Hobby Lobby wins Supreme Court case, limits the ACA contraception mandate

MOD NOTE:

Knock off the personal insults and bickering. Keep your posts on topic or posting bans may follow.

Do not reply to this post.

Blaine91555
Forum Moderator

a reply to: Daedalus

Can I ask you a question not directly related to birth control? Do you not see the how this ruling is setting a slightly worrisome precedent? The challenged a federal statute to not provide something according to their belief. Case law is extremely strong when arguing a case. If the supreme court has now ruled that a person(and this should apply to a actual person as well) can refuse to follow federal based on belief, I find that concerning. I find it particularly concerning because in this case it was found that it was ok to break federal law not because something was actually happening, but because it might happen. There might be a drug used that caused what they consider to be abortive. So the ruling wasn't because it was happening only that it was possible.

Second point that is constantly being addressed in the thread is it's only 4 out of 20 of the bc. It's already been clarified that it's true to this case only. The other cases coming down pipe are for ALL bc. And they are passing through as well. So it's not just about a couple pills this ruling effects the entire mandate. When you get into using case law in court it seems to effect more than that.

That concerns me for the simple reason that if the challenge has been made and succeeded it opens the door to a variety of other types of restrictions by employers as well as individuals to use this ruling. I know the law views certain corporations a people and they get the same rights but I do believe that's a mistake, and I do believe we are going to get to see why in the near future. Think about it, the lawsuits where a company didn't want to provide a cake for a gay wedding. They were arguing on faith just like these lawsuits. It has put a crack in the door for discrimination based on religion, not that it approves it but it does give it a bit more of a foothold.

But than again I could be very wrong, hopefully I am.

a reply to: jrod

-sigh-

and YOU are missing the point....if you WANT something, pay for it...if you NEED it, you can probably get some help....

a reply to: drivers1492

-puts his serious hat back on-

on the one hand, you make a good point about this being used to argue for things that might not be in the people's interest...on the other hand, i think we need to deal with that when we come to it, and not borrow trouble....we have enough right now already.

a reply to: dawnstar

Let me give you some of my perspective. We all have them, and they are driven by differing experiences.

I spent 2 months of my life working in a HUD project. I interviewed person after person. I heard BS that would make you ROFL, and I heard truths that would outrage you. I heard truths that would break your heart.

I heard from too many women (since they are the head of the family in 90% of the cases) who were content to remain in that cesspool and have child after child. I heard women with 6 kids talking trash about "babies having babies" .. wrf? Who pays the price? Certainly the taxpayer does....but the children pay the highest price. They are brought into a world by the worst parents imaginable. They are taught how to survive by either a) riding the free train of welfare or b) entering a world of crime and violence or both. Most often both.

I would not mind at all if my pocket book were a bit lighter if we could get those children out of that situation and turn them into productive citizens. Break the chain of poverty. Powerful words. Meaningless words.

When people do not want to change the way they live...how do you make them do it? You cannot force them to use contraceptives. You cannot sterilize them. You cannot, effectively, take their children away from them and attempt to break that chain.

People are effed up... so I rant about the free train because unless people are FORCED to face their responsibilities some will never do so. Personally...if they will not help themselves then I resent being extorted into helping them remain as they are.

I have been pretty nasty at times here...I apologize. We have a difference of opinion. I would fight to the death to maintain your right to disagree with me. I just happen to have a lot of years of seeing how the liberal approach to poverty just results in more poverty.

Not everyone will be responsible adults. It seems that those who refuse to accept the responsibilities for their actions or inactions may have to be left to their own devices so that they will learn.

Back up 80 years and see there was no welfare...you find a lot more people that were responsible caretakers of their lives and of their children...not everyone, but it seems that without a safety net more people will work to better themselves and their families.

