If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   "Notably, the Hobby Lobby used to have an employee insurance plan that covered the very same birth control methods it now claims violate its religious freedom" Popcorn, anyone?   (theguardian.com) divider line 168
    More: Dumbass, birth control methods, religious freedom, idea, Christian Scientists, religious values, amicus brief, contraceptives, health insurance  
•       •       •

3606 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Nov 2013 at 8:18 AM (39 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



168 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-28 12:23:04 AM
... I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.
 
2013-11-28 12:41:55 AM
How dare you question their righteous indignation at being forced to do something by that... person
 
NFA [TotalFark]
2013-11-28 12:47:59 AM
My homeowners policy covers personal watercraft up to 50 feet long.  I don't live near the water and don't own a boat. (TRUE)


farm3.staticflickr.com
 
2013-11-28 01:17:41 AM
Obviously, the company had a religious epiphany, in which it was saved by Jesus. Now, it is redeemed and realizes it cannot offer such plans, as it would be a sin, and then the company might spend eternity in hell after it's dissolved.
 
2013-11-28 01:25:01 AM
what pisses me off about this case is that it should be a 9-0 decision, but everyone knows it's going to be either 4-5 or 5-4. again.
 
2013-11-28 01:34:50 AM

log_jammin: what pisses me off about this case is that it should be a 9-0 decision, but everyone knows it's going to be either 4-5 or 5-4. again.


A whole lotta THIS.
 
2013-11-28 01:51:46 AM
If a corporation can have a religion, can a corporation start a religion (besides Apple)?  Or could I get married by Comcast and absolved of my transgressions by, I dunno, Church & Dwight (the cleaning products folks) or whatever? Kaboom!  And the sin is gone!
 
2013-11-28 01:58:50 AM

Relatively Obscure: If a corporation can have a religion, can a corporation start a religion (besides Apple)?  Or could I get married by Comcast and absolved of my transgressions by, I dunno, Church & Dwight (the cleaning products folks) or whatever? Kaboom!  And the sin is gone!


better yet, can a corporation go to jail?
 
2013-11-28 03:11:37 AM
If corporations are people, wouldn't owning a corporation be slavery?
 
2013-11-28 03:29:57 AM
Can I marry Walmart, divorce Walmart, and make Walmart pay me alimony?
 
2013-11-28 08:21:53 AM

Relatively Obscure: Can I marry Walmart, divorce Walmart, and make Walmart pay me alimony?



maybe, but you'll have to consummate the marriage before teh divorce
 
2013-11-28 08:22:15 AM

Relatively Obscure: If a corporation can have a religion, can a corporation start a religion (besides Apple)?  Or could I get married by Comcast and absolved of my transgressions by, I dunno, Church & Dwight (the cleaning products folks) or whatever? Kaboom!  And the sin is gone!


I'll jump aboard the corporate personhood bandwagon just as soon as Texas executes one of them.
 
2013-11-28 08:24:14 AM
www.gannett-cdn.com

Pardon me... You were saying?
 
2013-11-28 08:25:05 AM
Michaels has basically he same stuff, fewer crosses and fewer self-righteous hypocrites.
 
2013-11-28 08:26:45 AM

rev. dave: Michaels has basically he same stuff, fewer crosses and fewer self-righteous hypocrites.


What is it about born-agains and scrapbooking?
 
2013-11-28 08:36:40 AM
It's all about  the genetics......virtually nothing else matters. Not law, not mores, not ethics, not merit.  It's all about redistribution and recompensation, based on genetics.  Period......PROFIT!
 
2013-11-28 08:43:25 AM

Antifun: Relatively Obscure: Can I marry Walmart, divorce Walmart, and make Walmart pay me alimony?


maybe, but you'll have to consummate the marriage before teh divorce


Plenty of folks are f*cked by Walmart.
 
2013-11-28 08:44:21 AM
Notably, the Hobby Lobby used to have an employee insurance plan that covered the very same birth control methods it now claims violate its religious freedom. It wasn't until the GOP raised a stink about the contraception rules in Obama's healthcare legislation that the Hobby Lobby "re-examined" its insurance policies.

Are you farking kidding me? And this got to the Supreme Court?
 
2013-11-28 08:45:15 AM
MUH FREEDUMZ!
 
2013-11-28 08:45:38 AM

NFA: My homeowners policy covers personal watercraft up to 50 feet long. I don't live near the water and don't own a boat. (TRUE)


My homeowners policy expressly does NOT cover any damage caused by a hovercraft.


"Certain Underwriters" at Lloyd's of London are such jerks!
 
2013-11-28 08:47:11 AM

rev. dave: Michaels has basically he same stuff, fewer crosses and fewer self-righteous hypocrites.


But they still have a lot of crosses and self-righteous hypocrites
 
2013-11-28 08:52:47 AM
MaudlinMutantMollusk: How dare you question their righteous indignation at being forced to do something by that... [black]  person

FTFY
 
2013-11-28 08:53:26 AM

Yakk: Notably, the Hobby Lobby used to have an employee insurance plan that covered the very same birth control methods it now claims violate its religious freedom. It wasn't until the GOP raised a stink about the contraception rules in Obama's healthcare legislation that the Hobby Lobby "re-examined" its insurance policies.

Are you farking kidding me? And this got to the Supreme Court?


So, same with all the religious colleges that started to complain about their own insurance about 2 years ago.
 
2013-11-28 08:53:45 AM
Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?
 
2013-11-28 08:56:15 AM

Alphax: Yakk: Notably, the Hobby Lobby used to have an employee insurance plan that covered the very same birth control methods it now claims violate its religious freedom. It wasn't until the GOP raised a stink about the contraception rules in Obama's healthcare legislation that the Hobby Lobby "re-examined" its insurance policies.

Are you farking kidding me? And this got to the Supreme Court?

So, same with all the religious colleges that started to complain about their own insurance about 2 years ago.


It's almost as if they don't actually care about that particular rule, and are just using it to attack a President they dislike.
 
2013-11-28 08:57:27 AM
Notably, the Hobby Lobby used to have an employee insurance plan that covered the very same birth control methods it now claims violate its religious freedom. It wasn't until the GOP raised a stink about the contraception rules in Obama's healthcare legislation that the Hobby Lobby "re-examined" its insurance policies.

Making sure insurance policies actually cover real things real people need and want should not be controversial in 2013.

The cases the supreme court will hear were brought under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which bars the government from "substantially burden[ing] a person's exercise of religion" unless that burden is justified by a "compelling reason".

Not dying from preventable ovarian cancers cos your insurance plan sucks because some Jesus freaks decided that denying you medicine is the moral thing to do seems pretty compelling to me.
 
MFK
2013-11-28 08:58:22 AM

Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?


it farking should be!
 
2013-11-28 09:01:22 AM
This is a cynical power grab disguised as a religious freedom case.  If I were a Christian I would be upset.
 
2013-11-28 09:01:26 AM
fark these guys right in their earholes, eye sockets, nostrils, mouth, and unlubed assholes.
 
2013-11-28 09:02:44 AM
Great opportunity to finally divorce health insurance from employment.

Also, paying for the Hallmark channel as part of my cable subscription is a violation of my freedom of religion. Unbundle already!
 
2013-11-28 09:05:48 AM
If the SCOTUS rules in favor of Hobby Lobby the shiat will hit the fan, but the glimmer of hope will be if enough people realize the idiocy of having our health insurance coupled with our employment. Single payer anyone?
 
2013-11-28 09:07:07 AM

hinten: Great opportunity to finally divorce health insurance from employment.

Also, paying for the Hallmark channel as part of my cable subscription is a violation of my freedom of religion. Unbundle already!


That's a good point.  Why is my money going to EWTN?
 
2013-11-28 09:12:11 AM
Its all a matter of time until a business owner who is a Christian Scientist refuses to provide insurance that covers medicine.
 
