And SCOTUS gives Obammy ANOTHER big **** you!

[olevetonahill]

Breaking News:
Supreme Court finds for Hobby Lobby in birth-control case

[olevetonahill]

http://news.yahoo.com/justices-cant-employers-cover-contraception-141923713--finance.html

[Boomer.....]

Good!

[Skysooner]

You know I don't really care so much about the birth control thing, but I think this is another slippery slope by saying that non-religious corporations have religious freedom. This is about as bad as the stupid ruling (can't remember the name now) that allowed corporations to basically usurp the political process with virtually unlimited funding to political candidates. Just takes the little guy out of the governing of this country even more.

[okie52]

You know I don't really care so much about the birth control thing, but I think this is another slippery slope by saying that non-religious corporations have religious freedom. This is about as bad as the stupid ruling (can't remember the name now) that allowed corporations to basically usurp the political process with virtually unlimited funding to political candidates. Just takes the little guy out of the governing of this country even more.

Citizens United...

I don't care if they choose to not mandate BC as a medical coverage under Obamacare....but I'd also be happy if the government was handing out free BC on every corner.

[Skysooner]

Citizens United...

I don't care if they choose to not mandate BC as a medical coverage under Obamacare....but I'd also be happy if the government was handing out free BC on every corner.

Thanks and you and I totally agree on the free BC on every corner.

[badger]

I found the initial Obamacare SCOTUS ruling calling it a tax questionable, so perhaps this is in realization that the original Obamacare ruling was maybe not such a good idea and dialing back the mess that has happened since.

On a sidenote, I find the liberal trifecta of women on SCOTUS very cookie cutter bland. They always have the same opinions, they always vote the same way... maybe Obama should have appointed a different "wise latina." Lockstep liberalism among Democrat president appointees is predictable on SCOTUS though, I guess, whether it's chicks on the bench or guys

[Soonerjeepman]

EXCELLENT...

having sex is a choice...so it should be up to the person to choose bc or not. Not up to the gov to force a company to provide it.

[badger]

having sex is a choice

Not always. If a girl is raped, she will want emergency contraception if she wasn't already on regular birth control. The cost is about $50 for a single pill. However, it is readily available without a prescription and you don't have to be an adult to purchase it.

It is up for debate whether the "Plan B" pill is abortion-inducing, so Hobby Lobby doesn't want to provide it.

[olevetonahill]

Not always. If a girl is raped, she will want emergency contraception if she wasn't already on regular birth control. The cost is about $50 for a single pill. However, it is readily available without a prescription and you don't have to be an adult to purchase it.

It is up for debate whether the "Plan B" pill is abortion-inducing, so Hobby Lobby doesn't want to provide it.

Badj, Being RAPED aint having sex!

[badger]

Badj, Being RAPED aint having sex!

Just to be sure I just dictionary'd it --- it's defined as forced sex by Merriam-Webster and others.

If there's any cause for alarm with this ruling it's that it involves healthcare coverage, which is often more expensive for women than men. Ah well, I guess it comes out even when you boys need to spend $10 a pill.

[virginiasooner]

I am sure that everyone here is aware that Hobby Lobby's inventory is manufactured in The People's Republic of China -- where forced abortions are common and birth control is mandatory. Not to mention that Hobby Lobby pensions are invested in pharmaceutical companies that manufacture birth control. Hobby Lobby's hypocrisy is mind-numbing.

[jkjsooner]

I found the initial Obamacare SCOTUS ruling calling it a tax questionable


I didn't find that questionable. It was the exact argument I made over and over and was an argument most legal scholars dismissed.

A mandate with a fee for not having insurance is no different than a tax increase and a credit for having insurance. Clearly it's been well established that the government can influence behavior via tax policy.

Maybe some disagree because the wording wasn't exactly this way but at least from a net result perspective it was the same.

[REDREX]

I am sure that everyone here is aware that Hobby Lobby's inventory is manufactured in The People's Republic of China -- where forced abortions are common and birth control is mandatory. Not to mention that Hobby Lobby pensions are invested in pharmaceutical companies that manufacture birth control. Hobby Lobby's hypocrisy is mind-numbing.---How do you know where Hobby Lobby makes investments?----The only thing "mind numbing" is your comment

[badger]

---How do you know where Hobby Lobby makes investments?