I do favor a safety net...but not a blank check one. If you have fallen on hard times, you deserve a helping hand. One who teaches you how to fish...not one that hands you a fish and tells you there will be another fish in the morning. Not one who tells you that if you have more children there will be more fish. Way to create a cycle of poverty, Mr. Uncle Sam!! Way to undermine people's sense of pride. Way to expand poverty and perpetuate it.

The alternative is where we have arrived: 48% of the country is receiving money from the govt. That is a sad, despicable, deplorable situation that has to stop. What is the trend, you may ask? Guess.... if we do nothing to halt it, it will only get worse.

There...you see where I am coming from.

a reply to: Daedalus

Ahhhh the old capitalistic approach to healthcare.

There is a reason why the rest of the civilized world opted for social health care.

Is it a coincidence healthcare in the US continues to decline and while becoming more expensive.

A healthy population is a much more productive work force. We are already paying for millions for babies and children and this number continues to grow.

originally posted by: Daedalus
a reply to: mOjOm

so then you'd be ok with everyone being able to get abortion drugs.....so they can terminate a pregnancy......

and i get called a genocidal nazi for suggesting that maybe we should execute foreign invaders that keep violating our border illegally....

jesus, this is friggin bizzaro world...

Yah, I am ok with it and here is why. For the same reason we allow people to get guns if they want. To go extreme 4x4 snow drifting. Ok to with me if people do drugs and drink and drive fast too. Because it's there choice and I believe in Liberty to choose. See that word Choose. If everyone has access doesn't mean they TAKE IT. It means the option is there and it's THEIR CHOICE.

If it's MEDICAL and available for everyone are you gonna take it, let alone use it??? Who knows, not my business, just like it's not my business if some guy is going in there for boner pills or something to rid the rash in his bung hole. The idea is to have options, all of them in case you need it.

But that's philisophical. Just reality, this isn't about Religious Ideas, that's been shown to be BS from their Stock Shares in those same companies to the fact that A CORP ISN'T A PERSON. It can't go to church or even read a bible, because it's a FICTIONAL PERSON. Is it any wonder that it's a FICTIONAL PERSON being used to justify RELIGIOUS MEANING????? I mean the irony there is just obscene!!!!

All this did is give FICTIONAL PEOPLE more power than REAL PEOPLE and they'll abuse it like they always have, period!!!

a reply to: jrod

it's not healthcare....

if you WANT something, you pay for it..if you NEED it, then you can get help getting it.

what about that is "capitalistic healthcare"?

you obviously have a problem differentiating "need", and "want"

a reply to: mOjOm

nobody has removed the option....they've just opted not to pay for it.

you can still get the 4 things they don't wanna pay for, it's just you'd hafta pay for it...and like the other person, that's your real problem,....having to pay for it.

god, forbid you actually hafta PAY for something like that...

a reply to: drivers1492

I do...I think it is dangerous as hell. What trips my trigger is when I hear things like "right to contraceptives" or worse: "I have a right to free contraceptives".

Back to the dangerous as hell: This is a continuation of the corporate personhood concept. What Gryphon66 referred to as false..something.

The govt is granting an already powerful lobby (business) the rights of individuals when they already overwhelm us in terms of influence with our elected officials. We do not stand a chance....

There is a part of me that says "yeah!" a portion of the constitution is upheld!! (1st amendment). There is another part of me that simply says "oh crappola, we are screwed".

I think the long term ramifications are bad...very bad for us, the little guys.

On the other hand...I really hate entitlements. Particularly when the politicians use them to get re-elected. I hate govt influence in our lives. I do not need a nanny state to tell me how I should live my life. I just need a govt to provide basic infrastructure, police for protection and an army to protect OUR BORDERS. I could give a crap what happens in Afghanistan.

a reply to: Daedalus

The health insurance industry is squeezing the working class dry, and then costing our dying parents every last penny they have saved in the name of capitalism. Part of the oligarchy that is firmly in place.

Have you ever seen how health care works outside the US?

The statistics say a lot about the state of US health care compared to the rest of the world.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: zazzafrazz

You are making an assumption, a dangerous one where I am concerned. One that is most assuredly incorrect, but if that is all you have to fall back on now, then dish it out. I can take it.

