# How About Them Supremes (Hobby Lobby)



## drifter (Jun 30, 2014)

What do you think of today's Supreme Court ruling?


----------



## Jackie22 (Jun 30, 2014)

I think it is more acceleration of the Corporate takeover of our Country thanks to the conservatives.

You know 'Corporations are People', so lets give them another break...and another and another...

I just hope there are enough people paying attention when its time to vote and I hope there are enough women
that will boycott Hobby Lobby to send them a message, I will be one that will not spend a dime with them.


----------



## JustBonee (Jun 30, 2014)

Hobby Lobby is going to take a lickin' on this decision .. 

If Hobby Lobby was concerned with religious freedoms — not just those of conservative American Christians — *it would quit doing business in China.
*
Hobby Lobby reminds us why for-profit businesses should resist calling themselves "Christian." The free market is messy and complicated and riddled with hypocrisy. Conducting business in today's complex global economy almost ensures one will engage in behavior that is at least morally suspect from a Biblical standpoint.
If you want to call your business "Christian," by all means, go right ahead. But those who live by the label must die by it as well. You cannot call your business "Christian" when arguing before the Supreme Court, and then set aside Christian values when you're placing a bulk order for cheap wind chimes.

*Every time you buy a decorative platter from Hobby Lobby with a Bible verse stamped across it, you have funded the company's fight against the HHS contraception mandate. But you're also sending a chunk of change to a country that forces people to abort their children, flouts basic standards of workplace dignity, and denies more than a billion people the right to worship.*


http://theweek.com/article/index/263225/stop-calling-hobby-lobby-a-christian-business


----------



## Ina (Jun 30, 2014)

Bonnie, We still have Michael's art supplies and crafts stores. We need to boycott Hobby Lobby! :tapfoot: :wave:


----------



## Davey Jones (Jul 1, 2014)

This should give you the answer,the supreme court is getting as bad as Congress and the President.

Supreme Court hits new low: Only 30% have confidence in justices.

http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2014/06/30/supreme-court-confidence-gallup-poll/


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 1, 2014)

On one hand this ruling backs the business owner's rights on the other it's picking and choosing what benefits it wants to pay. I guess it comes down to wether you believe in the court backing Obama Care in it's current form.

 I don't agree with Obama Care in it's current form. Part of the problem with Obama Care that it is a mandate and you have to be very careful about what you make a mandate, especially if you are sincere in obeying the law.

It is voluntary to work for Hobby Lobby or any other company for that matter. No one is telling the employees you won't get all the other health care paid for or that you cannot go out and get a specific coverage on your own. These owners could say bag it, I'm closing shop and after your unemployment benefits run out you are on your own.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 1, 2014)

:dunno:...I'm surprised that these people drag their religious beliefs into their businesses anyway.  Aren't some religions against blood transfusions?  So if an employee in the ER and needs a life-saving blood transfusion, they're going to say, sorry we don't cover that, your boss' religion doesn't care for it.

It seems like these people are against birth control.  So does that mean they want these women to have eight kids, then go on welfare to have to pay for them?  I don't think we should go back to the good ol' days where abortions were done with a wire hanger in a back alley either.

Reminds me of that bakery who refused to make a wedding cake for a couple because they were gay, and the owner just didn't like gays due to his religion.  Seems like organized religions cause more hate and wars than love and peace.


----------



## Mirabilis (Jul 1, 2014)

Bonnie said:


> Hobby Lobby is going to take a lickin' on this decision ..
> 
> If Hobby Lobby was concerned with religious freedoms — not just those of conservative American Christians — *it would quit doing business in China.
> *
> ...



Amen (no pun intended!)


----------



## Misty (Jul 1, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> :dunno:...I'm surprised that these people drag their religious beliefs into their businesses anyway. Aren't some religions against blood transfusions? So if an employee in the ER and needs a life-saving blood transfusion, they're going to say, sorry we don't cover that, your boss' religion doesn't care for it.
> 
> It seems like these people are against birth control. So does that mean they want these women to have eight kids, then go on welfare to have to pay for them? I don't think we should go back to the good ol' days where abortions were done with a wire hanger in a back alley either.
> 
> Reminds me of that bakery who refused to make a wedding cake for a couple because they were gay, and the owner just didn't like gays due to his religion. Seems like organized religions cause more hate and wars than love and peace.



Hobby Lobby is not against birth control, Seabreeze, they already provide birth control and will continue to do so....they are against the 6 types of pills that produce abortions. 

