Christianity & Hobby Lobby

a reply to: dawnstar

what hobby lobby covers

Male condoms
Female condoms
Diaphragms with spermicide
Sponges with spermicide
Cervical caps with spermicide
Spermicide alone
Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (“Combined Pill)
Birth-control pills with progestin alone (“The Mini Pill)
Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
Contraceptive patches
Contraceptive rings
Progestin injections
Implantable rods
Vasectomies
Female sterilization surgeries
Female sterilization implants


what hobby lobby does not cover

Plan B (“The Morning After Pill”)
Ella (a similar type of “emergency contraception”)
Copper Intra-Uterine Device
IUD with progestin

Emergency contraception safely and effectively prevents pregnancy up to five days after unprotected sex. ... 1-800-230-PLAN ... and drugstores; Costs vary from $30 to $65 for the morning-after pill and $500 to $900 for IUD insertion ... Levonorgestrel pills, including the brands Next Choice One Dose and Plan B One-Step ...



The cost of emergency contraceptive pills ("morning after pills" or "day after pills") can vary a lot depending on where you get them, so be sure to call around and ask about costs up front. In the United States, Plan B One-Step and its generic forms (like Take Action and Next Choice One Dose) are now available directly on the shelf (check the family planning aisle) to consumers of any age - you don't need to show ID.



EC costs anywhere from $35 to $60 at pharmacies. The generic pills (like Next Choice One Dose and Take Action ) generally cost about 10-15% less than Plan B One-Step, but the makers of Plan B One-Step are currently offering a $10 coupon. To read a 2013 report from the American Society for Emergency Contraception on the price of EC in the US, click here.



The least expensive option for purchasing EC in the US is www.afterpill.com. AfterPill is an FDA-approved generic form of Plan B One-Step, and it is sold for $20 + $5 shipping. Be aware that they do not offer expedited shipping, so it's not intended for emergency use - but it's a good option to know about if you'd like to keep EC on hand just in case you need it.



ella may cost at least $50 at the pharmacy, but it is a prescription-only product and is often covered by insurance - be sure to call your insurance company to see if ella is covered. There is an online prescription service that you can use to purchase ella for $59, including next-day delivery. This service will transfer a prescription to your local pharmacy for a fee of $35 (and then you have to pay whatever that pharmacy charges for the pill).



The new health care law requires that insurance companies cover the full range of FDA-approved contraceptive methods without extra charges, like co-pays. But your plan may not cover every brand of EC, or over-the-counter products. The best way to find out of EC is covered under your plan is to call your insurance company. To learn more, click here.


so a woman is needing how many plan b or ella per month?

and a woman is having sex with the p0otential of producing
a child and simultaneously cannot afford 30-60 dollars for a one time pill.

a reply to: spirited75

the decisions with the other companies are a direct result of the hobby lobby ruling.
and some of those are catholic and are against any contraceptions.
to say that they are not related to the hobby lobby ruling is about the same as me telling you that how often a person has sex is irrelevant to sex!!

--------

"and a woman is having sex with the p0otential of producing
a child and simultaneously cannot afford 30-60 dollars for a one time pill. "

-------

after they pay the outrageous amount for the insurance coverage they are forced by the gov't to buy??? weather or not they can afford it isn't the question... why should they have to buy a insurance that doesn't cover birth control is!! heck why don't we just save on costs and eliminate all those other things in the plans that many think would be useless and actually save some money! you know the cancer screenings many other tests that are provided as preventive care. there was a time when I would have just about given my right arm for 30-60 dollars to buy something for one of my kids that he needed badly!!! And you are forgetting about the cost for the doctor's visit to get the prescription for the pills...

now let me ask you a question
do you go to church often?? if so how many times in the past year have you heard the words "Wives submit to your husbands in all things" being preached from the pulpit? I've been to many types of churches from many denominations since I left that church in tx. The last one I went I quit after the first visit because that was the topic of the sermon. It's funny but I have never heard of any conditions coming after that statement. Not a "unless he wants to beat the crap out of you" or "unless he wants you to do something you feel is wrong" and not a "unless you can't afford the child".
Since we are talking about hobby lobby it's reliegous beliefs the option of the wife not to have sex should be taken off the table! Otherwise aren't they just doing to people what they say the gov't is trying to do to them?? Encourage them to go against the religious beliefs?

