If Hobby Lobby wins...

[Quantum Windbag]

It isn't freedom to "force" someone else to pay for something. It is the company's obligation to its employees because they have the means to do so. Rich ***** just don't want to spend any money on their employees and are using "religious freedom" as a flimsy excuse to get away with it.

Hobby Lobby is NOT a church. "God" is not within their walls. It is a business. Businesses are not churches, but churches are businesses. If Hobby Lobby wins and corporations have religious freedom like churches, then will corporations be taxed like churches?

By that logic I can move into your apartment because you have the means to pay for it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

they believe that Plan B is an Abortificant drug and its not.

We could argue that all religious beliefs are false. So what?

Not religious beliefs...They dont believe in a fact and instead call that fact something UNFACTUAL and expects everyone to go along with it.

Again, what happens when some Jim Jones wanna be decides he's going to **** his 12 year old "wife". And tell you "I dont believe shes a child...Shes my wife"

Then what? Do we get to stop playing along then?

The fact is that there are scientists and doctors disagree about how the drugs we are discussing work, which explains why the government did not try to argue that the science proves that they are not abortifacient drugs, they just argued that, under us law, they are not defined that way.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

We could argue that all religious beliefs are false. So what?

Not religious beliefs...They dont believe in a fact and instead call that fact something UNFACTUAL and expects everyone to go along with it.

The beliefs are irrelevant. We're free to believe whatever we like. It's our actions that matter. The question is whether those actions harm others.

They don't.

 

[ClosedCaption]

No, Actual doctors and scientists looked into it and said its not. Hobby Lobby believes it is even tho it isnt. You cant defend it so you try to get runner up in the category of Best Zinger by a stupid *****. Congrats

Actual doctors and scientist have also said it is.

But don't let the fact that science doesn't have all the answers change the fact that you use it to prove you are always wrong.

No they havent because you're missing proof. I backed up my statement with links. You have nothing and you just decided lying about it is easier

Told you he wouldnt have proof of his bullshit.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No, Actual doctors and scientists looked into it and said its not. Hobby Lobby believes it is even tho it isnt. You cant defend it so you try to get runner up in the category of Best Zinger by a stupid *****. Congrats

Actual doctors and scientist have also said it is.

But don't let the fact that science doesn't have all the answers change the fact that you use it to prove you are always wrong.

No they havent because you're missing proof. I backed up my statement with links. You have nothing and you just decided lying about it is easier

I provided a link to the FDA. If that isn't proof, what is?

 

[dblack]

Not religious beliefs...They dont believe in a fact and instead call that fact something UNFACTUAL and expects everyone to go along with it.

The beliefs are irrelevant. We're free to believe whatever we like. It's our actions that matter. The question is whether those actions harm others.

They don't.

Agreed. But that's really where the crux of so many these arguments lies. Many people seem to think that not doing something positive for someone is the equivalent of harming them. But outside failing to fulfill expressed obligations, contractual or otherwise, I don't see how they're the same.

 

[emilynghiem]

Then whats stopping them from requiring everyone to say the lords prayer before work? Or have a certain diet?

Could any other owner force his beliefs on his employees in other ways? Could the owner who doesnt believe in prescription meds opt out of it all together and argue for "natural healing" methods? Could a vegan make their stores meat free? Even their employees lunches?

Where does it stop? Or a better question, WHAT makes it stop?

I believe some religions don't believe in blood transfusions...that some religions don't believe in vaccines......I guess if Hobby Lobby wins, they too can pick and choose what health care services they can refuse to pay for for their employees...all they have to do is claim "religious grounds".

Yes that is WHY GOVT SHOULD NOT IMPOSE MANDATES OR REGULATIONS ON HEALTH CARE.

ALL health care is based on different beliefs.
* do we believe health care is a right or a choice? That's a political belief
* do we believe in free market choices or singlepayer through govt? That's a political belief
* do we believe convicted criminals, undocumented immigrants, or people who commit social or corporate welfare fraud should be covered by our public assistance?
That's a matter of belief.

I believe in spiritual healing to reduce excess costs from disease and crime that could be prevented by curing physical, mental and criminal illness at the root before it escalates.

