-
@mrbee: I totally agree with this comparison.
-
This quote: "But in order for the HHS mandate to be sustained, it must also constitute the least restrictive means of serving that interest, and the mandate plainly fails that test. There are other ways in which Congress or HHS could equally ensure that every woman has cost-free access to the particular contraceptives at issue here and, indeed, to all FDA-approved contraceptives. In fact, HHS has already devised and implemented a system that seeks to respect the religious liberty of religious nonprofit corporations while ensuring that the employees of these entities have precisely the same access to all FDA-approved contraceptives as employees of companies whose owners have no religious objections to providing such coverage. The employees of these religious nonprofit corporations still have access to insurance coverage without cost sharing for all FDA-approved contraceptives; and according to HHS, this system imposes no net economic burden on the insurance companies that are required to provide or secure the coverage.
Although HHS has made this system available to religious nonprofits that have religious objections to the contraceptive mandate, HHS has provided no reason why the same system cannot be made available when the owners of for-profit corporations have similar religious objections."
-
@T.H.O.U.: I don't think it's as simple as comparing business pricing to individual pricing on products like computers. There are so many things wrong with the current system you have to go through to purchase insurance if it is not provided by your employer - I didn't realize how wrong and difficult it all was until I was in that situation. Obamacare did help some aspects, but complicated others. I agree with PPs about hoping that we can eventually move to a single-payer system.
-
I think this is sad and I'm disgusted. I don't think employers have any right to opinions on medications taken by their employees, period. Unless you're a religous organization I don't think you should be enforcing your morals on anyone else.
-
@wonderstruck: I agree the system for purchasing private insurance needs to be updated. But even though updates I think its naive to think that what a single consumer can purchase should be the same "bulk price" of what a large organization can purchase.
-
@TemperanceBrennan: Agreed! Especially considering before Obamacare, they actually covered the drugs that they are now protesting that they had to cover under Obamacare. It seems a corporation's "religious convictions" come to the forefront when it becomes politically expedient to fight a law/president it doesn't like. The fact that a corporation can have religious convictions is ridiculous. You want the benefits that come with being a legal entity? That means you don't get individual religious protections. Except now.
-
@T.H.O.U.: Maybe not the same, but the fact that for awhile having a child was simply out of the question because maternity coverage cost more than our mortgage and would have put us into debt - that's crazy. I actually would have been better off quitting my job and then just applying for medicaid and letting the taxpayers cover the costs of it for me. That's not what we did (I was under 26 at the time so I was able to be put back on my mother's insurance and then I just paid her for my portion,) but the fact that we would have come out ahead financally if I'd quit my job and gotten medicaid...that really says something!
-
@Mrs D: birth control pills make me vomit, i have a super weak stomach, but if i can't keep them down, they can't work, so i have a nuva ring which is more expensive. i don't use bc for contraception, i take it because i had surgery on my uterus just over a month ago and need the hormones to promote healing and prevent hemorrhage (i bled uncontrollably for the first two wks and am still bleeding 6+ wks later). i went to fill my script for the nuva ring without ins this wk end, it was $115 for the ring that lasts 28 days. if i'm working at hobby lobby as a cashier for $14/hour full time, that's my take home for a day and a half! i don't know that the nuva ring was one of the opposed items, but i'm bringing up the point that even if you can go to a planned parenthood (which not everyone has access to), and maybe you're able to have care on a sliding scale, that doesn't change the cost of the medications and there are reasons people use these medications/devices other than preventing/terminating pregnancy & the cost is not something many people can afford.
-
@looch: EXACTLY! This is why we need universal healthcare! Obamacare sucks because people are not willing to have true universal mandate for healthcare. Obamacare is as close as we could get.