2013-11-28 09:14:46 AM

how42itous: Its all a matter of time until a business owner who is a Christian Scientist refuses to provide insurance that covers medicine.


I'm pretty sure we already covered that one.
 
2013-11-28 09:16:17 AM
A company owned entirely by Christians has religious beliefs the same way a company owned entirely by African Americans is somehow black. That is to say, not at all.
 
2013-11-28 09:17:12 AM
This brings up an important point: What if Hobby Lobby has another epiphany? Will their employees be required to adhere to the new religious edicts? And what if Hobby Lobby's new religion demands specific behavior? Can Hobby Lobby force its employees to engage in the new behavior (i.e. praying 5 times per day)?
 
2013-11-28 09:21:53 AM
"In another case a religiously-affiliated school gave male employees a "head of household" supplement not offered to female employees because, according to their sincerely-held religious views, men should be the family's breadwinner."

My mother was once denied a raise because another male colleague had "just had a baby and he needs the extra income now." "She pointed out that she was raising two kids and that gender might not be a completely legal reason to make decisions regarding compensation. She got the raise. This happened in the farking late 70s for fark's sake.

Wake me up when we're done treating women like brood mares, mkay?
 
2013-11-28 09:22:48 AM
If businesses get religious rights, my LLC is declaring itself Rastafarian (for um ... tax reasons).
 
2013-11-28 09:24:23 AM

Relatively Obscure: Can I marry Walmart, divorce Walmart, and make Walmart pay me alimony?


Good plan, but something tells me that, by the time those divorce proceedings were over, you would be legally obligated to spend $1000 a month at any Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart SuperCenter, or Wal-Mart Home Market stores.
 
2013-11-28 09:26:22 AM
Yes, but now we can blame it on Obama. My insurance went up $10 in 2007, $35 in 2010 and is going up $5 this year. This time ITS BECAUSE OF OBAMA!! and I'm outraged!!   or something.
 
2013-11-28 09:29:35 AM
"The company heads bringing these claims want to have it both ways. By incorporating, owners and shareholders create separate entities and are not personally liable for their employees' salaries or health insurance costs - the entire point of incorporating is to create a legal entity separate from the individuals who created it. Yet these owners and shareholders want the court to consider their personal religious beliefs indistinguishable from those of the corporation, and allow those beliefs to dictate the kind of healthcare coverage their employees receive."

This is probably the most coherent argument. But if they went on it, they'd have to make a separate case for non-incorporated businesses...
 
2013-11-28 09:30:50 AM
Only through bankruptcy can a corporation be saved and be born again.
 
2013-11-28 09:35:55 AM

RubberBandMan: Only through bankruptcy can a corporation be saved and be born again.


I LOLed!!!!
 
2013-11-28 09:37:48 AM
Also, if you're going to claim this violates your religion, show the the passage in the bible that states: "thou shalt not give money to a third party, to be put in a fund, that may or may not be used to provide for the cost of hormone control, that has the side effect of preventing pregnancy, as a form of deferred payment to your employees."
 
2013-11-28 09:37:57 AM
As an ordained minister of the Church of Life, I am now offering marriages to any company you want. Feel like being an oil tycoon? Shack up with Exxon-Mobil.
 
2013-11-28 09:39:35 AM
From a purely contraceptive point of view I'm beginning to wonder if any decision here will matter. All insurance companies more have to provide maternity coverage. They also know that the pill is about a thousand times cheaper than paying for a pregnancy and any subsequent complications and healthcare for the child. Its in the insurance companies best interest to provide coverage. Won't it be next to impossible for hobby lobby to even find insurance that does not cover contraception?

Though, like citizens united, the decision here could have far reaching consequences as corporations adopt religion (or make them up while cloth) and claim many other things that corporations hate are against their religion.
 
2013-11-28 09:39:57 AM
Persecution envy.

Christian evangelicals legitimately make life harder for the people they don't like. They don't like being confronted with this fact because it makes them look bad, so they have to constantly find ways to portray themselves as victims of the kind of persecution they engage in every day.
 
2013-11-28 09:40:15 AM

RubberBandMan: Only through bankruptcy can a corporation be saved and be born again.


Socialize the sin, and privatize the redemption?
 
2013-11-28 09:47:16 AM

PanicMan: Also, if you're going to claim this violates your religion, show the the passage in the bible that states: "thou shalt not give money to a third party, to be put in a fund, that may or may not be used to provide for the cost of hormone control, that has the side effect of preventing pregnancy, as a form of deferred payment to your employees."


I wonder if the court could hand down a ruling along the lines of:
"As the corporation, nor its stakeholders, are required by the law to take contraceptives themselves, then law has not violated the freedom of religion of the corporation or stakeholders. Therefore, being required to provide coverage for contraceptives, and not the contraceptives themselves, to an employee of said corporation, the religious rights of the corporation have not been found to be violated."

Or, are hiring candidates considered corporate fetuses? Are they born if they are hired? If they aren't hired, were those candidates aborted? If the corporation isn't actively hiring anyone once a month, are they considered to be on birth control?
 
2013-11-28 09:52:02 AM
Furthermore....

Is the government forcing its will on Hobby Lobby legitimate corporate rape? Actual corporate rape? Doesn't Hobby Lobby have a way of shutting that down?
 
2013-11-28 09:57:29 AM
Is Hobby Lobby ok with biblical rape in their aisles?
 
2013-11-28 09:58:38 AM

MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!


I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion.  Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed?  OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk.  I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.
 
2013-11-28 10:04:13 AM
By refusing to cover contraception, the Hobby Lobby owners are in fact using their own religious beliefs to deny benefits to their employees who may not share those beliefs at all. That's not religious freedom; it's religious tyranny.

Bears repeating dot jpeg.
 
2013-11-28 10:05:19 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!

I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion.  Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed?  OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk.  I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.


If you had to actually prove you were Christian(ie, follow the teachings of Jesus), most Christians would not be capable of doing so.

/paulists
 
2013-11-28 10:06:45 AM
Whoever came up with the idea of letting employers control healthcare should be taken out back and shot in the back of the head... and left there for the coyotes.
 
2013-11-28 10:08:41 AM
I'd vote for a politician that stood up and said, "You know what?  Corporations and businesses really aren't all that special."
 
2013-11-28 10:09:48 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion. Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed? OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk. I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.


Alas, they can easily prove that they abide by the tenets of what THEY think is Christianity, which is all that the gov't is allowed to check.

/it was so much easier when all the "proof" needed was to offer some incense to a statue of the Emperor. Not BETTER, just easier.
 
2013-11-28 10:10:04 AM

Doctor Funkenstein: MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!

I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion.  Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed?  OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk.  I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.


The only problem with that is that the government would be deciding which sets of beliefs count as a religion and which do not. A violation of the first amendment
 
2013-11-28 10:12:25 AM
So they are just like the Georgetown law school that help start much of this.  Georgetown felt it so wrong to allow contraception, that they had to have a plan to deny it from the students that were forced to purchase health insurance if they attended school there.... BUT, the employee/staff plans... well those allowed for contraception coverage.  So the administrator reviewing a students 'legitimate need' for contraception were themselves free to get it covered with no input from the employer.  I guess their morals did have limits, and as usually when it come it to such people, its when its applied to them personally.
 
2013-11-28 10:14:05 AM
The article links to the ACLU amicus brief.  I don't suppose anyone has a source to others that I could read?
 
2013-11-28 10:14:07 AM

Notabunny: This brings up an important point: What if Hobby Lobby has another epiphany? Will their employees be required to adhere to the new religious edicts? And what if Hobby Lobby's new religion demands specific behavior? Can Hobby Lobby force its employees to engage in the new behavior (i.e. praying 5 times per day)?


What  if they (the corporation) decides that the new beliefs also include Droit du seigneur for the CEO.
 Or that mandatory Peyote worship is now the norm?
 