I can't impose that belief on others.

Yet given this federal mandate system, I would have to pay more to cover costs I believe could have been prevented for FREE. I'd rather pay may money into historic and environmental preservation that isn't being funded by anyone. I'd rather invest money into building charity hospitals and medical schools to train and provide services for FREE,
rather than "pay for insurance." but the exemptions don't include "my beliefs"

So this is unconstitutional regulation, discrimination and penalties against people
BASED ON RELIGIOUS BELIEFS and criteria/conditions regulated by FEDERAL GOVT.

Now do you see why this is a problem?

Or do you only care if it affects YOUR beliefs?

So as long as govt policy aligns with your beliefs, then it's "okay" for govt
to impose religious biases and regulations/requirements on "other people"
whose religious freedom would be violated? Just not do this to you?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

That's not the issue. An opt-out would be bad because if violates the basic principle of equal rights. We should all have to follow the same laws.

Which explains why no one can opt out of the draft by claiming conscientious objector status.

Actually, it only explains why you are wrong.

Nope. It just explains why a draft, and attached exemptions, are as wrong as the mandate at issue.

The fact that the draft is wrong does not make exemptions to it wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So if I think the mininum wage, social security withholding, environmental regs and safety regs violate my free-market-cult religious beliefs, can my business can opt out of those as well?

If not, why the wild hypocritical double standards?

I have no idea, other than a massive delusion that seems to have infected every progressive hack in the country.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Actual doctors and scientist have also said it is.

But don't let the fact that science doesn't have all the answers change the fact that you use it to prove you are always wrong.

No they havent because you're missing proof. I backed up my statement with links. You have nothing and you just decided lying about it is easier

Told you he wouldnt have proof of his bullshit.

Are you hearing voices again?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Hobby Lobby is not imposing their beliefs onto anyone.
No one who works at Hobby Lobby has lost their rights. It's the owner of the Hobby Lobby who has lost their right. It is sold at Walgreens for 49.99. They can get it for free at any Planned Parenthood clinic.
The people that work at Hobby Lobby can pay for it themselves, just like they are doing now. They could also get an additional private insurance that does pay for the morning after pill or the week after pill.
It is the Feds who passed this Plan B law that has violated the 1st Amendment.

Yeah they are, they believe that Plan B is an Abortificant drug and its not. So now we have to deal with not only people religion but what they believe things to be and not what they actually are.

Why does the FDA say it is?

Linking to a 30 page report is slick (throw shit against the wall) but where does it say that?

 

[emilynghiem]

It isn't freedom to "force" someone else to pay for something. It is the company's obligation to its employees because they have the means to do so. Rich ***** just don't want to spend any money on their employees and are using "religious freedom" as a flimsy excuse to get away with it.

Hobby Lobby is NOT a church. "God" is not within their walls. It is a business. Businesses are not churches, but churches are businesses. If Hobby Lobby wins and corporations have religious freedom like churches, then will corporations be taxed like churches?

By that logic I can move into your apartment because you have the means to pay for it.

Thank you QW!

You remind me of the "blank look" and silent stare I got from a friend who insisted on opening up the borders and stopping the war against immigrants.

So I told him of course you believe in security and restrictions.

Don't you have a lock on your door? Or do you let anyone in your house
who wants to come in, use your restroom and utilities, eat your food and use your space.

Don't you control who you let into your house or not?

 

[dblack]

Which explains why no one can opt out of the draft by claiming conscientious objector status.

Actually, it only explains why you are wrong.

Nope. It just explains why a draft, and attached exemptions, are as wrong as the mandate at issue.

The fact that the draft is wrong does not make exemptions to it wrong.

Well, that's the center of our disagreement on the concept. Equal protection is fundamental, and abandoning it undermines rule of law irreparably. Injustices that result from consistent application of the law should be dealt with without sacrificing equal rights.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yeah they are, they believe that Plan B is an Abortificant drug and its not. So now we have to deal with not only people religion but what they believe things to be and not what they actually are.

Why does the FDA say it is?

Linking to a 30 page report is slick (throw shit against the wall) but where does it say that?