and well why did you ask me if you knew the answer to your question??

if life was affordable to all we wouldn't even be concerned with what is on someone's heallthcare!

a reply to: NavyDoc

I am all for ditching the mandates also.
unfortunately the gov't and courts don't seem to see it that way.
and then there's a bunch of other state laws that have been recently passed in various states.
and there are women in one state at least that is sitting in prison under a law that allows prosecution if a women takes prescribed medications and happens to have a miscarriage afterwards.
in NYS there have been cases where the state has forced abortions on women because they became pregnant while on medications that were needed by the mother.
in this state they will prosecute the mother for taking the medication she needs!!

"Having a baby is the most natural thing in the world. Sure there are very rare complications in the west, but that is how our species survive."

I have a pretty good record of my history and I will tell you now the words "died in childbirth" pops up more than once!!
ya sure it's rare now but it was even rarer a few decades ago.
and one can't dismiss the idea that one of the reasons it is rare is we have birth control for women when the doctor tells them that it's not advisable to carry a child!

if you look at the whole picture of where the conservative right seems to want to take us it's not a pretty picture!
prosecution for miscarriages
restraints on birth control
limiting divorce
ending of abortions
and well there are some that have not become so obvious yet that I won't bother mentioning

i asked you the cost at 738 am and went to sleep and got up at 333 pm and you had not answered so i looked it up myself.

you assumed that when i asked i knew the price at 738 am and i did not know the price. do you know what it does when you assume?


figured you were ignoring me.

and once i looked u0p prices and posted
did not take long for assumption to become apparent.

so a woman who is having sex will probably only need the morning after pill how many times a month???

i think more than three times a month and you are probably talking about a whore lot more than a married woman.

a reply to: spirited75
a married women would more than likely choose an IUD or other method...
and IUD I believe is a one time cost of $500- $1000.
I know I certainly wouldn't be taking emergency contraception on a regular basis. don't believe it was made for that purpose.
I can also see where there might be a purpose for such medication such as a not sexually active who has just been raped for one.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: spirited75
a married women would more than likely choose an IUD or other method...
and IUD I believe is a one time cost of $500- $1000.
I know I certainly wouldn't be taking emergency contraception on a regular basis. don't believe it was made for that purpose.
I can also see where there might be a purpose for such medication such as a not sexually active who has just been raped for one.

I was switched to an IUD after removal of the breast tumor doctors said was caused by the type birth control pill I was on.

I was 21.

A woman's birth control choice is no one ekes business.

a reply to: Annee

I was advised that the pill wasn't a wise choice I think it was after 30 years old. I would have loved to have gotten sterilized at that point but it was an expense we just couldn't afford at the time. Some might have problems with the IUD's because of alleriges others might not be able to take the pills because of various reasons. It's not a one size fits all thing.
The more the taxpayers are stuck helping pay the medical bills for some the more they and the gov't will think that they have the right to dictate how we are treated. We are gonna probably end up with a one size fits all medical system that will kill more people than it helps.
What works for one isn't gonna work for everyone!

any reason why you two choose to not have the
conversation about what kinds of BC you have used,
are using and were advised to use, in a private conversation?

After all it is nobody's business what BC you use but yours, RIGHT?

a reply to: spirited75

I am not discusiing what kind of bc I am using at the present time and I don't believe Annee is either.
We are just using experiences in the past to make a point. BC is not a one size fits all...

a reply to: dawnstar

what does it have to do with
the topic of hobby lobby and
christianity?

a reply to: spirited75
only in that some seem to think that oh it's so cheap...no it isn't
and oh, but they can just go to the nearest pharmacy and pick up a pack of condoms and that is a suitable subsitute
when they aren't nearly as effective and in some cases cannot be used because of allergies.
birth control methods are best to be left to the doctor and the patient not the beliefs of others.

why haven't you accepted the fact that the hobby lobby decision has already resulted in other cases involving other companies with stronger beliefs in the area been given the same relief and some of these companies will not be covering any contraceptions now?