So should hobby lobby be able to discriminate against gays or people who don't share their religion? Why should the religious beliefs of a public business determine what I have rights to? Saying don't work there is like saying if you dot like American then get out. .No! This country and our constitution is built on the idea that we can and will be better. The idea that monopolies and majorities should not rule over others. I respect people's right to believe whatever they want to as an American but this is wrong. This is setting a very bad precident. But now that corporations are people I can't say I'm surprised. Ugh!
-
I guess I just generally struggle with anyone feeling like they are owed something. If Hobby Lobby doesnt offer this then go work at Michaels. Or negotiate more money from Hobby Lobby so that you can afford supplemented insurance coverage.
We are free to work where we want, take whatever medication we want and have whatever beliefs we want. Just like the privately held corporation* is free to pay you what they want, offer what benefits they want, etc. If you dont like them, dont work there.
I will say, I would hope that the cost of insurance at these places should be less than elsewhere since they do not offer all the benefits. Not to imply one could go obtain the contraceptive coverage for the difference because of the corporations ability to negotiate on volumes.
*Actually, I think all corporations should be free to do as they want, but I realize thats a more extreme view.
-
I strongly disagree with the decision and am disappointed in it.
-
@mrs. bird: I have health insurance...I pay $160 every two weeks for coverage...I also have to use the nuva ring for medical reasons...I pay $105 each time I pick it up...I have terrible insurance bc my company is cheap. Because they are cheap they turn a damn good profit, and I have bought stock and benefited from their cheapness which also negatively affects me.
At the end of the day, I still feel that we each make our own decisions and if you need medication that is $100 a month you can find a way to make it work. On $14/hr you can afford $100 a month - just a matter of how you prioritize.
I just fundamentally dont think the government should be involved in these kinds of business decisions.
-
What is the point in having the ACA if there are so many loopholes? My IUD cost $900 including insertion since my plan was "grandfathered."
-
I have learned my lesson in the past, that if I write and erase more than once I probably shouldn't say anything. So instead I'll just say the US healthcare system makes me sad.
-
Admittedly, I don't know much about this situation or the ruling, but I do feel like this is a slippery slope. What's to stop a company from choosing that IVF (just an example) is against their religion after crunching the numbers and realizing how much $$ it's costing them? Or that they don't want to provide health care benefits to same sex partners of employees because homosexuality is against their religion (I'm assuming that's already illegal in states with domestic partnership/ssm laws). I know Hobby Lobby is a strange case because, let's be honest, who really aspires to work at Hobby Lobby, but to all the people saying 'just go work somewhere else', what if this is your dream job, in all ways but the owner of the corporation's religious views?
-
I think it's total crap that employers can have a say in their emploees' medical care and treatment.
-
@Mrs D: I think many potential Hobby Lobby workers aren't in the position to negotiate a higher wage. I'm assuming that someone being hired as a retail sales associate isn't in the position to argue for a more attractive compensation package. Also, if you believe that a corporation is free to pay what it wishes, do you think laws regarding the minimum wage should be disregarded?
-
@lawbee11: Yep, I groaned to myself when I saw who it was
-
Oh no. Words can't accurately describe how I feel about this ruling. I'll just say I'm disgusted and think this is wrong, wrong, wrong.
-
@pinkcupcake: I respect the idea that there is a bare minimum amount one should be paid...but I also think the current minimum wage is above what I think should be the minimum. For the most part I think if you are a valuable enough employee and work hard you will get fairly compensated. I realize I may have an extreme view of things to some people
-
Just curious, for those who like the ruling -- does the fact that Hobby Lobby's retirement plan has millions invested in contraceptive-makers give anyone pause? I'm just curious how they can so strongly morally object to giving women access to contraceptives, but actually investing in them is OK.
ETA: I guess when it costs YOU money, your religion prohibits it, but as long as you're making money God is cool with it.
-
@Mrs D: I absolutely feel that I am owed quality health coverage provided by my employer. Imagine you're a married woman with kids and can only manage to make ends meet by stringing together part time jobs. You work for Hobby Lobby and find out that your birth control is suddenly no longer covered.