Here is the list of birth control pills they do and the 6 pills they do not provide:

View attachment 8285


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 1, 2014)

Misty said:


> Hobby Lobby is not against birth control, Seabreeze, they already provide birth control and will continue to do so....they are against the 6 types of pills that produce abortions.
> 
> Here is the list of birth control pills they do and the 6 pills they do not provide:
> 
> View attachment 8285



There go those things like pesky detail again. You would think by the reaction of the talking heads they won't cover antibiotics . And they same media that plays the politically correct word games portrays a those not covered as "victims" of a war on women or apartheid. Look at historical pictures of war or apartheid then look at the commentators and protestor. If they want to play word game police then play.

And when court approved Obama Care those same talking heads and commentators had no problems with the court. But all of the sudden it's those evil justices.


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 2, 2014)

WhatInThe said:


> There go those things like pesky detail again. You would think by the reaction of the talking heads they won't cover antibiotics . And they same media that plays the politically correct word games portrays a those not covered as "victims" of a war on women or apartheid. Look at historical pictures of war or apartheid then look at the commentators and protestor. If they want to play word game police then play.
> 
> And when court approved Obama Care those same talking heads and commentators had no problems with the court. But all of the sudden it's those evil justices.






The mandate that was struck down covers all birth control, not some and not the ones Hobby Lobby objects too.  The mandate does not pick and choose.  It does not matter if the owners of Hobby Lobby are against only certain birth control,  The ruling states that the mandate was struck down meaning that they are no longer required to cover ANY birth control method that goes against their religious beliefs. It does not specify only certain methods.



What DOES matter is that it is WRONG to impose the religious beliefs of the owners of a corporation on its employees.


----------



## Misty (Jul 2, 2014)

Jackie22 said:


> The mandate that was struck down covers all birth control, not some and not the ones Hobby Lobby objects too.  The mandate does not pick and choose.  It does not matter if the owners of Hobby Lobby are against only certain birth control,  The ruling states that the mandate was struck down meaning that they are no longer required to cover ANY birth control method that goes against their religious beliefs. It does not specify only certain methods.
> 
> 
> 
> What DOES matter is that it is WRONG to impose the religious beliefs of the owners of a corporation on its employees.



In today's USA news it states that the mandate only pertains to those birth control pills that deal with abortions, not all birth control.

Quote:
 WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court put freedom of religion above reproductive freedom Monday in the most closely watched case of its term, ruling that companies cannot be forced to offer insurance coverage for certain birth control methods they equate with abortion.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...-lobby-religion-contraception-obama/11473189/

CNN article :

Quote:
Washington (CNN) -- Some corporations have religious rights, a deeply divided Supreme Court decided Monday in ruling that certain for-profit companies cannot be required to pay for specific types of contraceptives for their employees.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/30/politics/scotus-obamacare-contraception/


----------



## marinaio (Jul 2, 2014)

First of all why do women think everyone should pay for their birth control?  No one pays for my aspirin or any other "necessary" medications!  Secondly, it isn't all birth control that is being objected to, it's those methods that result in abortions whether intentional or incidental.


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 2, 2014)

Misty said:


> In today's USA news it states that the mandate only pertains to those birth control pills that deal with abortions, not all birth control.
> 
> Quote:
> WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court put freedom of religion above reproductive freedom Monday in the most closely watched case of its term, ruling that companies cannot be forced to offer insurance coverage for certain birth control methods they equate with abortion.
> ...



Sorry, the SCOTUS confirmed today that it is ALL contraception....

http://news.yahoo.com/justices-act-...xYjk3BHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDQ2NF8x


----------



## Misty (Jul 2, 2014)

Jackie22 said:


> Sorry, the SCOTUS confirmed today that it is ALL contraception....
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/justices-act-...xYjk3BHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDQ2NF8x



In your article:

"Oklahoma-based Hobby Lobby Inc.  and a Pennsylvania furniture maker won their court challenges Monday in  which they refused to pay for two emergency contraceptive pills and two  intrauterine devices.

*Tuesday's orders apply to companies owned by Catholics who oppose all contraception."
*
The Supreme Court ruled on Monday.... and according to your article above it looks like another ruling of some kind on Tuesday. Hobby Lobby does not oppose all contraception, so it doesn't pertain to them. Hobby Lobby won on their court challenge of those birth control pills that deal with abortions.


----------



## drifter (Jul 2, 2014)

Whatever it does or does not cover, me and my house have spent our last dollar with that corporate person. Their home office is down the road a few short miles but in my soulful mind they really don't exist.


----------



## MrJim (Jul 2, 2014)

IMO, companies should provide health care to their employees then keep their noses out of it & let them use it the way they see fit.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 2, 2014)

MrJim said:


> IMO, companies should provide health care to their employees then keep their noses out of it & let them use it the way they see fit.



I agree Mr. Jim.