2013-11-28 10:14:49 AM

Russ1642: Whoever came up with the idea of letting employers control healthcare should be taken out back and shot in the back of the head... and left there for the coyotes.


Baylor University pretty much 'started it" by offering to pay for teacher's medical bills in exchange for them paying a little each month back in the 1920's. That little system grew up to become BCBS. Then WWII happened (thanks Hitler) and due to government rationing, changing tax laws, etc., employers started offering health insurance.

So blame BCBS or Hitler. I doubt anyone would oppose shooting either one in the head.
 
2013-11-28 10:15:31 AM
As if we didn't already have enough proof that Obama lied when he said "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan."
 
2013-11-28 10:16:53 AM
images.popmatters.com
 
2013-11-28 10:17:31 AM

markfara: rev. dave: Michaels has basically he same stuff, fewer crosses and fewer self-righteous hypocrites.

What is it about born-agains and scrapbooking?


As desperate and burning desire to relive a 1950's that never actually was.
 
2013-11-28 10:19:47 AM

starsrift: "The company heads bringing these claims want to have it both ways. By incorporating, owners and shareholders create separate entities and are not personally liable for their employees' salaries or health insurance costs - the entire point of incorporating is to create a legal entity separate from the individuals who created it. Yet these owners and shareholders want the court to consider their personal religious beliefs indistinguishable from those of the corporation, and allow those beliefs to dictate the kind of healthcare coverage their employees receive."

This is probably the most coherent argument. But if they went on it, they'd have to make a separate case for non-incorporated businesses...


How many businesses with 50 or more employees, and therefore obligated under Obamacare to provide any insurance, whether it covers birth control or not, are unincorporated?
 
2013-11-28 10:25:19 AM

Antifun: Relatively Obscure: Can I marry Walmart, divorce Walmart, and make Walmart pay me alimony?


maybe, but you'll have to consummate the marriage before teh divorce


I'd say just signing the marriage license would suffice, everyone gets farked by WalMart.
 
2013-11-28 10:30:29 AM

Karac: starsrift: "The company heads bringing these claims want to have it both ways. By incorporating, owners and shareholders create separate entities and are not personally liable for their employees' salaries or health insurance costs - the entire point of incorporating is to create a legal entity separate from the individuals who created it. Yet these owners and shareholders want the court to consider their personal religious beliefs indistinguishable from those of the corporation, and allow those beliefs to dictate the kind of healthcare coverage their employees receive."

This is probably the most coherent argument. But if they went on it, they'd have to make a separate case for non-incorporated businesses...

How many businesses with 50 or more employees, and therefore obligated under Obamacare to provide any insurance, whether it covers birth control or not, are unincorporated?


If someone is smart enough to get a business to be successful and grow to have +50 employees, I would have a hard time imagining that they aren't incorporated. I would put the number maybe at like 5 in the entire country.
 
2013-11-28 10:38:14 AM

Karac: starsrift: "The company heads bringing these claims want to have it both ways. By incorporating, owners and shareholders create separate entities and are not personally liable for their employees' salaries or health insurance costs - the entire point of incorporating is to create a legal entity separate from the individuals who created it. Yet these owners and shareholders want the court to consider their personal religious beliefs indistinguishable from those of the corporation, and allow those beliefs to dictate the kind of healthcare coverage their employees receive."

This is probably the most coherent argument. But if they went on it, they'd have to make a separate case for non-incorporated businesses...

How many businesses with 50 or more employees, and therefore obligated under Obamacare to provide any insurance, whether it covers birth control or not, are unincorporated?


A business of that size is going to need relationships with other parties: suppliers, banks, accountants, etc, none of whom will sign a contract for services unless the business is incorporated.
 
2013-11-28 10:38:25 AM

SoupGuru: I'd vote for a politician that stood up and said, "You know what?  Corporations and businesses really aren't all that special."


So would half of the country.  The other half would stroke out and/or be frothing at the mouth too much to make any recognizable sound other than WHARRGARBLE!!!
 
2013-11-28 10:43:32 AM
 This is not a fight that the right really wants to have. It cost far more to have a baby than it does to not have a baby. I promise you that if they win this one you will see more companies covering contraception, abortion, and the like while doing away with coverage for having a baby that will eat up additional cost via insurance.
 
2013-11-28 10:48:07 AM
RubberBandMan: "Only through bankruptcy can a corporation be saved and be born again."

King Barilla version, Chapters 7 and 11
 
2013-11-28 10:49:29 AM
 Also it's more than a little bit telling that they throw a fit about the government "getting between them and their doctor" yet they have no issue with corporations actually doing just that.
 
2013-11-28 10:50:43 AM
I look forward to the day when a Jehovah's Witness owned company says that their health insurance will no longer cover blood transfusions. There would not be enough popcorn in the world to keep us covered while watching that play out.
 
2013-11-28 10:51:39 AM

GWSuperfan: If corporations are people, wouldn't owning a corporation be slavery?


In fairness many slaves were treated better then companies taken over by Bain Capital.
 
2013-11-28 10:54:01 AM
I just wonder how long it will be before a corporation brings the argument that if corporations are people, then actual living people are property.

Probably not long if they do say that a corporation has religious rights under the 1st amendment.  They just need to find a reason to nullify that pesky 13th.
 
2013-11-28 10:54:59 AM
I'd be curious to know if Hobby Lobby provides paid maternity benefits, seeing as how they disapprove of contraception & all.
 
2013-11-28 10:58:06 AM

log_jammin: Relatively Obscure: If a corporation can have a religion, can a corporation start a religion (besides Apple)?  Or could I get married by Comcast and absolved of my transgressions by, I dunno, Church & Dwight (the cleaning products folks) or whatever? Kaboom!  And the sin is gone!

better yet, can a corporation go to jail?


I'd like to see arguments exploring this. JP Morgan would get worried...
 
2013-11-28 11:01:41 AM
I like Hobby Lobby. More unwanted babies with desperate, underpaid mothers = more readily available ultra fresh Satanic sacrifice fuel. Plus they have cheap wood circles that are just the right size for pentagram inscription for said sacrificial rites.
 
2013-11-28 11:02:20 AM

Antifun: Relatively Obscure: Can I marry Walmart, divorce Walmart, and make Walmart pay me alimony?


maybe, but you'll have to consummate the marriage before teh divorce


Low barrier: Walmart pretty much screws anybody not named Walton who has ever associated with it.
 
2013-11-28 11:06:04 AM

kidgenius: From a purely contraceptive point of view I'm beginning to wonder if any decision here will matter. All insurance companies more have to provide maternity coverage. They also know that the pill is about a thousand times cheaper than paying for a pregnancy and any subsequent complications and healthcare for the child. Its in the insurance companies best interest to provide coverage. Won't it be next to impossible for hobby lobby to even find insurance that does not cover contraception?



Yeah, which would be when they would claim a religious exception to the penalty because they can't find an insurance company that uses goat herders and fishers that died 2000+ years ago as actuaries.
 
2013-11-28 11:08:58 AM

Warlordtrooper: Doctor Funkenstein: MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!

I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion.  Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed?  OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk.  I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.

The only problem with that is that the government would be deciding which sets of beliefs count as a religion and which do not. A violation of the first amendment


If the snowflakes are asking for a special exemption from the law that the rest of the nation has to follow:

lh3.ggpht.com
 
2013-11-28 11:11:12 AM

The Madd Mann: A company owned entirely by Christians has religious beliefs the same way a company owned entirely by African Americans is somehow black. That is to say, not at all.


Magic Johnson's Starbucks franchises sell coffee like *this*
 
2013-11-28 11:16:11 AM

Yakk: Notably, the Hobby Lobby used to have an employee insurance plan that covered the very same birth control methods it now claims violate its religious freedom. It wasn't until the GOP raised a stink about the contraception rules in Obama's healthcare legislation that the Hobby Lobby "re-examined" its insurance policies.

