Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

[Heka]

Sex ed should be taught by a woman 3 weeks past her due date. This is all.

Loooooooooooooooooooool!!!!!

[Roknrol]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

Sex ed should be taught by a woman 3 weeks past her due date. This is all.

[Heka]

"Well don't screw. Then there wouldn't be this problem, and then there wouldn't be a cause for abortions and the killing of babies".

Education education education education.

I teach sex ed. I recently convinced a young male teenager that the pill wasnt abortion because of what it actually does. It really didnt take much to convince him once he saw the science. Educate them young I say, and in 40 years all these problems will go away. /optimisticstatement

Fix education and you fix the world.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

The US government is run by the majority of men, and the body of a woman has always been under question. We have the right to vote, and make sign legal documents if it comes to it, but they are still trying to make decisions about what women should do about their bodies because we apparently can't make decisions for ourselves.

I know it's fun to make this a "independent women vs. ignorant men" issue, but that is not quite the truth, except where liberals converge.

In the nation, there is close to a 50/50 split in pro-life vs. pro-choice, and that 50% isn't entirely the male half. Your own testimony, in reference to your family, bears this out.

Signed, Corbin, the PF token conservative.

[moonixir]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

In the late 90's my OB/GYN put me on the pill to control issues with fibroids. I was completely celibate at the time so it had absolutely nothing to do with birth control. My employer's plan did not cover it because it was considered "optional", and that was that. If the makers of such drugs marketed some variety of them differently perhaps this wouldn't be an issue - call it "Hormone management therapy" or something.

If it were marketed as something different than 'birth control', then I think it would be viewed at differently. However, in places like Texas (where I am originally from, born and raised from there), they would still have an issue with it. My own family won't listen to the science that is behind the morning after pill because they think it induces abortion. They are totally against it, even though it isn't terminating life at all. I got an ear full of how happy they were with Hobby Lobby, and how eventually they want the pill (or any other form of birth control for women) to be completely made illegal.

To quote my family members and what was directly relayed to me because they don't agree with my 'liberal' views, "Well don't screw. Then there wouldn't be this problem, and then there wouldn't be a cause for abortions and the killing of babies".

The US government is run by the majority of men, and the body of a woman has always been under question. We have the right to vote, and make sign legal documents if it comes to it, but they are still trying to make decisions about what women should do about their bodies because we apparently can't make decisions for ourselves.

It's also why I feel like this is opening a giant can of worms. I'm reading of other places, even colleges, going through the process of saying they can deny a women rights to birth control, or the LGBTQ can be forced out of an area based on their religious preferences. Now don't get me wrong, I have nothing against it. I have a problem however with the people who spear head these campaigns trying to force those beliefs upon others who might have a problem with it because they choose to believe differently.

[lightdragon]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

Unfortunately, I don't think its gonna make it...

well as long as there is a republican as a house speak it will not. as the Unemployment extension benefits will hit the House floor faster than this bill. actually another bill similar to that one might make it if there is a democrat or indie as a house speaker. or the very least if John Boehner is not house speaker anymore.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

The GOPs have introduced a bill guaranteeing the right of women to pay for their own BC when not covered by insurance.

Seriously...

Sounds like a joke, but it's for real.

[thalassa]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

I believe there was a bill put into action that will counter the Supreme court's decision.

Unfortunately, I don't think its gonna make it...

[lightdragon]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

I'm not telling a Christian not to follow their faith. I'm telling a corporation that their corporation doesn't have religious rights. What an individual does in their own time is their own business.

If you own stock in a corporation, your corpration doesn't get to impose its shareholder's religious rights on the employees of the business.
And the "then don't get a job there" mentality is elietist and unworthy of anyone with even an ounce of empathy or compassion--jobs aren't growing on trees. If a place is hiring and you need a job, you apply there so you can keep a roof over your head, feed your kids, and have blankies for the long cold winter.

As for the rest of it--you are right, this isn't a free speech zone, but you can certainly have a dissenting opinion.

agreed.

also I didn't have time to go through all 11 pages of this thread. but I believe there was a bill put into action that will counter the Supreme court's decision.

[Bjorn]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

I'm not telling a Christian not to follow their faith. I'm telling a corporation that their corporation doesn't have religious rights. What an individual does in their own time is their own business.

If you own stock in a corporation, your corpration doesn't get to impose its shareholder's religious rights on the employees of the business.


And the "then don't get a job there" mentality is elietist and unworthy of anyone with even an ounce of empathy or compassion--jobs aren't growing on trees. If a place is hiring and you need a job, you apply there so you can keep a roof over your head, feed your kids, and have blankies for the long cold winter.



As for the rest of it--you are right, this isn't a free speech zone, but you can certainly have a dissenting opinion.

Can I just say... you're my friggin role model? This was so succinct and well put I'm sad there's not more to read!

[thalassa]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

I would NEVER try to make you go against your faith, why would I do it to a Christian?

I'm not telling a Christian not to follow their faith. I'm telling a corporation that their corporation doesn't have religious rights. What an individual does in their own time is their own business.

If you own stock in a corporation, your corpration doesn't get to impose its shareholder's religious rights on the employees of the business.


And the "then don't get a job there" mentality is elietist and unworthy of anyone with even an ounce of empathy or compassion--jobs aren't growing on trees. If a place is hiring and you need a job, you apply there so you can keep a roof over your head, feed your kids, and have blankies for the long cold winter.



As for the rest of it--you are right, this isn't a free speech zone, but you can certainly have a dissenting opinion.

[Heka]

I will start taking offense if people keep confusing the overlords of PF with such pitiful examples of wrath and tyranny. I'll grant Adolf was more impressive than the Kim dynasty but he is still far from adequate...

There was no confusion. I had a goood reason for playing the Hitler card.

[Roknrol]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

You kind of include yourself in that.

How so? Please be clear on what you are accusing me of.

[ChainLightning]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

Wow.

Sorry Mr Lightning but you cannot force somebody to go against their religion, even if they own a company it's just not right. I would NEVER try to make you go against your faith, why would I do it to a Christian?

I'm not forcing ANYONE to go against their religion. I'm complaining about a business that is out of control. It's Henry Ford, all over again. A corporation has no say, no right to come between patients and their health care. Picking and choosing what forms of treatment their employees are allowed to seek, in terms of health care, the company has over-reached it's "business" and gone into social experiments. Involving itself in the personal, private lives of people trying to earn a living.

I have no idea where you got "Christian" out of that.

Why would YOU do it to a Christian?

Why would you assume such nonsense? I'm not going against Christians, in any way, shape or form. I'm not trying to force a religion to change, I'm not even suggesting that one should. Seriously, bringing 'Christian' into this debate seems to be a strawman. It's not about religious freedom. It's about employees being shortchanged at their medical clinic simply because this company has been granted the ability to manipulate people's private lives

You don't have to work there, you don't have to shop there. And that's how you put them out of business.

I don't want them out of business. I want the company to be held to the same standards as any other corporation, and NOT be involved in what its employees do or decide on, WITH THEIR DOCTOR.

There is so much I'd like to say but won't. Because I do not have free speech here.

I'm not certain what you mean by that. Care to elaborate?

[Luce]

Re: Supreme court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby

Says you. In a society where the majority (of loud obnoxious people) define the rules, I'd say the Constitution is only as good as the People are willing to protect. Look around you. Weep.

You kind of include yourself in that.

- - - Updated - - -

And I can tell you, when the last of the constitution dribbles away, you'll know it.

You think police can get out of hand NOW, for example? Ho ho ho! You haven't seen ANYTHING yet.