----------



## Misty (Jul 2, 2014)

Jackie22 said:


> Sorry, the SCOTUS confirmed today that it is ALL contraception....
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/justices-act-...xYjk3BHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDQ2NF8x



It's me again, Jackie, and thanks for sharing your article.  I find the article confusing as the first paragraph states:

*Justices act in other health law mandate cases*



                                                                                                            July 1, 2014 10:23 AM                                                                                                        



WASHINGTON  (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday confirmed that its decision a day  earlier extending religious rights to closely held corporations applies  broadly to the contraceptive coverage requirement in the new health care  law, not just the handful of methods the justices considered in their  ruling.

It looks to me like the Justices are confirming their decision, and they are adding in all of the contraceptives, not just the ones that Hobby Lobby presented.

At the end of the article it states:


The justices also ordered lower  courts that ruled in favor of the Obama administration to reconsider  those decisions in light of Monday's 5-4 decision.

Two  Michigan-based companies, Autocam Corp. and Eden Foods Inc., both lost  their cases in the lower courts. The justices ordered the 6th U.S.  Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its decisions against the  companies 

The Justices have ordered the lower courts to reconsider their decisions in other cases, due to their 5-4 decision. Now I'm done....I'm just not getting the same opinion that you are getting from the article, but I could be getting my opinion wrong, Jackie.


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 2, 2014)

One of the things that puzzle me in many supreme court decisions is the split vote. Their decisions are supposed to be based on the law which should be pretty cut and dry. I understand precedent and case law etc but I still think they are making leaps to get their personal opinion in their decision. I guess that's why the system has a voting process and an odd number of judges. They become a defacto legislature making law with judicial decisions. Still you would think the law or the rules would be more cut and dry.

They also need to be careful on commenting because they open themselves up to ridicule and hypocrisy. The recent decision opens up future cases to their comments. Unless they spelled it out in their briefs, not what they ment but what they actually put into the court records that is what should be followed or used in future cases.


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 2, 2014)

MrJim said:


> IMO, companies should provide health care to their employees then keep their noses out of it & let them use it the way they see fit.



Exactly!


----------



## marinaio (Jul 2, 2014)

Anyone can buy and use any contraception methods, materials or services they choose just don't try to bully those who oppose their use into providing them.  No Catholic or other religious group is demanding contraceptives and abortion inducing drugs be outlawed, they simple refuse to actively participate in their purchase as should be their right.  Women have no rights beyond those provided to all citizens, there is nothing special about women that should afford them special exemptions from the Constitutional right of others' Freedom of Religion.  The only thing unique about women is their ability to bear children, an ability they are so actively trying to bully everyone into eliminating!


----------



## Jackie22 (Jul 2, 2014)

Well, I guess us 'wimin folk' should just simmer down and get in the kitchen and cook up you men folk a pie.


----------



## marinaio (Jul 2, 2014)

I can cook as well as any "wymyn" here, heck, I can even parallel park!


----------



## Misty (Jul 2, 2014)

marinaio said:


> I can cook as well as any "wymyn" here, heck, I can even parallel park!



You got me beat, marinaio, :lol:


----------



## marinaio (Jul 2, 2014)

Glad to bring some fun into this, sometimes these discussions take on a personal aspect that is neither pleasant not beneficial.


----------



## Sunny (Jul 2, 2014)

Today's newspaper made a good point about all this. It said it's interesting how the Supreme Court unanimously agreed that the police need a search warrant before poking their noses into anyone's cell phone. But the vote on providing contraception was split. How come? Well, their explanation was that all the S.C. justices presumably possess cell phones. But only three of them possess uteruses. Guess how those three voted?


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 2, 2014)

marinaio said:


> Anyone can buy and use any contraception methods, materials or services they choose just don't try to bully those who oppose their use into providing them.  No Catholic or other religious group is demanding contraceptives and abortion inducing drugs be outlawed, they simple refuse to actively participate in their purchase as should be their right.  Women have no rights beyond those provided to all citizens, there is nothing special about women that should afford them special exemptions from the Constitutional right of others' Freedom of Religion.  The only thing unique about women is their ability to bear children, an ability they are so actively trying to bully everyone into eliminating!



I guess the verdict is in, a corporation is a person.  I wonder if the Hobby Lobby person is against ****** for their male employees, I hope not, that's much more important than birth control.



> In her dissent in today’s contraception ruling, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg notes that “the exercise of religion is characteristic of natural persons, not artificial legal entities.” That used to be true.
> 
> For all the years of jokes about corporations being people, the United States has never actually seen corporations as being capable of exercising their own personal faith.
> 
> ...













marinaio said:


> I can cook as well as any "wymyn" here, heck, I can even parallel park!