So what do you do? Stop having sex with your husband? Just pull and pray? (pun intended) Have more kids that you can't afford? Something tells me Hobby Lobby isn't providing extensive maternity leave or daycare subsidies. Take time off (that you can't afford) to go interview somewhere else?
I'm just really tired of things like birth control being a hot button issue. It is 2014. Why are we still arguing over this stuff like taking it makes you a slut and other people get to judge you for it? In this day and age I believe easy access to birth control is something all women should have.
-
I'm disappointed.
I don't buy the line of reasoning that a corporation can decide what it supports and what it doesn't.
Does that mean a corporation can decide to discriminate against certain groups because they claim its within their religious beliefs, even if that line of discrimination is against federal/state law?
-
@MrsSCB: I find that to be questionable when compared to the argument they just made. However, if the only way for their retirees to capitalize on the profits of the major drug companies is to invest in companies that produce contraceptives then my opinion would be that is their decision to make. (Basically, I dont know who the major contraceptives companies are but if its pfizer and they are taking the good with the bad then so be it.)
Also - I would be interested in knowing if their opinion is opposition to all contraceptives or if they are okay with those which prevent?
However, at the end of the day I still would feel the same about the ruling from the standpoint of "less government involvement is better" - even if it was just that they found a loophole in the system while still keeping their investments.
-
@Mrs D: but where do they draw the line about what medications to cover?? Not everyone can afford medication without prescription coverage, most ppl don't take medication because they want to, it's usually because they NEED it. What about religions that don't believe in treating mental illness? Psych meds are incrediably expensive out of pocket! And I don't think I agree that on $14/ hour you can easily afford $100 in prescriptions each month. Your take home is gonna be about $1,800/month, rent is $1,000, let's say you have equally crappy ins like yours for $320, your car ins is $100, your phone is $50, your electric is $50, you buy food & put gas in your car- we'll call those a combined $200/month because you're frugal, you pay $100 for the budget heating plan each month, now you're down to $20 for your co pays, clothing, entertainment, emergencies, and savings, still haven't picked up your meds because there's no money left to pay for them.
-
@Shutterbug: 99% of the time IVF is not a covered medical procedure. For that reason. Thus, an infertile couple has to make those choices and figure out if they want a car or a baby. It is pretty much a lose-lose situation. Our son was 20K and another baby won't be possible (30K). So we adopt (probably the same cost) or we are one and done. Yes these are choices but it is a terrible thing that any person would have to choose.
Until it is you it is all fine and dandy to be all "you can just quit the job", "you can figure out how to prioritize it". But at some point you are in a life where you don't actually have a choice anymore. I have no way to find 30K to have another baby. It just isn't a possibility. So I get to live with being sad about not having the life that I envision and that IS NOT OK!
-
@ShootingStar: I'm sorry, you wont like my opinion but yes, I guess if you value having sex with your husband you would find a way (condoms, planned parenthoood, full price) to get birth control.
-
@Mrs D: the companies they're invested in make products Hobby Lobby specifically mentioned having a problem with. Either you're morally opposed to Plan B, etc. or you're not. It's pretty simple.
-
@mrs. bird: @Shutterbug: Let's just be happy we live in MA. I'm proud to live in a state that values women's rights so much that IF coverage is mandated.
-
@MrsSCB: Yeah, that's ridiculous and hypocritical.
"Oh, just go to Planned Parenthood." Yep, just how I like my birth control, with a side of harassment from the lifers.
-
@mrbee: @TemperanceBrennan: I also agree with the comparison. This decision, however . . . well,in the words of Ginsburg shortly before her nomination to the Court (in 1993): "Measured motions seem to me right, in the main, for constitutional as well as common law adjudication. Doctrinal limbs too swiftly shaped, experience teaches, may prove unstable."
