Print Page | Close Window

Hobby Lobby Wins Ruling on Birth Control

Printed From: Black Hair Media Forum
Category: Lets Talk
Forum Name: Talk, Talk, and More Talk
Forum Description: In this Forum, the talk is about everything that can be talked about.
URL: http://Forum.BlackHairMedia.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=371964
Printed Date: Dec 12 2018 at 3:27pm


Topic: Hobby Lobby Wins Ruling on Birth Control
Posted By: PurplePhase
Subject: Hobby Lobby Wins Ruling on Birth Control
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:24pm
Supreme Court rules in favor of Hobby Lobby in birth-control mandate case


The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that business owners can object on religious grounds to a provision of President Barack Obama's healthcare law that requires closely held private companies to provide health insurance that covers birth control.

In a 5-4 vote on ideological lines, the justices said that such companies can seek an exemption from the so-called birth control mandate of the law known as Obamacare. The decision, which applies only to companies owned by a small number of individuals, means employees of those companies will have to obtain certain forms of birth control from other sources.

Hundreds of demonstrators on both side of one of the most contentious cases of the Supreme Court term converged on the court building, wearing costumes, chanting and carrying signs. Some demonstrators chanted, "Keep your boardroom out of my bedroom" and "Separate church and state, women must decide their fate." Signs carried by demonstrators offered contrasting views: "Obamacare - religious liberty First Amendment outlawed," "I am the pro-life generation," and "Birth control not my boss's business." One man dressed up as a copy of the Bible, brandishing a sign saying, "Use me not for your bigotry."

In a majority opinion by conservative Justice Samuel Alito, the court said the ruling applies only to the birth control mandate and does not mean companies would necessarily succeed if they made similar claims to other insurance requirements, such as vaccinations and blood transfusions.

In the majority opinion, Alito indicated that employees could still be able to obtain the birth control coverage via an expansion of an accommodation to the mandate that the Obama administration has already introduced for religious-affiliated nonprofits. The accommodation allows health insurance companies to provide the coverage without the employer being involved in the process.

Under the accommodation, eligible non-profits must provide a "self certification", described by one lower court judge as a "permission slip" authorizing insurance companies to provide the coverage. The accommodation is itself the subject of a separate legal challenge.

The government’s accommodation is “less restrictive than requiring employers to fund contraceptive methods that violate their religious beliefs," Alito wrote.

GINSBURG DISSENT

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a dissenting opinion on behalf of the liberal wing of the court.

"In a decision of startling breadth, the court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law ... they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs," she wrote.

The justices ruled for the first time that for-profit companies can make claims under a 1993 federal law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

One of the two cases was brought by arts-and-crafts retailer Hobby Lobby Stores Ltd, which is owned and operated by David and Barbara Green and their children, who are evangelical Christians. The other case was brought by Norman and Elizabeth Hahn, Mennonites who own Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp in Pennsylvania.

None of the companies that have objected are publicly traded companies. Hobby Lobby has around 13,000 full-time employees while Conestoga Wood has 950.

The decision will affect similar cases brought by employers around the country. There are 49 cases in total, according to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. Religious institutions are already exempt from the requirement.

The company owners involved in litigation around the country do not all oppose every type of birth control. Some, including Hobby Lobby and Conestoga, object only to emergency contraceptive methods, such as Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd's Plan B morning-after pill, and ella, made by the Watson Pharma unit of Actavis PLC.

THE WHITE HOUSE REACTS

The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that some business owners are not required to provide birth control coverage to employees puts women's health at risk, the White House said on Monday, and called on Congress to make contraception widely available.

"Today's decision jeopardizes the health of women who are employed by these companies," White House spokesman Josh Earnest said at a briefing.

"We will work with Congress to make sure that any women affected by this decision will still have the same coverage of vital health services as everyone else," he said.

Earnest urged Congress to act to ensure that contraceptive care is widely available and said President Barack Obama would consider whether he can act on his own to ensure such coverage is available to all women.



The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday ruled that business owners can object on religious grounds to a provision of President Barack Obama's healthcare law that requires closely held private companies to provide health insurance that covers birth control.

In a 5-4 vote on ideological lines, the justices said that such companies can seek an exemption from the so-called birth control mandate of the law known as Obamacare. The decision, which applies only to companies owned by a small number of individuals, means employees of those companies will have to obtain certain forms of birth control from other sources.

Hundreds of demonstrators on both side of one of the most contentious cases of the Supreme Court term converged on the court building, wearing costumes, chanting and carrying signs. Some demonstrators chanted, "Keep your boardroom out of my bedroom" and "Separate church and state, women must decide their fate." Signs carried by demonstrators offered contrasting views: "Obamacare - religious liberty First Amendment outlawed," "I am the pro-life generation," and "Birth control not my boss's business." One man dressed up as a copy of the Bible, brandishing a sign saying, "Use me not for your bigotry."