Is reading a drug insert that is required by the FDA beyond your skill set?

Plan B One-Step is believed to act as an emergency contraceptive principally by preventing ovulation or fertilization (by altering tubal transport of sperm and/or ova). In addition, it may inhibit implantation (by altering the endometrium).

Feel free to pull out all the studies that actually don't use science to contradict the FDA. After all, Obama is famous for putting politics over science, and you are a devoted disciple, so you will be true to your principles.

 

[emilynghiem]

You are all aware that a pill that terminates a fertilized egg is not the same as a surgical abortion, right?

If Christians want to cut down on abortions, contraception and birth-control pills should be made available to everyone.

Many believe that life begins at conception and a fertilized egg is life.

It is not about birth control pills.
It's about Plan B - the morning after pill and the week after pill.

And what's wrong with a pill? If Hobby Lobby is about profit, they should know that it costs a hell of a lot less to pay for Plan B than it does to pay for maternity leave, etc., for their employees.

Why does a business get to dictate the religious freedom of its employees?

Hi KNB:
It would also cost the govt and taxpayers a lot less
to 'cure all criminals' of mental illness and addiction
by implementing "spiritual healing" (which is FREE and has no harmful side effects)
instead of spending billions on the death penalty and incarceration
that does NOTHING to prevent or cure criminal behavior.

But that is NOT the role or jurisdiction of govt.

Nor is it the religious belief of the people running this company
to pay for abortifacient prescriptions. If they are prolife they would rather
pay for profamily programs, and that is their option.

If anything your argument PROVES they are not about monetary greed
but about principle. it also costs more resources to defend a principle,
so clearly that is the issue and not the money.

Buying and eating vegetarian may be healthier and cost less than other diets,
but it can't be forced on people, and they "can't be judged" for wanting to
buy and eat more expensive diets.

Since when is govt in charge of personal, private and religious beliefs,
and deciding what does and does not count as a religious belief?

How is this mandate and its consequences
NOT govt regulating on the basis of religion?
The whole process seems to be an infringement to me.

if religious freedom is an inalienable right,
then no one should have to go to court to defend the right to get back their liberties.

Such liberties aren't supposed to be taken away by govt or limited by law without due process; so where was the crime, conviction and due process against the owners of Hobby Lobby BEFORE THIS LAW WAS PASSED that imposed undue requirements on them.

Why is this "due process" happening AFTERWARDS? With the burden being put on the people running Hobby Lobby, treated as "criminal" and assumed "guilty until proven innocent." How did this get so turned around backwards?

 

[eflatminor]

You are all aware that a pill that terminates a fertilized egg is not the same as a surgical abortion, right?

If Christians want to cut down on abortions, contraception and birth-control pills should be made available to everyone.

Many believe that life begins at conception and a fertilized egg is life.

It is not about birth control pills.
It's about Plan B - the morning after pill and the week after pill.

And what's wrong with a pill? If Hobby Lobby is about profit, they should know that it costs a hell of a lot less to pay for Plan B than it does to pay for maternity leave, etc., for their employees.

Hobby Lobby gets to be "about" whatever they want to be about, profit or otherwise. That's how private property works.

Why does a business get to dictate the religious freedom of its employees?

They don't. Employees are free to practice any religion they like just as they are free to obtain any insurance they like. No employee is forced to take the insurance plan offered by Hobby Lobby. Of course, the government is trying to force HB to offer a particular insurance plan...on that violates THEIR religious freedom, which is why the government is going to lose this one.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Why does the FDA say it is?

Linking to a 30 page report is slick (throw shit against the wall) but where does it say that?

Is reading a drug insert that is required by the FDA beyond your skill set?

Plan B One-Step is believed to act as an emergency contraceptive principally by preventing ovulation or fertilization (by altering tubal transport of sperm and/or ova). In addition, it may inhibit implantation (by altering the endometrium).

Feel free to pull out all the studies that actually don't use science to contradict the FDA. After all, Obama is famous for putting politics over science, and you are a devoted disciple, so you will be true to your principles.