Are you farking kidding me? And this got to the Supreme Court?


I hope some Justice (Ginsburg??) slaps them down for this cynical opportunistic obvious bullshiat case.  The GOP was shopping around for anything to challenge ACA in the courts and Hobby Lobby volunteered.  "You had no problem with contraception for how many years until the ACA said you had to provide it... then you have moral problems?  Does that sound a little political to you?  A little disingenuous?  Maybe a calculated bit of theater at the expense of Hobby Lobby's employees?"
 
2013-11-28 11:26:17 AM

Russ1642: Whoever came up with the idea of letting employers control healthcare should be taken out back and shot in the back of the head... and left there for the coyotes.


www.rugusavay.com
 
2013-11-28 11:29:35 AM
Well... like Mormon's and Las Vegas, you can't win by banning what you oppose. The path forward is to discourage followers and shame them into contributing more to the church in exchange for having access to mocha lattes and slot machines.
 
2013-11-28 11:32:41 AM

Zombalupagus: By refusing to cover contraception, the Hobby Lobby owners are in fact using their own religious beliefs to deny benefits to their employees who may not share those beliefs at all. That's not religious freedom; it's religious tyranny.

Bears repeating dot jpeg.


also known as corporate fascism. but but secret Muslim Kenyan socialism or some shiat.
 
2013-11-28 11:32:43 AM

kidgenius: Karac: starsrift: "The company heads bringing these claims want to have it both ways. By incorporating, owners and shareholders create separate entities and are not personally liable for their employees' salaries or health insurance costs - the entire point of incorporating is to create a legal entity separate from the individuals who created it. Yet these owners and shareholders want the court to consider their personal religious beliefs indistinguishable from those of the corporation, and allow those beliefs to dictate the kind of healthcare coverage their employees receive."

This is probably the most coherent argument. But if they went on it, they'd have to make a separate case for non-incorporated businesses...

How many businesses with 50 or more employees, and therefore obligated under Obamacare to provide any insurance, whether it covers birth control or not, are unincorporated?

If someone is smart enough to get a business to be successful and grow to have +50 employees, I would have a hard time imagining that they aren't incorporated. I would put the number maybe at like 5 in the entire country.


blogs-images.forbes.com
 
2013-11-28 11:34:01 AM

pueblonative: Warlordtrooper: Doctor Funkenstein: MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!

I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion.  Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed?  OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk.  I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.

The only problem with that is that the government would be deciding which sets of beliefs count as a religion and which do not. A violation of the first amendment

If the snowflakes are asking for a special exemption from the law that the rest of the nation has to follow:

[lh3.ggpht.com image 379x214]


Thing is you sort of don't want the government to be able to define what is or isn't a religion.  First of all is because religion is just a made up set of beliefs and second of all the next logical step is for a fundamentalist in the government to declare all religions besides their own brand of Christianity as not real religions.
 
2013-11-28 11:35:34 AM

log_jammin: what pisses me off about this case is that it should be a 9-0 decision, but everyone knows it's going to be either 4-5 or 5-4. again.


didn't count how many THIS you got but add mine. this case should have been thrown out as frivolous. and that up held on appeal and massive cost assigned for wasting the courts time.
 
2013-11-28 11:35:51 AM
I have NO faith that our Supreme Court will reach the right decision on this, especially given the current make-up of it.  I'm expecting to see my right to have medically prescribed birth control taken from me, all because of religion.   This is NOT the country my granddad went to war for.
 
2013-11-28 11:39:59 AM
Aquapope:

A little disingenuous? Maybe a calculated bit of theater at the expense of Hobby Lobby's employees?

That doesn't even slow them down... The one that amazed me was the owner of Papa John's Pizza biatching about how providing healthcare for their workers might cost an extra two cents a pie while running an ad where he was giving away a million dollars worth of pizza in a Superbowl promotion.
 
2013-11-28 11:42:53 AM
On its face, it seems odd to even consider the question seriously. After all, no one is forcing the owners of the company to take contraception or purchase contraception. The belief in question - that certain types of contraception are "abortifacients" - is also far from scientific fact. Also, the company owners issue their employees a pay check and have no say over how the employees spend it; they have no say over the activities their employees participate in on a vacation day.

It's certainly not violating the company's religious freedom for an employee to use the money paid to them by the company for a whole series of things that the company owner may find religiously objectionable, including buying contraception. It's certainly not violating the company's religious freedom for an employee to use a company-issued vacation day to enjoy a whole series of things that the company owner may find religiously objectionable, including, say, a full-day contracepted sex-fest, a trip to Mecca or a pork barbecue.


I've made these exact points several times before. Frankly, I'm amazed that this even got all the way to the Supreme Court.
 
2013-11-28 11:44:34 AM

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: kidgenius: Karac: starsrift: "The company heads bringing these claims want to have it both ways. By incorporating, owners and shareholders create separate entities and are not personally liable for their employees' salaries or health insurance costs - the entire point of incorporating is to create a legal entity separate from the individuals who created it. Yet these owners and shareholders want the court to consider their personal religious beliefs indistinguishable from those of the corporation, and allow those beliefs to dictate the kind of healthcare coverage their employees receive."

This is probably the most coherent argument. But if they went on it, they'd have to make a separate case for non-incorporated businesses...

How many businesses with 50 or more employees, and therefore obligated under Obamacare to provide any insurance, whether it covers birth control or not, are unincorporated?

If someone is smart enough to get a business to be successful and grow to have +50 employees, I would have a hard time imagining that they aren't incorporated. I would put the number maybe at like 5 in the entire country.

[blogs-images.forbes.com image 398x293]


That image is a list of Private companies.  They're incorporated, but not public.
 
2013-11-28 11:45:09 AM
Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.
 
2013-11-28 11:46:15 AM

mrshowrules: GWSuperfan: If corporations are people, wouldn't owning a corporation be slavery?

In fairness many slaves were treated better then companies taken over by Bain Capital.


True. Bain castrated Dunkin Donuts, taking production out of the store and turning them into dispensaries dependent on coffee sales.
 
2013-11-28 11:46:41 AM

capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.


You'll have an even harder time finding the religious basis for a prohibition against providing health insurance plans that merely cover birth control.
 
2013-11-28 11:47:45 AM

capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.


There isn't one.

Christian zealots are passionate defenders of what they imagine the Bible to be.
 
2013-11-28 11:49:28 AM
What's the Biblical basis for corporations?
 
2013-11-28 11:49:41 AM

grumpfuff: capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.

There isn't one.

Christian zealots are passionate defenders of what they imagine the Bible to be.


And they ignore all of the references in the bible that allow for slavery.
 
2013-11-28 11:50:16 AM
If you were to marry (or be farked or fark) a company, would it have to be 18?
Or would the laws of it's home state apply?

Could you go to jail if you get farked by a young company?
What if someone videos you getting farked by a company?
 
2013-11-28 11:51:29 AM

sdd2000: grumpfuff: capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.

There isn't one.

Christian zealots are passionate defenders of what they imagine the Bible to be.

And they ignore all of the references in the bible that allow for slavery.


See, that's where you're wrong. The references allowing for slavery are in the Old Testament, which doesn't count anymore.*


*except when they want it to
 
2013-11-28 11:54:22 AM

grumpfuff: sdd2000: grumpfuff: capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.

There isn't one.

Christian zealots are passionate defenders of what they imagine the Bible to be.

And they ignore all of the references in the bible that allow for slavery.

See, that's where you're wrong. The references allowing for slavery are in the Old Testament, which doesn't count anymore.*


*except when they want it to


You sure:

Ephesians 6:5 NLT) Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.
Christian slaves whose master is also Christian are told:
(1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them.
There are instructions for Christian slave owners to treat their slaves well.
Eph 6:9 ) And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favouritism with him. (See also Ephesians 6:7-8)
(Coll 4:1 ) Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven.
 
