Hobby Lobby Birth Control Case at Supreme Court

25 Mar 2014 11:41 #1 by ScienceChic
I previously mentioned Hobby Lobby and their efforts to be able to refuse offering birth control coverage under the ACA. It's now at the Supreme Court and there's an account of the proceedings here from Think Progress which is attending:

Justice Kennedy Thinks Hobby Lobby Is An Abortion Case — That’s Bad News For Birth Control
By Ian Millhiser on March 25, 2014 at 1:00 pm

SC wrote: So what do y'all think about this? Should a company have a right to dictate what is and is not provided by the health insurance companies plans that they usually only partially cover costs on in the first place? If so, should they also be allowed to not cover costs if you participate in risky activities like riding a motorcycle or skydiving? Cancer treatment if you are diagnosed with lung cancer after smoking as a teen 50 years earlier? Where does the line get drawn?

Fox News Story: Supreme Court denies Hobby Lobby request for reprieve from health care mandate
Published December 26, 2012

Huffington Post story: Hobby Lobby Plan To Defy Obamacare To Cost $1.3 Million Per Day
12/27/12

From a previous thread

"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

25 Mar 2014 11:47 #2 by Unpopular Poster
Replied by Unpopular Poster on topic Hobby Lobby Birth Control Case at Supreme Court
Well, we won't be shopping at Hobby Lobby anytime soon, in fact we might go in there and crunch lil Do Dads with our fingers when no ones looking....If Chic Fil A and Hobby Lobby wants to do business, they need to get a time machine and go back to the Dark Ages to do it

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

25 Mar 2014 11:49 #3 by Reverend Revelant

ScienceChic wrote: I previously mentioned Hobby Lobby and their efforts to be able to refuse offering birth control coverage under the ACA. It's now at the Supreme Court and there's an account of the proceedings here from Think Progress which is attending:

[snip]


What kind of birth control?

Waiting for Armageddon since 33 AD

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

25 Mar 2014 12:11 #4 by FredHayek
The press seems to playing loose with the facts on this. Hobby Lobby is opposed to paying for some birth control like morning after pills, rather than refusing to pay for everything.

Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

25 Mar 2014 12:12 #5 by FredHayek

Vice Lord wrote: Well, we won't be shopping at Hobby Lobby anytime soon, in fact we might go in there and crunch lil Do Dads with our fingers when no ones looking....If Chic Fil A and Hobby Lobby wants to do business, they need to get a time machine and go back to the Dark Ages to do it


Nice union thug tactics you want to practice there VL. VL's own Kristalnacht.
Don't agree with their religious views and you will go in and smash things!

Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

25 Mar 2014 12:13 #6 by Unpopular Poster
Replied by Unpopular Poster on topic Hobby Lobby Birth Control Case at Supreme Court

FredHayek wrote: The press seems to playing loose with the facts on this. Hobby Lobby is opposed to paying for some birth control like morning after pills, rather than refusing to pay for everything.


Hobby lobby doesn't pay for it, the insurance company does..You think Hobby Lobby writes a check evertime one of their employees goes to the doctor?

#Dumbguy

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

25 Mar 2014 12:16 - 25 Mar 2014 12:19 #7 by Unpopular Poster
Replied by Unpopular Poster on topic Hobby Lobby Birth Control Case at Supreme Court

FredHayek wrote:

Vice Lord wrote: Well, we won't be shopping at Hobby Lobby anytime soon, in fact we might go in there and crunch lil Do Dads with our fingers when no ones looking....If Chic Fil A and Hobby Lobby wants to do business, they need to get a time machine and go back to the Dark Ages to do it


Nice union thug tactics


Yes, we have the power to get what we want...We're not cattle (like you) and we wont be getting butchered anytime soon...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

25 Mar 2014 12:17 #8 by FredHayek
Oh, insurance companies. So now you want innocents to pay for your vandalism?
Some old lady is getting a smaller dividend check because VL had to act out.
As classy as the guy who was berating a cashier at Chik-Fil-A on video.

:banghead: We are, not were. Ironically you spell like the Chik-Fil-A cattle.

Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

25 Mar 2014 12:18 - 25 Mar 2014 12:23 #9 by Unpopular Poster
Replied by Unpopular Poster on topic Hobby Lobby Birth Control Case at Supreme Court
Didn't King Goerge call us thugs when we threw all the tea into the Boston Harbor?

Youre unamerican fred..A lemming

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

25 Mar 2014 12:22 #10 by Unpopular Poster
Replied by Unpopular Poster on topic Hobby Lobby Birth Control Case at Supreme Court

FredHayek wrote: :banghead: We are, not were. Ironically you spell like the Chik-Fil-A cattle.


I hate being a grammer nazi, but its called a contraction Fred- Can you discuss the subject now?



we're

contraction of we are: We're happy to see you.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.149 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+