I find it hard to have such a narrow veiw of things sorry. throw a rock into a pond and the first result is a splash but after that the effects will ripple throughout the pond.

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: dawnstar

what does it have to do with
the topic of hobby lobby and
christianity?

Funny, I thought the topic was about a corporation given the right to choose by religious belief, not science fact women's birth control method.

I provided fact that sometimes an IUD is required, or another method of birth control is recommended by a doctor.

Birth control for whatever reason should be between the woman and her doctor ONLY. It is no one else's business.

And where did the subject of the cost if IUDs come from?

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: NavyDoc

I am all for ditching the mandates also.
unfortunately the gov't and courts don't seem to see it that way.
and then there's a bunch of other state laws that have been recently passed in various states.
and there are women in one state at least that is sitting in prison under a law that allows prosecution if a women takes prescribed medications and happens to have a miscarriage afterwards.
in NYS there have been cases where the state has forced abortions on women because they became pregnant while on medications that were needed by the mother.
in this state they will prosecute the mother for taking the medication she needs!!

"Having a baby is the most natural thing in the world. Sure there are very rare complications in the west, but that is how our species survive."

I have a pretty good record of my history and I will tell you now the words "died in childbirth" pops up more than once!!
ya sure it's rare now but it was even rarer a few decades ago.
and one can't dismiss the idea that one of the reasons it is rare is we have birth control for women when the doctor tells them that it's not advisable to carry a child!

if you look at the whole picture of where the conservative right seems to want to take us it's not a pretty picture!
prosecution for miscarriages
restraints on birth control
limiting divorce
ending of abortions
and well there are some that have not become so obvious yet that I won't bother mentioning

Shrug. I know that is the fear mongering of the left, but in reality, the right by and large is for less federal government mandates. Abortion is not going away anywhere in the states, especially if it is for the life of the mother.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: spirited75
a reply to: dawnstar

what does it have to do with
the topic of hobby lobby and
christianity?

Funny, I thought the topic was about a corporation given the right to choose by religious belief, not science fact women's birth control method.

I provided fact that sometimes an IUD is required, or another method of birth control is recommended by a doctor.

Birth control for whatever reason should be between the woman and her doctor ONLY. It is no one else's business.

And where did the subject of the cost if IUDs come from?

disingenuously funny.

the cost for the morning after pill.

researched and brought up due to the misrepresentation on some of the posters behalf in here that it was going to cause a God awful financial burden on women.

i said if a woman is using the morning after pill more than once a month we are talking about a woman in the oldest profession. Any probably pretty soon she will get a bad PID and render herself sterile. A married woman needing the morning after pill more than once a month. she would be suicidal.

originally posted by: spirited75

the cost for the morning after pill.

researched and brought up due to the misrepresentation on some of the posters behalf in here that it was going to cause a God awful financial burden on women.

My IUD was paid for in full by my company provided insurance.

The companies religious belief was never considered, as it shouldn't be --- because it's none of their damn business.

The morning after pill is none of your business either.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: spirited75

the cost for the morning after pill.

researched and brought up due to the misrepresentation on some of the posters behalf in here that it was going to cause a God awful financial burden on women.

My IUD was paid for in full by my company provided insurance.

The companies religious belief was never considered, as it shouldn't be --- because it's none of their damn business.

The morning after pill is none of your business either.

Yet it's the government's business? Do you want complete autonomy or do you want the government getting into your private business?

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: spirited75

the cost for the morning after pill.

researched and brought up due to the misrepresentation on some of the posters behalf in here that it was going to cause a God awful financial burden on women.

My IUD was paid for in full by my company provided insurance.

The companies religious belief was never considered, as it shouldn't be --- because it's none of their damn business.