Mother Jones. (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers)

There's a bit more gray area to the pharmaceutical thing though... mutual funds aren't direct investments like stocks, but investing in a diversified group of companies simultaneously to reduce risk, if I'm not mistaken.

There's less gray area with the product suppliers, especially if you're a company as large as Hobby Lobby. Chinese goods are becoming more expensive though, so perhaps they'll move manufacturing to an even more oppressive country :(

[virginiasooner]

---How do you know where Hobby Lobby makes investments?----The only thing "mind numbing" is your comment

Nothing to say on forced abortions or MANDATORY birth control?

[virginiasooner]

Mother Jones. (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers)

There's a bit more gray area to the pharmaceutical thing though... mutual funds aren't direct investments like stocks, but investing in a diversified group of companies simultaneously to reduce risk, if I'm not mistaken.

There's less gray area with the product suppliers, especially if you're a company as large as Hobby Lobby. Chinese goods are becoming more expensive though, so perhaps they'll move manufacturing to an even more oppressive country :(

As you say, Hobby Lobby is a big company -- big enough to pick and choose which mutual funds to invest in that don't contradict their belief system. And there are mutual funds out there who cater to those beliefs.

[REDREX]

First of all it does not all come from China------As far as forced abortions or birth control that is a gov't policy------Maybe we should not deal with any country that has Sharia law----or Mexico that is controlled by the drug lords------ Just because a business is in a country does not mean that it agrees with everything the Gov't does-----Or has any chance to change it----------Maybe you should read something besides Mother Jones or the daily Kos

[badger]

First of all it does not all come from China------As far as forced abortions or birth control that is a gov't policy------Maybe we should not deal with any country that has Sharia law----or Mexico that is controlled by the drug lords------ Just because a business is in a country does not mean that it agrees with everything the Gov't does-----Or has any chance to change it----------Maybe you should read something besides Mother Jones or the daily Kos

Ideologically, there is one reason or another to not deal with any country except the United States... hey! Not a bad idea! Bring manufacturing home again :)

[olevetonahill]

Nothing to say on forced abortions or MANDATORY birth control?

Ill say it WGAS? Thats Chink land Not here.This is about forcing a company to do something HERE against their will/ Not Over Yonder!

[8timechamps]

As you say, Hobby Lobby is a big company -- big enough to pick and choose which mutual funds to invest in that don't contradict their belief system. And there are mutual funds out there who cater to those beliefs.

Hobby Lobby isn't mandated to offer their employees a 401(k) program, it's an option they choose to make available. The issue here is that Hobby Lobby doesn't want the government mandating something that they feel opposes their religious beliefs. Retirement plans don't do that, and trying to find a fund that has 0.30% holding in a company that owns a company that makes an abortion pill, seems like a reach.

I don't manage Hobby Lobby's qualified plan holdings, but I do manage companies close in size. In my 25+ years in this industry, I've never seen an a la cart plan made available to a mid size company. They get options, but it's typically "do you want this plan with 35 fund, this plan with 40 funds or this plan with 45 funds"? Employers typically offer the best available plan for everyone. But the don't get to build a plan specifically with the funds they want. If that's the kind of plan they want, then they wouldn't be offering a 401(k) at all.

What I find kind of funny with this "Landmark Case" is that the ruling will affect nearly nobody. Most companies aren't going to purposly try to make their plans look less inclusive (as a good retirement plan is a draw to future employees). The IBMs, McKesson's, Proctor & Gambel's of the world aren't going to lose a minute of sleep over this. This helps the small companies, the companies that weave their religious beliefs into the fabric of their business. They're the one's who win. It doesn't really "hurt" anyone.

[TitoMorelli]

I am sure that everyone here is aware that Hobby Lobby's inventory is manufactured in The People's Republic of China -- where forced abortions are common and birth control is mandatory. Not to mention that Hobby Lobby pensions are invested in pharmaceutical companies that manufacture birth control. Hobby Lobby's hypocrisy is mind-numbing.

This line of argument absolutely reeks of sore loser-ism.

[TAFBSooner]

I found the initial Obamacare SCOTUS ruling calling it a tax questionable, so perhaps this is in realization that the original Obamacare ruling was maybe not such a good idea and dialing back the mess that has happened since.

