Comments 1 - 40 of 132 Next » Last » Search these comments
Last I heard, women are 50% of the population.
If even 40% of those women decide to take their business elsewhere, that's 20% of Hobby Lobby's potential customer base - maybe a lot more, if their customers skew as heavily female as I suspect. Add in a few men, and we have a situation that could make the owners regret ever bringing this up.
If 25% of your customers disappear in this age of narrow retail margins, particularly in brick and mortar retail, you're done for.
How is a company NOT providing condoms to sluts a blow to the ACA?
I wonder how the conservatives on the court would have ruled if Hobby Lobby had been owned by Muslims or Hindus? Opening the floodgates now for all kind of exclusions based on"religious" beliefs. It's time to phase out employer based health care and moved to some type of individualized system. (single payer like Canada or subsidized private coverage like the Swiss, Dutch or Germans)
In rejecting the men's claim that Oregon's law barring peyote use under all circumstances violates their religious freedom, Justice Antonin Scalia, in writing for the majority, said that the First Amendment freedom of religion does not allow individuals to break the law: "We have never held that an individual's beliefs excuse him from compliance with an otherwise valid law prohibiting conduct that the state is free to regulate." He said it would be "courting anarchy" to create exceptions every time a religious group claims that a law infringes on its practices.
Here's what's going on here, straight up: Scalia places the Republican Party and the Catholic Church, above the law of the land.
He's just an asshole.
Kindly lend me a hand rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
This court case is a perfect example of why we need socialized medicine. Employers should not have any say in the health insurance of their employees. Health care should not in any way be tied to employment.
There should be a single, national health insurance system that covers everything and is paid for by taxes. The federal government should then mandate standardized and transparent pricing and put in price controls to prevent gouging.
Clearly, capitalism has failed to solve the problem of health care after being allowed free reign for over a hundred years. It's time to admit that health care, like light houses, are better done as socialist projects.
If we did this, no company would have to go through the expense of health care management and no company would be able to force their arbitrary religious beliefs onto their employees. Under the current system, the employees' religious freedom is being violated because they are effectively forced to forgo coverage they want because of religious beliefs imposed on them.
Now medical decisions will be based on superstition I suppose. What if my employer believes in blood transfusions allow the spirit of one person to "posses" another person and forbids them under the company plan?
What if my employer believes in blood transfusions allow the spirit of one person to "posses" another person and forbids them under the company plan?
Won't happen.
They explicitly narrowed the ruling to contraception (abortion) issues, because this is a special-interest establishment of religion on behalf of Catholics and evangelicals.
Other religious groups need not apply.
Lol@ poking the bee hive.
Certain things agitate Republicans, this would be one of those things that agitates Dems. And nearly all of it on both sides completely ridiculous and marginally consequential.
Btw, why do all of you hate separation of church and state so much?
This is the free market. If you don't like it, get a different job with another company that will pay for your French ticklers.
It's time for health insurance not tied to employment. It's not a workable system, was a historical accident that occurred during and after WWII. It should be an individualized system.......single payer or subsidized private system...take your pick.
Btw, why do all of you hate separation of church and state so much?
They deliberately restricted the situation to types of contraception which are construed by Catholics and evangelical Christians to be abortion. This privileges the interests of one sort of religion against others, which is an establishment of religion. That is precisely the opposite of church/state separation. Basically, Sharia Law.
It will be interesting to see the change of tune among conservatives when Hindus (the 2nd largest religion in AZ) or Muslims become more numerous in the United States.
That's one side of the equation.
58% or more of americans oppose abortion or some form of it.
So these people who've been whoring their whobby trinkets at HL's competitors may be inclined to switch shopping sprees to a store that supports their beliefs...
Looks like that -25% has some serious adjustments forthcoming...
Last I heard, women are 50% of the population.
If even 40% of those women decide to take their business elsewhere, that's 20% of Hobby Lobby's potential customer base - maybe a lot more, if their customers skew as heavily female as I suspect. Add in a few men, and we have a situation that could make the owners regret ever bringing this up.
If 25% of your customers disappear in this age of narrow retail margins, particularly in brick and mortar retail, you're done for.
58% or more of americans oppose abortion or some form of it for other people
FTFY ;-)
HL is not forcing anything on anybody.
No one is forced to work there.
Benefits from companies are not standardized.
People shop and select jobs based on salary offered and benefits attached.
Every place is different.
