Federal appeals court rules against Hobby Lobby on contraception

Comments (10)
Raelyn wrote:

Yay! Nice to know the bossman doesn’t own his female employees’ vaginas…

Dec 20, 2012 11:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
wrote:

What an absolutely ridiculous, low class and vulgar response, Raelyn. Hobby Lobby is in the right on this subject and should not have to pay for how someone inappropriately decides to use their body… It is against their religion ; their belief. Period. They have the right NOT to support what they believe is against their religion in their own business. It is against Hobby Lobby’s rights to fine them if they do not agree or comply with such a foolish requirement that the government shouldn’t be involved with in the first place.

Dec 21, 2012 12:10am EST  --  Report as abuse
arttie wrote:

Yahoo! Score one for free thinking. The owners are absolutely breaking the LAW on this one. I’m sure the Green’s are sitting comfortably and not wanting to have to give up ANY of their income to provide for their employees, huh? Maybe they should open a church instead. There’s always plenty of money to be made on ‘God’. And tax free at that!

Dec 21, 2012 2:13am EST  --  Report as abuse
JamVee wrote:

It seems if people who have a job, insist on having unprotected sex, they can afford to buy their own “morning after” pill. Or do they practice unprotected sex like twice a week, in which case, maybe they should get a prescription for a bottle of 100. Come on folks, can’t the individuals be responsible for their own actions, why do I have to pay for their lack of discretion?

Dec 21, 2012 5:57am EST  --  Report as abuse
josie9967 wrote:

It’s a lot cheaper to pay for their lack of discretion than to pay for a resulting pregnancy and birth. If all these religious pro-lifers would take on the responsibility of raising and caring for all these unwanted children instead of demanding that they be born to poor irresponsible parents, the world would be a different place. It’s not the irresponsible parents or the pro-lifer’s that pay the price – it’s the child! Do you really have the right to demand that a child be born under those circumstances? If you do I truly believe you are also responsible to see that the child is properly cared for and educated!

Dec 21, 2012 7:35am EST  --  Report as abuse
Zindelis wrote:

I will add in two comments. One a person does not stop being a Christian (or any faith) because they open up a business, go to work, or do any activity your faith goes with you. The government does not have the right to compel anyone how to worship. When the government forces an owner to do something against his faith they are resticting our right to worship. In the past when employees did not like the benefits offered at one job they took a diffrent job.

On the second note: If a business owner has two employees with simular education, simular work experince, and both on the interview seemed a good fit for the job, but one employee would cost the employeer $5000 more a year which employee do you believe will be hired? This law is an added cost for some employees.

Dec 21, 2012 9:36am EST  --  Report as abuse
jfdjr wrote:

jose, the child pays the price for being born? What price does the child pay for being killed!

Dec 21, 2012 10:38am EST  --  Report as abuse
SKBM wrote:

Hobby Lobby must obey the law exactly as a private citizen must. It’s *entirely* too easy for those who don’t want to provide legally mandated medical coverage for their employees to play the “it’s against my religion” card.

If the Greens don’t want to provide the cited contraceptive care for employees needing/wanting it, they should be prepared not to accept patronage from customers using these methods.

The mistake that many, MANY folks make is in thinking being “anti-abortion” is the same as being “pro-life”. Big difference…HUGE!

Dec 21, 2012 2:22pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ConstFundie wrote:

@Zindelis, An employer has no right to dictate how a person spends their earned work compensation, i.e., whether income or required benefits.

Dec 21, 2012 3:16pm EST  --  Report as abuse
jfdjr wrote:

Why is it that people who hold a principled position must automatically accept responsibility for those who do not? And if the position josie states is that a child pays the price for the irresponsibility of its parents in being born, how much greater is the price the child pays if it is aborted?

And yes, a corporation must obey the law like a private citizen, but the government must also follow the constitution. The constitution allows for the free exercise of religion by citizens. It does not limit the free exercise to corporate worship services. And while the free exercise of religion does not allow putting others in harm, what the Greens are doing is trying to keep people, both children and adults. from harm in the practice of their religion–something that in our current circumstances people should be supportive of.

Dec 21, 2012 5:04pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.