In a majority opinion by conservative Justice Samuel Alito, the court said the ruling applies only to the birth control mandate and does not mean companies would necessarily succeed if they made similar claims to other insurance requirements, such as vaccinations and blood transfusions.

In the majority opinion, Alito indicated that employees could still be able to obtain the birth control coverage via an expansion of an accommodation to the mandate that the Obama administration has already introduced for religious-affiliated nonprofits. The accommodation allows health insurance companies to provide the coverage without the employer being involved in the process.

Under the accommodation, eligible non-profits must provide a "self certification", described by one lower court judge as a "permission slip" authorizing insurance companies to provide the coverage. The accommodation is itself the subject of a separate legal challenge.

The government’s accommodation is “less restrictive than requiring employers to fund contraceptive methods that violate their religious beliefs," Alito wrote.

GINSBURG DISSENT

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a dissenting opinion on behalf of the liberal wing of the court.

"In a decision of startling breadth, the court holds that commercial enterprises, including corporations, along with partnerships and sole proprietorships, can opt out of any law ... they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs," she wrote.

The justices ruled for the first time that for-profit companies can make claims under a 1993 federal law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA).

One of the two cases was brought by arts-and-crafts retailer Hobby Lobby Stores Ltd, which is owned and operated by David and Barbara Green and their children, who are evangelical Christians. The other case was brought by Norman and Elizabeth Hahn, Mennonites who own Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp in Pennsylvania.

None of the companies that have objected are publicly traded companies. Hobby Lobby has around 13,000 full-time employees while Conestoga Wood has 950.

The decision will affect similar cases brought by employers around the country. There are 49 cases in total, according to the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. Religious institutions are already exempt from the requirement.

The company owners involved in litigation around the country do not all oppose every type of birth control. Some, including Hobby Lobby and Conestoga, object only to emergency contraceptive methods, such as Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd's Plan B morning-after pill, and ella, made by the Watson Pharma unit of Actavis PLC.




Replies:
Posted By: ThoughtCouture
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:36pm
disappointing.  they are also closed on sundays so that their workers can worship. 


Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:46pm
yes. And they also had to be called on it before they started carring Jewish themed items. I don't like them.


Posted By: ThoughtCouture
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:47pm
oh wow i didn't know that.  hmmmmm...i may have to revisit my shopping there. 


Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:47pm
when asked by customer about why they didn't have items the response was 'we don't cater to you people.'


Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:48pm
it is a privately owned company though and the owners are Christian so it's well w/in their rights to sell what they want I guess, but I can exercise my right too. I'm sure they won't miss my $ though lol. They do well.


Posted By: ThoughtCouture
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:50pm
samone i am always in there as well.  besides the craft stuff... they have the best lil nick knacks up in there.  sigh.


Posted By: tatee
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:55pm
Originally posted by PurplePhase PurplePhase wrote:

when asked by customer about why they didn't have items the response was 'we don't cater to you people.'


oh!


Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:56pm
Originally posted by ThoughtCouture ThoughtCouture wrote:

oh wow i didn't know that.  hmmmmm...i may have to revisit my shopping there. 

everything has been smoothed over now . But I was surprised that the home office  even had a response for that question when asked. Almost like the company knew they were discriminating and it wasn't just a case of not selling items in the stores because there was no demand.


Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:57pm
Originally posted by SamoneLenior SamoneLenior wrote:


I am in hobby lobby every week :(

I would be too if they didn't make me so mad LOL


Posted By: kfoxx1998
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:58pm
I stopped shopping there as soon as this suit was announced.  IDK if Michaels and Joanne Fabric have similar ideology but since HL's position was pretty public I heard about it fast.  Fck them and their sales.  I hope this gets enough press for ppl to stop shopping there and help them close their doors.   


Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 4:58pm
^^HL is much closer than Micheal's.


Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 5:02pm
Originally posted by kfoxx1998 kfoxx1998 wrote:

I stopped shopping there as soon as this suit was announced.  IDK if Michaels and Joanne Fabric have similar ideology but since HL's position was pretty public I heard about it fast.  Fck them and their sales.  I hope this gets enough press for ppl to stop shopping there and help them close their doors.   

yeah I've been looking into Micheals policies too just to make sure they aren't as bad.


Posted By: MizzAmirah
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 6:13pm
I hope all their employees get pregnant at the same time and call off.........during the holidays. 