Your analogy does not hold breaking water....
no company would be able to force their arbitrary religious beliefs onto their employees.
If they forego coverage, it is of their own volition. They can go purchase the shit somewhere else if the benefits offered by a company do not meet their needs.
Your statement below does not hold breaking water.
Under the current system, the employees' religious freedom is being violated because they are effectively forced to forgo coverage they want because of religious beliefs imposed on them.
At what point in history did you not think this was true?
Now medical decisions will be based on superstition I suppose.
58% or more of americans oppose abortion or some form of it.
I believe that Hobby Lobby is specifically trying to keep from paying for contraceptives (69% of Americans are for a mandate to support contraception coverage).
Additionally, while birth control pills are contraceptives, they are also hormone regulators frequently used for conditions such as PCOS.
So if a woman works for Hobby Lobby and discovers that she has PCOS, congrats! Your employer (and SCOTUS) just enabled the destruction of your uterus!
Next up: Walmart declares itself to be Christian Scientists, and refuse to pay for health insurance of any kind.
I have decided to boycott Hobby Lobby because they give so much business to China, a country where women are forced to have abortions.
Sorry, but it's a matter of religious conscience.
58% or more of americans oppose abortion or some form of it.
Nice BS remark by saying "some form of it."
The reality is that regardless of whether people label themselves pro-life or pro-choice, most people believe that abortion should be allowed through at least the first trimester or should be allowed in certain factual circumstances:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/170249/split-abortion-pro-choice-pro-life.aspx
78% think abortion should be legal under certain circumstances or all circumstances, even though the label numbers are basically even and have been for several years.
Abortion(before 20 weeks) Should be a moral issue, not a legal one. I personally find it to be a deeply immoral practice, but I'm not willing to force this belief on others. Babies routinely survive early deliveries as early as 20 weeks. Therefore I'm calling abortion after this point, and especially the disgusting and horrifying practice of partial birth abortion to be an illegal act. The law is in place to protect the weak and defenseless from the strong and remorseless. How much more deserving is an innocent baby of this protection than the sociopathic woman who wants to kill him/her?
bottom line we shouldn't be forced to pay for your sick twisted sexual encounters...if you can't take on the responsibility, you should get yourself castrated..
plymster says
58% or more of americans oppose abortion or some form of it.
I believe that Hobby Lobby is specifically trying to keep from paying for contraceptives
You should complain directly to CNN....
58% or more of americans oppose abortion or some form of it.
Nice BS remark by saying "some form of it."
No.
Put in a addendum that stipulates if someone has PCOS then they get the pills paid for...I have no problem paying for legitimate health concerns that are out of the control of the patient...
So if a woman works for Hobby Lobby and discovers that she has PCOS, congrats! Your employer (and SCOTUS) just enabled the destruction of your uterus!
Partial-birth abortions? What's the difference if you abort inside or out of the uterus? I never understood why this is more grotesque than scrambling the brain inside the uterus. Whatever gets Republicans elected, I guess.
It's just another artificial focus-group tested distinction, like the undefinable concept of "assault weapon" - suitable for getting votes and raising money only.
A lot of late-term abortions are performed in cases of total unviability and threat to the mother. Nature makes mistakes, and small-government types should butt out of other people's business.
No.
Put in a addendum that stipulates if someone has PCOS then they get the pills paid for...I have no problem paying for legitimate health concerns that are out of the control of the patient...
So if a woman works for Hobby Lobby and discovers that she has PCOS, congrats! Your employer (and SCOTUS) just enabled the destruction of your uterus!
Are you willing to pay for someone else's viagra?
No way!
I'd have to pay for the entire liberal population of the US!!
Are you willing to pay for someone else's viagra?
Abortion(before 20 weeks) Should be a moral issue, not a legal one.
Straw man argument. Not that many people think abortions should be allowed after somewhere in the 20-24 weeks range-- most of these people are NARAL-type people who are posturing against Jesus freaks and actually think abortions should be available, cheap, and rare.
Partial-birth abortions?
No such thing. This is a made-up bullshit term that is not used by a legitimate medical professional. It's meant specifically to enflame people by implying that the process is somehow related to birth, even though medically it has absolutely nothing to do with birth.
You should complain directly to CNN....
Note that the CNN data agree with what I said.
Am I the only one finding the Irony in "Affordable Healthcare" has been the only issue NOT taken to the Supreme court over a very expensive "Affordable Care Act".