Lol Marinaio, you'd make a good politician making statements like that!   Don't know if you can cook as well as I can, or parallel park...oooh, those darn stereotypes!


----------



## marinaio (Jul 2, 2014)

The problem is that everything anyone wants now becomes a right, there was a time in this country when citizens had a personal responsibility to purchase what they wanted and ask for help for things they needed but couldn't afford.  This demand mentality is crap and if it continues it will destroy our society, it's already well on the way to that end.  This isn't about Women's Rights or Women's Health at all, almost everyone can afford the contraceptives at issue and there is already help available for those who cannot.  This is about shutting down any opposition to a movement to socialize the US, bring every aspect of our lives under the control of some government bureau; it's accomplishing this by demanding government provide any and all wants either directly or by forcing private corporations to do so.

The religion aspect of all this is particularly onerous in that it attempts to subvert the basic tenets of Christianity and force Christians to violate their firmly and historically held beliefs.  There is no telling which segments of the population will be attacked next if this is successful nor will there be any limits on the attacks.  Christians are well accustomed to persecution having had a couple thousand years of it and are unlikely to buckle under.  It's a dangerous exercise by those backing this mandate because a subgroup of them will likely become the target of the next attack by some "Rights" group and on and on.

While I am deeply saddened, disgusted by the deaths of over 5 million unborn children I realize I cannot stop the practice but I can refuse to be a party to any of it and I will not be cowed by bullies at any level from Obama and his administration goons to my neighbors.  The eventual outcome of this mandate would have been/will be civil disobedience at a level never before experienced here.  Can you imagine the global reaction if the US starts jailing Christian clerics, nuns and citizens for refusing to violate their religious rights?


----------



## Sid (Jul 4, 2014)

marinaio said:


> The problem is that everything anyone wants now becomes a right, there was a time in this country when citizens had a personal responsibility to purchase what they wanted and ask for help for things they needed but couldn't afford.  This demand mentality is crap and if it continues it will destroy our society, it's already well on the way to that end.  This isn't about Women's Rights or Women's Health at all, almost everyone can afford the contraceptives at issue and there is already help available for those who cannot.  This is about shutting down any opposition to a movement to socialize the US, bring every aspect of our lives under the control of some government bureau; it's accomplishing this by demanding government provide any and all wants either directly or by forcing private corporations to do so.



      For what it is worth I pretty much agree.


----------



## Sid (Jul 4, 2014)

These Supremes are the ones I expected. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Supremes


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 13, 2015)

Obama made the Hobby Lobby ruling obsolete, now women who work for "religious" companies will not be denied access to birth control.  Thanks to our President, another 'fire' has been put out.   Full story here. 









 In 21st Century America, evangelical Republicans are those who demand it is “_their way or the highway_” and there is no greater example than the religious Republican crusade to control women’s reproductive health; or better put, to force every woman in America into being perpetual birth machines.

 Last year a wildly popular evangelical talking point to support their demand for control over American women was they would not tolerate any woman, married or single, having “_consequence free sex_;” restricting birth control was the religious right’s method of punishing women who failed to toe the evangelical line and remain celibate or perpetually pregnant.

The idea of Christian conservatives wielding control over women’s reproductive health was behind the Hobby Lobby v. Burwell lawsuit that the Vatican-5 on the Supreme Court decided was evangelical employer’s religious liberty to control women and prevent them from having consequence free ****** relations.

 According to the Catholic justices’ ruling, the Obama Administration ‘_must_‘ provide an accommodation for “_religious_” for-profit corporations and on Friday, President Obama did just that in response to the High Court’s decision. 

In fact, what President Obama did was effectively neuter the Hobby Lobby ruling and ensure that all women, even those employed by ‘religious corporations,’ will still have birth control covered at no cost to them; even if their evangelical employers object and refuse to provide it. 

The sad, unfortunate women who happen to work for a church, or place of worship though, are still bound to adhere to their employer’s religious edict that under no circumstances will they be allowed to have ‘consequence free’ sex.

The way the new rule is written, a religious corporation that refuses to allow their employees’ health plans to provide contraception will write a letter to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and claim that their religious freedom demands they control women’s ****** activities.

 The HHS will then notify a third-party insurer that the company’s theocratic owners’ insist on controlling women and the third-party insurer will provide birth control coverage to the employees at no additional cost to the religious corporation or the female employees. 

The Secretary of the HHS released a statement saying that “Women across the country should have access to preventive services, including contraception. We recognize the deeply held views on these issues and are committed to securing women’s access to important preventive services at no additional costs while respecting religious beliefs.”


----------



## tnthomas (Jul 13, 2015)

Sid said:


> These Supremes are the ones I expected. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Supremes



That's what I first thought too!


----------

