-
Here's what I think is interesting: This law is not even intended to target religious organizations. It's intended to WIDEN access to health care to the American public. There is even a specific exemption in the law for religious organizations! It gives them an out by which they can stay true to their faith -- IF they are truly a religious organization and meet what I believe is a very fair four-pronged test. But because this test is perceived as too narrow by not allowing just about anybody to claim themselves as a religious organization -- whether they actively inculcate the tenets of their faith or merely sell crappy picture frames and art supplies and maybe some Jesus stickers -- people are claiming that the government is actually PERSECUTING CORPORATIONS for their beliefs.
I mean... I just... I can't.
-
@ladyfingers: what is the test? are churches exempt? because I heard many aren't but I don't really know.
-
@Mrs. Pen: Churches should be exempt, I believe. The test is:
1. The goal of your organization is to spread your faith
2. You primarily serve people of your faith
3. You primarily employ people of your faith
4. You have federal non-profit statusETA I think this lays it out very well:
-
@Mrs. Jacks: The Catholic Church never argued that a seven month old fetus is not a person. The legal defense of a Catholic Hospital (not the Catholic Church) argued that Colorado state law does not recognize a fetus as a person. This is a statement of fact. They made no argument as to whether a fetus actually is a person
@turtledoves @yoursilverlining: How does refusal to pay for something one finds to be morally abhorrent constitute an imposition upon others? The employees still have access to birth control. Hobby Lobby preventing them from purchasing birth control by refusing to pay for something that anyone can buy for less than $10 per month.
It really is sad that people fail to recognize that they are compromising the primacy of their own conscience rights by supporting this type of infringement on First Amendment liberties.
-
@Zuzu2and11: when the government says a person is entitled to it for free, and a corporation refuses to give it for free, they are not giving the people their American rights.
So, yes they can buy it from anywhere but, why should they have to? Why can they not receive the same rights as all other employees?
Is it because they work for a church? Nope! They work for Hobby Lobby. Who mind you, is not a legal "religious organization" and thus is not exempt from this law. -
@turtledoves: I understand what the law says. The simple fact that the Federal government imposes a law does not make it moral, rational, or constitutional. The government does not define rights. The Constitution does that.
I think the claim that it is a fundamental right of all people to force others to pay for their birth control is a stretch.
-
@Zuzu2and11: it is the employee's right that his/her employer FOLLOW the law of the country they live in (is what I meant but may not have clearly relayed).
-
@turtledoves: That is why the law is being challenged in court by dozens of entities.
-
@Zuzu2and11: K
good chat, ladies!
-
Wow, very heated! I agree with the anti-Hobby Lobby camp, for the record. I boycot Chick-fil-a for the same reasons.
This is why I should just move to Canada.
-
@Mrs. Pen: I couldn't help myself, sorry:)
Seriously though, I think it s such a slippery slope and I don't think we should get to pick and choose which laws we want to abide by based our individual perception of morality.
-
The thing that bothers me the most is that Hobby Lobby is calling this "civil disobedience." Please just look up instances of civil disobedience in the United States. Civil disobedience takes place when there is no other way to advocate for your group - a group that typically has no voice and usually is being persecuted. I would hardly call a large corporation like Hobby Lobby "persecuted," and they have SO many other ways to use their millions to advocate for their beliefs - ways that are not to the detriment of their many employees. Heck, at least Chick-Fil-A supported their beliefs legally!
-
@Mrs. Pen: Most people are forced to support things they are morally against. Do any of your tax dollars go to support things/actions/organizations you are morally against? Mine certainly do; but I still have to pay my taxes, in full, because that's that law.
Not complying with a law is not what freedom of religion means; and being held to comply with laws is not persecution of any kind. Sorry.
@Zuzu2and11: Plan B is actually not less than $10 a month. It's about $50 to purchase over the counter; which is a fair amount of money to a lot of people. If you (generic you, not you-you) refuse to comply with parts of laws/regulations because you are morally opposed to parts of them and create a financial burden for someone else; then yes, I think that's imposing your beliefs on someone else. I'm not sure what you mean when you say that governments do not define rights; governments do define our legal rights - rights to marry, property rights among many, many other rights are legally defined by the government.
-
@yoursilverlining: You can get Plan B for free at Planned Parenthood and most health clinics, but it is an emergency contraceptive anyway so it shouldn't be a regular expense. Choosing to take part in a voluntary, high risk activity and forcing others to subsidize it seems like a pretty dramatic abdication of personal responsibility.
The fundamental rights defined in the Constitution are not contingent on legislation. The government has no power to institute laws that contradict these protections (in this case the First Amendment).
-
@Zuzu2and11: What about having to take Plan B makes the person automatically have been involved in voluntary, high risk activity? It isn't always consensual sex that results in the taking of Plan B. It isn't about personal responsibility, it's about working for a company that is refusing to give it's female employees the same rights as employees across the street at company x,y,z.
-
@Bookworm: Plan B is free at hospitals in the event of non-consensual sexual activity.
Every employer in the US offering identical health benefits packages is not a right, and is not mandated by the ACA.
-
@TurtleDoves: couldn't of said it better
-
Adding Hobby Lobby to my boycott list: Check.
-
The weird thing to me is:
1. The Catholic Church isn't opposed to the pill because its an abortifacient (though many Catholics have that problem with it.) it's opposed because it is contraception. Which is why condoms aren't ok but taking the pill for health reasons like endometriosis is.
2. The vast majority of other Protestant denominations do not believe contraception, including the pill, is a sin. A few small sects might, but the vast majority don't.
3. If a company opposes every abortifacient, I hope they are also fighting against prescription strength aleve.
4. The Catholic Church believes health care is a human right and has supported health care reform.
My point is this is largely an invented issue, much more about politics than religion. As a Catholic, I had some issue with the original mandate, but was thoroughly disappointed in Dolan's response to the compromise.
-
@ladyfingers: @Mrs. Pen: The test would exempt most churches. The problem is that organizations like Catholic Charities, Catholic schools, and Catholic hospitals do not meet that test. (They fail #2 in ladyfingers' list.)
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite0
59 comments