. And a man of my age with medical issues couldn't get a policy for $5000 for love or money.

In short, Hobby Lobby is able to get the benefits of collectivization, but not the penalties, which means you have to pay for a few treatments your Imaginary Friend in the Sky doesn't like.

 

[JoeB131]

W

No one has claimed it was an establishment of religion. What a ridiculous straw man.

The owners of hobby lobby, however, have the right to religious expression. The fact that you seem to think the federal government has the power to rob then of that right.

Well, of course it does.

If Hobby Lobby wanted to fire an employee for not belonging to their religion, or for living a lifestyle they didn't approve of, their "religious expression" would go right out the window. That would be discrimination.

Hobby Lobby wants to dictate how a third party (their insurance company) manages health care based on a religous belief.

 

[g5000]

Health Insurance is essentially a form of compensation.

A company car is compensation, too. Discount coupons for sporting events are a compensation.

The employer CHOOSES what compensations to offer. This is the part you are too stoneheaded to understand.

Now the government has decided it is going to FORCE an employer to provide a specific compensation.

Here's the thing. as I pointed out earlier and everyone avoided, in most Employer provided plans, you and your employer pay a certain amount in for the plan. Usually about $5000 a person or $10,000 for a family. Said amount is calculated into your cost of employment and the value you bring to the company is expected to offset your pay, your insurance and other benefits, and then create enough additional revenue to make the company a profit.

And as I have said many times, this gigantic employer-sponsored insurance boondoggle bends the cost of healthcare in America up. This is what makes it a dead giveaway that ObamaCare was not about bringing down the cost of healthcare.

The employer mandate which forces EVERY employer to provide this perq was Obama's way of giving a giant sop to labor unions. It achieved an ends at which labor unions had failed. This had NOTHING to do with reforming healthcare and making life better for Americans.


You fools don't want freedom to choose for yourselves, or for employers to have the freedom to choose their pay and compensation structure.

You want totalitarianism. You want the government deciding what you should have provided to you. This is sheer insanity.

 

[bripat9643]

Your employer is not "buying you stuff", you are earning health coverage as part of your compensation for labor performed.

It is a perq, not a right.

It's neither a perq nor a right. it's compensation. That's what it was designed for, to be additional compensation to attract talent in a time period where the government froze wages when unemployment was low.

All ACA did was standardize what constituted a valid insurance policy.

No. ACA is forcing employers to provide that perq, and it is dictating the terms of that perq.

You idiots have now made every worker hostage to the government and their employers.

You should be getting nothing more than a paycheck from your employer. If you morons want birth control, then NO ONE CAN TAKE THAT FROM YOU IF YOU BUY YOUR OWN INSURANCE.

Instead, you are demanding the government decide what you need, and to force employers to provide what the government decides you need. Jesus Christ, you people are dumbasses.

And now the government has decided your employer doesn't have to provide you a particular perq.

You are too stupid to know how stupid you are.

Well, namecalling aside. (Again, I usually like your posts, compared to other people) Health Insurance is essentially a form of compensation.

Here's the thing. as I pointed out earlier and everyone avoided, in most Employer provided plans, you and your employer pay a certain amount in for the plan. Usually about $5000 a person or $10,000 for a family. Said amount is calculated into your cost of employment and the value you bring to the company is expected to offset your pay, your insurance and other benefits, and then create enough additional revenue to make the company a profit.

But most of us are not running up $5000 a year in medical expenses, most years. In between 1992 and 2006, I doubt I went to the doctor more than once or twice a year, usually for something petty like a cold that wouldn't go away a shot for a sore shoulder. So I was paying/earning more to go into that coverage than was being paid out for my benefit.

Then I had 2007, the year that cured me of Republicanism. I ran up $50,000 in medical expenses between two operations and subsequent therapy and after treatments. And oddly, the company was in a big hurry to get rid of me after that.

So in my case, I paid more in than I got out, up until I didn't.

Now, if we ran health insurance like car insurance, this wouldn't be an issue. A 25 year old woman could easily get a policy for a lot less than $5000.00 that covered every kind of birth control she wanted. And a man of my age with medical issues couldn't get a policy for $5000 for love or money.

In short, Hobby Lobby is able to get the benefits of collectivization, but not the penalties, which means you have to pay for a few treatments your Imaginary Friend in the Sky doesn't like.

No it doesn't, asshole. If I don't t like the benefits one auto insurance company is offering, I can choose another. THere's no rule that says I have to take X, Y, Z benefits for my car insurance. In fact, most car insurance companies allow you to choose from a smorgasboard of benefits. So long as you purchase the state required minimums, you can get pretty much whatever you want.

You theory insurance "collectivization" is obvious horseshit. It only obtains when government sticks its nose into the arrangement.

 

[The Rabbi]

Let's rehearse the facts here because people seem to have lost sight of them.