On a sidenote, I find the liberal trifecta of women on SCOTUS very cookie cutter bland. They always have the same opinions, they always vote the same way... maybe Obama should have appointed a different "wise latina." Lockstep liberalism among Democrat president appointees is predictable on SCOTUS though, I guess, whether it's chicks on the bench or guys

Umm, the vote was 5 Catholic men against the rest* of SCOTUS. Who's in lockstep?

*One Catholic woman and three Jews.

[okie52]

I am sure that everyone here is aware that Hobby Lobby's inventory is manufactured in The People's Republic of China -- where forced abortions are common and birth control is mandatory. Not to mention that Hobby Lobby pensions are invested in pharmaceutical companies that manufacture birth control. Hobby Lobby's hypocrisy is mind-numbing.

Sounds like you missed your midol.

[olevetonahill]

Sounds like you missed your midol.

Im only enjoying this cause Obammy gets his PeePee slapped in the dirt again. Othere than that I really dint care one way er the other. For the Life of me I cant understand the Outrage at Hobby Lobby for something the Gov, TRIED to do and The SCOTUS naw dont do that.

If it dont affect you or yours then why hell do you care. If its that big a Deal that yer Hos get BC then Yer Tribe should all band together and Buy em some!

[badger]

Umm, the vote was 5 Catholic men against the rest* of SCOTUS. Who's in lockstep?

*One Catholic woman and three Jews.

I'm talking about the three women always having the same opinion, always voting the same way. Is this truly representative of women in this country? Hardly. Weren't they adding more women to the Supreme Court to improve diversity? When they lockstep to the same conclusion without fail every damn decision, it's pathetic

[olevetonahill]

Badj they aint really addin wimmen they just addin Hard Left Libs in dresses

[TAFBSooner]

I'm talking about the three women always having the same opinion, always voting the same way. Is this truly representative of women in this country? Hardly. Weren't they adding more women to the Supreme Court to improve diversity? When they lockstep to the same conclusion without fail every damn decision, it's pathetic

You're looking at one side of the fact that SCOTUS is now a political branch of government. (The other side is the five male Catholics that, SURPRISE, voted against birth control.) Both sides use the fear of losing clout on the Court to whip up support for their POTUS candidates.

You want diversity of opinion among womeon on SCOTUS? Pressure the next Republican candidate for POTUS to appoint a conservative woman to the Court. I hear there are binders full of them. Here's hoping he (and you know it will be a he) won't get the chance.

[8timechamps]

Here's a fact that most of the folks, speaking out against this ruling, are missing:

Hobby Lobby covers 16 types of birth control under their health plan. They won the right to not cover 4 that they deemed went against their religious beliefs.

How in the hell does that equate to this:

http://newsbusters.org/sites/default/files/2013/jimmywilliamstweet.JPG

EDIT: I'm not "Following" Jimmy Willaims (surprise, and MSNBC contributor), I just copied the image from this (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kristine-marsh/2014/06/30/three-biggest-lies-liberals-spread-about-hobby-lobby-ruling?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Marketing&utm_term=Facebook&utm_content=socialflow&utm_campaign=lies-hobbylobby) site.

[badger]

I agree that tweet is taking it to an extreme. In seeking a more moderate/conservative woman's input on the decision, I'd love it if someone asked Sandra Day O'Connor how she would have voted... my guess is she's enjoying retirement though, and deservedly so.

This may not be an end-all decision. SCOTUS once said separate but equal but then realized separate is never equal. There is also the possibility that Congress may create new laws regarding contraceptives.

Another note on the SCOTUS women: Unless I'm mistaken, only Ruth has children and is (or has been) married. Sonia and Elena don't. I doubt that even represents two-third of Democratic women, let alone all women in the U.S. O'Connor was married and had three sons I think.

[Skysooner]

I could see this case morphing into something if/when same sex marriage becomes the law of the land. Can these same closely held corporations not give medical plans to the spouses of employees if they offer it to different sex married couples? As long as they keep it common sense and only limit it to the medicines they objected to then I have no real problem with it.

[badger]

I could see this case morphing into something if/when same sex marriage becomes the law of the land. Can these same closely held corporations not give medical plans to the spouses of employees if they offer it to different sex married couples? As long as they keep it common sense and only limit it to the medicines they objected to then I have no real problem with it.

It probably won't be an issue till the couples get older. Old people medicine costs a lot of money.