2013-11-28 11:56:01 AM

raerae1980: I have NO faith that our Supreme Court will reach the right decision on this, especially given the current make-up of it.  I'm expecting to see my right to have medically prescribed birth control taken from me, all because of religion.   This is NOT the country my granddad went to war for.


It's basically a coin toss. Either they do waht makes sense or they make up some bullshiat justification to screw people over.
 
2013-11-28 11:58:13 AM

maxheck: Aquapope:

A little disingenuous? Maybe a calculated bit of theater at the expense of Hobby Lobby's employees?

That doesn't even slow them down... The one that amazed me was the owner of Papa John's Pizza biatching about how providing healthcare for their workers might cost an extra two cents a pie while running an ad where he was giving away a million dollars worth of pizza in a Superbowl promotion.


That particular situation was taken way out of context.  He was giving a lecture about business and some reporter baited him with that question to get the answer that they wanted and everyone ran with it and made him look like a jackball.  He's actually a pretty good guy and provides healthcare for his employees.
 
2013-11-28 11:58:26 AM

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: kidgenius: Karac: starsrift: "The company heads bringing these claims want to have it both ways. By incorporating, owners and shareholders create separate entities and are not personally liable for their employees' salaries or health insurance costs - the entire point of incorporating is to create a legal entity separate from the individuals who created it. Yet these owners and shareholders want the court to consider their personal religious beliefs indistinguishable from those of the corporation, and allow those beliefs to dictate the kind of healthcare coverage their employees receive."

This is probably the most coherent argument. But if they went on it, they'd have to make a separate case for non-incorporated businesses...

How many businesses with 50 or more employees, and therefore obligated under Obamacare to provide any insurance, whether it covers birth control or not, are unincorporated?

If someone is smart enough to get a business to be successful and grow to have +50 employees, I would have a hard time imagining that they aren't incorporated. I would put the number maybe at like 5 in the entire country.


The Koch's are too smart to not be incorporated. Incorporation is forming a corporation. Its an entity by which you separate the liabilities of the company from your own. Private/public corporations are both still incorporated.
 
2013-11-28 12:00:19 PM
The closest thing I've gotten to a cogent answer from my right-wing, religious friends is that birth control was a key part of the cultural shift in the 1960's that "destroyed" America (as they choose to remember it), and that it enables or contributes to most of the behaviors they attribute to the secular "war" on their faith (i.e., anything fun).
 
2013-11-28 12:02:09 PM

Warlordtrooper: pueblonative: Warlordtrooper: Doctor Funkenstein: MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!

I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion.  Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed?  OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk.  I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.

The only problem with that is that the government would be deciding which sets of beliefs count as a religion and which do not. A violation of the first amendment

If the snowflakes are asking for a special exemption from the law that the rest of the nation has to follow:

[lh3.ggpht.com image 379x214]

Thing is you sort of don't want the government to be able to define what is or isn't a religion.  First of all is because religion is just a made up set of beliefs and second of all the next logical step is for a fundamentalist in the government to declare all religions besides their own brand of Christianity as not real religions.


All right we'll go to Plan B (actually my Plan A): no religious exemption from the law. If you can exempt one person from the law because of a belief it shouldn't be a law. If you believe something should be a law it should be the law for everybody.
 
2013-11-28 12:05:30 PM

capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.


Numbers 5:11-31

http://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/numbers/5.html

Oh wait...
 
2013-11-28 12:06:15 PM

Pasnute: If you were to marry (or be farked or fark) a company, would it have to be 18?
Or would the laws of it's home state apply?

Could you go to jail if you get farked by a young company?
What if someone videos you getting farked by a company?


What if it's just the tip?
 
2013-11-28 12:11:06 PM

sdd2000: grumpfuff: sdd2000: grumpfuff: capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.

There isn't one.

Christian zealots are passionate defenders of what they imagine the Bible to be.

And they ignore all of the references in the bible that allow for slavery.

See, that's where you're wrong. The references allowing for slavery are in the Old Testament, which doesn't count anymore.*


*except when they want it to

You sure:

Ephesians 6:5 NLT) Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.
Christian slaves whose master is also Christian are told:
(1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT) Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them.
There are instructions for Christian slave owners to treat their slaves well.
Eph 6:9 ) And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favouritism with him. (See also Ephesians 6:7-8)
(Coll 4:1 ) Masters, provide your slaves with what is right and fair, because you know that you also have a Master in heaven.


It was a joke. I'm fully aware the NT has references to slavery too.
 
2013-11-28 12:20:00 PM

NIXON YOU DOLT!!!!!: Zombalupagus: By refusing to cover contraception, the Hobby Lobby owners are in fact using their own religious beliefs to deny benefits to their employees who may not share those beliefs at all. That's not religious freedom; it's religious tyranny.

Bears repeating dot jpeg.

also known as corporate fascism. but but secret Muslim Kenyan socialism or some shiat.


"Help! We're being oppressed!" said the corporations.
 
2013-11-28 12:20:18 PM

capn' fun: The closest thing I've gotten to a cogent answer from my right-wing, religious friends is that birth control was a key part of the cultural shift in the 1960's that "destroyed" America (as they choose to remember it), and that it enables or contributes to most of the behaviors they attribute to the secular "war" on their faith (i.e., anything fun).


So their misogynists and you should call then out on it. What they hate is that women began to be liberated, stopped "needing a man to take care of them", and that is what caused the destruction of society.... In their eyes.That's the "cultural shift" that happened in the sixties. Oh and civil rights too. So they're racists and misogynists.
 
2013-11-28 12:24:04 PM

hinten: Great opportunity to finally divorce health insurance from employment.


I'm thinking this is the only silver lining that might come out of this. It's high time we just toss employer-funded health insurance in the bin and let them bump up wages to compen -- hahahahaha, well, I almost made it the end of that statement without cracking up.
 
2013-11-28 12:27:39 PM

Aquapope: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: kidgenius: Karac: starsrift: "The company heads bringing these claims want to have it both ways. By incorporating, owners and shareholders create separate entities and are not personally liable for their employees' salaries or health insurance costs - the entire point of incorporating is to create a legal entity separate from the individuals who created it. Yet these owners and shareholders want the court to consider their personal religious beliefs indistinguishable from those of the corporation, and allow those beliefs to dictate the kind of healthcare coverage their employees receive."

This is probably the most coherent argument. But if they went on it, they'd have to make a separate case for non-incorporated businesses...

How many businesses with 50 or more employees, and therefore obligated under Obamacare to provide any insurance, whether it covers birth control or not, are unincorporated?

If someone is smart enough to get a business to be successful and grow to have +50 employees, I would have a hard time imagining that they aren't incorporated. I would put the number maybe at like 5 in the entire country.

[blogs-images.forbes.com image 398x293]

That image is a list of Private companies.  They're incorporated, but not public.


www.sondrakistan.com
Forget it, he's rolling.  Or just shoring up street cred for his chosen username.
 
2013-11-28 12:30:55 PM

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: kidgenius: Karac: starsrift: "The company heads bringing these claims want to have it both ways. By incorporating, owners and shareholders create separate entities and are not personally liable for their employees' salaries or health insurance costs - the entire point of incorporating is to create a legal entity separate from the individuals who created it. Yet these owners and shareholders want the court to consider their personal religious beliefs indistinguishable from those of the corporation, and allow those beliefs to dictate the kind of healthcare coverage their employees receive."

This is probably the most coherent argument. But if they went on it, they'd have to make a separate case for non-incorporated businesses...

How many businesses with 50 or more employees, and therefore obligated under Obamacare to provide any insurance, whether it covers birth control or not, are unincorporated?