VERY dramatic post. You are saying what tax dollars should be spent on, am I misreading your comments?

originally posted by: Daedalus
a reply to: mOjOm

nobody has removed the option....they've just opted not to pay for it.

you can still get the 4 things they don't wanna pay for, it's just you'd hafta pay for it...and like the other person, that's your real problem,....having to pay for it.

god, forbid you actually hafta PAY for something like that...

Is there like a team of you people that just rotate the same arguments over and over forever. I'm not even bother with this one again. This has been covered already. Face it, I will never see it like you and you'll never see it like I do. It's a fact.

You see "Baby Murder" when even the science argues with you. But it's not about that is it, it's about the money now. Ok fine and when I show that to be wrong and hypocritical it will move to something else.

I love your remarks Like "God forbid...." but it's only funny because it shows me how often you attach God into your BS.

I'd say the same goes for Hobby Lobby too.

a reply to: jrod

Haha

Sorry...there is also a reason that the European Union, in general, is in debt up to their eyeballs and in worse shape then we are. Runaway socialized medicine costs. There are a few countries that are handling it better than others, and kudos to them.

Somehow I just see more of the same with socialized medicine in the US...govt waste, govt corruption, govt bureaucracy and red tape... we would lose out badly. Just look at what the frack they did to our education.

a reply to: Daedalus

Check your pay stub.

Already paying for something. Might as well let the general population benefit to.

Promote the General Welfare!

a reply to: zazzafrazz

I am saying that we spend way too much on the military, way too much on wars in shistholes like Vietnam and particularly Afghanistan. But then we also spend way too much money on stupid and ineffective wars like the war on poverty and the war on drugs. Stupid and ineffective wastes of humanity and money.

Teach a man to fish... dont hand him a fracking fish and tell him to come back tomorrow. Our govt is directly responsible for MAINTAINING the chain of poverty and even expanding it. DIRECTLY responsible.

I wouldn't mind the taxes if we could actually lift children out of poverty and break that chain. Money well spent, that would be. What our govt is doing with our money (wait...it's their money, right?) is a disaster, it is a disgrace. Politicians are elected and are barely well off...after a few years they are freaking millionaires.

Is anyone the least bit too stupid to realize what is happening there?

a reply to: bbracken677

I know this reply was to someone else, but I want to tell you "thank you" for making this post. It can be easy to see people one-dimensionally here in a forum, to get so into the back and forth of polarized debate that there is a sense it is all about counting coup and not really about even HEARING another person's point of view - just "label them and either applaud or fire on them at will." I really want to listen to other people's opinions here on ATS, and when all the bickering and nastiness kicks in, I get really frustrated. So, thanks again for this.

The think is, once the noise stops, and I can hear, I suddenly realize I can begin the process of connection to their ideas. Otherwise, I just turn off the noise as best as I can and sigh heavily at my screen.

Back on topic...

I am of the opinion that this ruling will have far-reaching implications and will bring a massive back-lash. Especially now that there are for-profit Corporations taking advantage of the ruling to eliminate all birth control - it is already happening (started a thread about it).

Thanks again,
AB

a reply to: jrod

I have an idea. Why don't we all just quit our jobs and get on welfare?

Sounds like a plan to me!

a reply to: bbracken677

Are you not familiar with this:www.usdebtclock.org...

But you have no problem with tax dollars being used to 'put warheads on foreheads'?

a reply to: AboveBoard

Thank you. My post was genuinely sincere... I get like that sometimes.

I fear that the far-reaching effects will dwarf anything we will see regarding this ruling and the direct results affecting ACA.

I think we cannot imagine the eventual effects of corporate personhood. Not now...but give it about 10 years.

When the Patriot Act passed I made the prediction that the current president would not abuse it (much) and that the next one would do no worse...but the one after that, or the following after that. Look out. We ain't seen nuttin yet.