Just don't my make companies pay for the rascal wraps, and don't ask McDonald's to insure all of their part time Welfare McPloyee's, and don't call it a fine when it's a tax.
No... Nah... I'm GOOD! That pretty much sums up all of the official court challenges.
If some Dick is not getting a condom, slathered on it by a horny ravaged baby machine, a condom paid for by their employers.
Then somehow all of the GREAT work of the Affordable Healthcare Act, will be diminished in some capacity.
While nodoby says dick all about the still high price of premiums and healthcare costs. And spite what the Liberals keep saying like a broken record, that healthcare will decrease.
All reports from both Insurers and Hospitals forecast nothing but 20% or more YOY increases in Healthcare for the next foreseeable future. {crickets}
but Oh my God let's get a church a sponsored condom on all the dicks out there! It will be a Riot! We'll show those pasty White Right bastards. I can't wait to see the look on their pissed off faces... he... he...Hah!! .... Oh what... my copay is $500?
Whooo! Well it was worth every penny, you should have seen those bastards squirm.
You guys are a JOKE!
partial birth abortion description, from medical dictionary website, listed here: http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/partial+birth+abortion
Description
IDX first involves administration of medications to cause the cervix to dilate. Dilation usually occurs over the course of several days. Next, the physician rotates the fetus to a footling breech position. The body of the fetus is then drawn out of the uterus feet first, until only the head remains inside the uterus. The physician then uses an instrument to puncture the base of the skull, which collapses the fetal head. Typically, the contents of the fetal head are then partially suctioned out, which results in the death of the fetus and reduces the size of the fetal head enough to allow it to pass through the cervix. The dead but otherwise intact fetus is then removed from the woman's body.
So, to recap, the live baby is left technically unborn before it is unceremoniously killed and its brains sucked out. HOW THE FUCK IS THAT OKAY?????
I'm going to assume that Huggy and controllio don't actually know what is involved, and thus give them the benefit of the doubt. Otherwise, I'd have to assume they're raving psychopaths, as only such a person would believe that killing an innocent baby who would be otherwise viable is perfectly acceptable if the woman decides it would be inconvenient for the baby to have its life.
No way!
I'd have to pay for the entire liberal population of the US!!
Are you willing to pay for someone else's viagra?
Viagra, no. Birth control yes!
APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says
When will SCOTUS rule that rape is a sacrament !!??
The Republican establishment already has ruled this. Ricard Murdoc and Rick Santorum call rape a "gift from god". And no, I'm not making this up. They actually believe that rape is a gift from god and rape babies must be carried to term and the rapist has visitation rights.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/EzPjw06QGkI
Republicans are pretty fucked up.
By the way, the entire argument of "gift from god" rapes is yet another reason why religion is a significant negative force in our nation.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/r1b9GV-h8BQ
Let's just look at the second person's statement. The rest are basically saying the same thing. On whether or not a woman should be allowed to abort her pregnancy in the case of rape, this politician says,
You know I'm a Christian, and I believe that god has a plan and a purpose for each one of our lives and that he can intercede in all kinds of situations and we need to have a little faith in many things.
Did you get that? A politician is stating that because she believes that her god has a plan when a woman becomes pregnant through rape, the state should outlaw abortions and use its monopoly on violence to ensure that the rape victim cannot get an abortion.
Let me repeat that. Because her fictitious god "has a plan", the state can use violence on a woman trying to or having gotten an abortion after being brutally raped.
Think about that. A politician's faith makes her pass laws to use violence against rape victims who get abortions. And the police have full access to all the tools of violence to enforce this edict, including killing the rape victim if she resists arrest. That is what it means to make something illegal.
Anyone who says that faith and religion are not forces of evil really needs to think about this.
The slut should have made her rapist use a condom, right Captain?
Republicans would call that consent.
The GOP needs to start an abstinence initiative in all of the Liberal gated communities. Like a Mormon Community organizer, some kid could do that for a few years. Then who knows, that will give him enough experience to become President someday.
I believe that Hobby Lobby is specifically trying to keep from paying for contraceptives (69% of Americans are for a mandate to support contraception coverage).
Ahhh, another uninformed citizen. Hobby Lobby had little problem with most forms of birth control (14 to be exact) but had problems with 2, emergency contraception and intrauterine devices which they found comparable with abortion; and they are against abortion. They are NOT against birth control in general.
Comments 1 - 40 of 132 Next » Last » Search these comments
http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=26190