If someone is smart enough to get a business to be successful and grow to have +50 employees, I would have a hard time imagining that they aren't incorporated. I would put the number maybe at like 5 in the entire country.

[blogs-images.forbes.com image 398x293]


You realize the incorporated and publicly traded aren't the same thing, right?  A company can be a privately held corporation. None of the companies on your list are sole proprietorships
 
2013-11-28 12:52:09 PM

Moriel: I look forward to the day when a Jehovah's Witness owned company says that their health insurance will no longer cover blood transfusions. There would not be enough popcorn in the world to keep us covered while watching that play out.


Even better will be when a Muslim-owned company denies coverage for insulin because it comes from pigs.  The outrage of "ragheads gettin' in the way of mah diabeetus!" would be epic.
 
2013-11-28 12:59:34 PM
Okay, I'm wondering this....

I'm a reform Jew, so that doesn't give me much opportunity to limit what employees do---we're pretty much okay with you getting an abortion on the way to gay wedding where bacon cheeseburgers will be served.

But if I have a company, does the company have to be Jewish? Why can't my company be Catholic? Then I don't have to provide insurance that includes birth control and abortion services that my faith would have no objection to providing employees, but that offends the hell out of my good Catholic company. Why can't my company be a Scientologist?
 
2013-11-28 01:13:00 PM

Chameleon: Even better will be when a Muslim-owned company denies coverage for insulin because it comes from pigs.  The outrage of "ragheads gettin' in the way of mah diabeetus!" would be epic.


Insulin comes from Genetically Modified E. Coli and Yeast these days.

/just sayin'
 
2013-11-28 01:29:08 PM

pueblonative: Warlordtrooper: Doctor Funkenstein: MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!

I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion.  Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed?  OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk.  I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.

The only problem with that is that the government would be deciding which sets of beliefs count as a religion and which do not. A violation of the first amendment

If the snowflakes are asking for a special exemption from the law that the rest of the nation has to follow:

[lh3.ggpht.com image 379x214]


I'm not.  Nip it in the bud. No exemptions, period.  If you don't want to give your workers insurance that could cover birth control, don't start a business. Period.
 
2013-11-28 01:30:57 PM

capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.


For Catholics, it's not based on a biblical prohibition but rather on Papal Encyclicals, notably the Humanae Vitae encyclical by Paul VI.
 
2013-11-28 01:32:58 PM

GWSuperfan: Chameleon: Even better will be when a Muslim-owned company denies coverage for insulin because it comes from pigs.  The outrage of "ragheads gettin' in the way of mah diabeetus!" would be epic.

Insulin comes from Genetically Modified E. Coli and Yeast these days.

/just sayin'


I think you are correct for almost all insulin, but change it to a tissue heart valve  (most of those are either porcine or bovine)  replacement for either a Mulim or a Hindu
 
2013-11-28 01:34:42 PM

IlGreven: pueblonative: Warlordtrooper: Doctor Funkenstein: MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!

I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion.  Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed?  OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk.  I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.

The only problem with that is that the government would be deciding which sets of beliefs count as a religion and which do not. A violation of the first amendment

If the snowflakes are asking for a special exemption from the law that the rest of the nation has to follow:

[lh3.ggpht.com image 379x214]

I'm not.  Nip it in the bud. No exemptions, period.  If you don't want to give your workers insurance that could cover birth control, don't start a business. Period.


Clearly you didn't get to my Plan A/B post.

http://www.fark.com/comments/8037151/87873347#c87873347


Consider this Plan Z
 
2013-11-28 01:48:02 PM

Moriel: I look forward to the day when a Jehovah's Witness owned company says that their health insurance will no longer cover blood transfusions. There would not be enough popcorn in the world to keep us covered while watching that play out.


That would never happen because a) men get blood transfusions and b) this is all about conservatives' discomfort with sex, women and women having sex.
 
2013-11-28 02:01:45 PM

pueblonative: Warlordtrooper: pueblonative: Warlordtrooper: Doctor Funkenstein: MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!

I know it probably doesn't work this way, but I think they should have to first prove in court that they actually are Christian and abide by the actual tenets of the religion.  Want to whine that your religious rights are being infringed?  OK, first prove to us that you walk the walk.  I'm guessing not a lot of these perpetually offended jackasses would qualify.

The only problem with that is that the government would be deciding which sets of beliefs count as a religion and which do not. A violation of the first amendment

If the snowflakes are asking for a special exemption from the law that the rest of the nation has to follow:

[lh3.ggpht.com image 379x214]

Thing is you sort of don't want the government to be able to define what is or isn't a religion.  First of all is because religion is just a made up set of beliefs and second of all the next logical step is for a fundamentalist in the government to declare all religions besides their own brand of Christianity as not real religions.

All right we'll go to Plan B (actually my Plan A): no religious exemption from the law. If you can exempt one person from the law because of a belief it shouldn't be a law. If you believe something should be a law it should be the law for everybody.


5: Agree Strongly
 
2013-11-28 02:02:31 PM

Relatively Obscure: If a corporation can have a religion, can a corporation start a religion (besides Apple)?



How about witchcraft or starting a religion to worship evil. And sell costumes and spells?  And cursing competitors and their consumers?
 
2013-11-28 02:03:27 PM

Graffito: Moriel: I look forward to the day when a Jehovah's Witness owned company says that their health insurance will no longer cover blood transfusions. There would not be enough popcorn in the world to keep us covered while watching that play out.

That would never happen because a) men get blood transfusions and b) this is all about conservatives' discomfort with sex, women and women having sex.


Still it would be lulzy for a pagan priestess to run a company and say that providing health care that covers boner pills because they go against Diana's will.
 
2013-11-28 02:11:31 PM
How is this different than Hobby Lobby's   "We don't sell Jewish stuff to Jews." or Woolworth's we don't serve Blacks in the 1960's?
 
2013-11-28 02:23:50 PM

wozzeck: Okay, I'm wondering this....

I'm a reform Jew, so that doesn't give me much opportunity to limit what employees do---we're pretty much okay with you getting an abortion on the way to gay wedding where bacon cheeseburgers will be served.

But if I have a company, does the company have to be Jewish? Why can't my company be Catholic? Then I don't have to provide insurance that includes birth control and abortion services that my faith would have no objection to providing employees, but that offends the hell out of my good Catholic company. Why can't my company be a Scientologist?


Why not a Christen Scientist - if your company doesn't believe in blood transfusions, that would presumably take off the board a lot of possibly expensive operations and cut your health insurance costs right down.
 
2013-11-28 02:30:32 PM

GWSuperfan: Chameleon: Even better will be when a Muslim-owned company denies coverage for insulin because it comes from pigs.  The outrage of "ragheads gettin' in the way of mah diabeetus!" would be epic.

Insulin comes from Genetically Modified E. Coli and Yeast these days.

/just sayin'


Good point.  I'm going to make my company Jainist.  We don't believe in harming anything, even bacteria.  So we refuse to cover antibiotics, too.
 
2013-11-28 02:36:06 PM

Graffito: and b) this is all about conservatives' discomfort with sex, women and women having sex.


Women having sex for FUN, you mean, instead of making babies they can't abort without offending G-d.

I only hope that their image of the afterlife is somewhat correct, and St. Peter pulls them aside at the Pearly Gates and says, "Listen...before we...um, decide what you're going to do for eternity, our records show that you need to attend a lecture entitled "What Sin REALLY Is, Jackhole."
 
2013-11-28 02:36:56 PM

Chameleon: So we refuse to cover antibiotics, too.


That's actually not going to be much of a problem for much longer...
 
2013-11-28 03:55:14 PM

pueblonative: Graffito: Moriel: I look forward to the day when a Jehovah's Witness owned company says that their health insurance will no longer cover blood transfusions. There would not be enough popcorn in the world to keep us covered while watching that play out.