THe ACA authorized Health and Human Services to promulgate regulations on what employers had to offer in their health insurance packages, if they offered health insurance. Companies could opt out and pay a penalty instead (this was delayed by Obama until after the November election because it will result in millions of people getting cancelled. But I digress).
HHS's regulations mandated coverage of 20 types of birth control. Four of those twenty in fact do not prevent conception at all and cause a very early term abortion.
Congress had previously passed under Clinton the Religious Rights Restoration Act that mandated that regulations could not be overly intrusive to religious values.
Hobby Lobby requested an exemption from HHS's regulation due to their religious nature. The administration refused to grant the exemption, as they have almost universally. (this is a change in government policy because previously most religiously oriented orgs could ask for and receive exemptions on regulations that went against their beliefs. This administration pretty much stopped that).
HL sued on the grounds that the regulation violated federal law, namely the Religious Rights Restoration Act.
At issue was whether a for profit corporation could have a religious leaning similar to non-profits, like Catholic Charities.
The Court held for HL, ruling that the HHS regulation did in fact violate federal law.
Nowhere was the Constitution at issue. Nowhere did the COurt say HL or any other org could impose their religious beliefs on anyone else. The Court provided a method to resolve the issue similar to what happened to non profits. To date the president has not done that.
Those are the facts. Period.

 

[daveman]

[
Your personal experiences are meaningless. Look at the VA (although you refuse to; you don't see anything wrong going on) -- it was held up as a model of government health care.

And while the left was holding it up, we know now that veterans weren't getting the care they needed and bureaucrats were lying about it. And it's only gotten worse since then.

Of course, government-worshiping fools like you refuse to see it.

I see a lot wrong with the VA. But the real problem is that we fought a war for 13 years, kept shoving the same kids through that meat grinder, and then wondered why a system designed for a lot less veterans didn't hold up as well as it should.

But to put it in perspective, you'd find just as many problems in private health care.

The real problem at the VA is between Bush's wars and Bush's recessions, the system was taxed a lot more than it was designed for.

It's like asking why my Ford Focus blew out it's engine after I tried to use it to tow a tractor-trailer.

And yet the left claims the American health care industry won't have any problems absorbing millions of patients newly-covered by Obamacare.

I see you agree with us thinking people that it's going to be a disaster.

 

[daveman]

That wording isn't in the constitution.

The wording is...

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Which does not apply to corporate entities. Corporations are not people.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Psst! The word "people" isn't in there.

True enough. ANd the word "Corporations" isn't there, either.

ANd since Hobby Lobby isn't an "establishment of religion", it can't claim a religious privilage.

"...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

You lose. Accept it.

 

[JoeB131]

No it doesn't, asshole. If I don't t like the benefits one auto insurance company is offering, I can choose another. THere's no rule that says I have to take X, Y, Z benefits for my car insurance. In fact, most car insurance companies allow you to choose from a smorgasboard of benefits. So long as you purchase the state required minimums, you can get pretty much whatever you want.

You theory insurance "collectivization" is obvious horseshit. It only obtains when government sticks its nose into the arrangement.

Here's the thing. If I don't like the insurance Allstate is giving me for my car, I can go to Progressive or Geico or State Farm.

If I don't like the insurance Cigna is giving me at my job, my only real option is to quit my job and then hope that my employer is not going to offer a form of insurance that sucks just as bad or maybe a little worse.

Of course, all insurance is collectivization. And frankly, most states REQUIRE you to get insurance if you want to drive a car.

 

[JoeB131]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

Psst! The word "people" isn't in there.

True enough. ANd the word "Corporations" isn't there, either.

ANd since Hobby Lobby isn't an "establishment of religion", it can't claim a religious privilage.

"...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

You lose. Accept it.

In the long run, you are telling the 99% of women who use contraception that their choices are dependent on the religious whims of their employers.

I seriously think you guys should run on that in 2014 and 2016.

 

[whitehall]

Are you trying to say all we have to do is pass a law that makes abortion illegal? Dream on lefties.

 

[The Rabbi]

True enough. ANd the word "Corporations" isn't there, either.

ANd since Hobby Lobby isn't an "establishment of religion", it can't claim a religious privilage.

"...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

You lose. Accept it.

In the long run, you are telling the 99% of women who use contraception that their choices are dependent on the religious whims of their employers.

I seriously think you guys should run on that in 2014 and 2016.

No one is saying that except you. If you want something that your insurance doesnt pay for, buy it yourself. Novel concept I know.

 

[JoeB131]

[

And as I have said many times, this gigantic employer-sponsored insurance boondoggle bends the cost of healthcare in America up. This is what makes it a dead giveaway that ObamaCare was not about bringing down the cost of healthcare.

The employer mandate which forces EVERY employer to provide this perq was Obama's way of giving a giant sop to labor unions. It achieved an ends at which labor unions had failed. This had NOTHING to do with reforming healthcare and making life better for Americans.

You fools don't want freedom to choose for yourselves, or for employers to have the freedom to choose their pay and compensation structure.

You want totalitarianism. You want the government deciding what you should have provided to you. This is sheer insanity.

I'm not sure if it bends it up as it collectivizes the risk.

Again, when I was in my 20's, when the US Army covered my health issues, I almost never went to the doctor. I had this operation on my feet to correct a bunion, but that was about it.

In my 40's and 50's, I had a whole slew of medical issues. Sleep Apena, arthritis, high blood pressure, a few things I don't want to discuss publicly.

In my 60's or 70's, no private insurance would touch me, and I know it.

YOu see, the problem with the pre-ACA system is that private insurance wouldn't cover the people who need health care the most.

ObamaCare's main flaw is that it wasn't allowed to have a public option or a MediCare buy in, and the Private Insurance System was expected to cover people they otherwise didn't want to cover.

When the simplest solution would simply be to have single payer. Eliminate all the middle men, direct payment from a consolidated fund to providers.