The morning after pill is none of your business either.

Yet it's the government's business? Do you want complete autonomy or do you want the government getting into your private business?

First off, I am not anti government. I personally find it irresponsible and immature.

Any concept that 300 million people can responsibly self govern is ludicrous.

The political right claiming they are for smaller government IMO is the joke of the century. They don't want less, they just want their version of more control through legislation.

Reproduction affects everyone. As far as I'm concerned all and anything to reduce unplanned or unwanted children (including abortion) should be 100% free and available through government programs and subsidies.

Let me know when every living child is loved and positively cared for. Oh wait, that might involve government programs.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: spirited75

the cost for the morning after pill.

researched and brought up due to the misrepresentation on some of the posters behalf in here that it was going to cause a God awful financial burden on women.

My IUD was paid for in full by my company provided insurance.

The companies religious belief was never considered, as it shouldn't be --- because it's none of their damn business.

The morning after pill is none of your business either.

Yet it's the government's business? Do you want complete autonomy or do you want the government getting into your private business?

First off, I am not anti government. I personally find it irresponsible and immature.

Any concept that 300 million people can responsibly self govern is ludicrous.

The political right claiming they are for smaller government IMO is the joke of the century. They don't want less, they just want their version of more control through legislation.

Reproduction affects everyone. As far as I'm concerned all and anything to reduce unplanned or unwanted children (including abortion) should be 100% free and available through government programs and subsidies.

Let me know when every living child is loved and positively cared for. Oh wait, that might involve government programs.

Less government intrusion is not being "anti-government." Government has it's place and works best if it stays in it's proper place.

So basically, you want other people to pay for your birth control and abortions. Therein lies the problem. As long as people want government to take care of them, government will be in their lives. It is all fine and dandy when you get your freebies, but eventually, you will find that you've sold out to a master that wants to run your life because you are incapable of running it yourself.

IT is not ludicrous to expect 300 million or 3 million or 300 thousand people to take individual responsibility. What is more ludicrous is to expect a central government to be able to manage 300 million people's lives and expect to make everyone happy.

NO, they are not the ones who want more control, YOU are wanting more control by promoting cradle to grave subsidies and government mandates.

NO, children were not better cared for before government programs. It is your "great society" that has created generational poverty and fatherless families and single moms. That you expect government to do it, shows that you've abrigated your responsibilities.

Before leftists demanding that someone else take care of them, families did a much better job.

a reply to: NavyDoc


unfortunately the gov't seems to do more to create people who need the gov't giving them stuff than they do help those who are holding their own to remain independent of them.
the hobby lobby ruling (and I am beginning to thing obamacare itself is just another one of those acts that will create more need for those gov't programs
which is preferable? To have the people working for a wage along with benefits that provides enough to cover their cost of living? Or to pay them less and let the gov't pick up the slack? would you prefer that people get all their healthcare needs met through insurance that is independent of the gov't or do we really want to start a precedent where this need or that need isn't covered and instead the responsibility for it falls onto the gov't?
is the priviledge of having cheap labor high costs and higher profits really worth it if the result is that more and more people fall into a state of dependency to the gov't?
people can preach "responsibility" to the masses all they want but if there is not a means to be responsible then I don't think it will do much good. And I wonder how much do you reckon it costs the taxpayers to send 10 dollars of aide to a needy person? I mean isn't just as ludicrous to think that it could be cheaper to have all these various agencies and programs providing to the "poor" with us footing the tab for it all than it would be for the businesses to pay a decent wage and charge an extra 50 cents for that big mac?
And it's just as much the republicans as it is the leftists...
they two work hand in hand. there's probably just as many business owners who would prefer to pay their employees that low pay and let the taxpayers foot the greater share of the tab in keeping those employees alive! not to mention their tax credits loopholes and the like! it's the liberals jobs to make sure the gov't picks up the slack while the republicans make sure that the businesses pay as little as possible to that tax pool

which should come first?? the end to these programs or the business sector picking up more of the tab for their employees?