That would never happen because a) men get blood transfusions and b) this is all about conservatives' discomfort with sex, women and women having sex.

Still it would be lulzy for a pagan priestess to run a company and say that providing health care that covers boner pills because they go against Diana's will.


I would love to do that except that I have no desire to fark over my employees.
 
2013-11-28 03:57:09 PM
I believe the ghosts of magical space mice cause disease. Therefore, the only treatment I will cover a fumigation seance by an exorcist with a trained ghost cat.
 
2013-11-28 04:20:05 PM
So kinda like how Georgetown excluded contraceptive coverage from its student healthcare plan because of deeply and sincerely held religious beliefs that don't quite extend to excluding contraception from its faculty healthcare plan.
 
2013-11-28 04:31:44 PM

machodonkeywrestler: Antifun: Relatively Obscure: Can I marry Walmart, divorce Walmart, and make Walmart pay me alimony?


maybe, but you'll have to consummate the marriage before teh divorce

Plenty of folks are f*cked by Walmart.


All the more reason to divorce and nail them with alimony for infidelity.
 
2013-11-28 04:41:41 PM

MFK: Warlordtrooper: Could this be pointed out in court as a counter to their arguments or not?

it farking should be!


My right to do x today should never be dependent on ehether I exercised it yesterday.

Hobby lobby can suck my dick.
 
2013-11-28 04:54:07 PM
I honestly do not understand how birth control is in any way affected by religion.

I grew up in a Catholic family. I went to Catholic school. No one.. not one damn soul.. ever said birth control was a sin or morally wrong.
 
2013-11-28 05:02:13 PM
nucrash:

maxheck: Aquapope:

A little disingenuous? Maybe a calculated bit of theater at the expense of Hobby Lobby's employees?

That doesn't even slow them down... The one that amazed me was the owner of Papa John's Pizza biatching about how providing healthcare for their workers might cost an extra two cents a pie while running an ad where he was giving away a million dollars worth of pizza in a Superbowl promotion.

That particular situation was taken way out of context. He was giving a lecture about business and some reporter baited him with that question to get the answer that they wanted and everyone ran with it and made him look like a jackball. He's actually a pretty good guy and provides healthcare for his employees.


It was not a one time "gotcha question." He repeated himself over and over until he figured out it would be bad for business and suddenly had an epiphany.
 
2013-11-28 05:02:41 PM

threedingers: capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.

For Catholics, it's not based on a biblical prohibition but rather on Papal Encyclicals, notably the Humanae Vitae encyclical by Paul VI.


So, what's the excuse for Hobby Lobby? They're not Catholic, they're Evangelical Protestants.
 
2013-11-28 05:50:05 PM

havocmike: I grew up in a Catholic family. I went to Catholic school. No one.. not one damn soul.. ever said birth control was a sin or morally wrong.


In my Catholic school they said it was, and that God wouldn't give anyone more than they could handle and to have faith... with the usual... because Jesus tacked on when people asked why.  That was the pat answer for everything illogical, though.  Because Jesus.

And that's the reason here.

They believe sex is part of marriage, which is a covenant with Jesus to accept all the children he bestows upon them due to the procreative sex. It's in the vows, even.  But most people, understanding science and logic realize that this is a ridiculous way to live in modern times as we can actually plan if/when/how many kids we will have and not attribute 20 kids in a 1-bedroom apartment having Fight Cub matches for the turkey leg on this fine holiday to God.
 
2013-11-28 06:59:19 PM

GWSuperfan: ... I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.


Done in one; what are these dozens of other replies? Hmph.

My personal beef with them: an abandoned cart a mile away from their store. I've called them twice in two weeks about it. How Christian of them to leave the landscape sullied.
 
2013-11-28 07:35:25 PM
My name is Robbie Stobby, and I'm here to lobby for hobbies.

o.onionstatic.com
 
2013-11-28 08:21:43 PM

CorporatePerson: Persecution envy.

Christian evangelicals legitimately make life harder for the people they don't like. They don't like being confronted with this fact because it makes them look bad, so they have to constantly find ways to portray themselves as victims of the kind of persecution they engage in every day.


Can religion survive without a enemy and the lure of martyrdom?  American Christians have no religious enemy, thus Christians are bored out of their minds and must manufacture an enemy to "battle."  Designated Christian enemies change with each generation, recently being communist Russia, then Elvis' hips and now the uppity trifecta of gays, black presidents and women.
 
2013-11-28 08:32:19 PM

kidgenius: All insurance companies have to provide maternity coverage.


In 2011, Oklahoma Republican governor "Faith, Family and Freedom" Mary Fallin signed an emergency order with cosignature of the state insurance commission, declaring "birth is not a qualifying event for health coverage."  With a totally straight face, the insurance commish claimed this was to get *more* babies covered.  In fact, this deletion from existing insurance forces parents to buy a separate "child-only" policy loooong before pregnancy ever occurs, if they can afford it; a type of policy that had failed to flourish in Oklahoma over the prior 18 months as per the commish's actual words.

By declaring birth as a nonqualifying event for health insurance, all injuries, procedures and treatments occurring to mother and child, including NICU stays, can be denied reimbursement.
 
2013-11-28 08:33:41 PM
If I work for a Christian Scientist, does that mean my kids vaccinations won't be covered?
 
2013-11-28 08:45:03 PM

fustanella: GWSuperfan: ... I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.

Done in one; what are these dozens of other replies? Hmph.

My personal beef with them: an abandoned cart a mile away from their store. I've called them twice in two weeks about it. How Christian of them to leave the landscape sullied.


Judging by the lack of gray responses, it seems like we're all having a discussion basically agreeing with how stupid this is.
 
2013-11-28 08:49:26 PM

DeaH: If I work for a Christian Scientist, does that mean my kids vaccinations won't be covered?


Yes.  Because vaccinations are just a massive ObamaDeathcare conspiracy to gay-Hitler your babies.
 
2013-11-28 09:12:51 PM

Triple Oak: Judging by the lack of gray responses, it seems like we're all having a discussion basically agreeing with how stupid this is.


We found something so stupid that even the whackjob trolls won't defend it? or are we just assuming that the Koch brothers gave them the day off for Thanksgiving?
 
2013-11-28 09:39:48 PM

Stile4aly: threedingers: capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.

For Catholics, it's not based on a biblical prohibition but rather on Papal Encyclicals, notably the Humanae Vitae encyclical by Paul VI.

So, what's the excuse for Hobby Lobby? They're not Catholic, they're Evangelical Protestants.


Obama bad.

That or Christians defending what they imagine the Bible to be.

/idiots either way
 
2013-11-28 10:12:50 PM
So basically they are lying to escape their obligations.

That's okay. Not like there is anything in the bible about bearing false witness.
 
2013-11-28 10:53:42 PM

OooShiny: Can religion survive without a enemy and the lure of martyrdom?  American Christians have no religious enemy, thus Christians are bored out of their minds and must manufacture an enemy to "battle."


Gotta create enemies to fight. What other option do they have? Treating their fellow human beings as brothers and sisters? Helping the poor?  That's not the Christians I know.

Christianity is all about feeling like you're better than other people.
 
2013-11-28 11:15:55 PM

Stile4aly: threedingers: capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.

For Catholics, it's not based on a biblical prohibition but rather on Papal Encyclicals, notably the Humanae Vitae encyclical by Paul VI.

So, what's the excuse for Hobby Lobby? They're not Catholic, they're Evangelical Protestants.


The argument that usually gets thrown around is that birth control pills function as an abortifacient; that is, they can cause an already fertilized egg to fail to implant in the uterine wall. If you believe that "life begins at conception" and therefore a zygote is morally a full human being, then making it fail to implant is killing it.