-
@mrs. bird: I guess I believe the the marketplace draws the line for you. For example, if you decide to cut this and that from your coverage it will eventually make you an undesirable employer. You will not attract quality employees or those you do keep will resent you and not perform well as a result. You then will have to reconsider if it is worth it or not for your business.
Perhaps the fallout from all of this will affect hobby lobby so drastically they will change their minds and offer it. Or perhaps half of their staff will walk out because of it. Either way, its their choice and their problem to deal with the ramifications of it.
-
@mrsjazz: I've been to planned parenthood many times and never have been harassed once.
-
@MrsSCB: Or you're a crooked business man who is using "morally against" to your benefit. As I said before...I'm not opposed either way. If it means they get the gov't out of there business then more power to them.
-
I'm not happy. I fully respect the owners' beliefs about birth control, but I don't see how they are relevant to their employees. Sure, they could just 'work elsewhere,' except that isn't that simple for many people.
I have huge issues with the way rights are being taken away from women. As for those of you who suggested going to Planned Parenthood for cheap contraceptives, well, ours got shut down. The nearest one is a two hour drive.
I just don't understand how we can be simultaneously shutting down centers like planned parenthood, allowing employers to decide on contraceptive choices for their employees, and yet when people get pregnant because they don't have access to affordable birth control, be cutting safety net/welfare/social support programs.
Frankly, this stuff pisses me off, and I feel like we are going backwards.
-
@Mrs D: I used to go to PP for birth control. The one I went to always had protestors. They were nice looking ladies, but handing me pics of aborted babies is what I call harassment. I'm sure it doesn't happen at all PPs but it happens at many. As seen with the ruling in Massachusetts recently revoking the 35ft. buffer zone for protestors.
-
@Mrs D: That experience may change. The Supreme Court also ruled MA's buffer zones illegal. And at ours, before it closed, there were protesters there daily harassing women. It does happen.
-
Hate the ruling. It sets us back in time to the stone ages where men rule supreme and because we are woman, we have no opinion.
There needs to be a separation from religious views and government. I am fairly religious and disagree with what people do based on my religion, but let me make that call for myself and myself only and I in turn will not mandate others to uphold my views as well. This is a free country with a variety of religions and diverse cultures. The ruling will open the doors to other issues but most importantly gender discrimination which I feel this issue violates.
The evangelical aspect has no place in corporations.
-
@BlueWolverine: @MrsSCB: yes and yes to what you guys said. HL are total hypocrits.
To say I’m appalled, but not surprised is putting it mildly. Hobby Lobby is not a religious organization, it is a for-profit privately owned business that suddenly misunderstands how certain birth control methods work after the passage of Obamacare. This has nothing to do with the separation of church and state – Hobby Lobby isn’t a church and isn’t even a religiously affiliated organization.
I also find it laughable (if it was not so infuriating) that many of the same people who want to cut funding for reproductive health, in the same breath argue “can’t women just go to planned parenthood?” How do you expect that to be a viable option if you don’t support funding PP; and, would rather have individual taxpayers funding birth control so that a private corporation doesn’t have to? It always comes back to women being “good girls”. “we don’t want to pay for women to have sex” “if women want to have sex then they should pay for protection” etc. etc. Never a word about MEN’s responsibility. Many of our own mothers faced doctors who wouldn’t prescribe birth control to single women because they thought it would lead to promiscuity. I feel much of that same vibe in these arguments today.
-
@brownie: I totally agree that it's unfair for medical treatments to be excluded from health care coverage just because a company doesn't want to/can't pony up the $$. If I were president IVF coverage would be mandated nationwide. And for the record, I certainly wasn't trying to be flippant about the situation that you're in. I have been through IVF, twice, unsuccessfully, and I know that without my medical insurance I'd be done TTC with nothing to show for it. I'm sorry if my post came off as insensitive.
@ShootingStar: woooorrrrd. I find myself saying 'thank goodness we live in MA' so often.
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite1
292 comments