Posted By: JamCaygirl
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 6:20pm
I wanna say something about the things people choose to boycott over, but Imma keep my mouth shut LOL


Posted By: ThoughtCouture
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 6:22pm
nah go on and type it with ya chest jam.LOL


Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 6:24pm
I protested a business  because they didn't allow men to wear earrings.

I can't stand men in earrings for me personally  .


Posted By: JamCaygirl
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 6:51pm
trying to move on...today is a new day, and  that thread was unnecessarily long


Posted By: purple.chuckz
Date Posted: Jun 30 2014 at 7:40pm
Those hypocrites have no problem making money off of companies that manufacture BC.

This according to  http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers" rel="nofollow - Mother Jones’ Molly Redden :

Documents filed with the Department of Labor and dated December 2012 (see above)—three months after the company’s owners  http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2013/2013_13_354" rel="nofollow - filed their lawsuit —show that the Hobby Lobby 401(k) employee retirement plan held more than $73 million in mutual funds with investments in companies that produce emergency contraceptive pills, intrauterine devices, and drugs commonly used in abortions. Hobby Lobby makes large matching contributions to this company-sponsored 401(k).


The following is a summation of the companies manufacturing these products that are held by the Hobby Lobby employee retirement plan, as set forth by  http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/hobby-lobby-retirement-plan-invested-emergency-contraception-and-abortion-drug-makers" rel="nofollow - Ms. Redden’s remarkable reporting :

These companies include Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, which makes  http://www.tevapharm.com/Products/Pages/Womens-Health.aspx" rel="nofollow - Plan B  and  http://www.tevapharm.com/Products/Pages/Womens-Health.aspx" rel="nofollow - ParaGard , a copper IUD, and  http://www.forbes.com/companies/actavis/" rel="nofollow - Actavis   http://www.forbes.com/companies/actavis/" rel="nofollow - http://www.forbes.com/companies/pfizer/" rel="nofollow - http://www.forbes.com/companies/astrazeneca/" rel="nofollow - http://www.forbes.com/companies/aetna/" rel="nofollow -



Posted By: PurplePhase
Date Posted: Jul 01 2014 at 5:12pm
Kfoxx, did you see this?






Posted By: naturesgift
Date Posted: Jul 01 2014 at 5:55pm
Originally posted by ThoughtCouture ThoughtCouture wrote:


disappointing.  they are also closed on sundays so that their workers can worship. 
Ive always thought this was great! who want to work on Sunday's?


Posted By: Tbaby
Date Posted: Jul 01 2014 at 8:11pm
Hobby lobby only objected to morning after pills and IUDs--not all forms of birth control.  I'm not seeing what the big outrage this is.  If a woman really wants to get either of these items its not going to break her financially to get them on her own.  It would be different if HB said they wouldn't cover out of wedlock prenatal care or something like that.  Save the outrage for things that really matter....


Posted By: jonesable
Date Posted: Jul 01 2014 at 9:54pm
A white older man whose opinions I usually like and respect just said Hobby Lobby and the courts decision is worse than Plessy.

Why did he feel the need to compare? And since he did I'm annoyed


Posted By: nitabug
Date Posted: Jul 01 2014 at 10:00pm
Originally posted by Tbaby Tbaby wrote:

Hobby lobby only objected to morning after pills and IUDs--not all forms of birth control.  I'm not seeing what the big outrage this is.  If a woman really wants to get either of these items its not going to break her financially to get them on her own.  It would be different if HB said they wouldn't cover out of wedlock prenatal care or something like that.  Save the outrage for things that really matter....
the only Non hormonal BC is one of the iud's and this does really matter.


Posted By: Gkisses
Date Posted: Jul 01 2014 at 10:07pm
Yet these companies dont mind their insurance covering male enhancement drugs and penis pumps.


Posted By: JasmineE02
Date Posted: Jul 02 2014 at 6:59am
Originally posted by Tbaby Tbaby wrote:

Hobby lobby only objected to morning after pills and IUDs--not all forms of birth control.  I'm not seeing what the big outrage this is.  If a woman really wants to get either of these items its not going to break her financially to get them on her own.  It would be different if HB said they wouldn't cover out of wedlock prenatal care or something like that.  Save the outrage for things that really matter....

Dig deeper.  This case wasn't only about birth control.  It was about giving a closely held corporation, a strictly for profit entity, religious freedom.  Not people...a corporation.  That is terrifying.  

People forget that benefits are not a gift that employers give to their employees.  It's a part of their paycheck.  Back in the day, it was hard to give bigger paychecks to employees, so they enticed job hunters with benefits like healthcare.  This is really the equivalent of your boss telling you what you can and can't do with your money.  This has nothing to do with what a woman can and can't afford.   This will have some deep repercussions.     



Print Page | Close Window