The main problem with this argument is that it is completely false, since hormonal birth control works by preventing ovulation. However, whenever someone tries to correct this lie, they get labeled as being part of the "abortion industry" so much like climate change and evolution, the way birth control actually works is one of those bit of reality you must deny to be a "True Christian."

(Other problems with this argument involve the fact that, even assuming that birth control does prevent implantation, an undifferentialed ball of cells the size of the head if a pin is only a "person" of you declare it by religious fiat, and the fact that if you take normal spontaneous abortion into account, a woman on birth control will wind up killing fewer embryos than if she's having unprotected sex. And that's not even getting into the fact that some evangelicals feel morally culpable if they assist unmarried people in having sex safely.)
 
2013-11-29 03:04:41 AM

Antifun: Relatively Obscure: Can I marry Walmart, divorce Walmart, and make Walmart pay me alimony?


maybe, but you'll have to consummate the marriage before teh divorce


"Cleanup in aisle 9!"
 
2013-11-29 05:52:13 AM
I wish we could just go back in time and reverse that completely retarded "corporations are people" decision.
 
2013-11-29 06:10:17 AM

Graffito: pueblonative: Graffito: Moriel: I look forward to the day when a Jehovah's Witness owned company says that their health insurance will no longer cover blood transfusions. There would not be enough popcorn in the world to keep us covered while watching that play out.

That would never happen because a) men get blood transfusions and b) this is all about conservatives' discomfort with sex, women and women having sex.

Still it would be lulzy for a pagan priestess to run a company and say that providing health care that covers boner pills because they go against Diana's will.

I would love to do that except that I have no desire to fark over my employees.


Still, having Rush Limbaugh come into the office to read that in the employee e-mail. . .

Excuse me, I need bunk time.
 
2013-11-29 07:28:12 AM

xria: wozzeck: Okay, I'm wondering this....

I'm a reform Jew, so that doesn't give me much opportunity to limit what employees do---we're pretty much okay with you getting an abortion on the way to gay wedding where bacon cheeseburgers will be served.

But if I have a company, does the company have to be Jewish? Why can't my company be Catholic? Then I don't have to provide insurance that includes birth control and abortion services that my faith would have no objection to providing employees, but that offends the hell out of my good Catholic company. Why can't my company be a Scientologist?

Why not a Christen Scientist - if your company doesn't believe in blood transfusions, that would presumably take off the board a lot of possibly expensive operations and cut your health insurance costs right down.


You just farking know that if this shiat is not stopped in its tracks all kinds of CEOs will have religious epiphanies and convert to Christian Science or other faith based healing sects so they don"t have to pay anything out in health insurance. Ruling for religious exemption will functionally enable any company run by people sleazy and bold enough to just stop providing health care.
 
2013-11-29 07:54:03 AM

ambercat: xria: wozzeck: Okay, I'm wondering this....

I'm a reform Jew, so that doesn't give me much opportunity to limit what employees do---we're pretty much okay with you getting an abortion on the way to gay wedding where bacon cheeseburgers will be served.

But if I have a company, does the company have to be Jewish? Why can't my company be Catholic? Then I don't have to provide insurance that includes birth control and abortion services that my faith would have no objection to providing employees, but that offends the hell out of my good Catholic company. Why can't my company be a Scientologist?

Why not a Christen Scientist - if your company doesn't believe in blood transfusions, that would presumably take off the board a lot of possibly expensive operations and cut your health insurance costs right down.

You just farking know that if this shiat is not stopped in its tracks all kinds of CEOs will have religious epiphanies and convert to Christian Science or other faith based healing sects so they don"t have to pay anything out in health insurance. Ruling for religious exemption will functionally enable any company run by people sleazy and bold enough to just stop providing health care.


Which is exactly why it's highly likely this Court will rule in favor of it.
 
2013-11-29 09:16:28 AM
Ah but there is the pesky Keyword  !  Mandated not by choice .
 
2013-11-29 09:51:33 AM

LockeOak: My name is Robbie Stobby, and I'm here to lobby for hobbies.

[o.onionstatic.com image 700x396]


Has anybody pointed out yet that the computer isn't plugged into power?
 
2013-11-29 11:16:18 AM

maxheck: The one that amazed me was the owner of Papa John's Pizza biatching about how providing healthcare for their workers might cost an extra two cents a pie while running an ad where he was giving away a million dollars worth of pizza in a Superbowl promotion.


I haven't bought anything from Papa John's since he did that. They were the closest pizza place to my house, and they have good pizzas, so that was the only pizza I bought for like 5 years, and then *poof* he got political, and it was against my politics, so now I get Dominoes or Pizza Hut, and i tell everybody I know that Papa John's is horrible and disgusting.
 
2013-11-29 12:06:22 PM

FnkyTwn: Papa John's is horrible and disgusting.


Well, yes. But it has nothing to do with their politics.
 
2013-11-29 01:15:19 PM

GWSuperfan: If corporations are people, wouldn't owning a corporation be slavery?


Let my Jamba Juices GO!
 
2013-11-29 03:57:48 PM
s17.postimg.org
 
2013-11-29 06:58:35 PM

Stile4aly: threedingers: capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.

For Catholics, it's not based on a biblical prohibition but rather on Papal Encyclicals, notably the Humanae Vitae encyclical by Paul VI.

So, what's the excuse for Hobby Lobby? They're not Catholic, they're Evangelical Protestants.


Genesis 39:9

You're not allowed to spill your baby batter anywhere except a God-approved receptacle.

Of course, they're mis-interpreting it. Onan was killed because he refused to honor his dead brother (he was supposed to give the brother's wife an heir), not because he spilled his seed.
 
2013-11-29 07:03:48 PM

Jgok: Stile4aly: threedingers: capn' fun: Genuine question, no snark: what is the religious basis for a prohibition against birth control?  I've read the Bible cover to cover, twice, and don't recall any mention of birth control.

For Catholics, it's not based on a biblical prohibition but rather on Papal Encyclicals, notably the Humanae Vitae encyclical by Paul VI.

So, what's the excuse for Hobby Lobby? They're not Catholic, they're Evangelical Protestants.

Genesis 39:9

You're not allowed to spill your baby batter anywhere except a God-approved receptacle.

Of course, they're mis-interpreting it. Onan was killed because he refused to honor his dead brother (he was supposed to give the brother's wife an heir), not because he spilled his seed.


I'm assuming you mixed up verses. because Gen 39:9 is about Joeseph refusing to sleep with his master's wife.

Since you're talking about Onan, a quick google makes me think you meant Gen 38:8-10?
 
2013-11-29 07:07:51 PM

grumpfuff: ou're not allowed to spill your baby batter anywhere except a God-approved receptacle.

Of course, they're mis-interpreting it. Onan was killed because he refused to honor his dead brother (he was supposed to give the brother's wife an heir), not because he spilled his seed.

I'm assuming you mixed up verses. because Gen 39:9 is about Joeseph refusing to sleep with his master's wife.

Since you're talking about Onan, a quick google makes me think you meant Gen 38:8-10?


Onan was enjoying the benefits of a levirate marriage without fulfilling the responsibility to provide an heir for his dead brother. He was pulling out.
 
2013-11-29 07:10:16 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: grumpfuff: ou're not allowed to spill your baby batter anywhere except a God-approved receptacle.

Of course, they're mis-interpreting it. Onan was killed because he refused to honor his dead brother (he was supposed to give the brother's wife an heir), not because he spilled his seed.

I'm assuming you mixed up verses. because Gen 39:9 is about Joeseph refusing to sleep with his master's wife.

Since you're talking about Onan, a quick google makes me think you meant Gen 38:8-10?

Onan was enjoying the benefits of a levirate marriage without fulfilling the responsibility to provide an heir for his dead brother. He was pulling out.


I know. I was just correcting the verse he was referencing. Like you said last time we discussed Christians and the Old Testament...not their fault, not their book.
 
Displayed 168 of 168 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report