I will find Doctors and scientist who say otherwise because as you know govt agencies never screw up.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The constant references to Plan B and ella as abortion-causing pills frustrates Susan Wood, a professor of health policy at George Washington University and a former assistant commissioner for women's health at the FDA.

"It is not only factually incorrect, it is downright misleading. These products are not abortifacients," she says. "And their only connection to abortion is that they can prevent the need for one."

That's not a universal medical opinion, however.

"It would be my preference that none of these products had any potential to cause abortion or post-fertilization effects — that would be my preference — but we don't know that," says Gene Rudd, senior vice president of the Christian Medical and Dental Associations and a practicing OB-GYN in Bristol, Tenn.

That's not really the case anymore.

For years, scientists knew the pills, particularly Plan B, were highly effective in preventing pregnancy after unprotected sex but weren't exactly sure how they managed that. "It wasn't really clear whether it worked before ovulation or after ovulation," says Wood.

Scientists did know the drug worked primarily by preventing ovulation. It stops an egg from being released from a woman's ovary and thus prevents any chance of fertilization and pregnancy. But they also thought the drug might make it more difficult for a fertilized egg to implant in a woman's uterus.

Technically, that's not an abortion, says Wood.

"We know that about half of fertilized eggs never stick around. They just pass out of the woman's body," she says. "An abortifacient is something that interrupts an established pregnancy."

But people like Rudd worry that even if what the drugs do is not technically abortion, it's still objectionable if it happens after fertilization.

But it turns out, at least when it comes to Plan B, there is now fairly definitive research that shows the only way it works is by preventing ovulation, and therefore, fertilization.

"We've learned a lot about how these drugs work," says Diana Blithe, a biochemist and contraceptive researcher at the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. "I think it's time to revise our speculations about how things might work in view of data that show how things do work."

For example, says Blithe, a study published just last year led the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics to declare that Plan B does not inhibit implantation. And some abortion opponents in the medical community are beginning to accept that conclusion.

Morning-After Pills Don't Cause Abortion, Studies Say : Shots - Health News : NPR

But if the FDA says it isnt....wait...the FDA never says if it is an abortificiant or not so where are you getting this "translation"?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Nope. It just explains why a draft, and attached exemptions, are as wrong as the mandate at issue.

The fact that the draft is wrong does not make exemptions to it wrong.

Well, that's the center of our disagreement on the concept. Equal protection is fundamental, and abandoning it undermines rule of law irreparably. Injustices that result from consistent application of the law should be dealt with without sacrificing equal rights.

You are exhibiting a fundamental misunderstanding of how the law works. There is nothing about the rule of law that prevents a judge from actually judging the circumstances of a crime. In fact, it is a fundamental principle of the law that judges recognize that stealing in order to eat is fundamentally different than stealing for profit.

Another fundamental principal of out law is best summed up with the phrase quod est necessarium est licitum. (What is necessary is lawful.) An example of this is that it is perfectly legal to speed and run red lights if it is necessary to save a life.

Since our entire legal system is built on the exceptions to law, and these exceptions are open to anyone, there is no violation of equal protection in providing exceptions to laws as long as those exceptions are open to anyone. If you have a sincere objection to paying for an abortifacient for your employees, and Hobby Lobby wins this case, you will also have the ability to claim that exception. You will also be free not to claim the exception, just like most of the people who were drafted never tired to claim conscientious objector status.

If you make the claim the government can then either accommodate you, or challenge you on the basis that your claim is not sincere.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Linking to a 30 page report is slick (throw shit against the wall) but where does it say that?

Is reading a drug insert that is required by the FDA beyond your skill set?

Plan B One-Step is believed to act as an emergency contraceptive principally by preventing ovulation or fertilization (by altering tubal transport of sperm and/or ova). In addition, it may inhibit implantation (by altering the endometrium).

Feel free to pull out all the studies that actually don't use science to contradict the FDA. After all, Obama is famous for putting politics over science, and you are a devoted disciple, so you will be true to your principles.

I will find Doctors and scientist who say otherwise because as you know govt agencies never screw up.

I never said you can't find scientists who disagree, I said that every study you posted blatantly ignores the science.