Flat Earth Birth Control
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
It's funny, once you start reading the court opinions/scientific studies/essays instead of just the partisan comments on them, you start seeing just how dumb and sheepish everyone is. The Hobby Lobby opinion actually shifts the cost for birth control to the government/insurance companies rather than the companies themselves and only applies to closely held companies (companies that have (I believe the number is) 15 or less controlling shareholders, mostly family-owned companies). Even then, there has to be evidence of the sincerity of their beliefs to get the exemption, which is a pain to prove in court for anyone trying to skip in on it.
Bottom line is: if you want birth control and work for Hobby Lobby, you can still get it at the same cost to the end person, just the money for it comes from a different source. I will add that there is the slight wrinkle that there's some kind of sign up that's been referred to that makes it annoying, but not really harder.
If you have an issue with this case, the real "bad guy" ideology isn't Christianity or religion in general, but the doctrine of corporate personhood, which causes immense problems in the US, but would cause even worse problems were it to go away. One of the major catch-22s of the current state of law.
Then again, I heard there's an order that went out yesterday that might alter Hobby Lobby a bit, haven't read it yet.
Bottom line is: if you want birth control and work for Hobby Lobby, you can still get it at the same cost to the end person, just the money for it comes from a different source. I will add that there is the slight wrinkle that there's some kind of sign up that's been referred to that makes it annoying, but not really harder.
If you have an issue with this case, the real "bad guy" ideology isn't Christianity or religion in general, but the doctrine of corporate personhood, which causes immense problems in the US, but would cause even worse problems were it to go away. One of the major catch-22s of the current state of law.
Then again, I heard there's an order that went out yesterday that might alter Hobby Lobby a bit, haven't read it yet.
Eh, WGDF works for all sorts of issues, though. Which was why it was controversial, the same issues keep coming up, and keep getting shouted down.RJ 17 said:I still say the whole "Ubisoft thinks female characters are too hard/expensive to make" deal would have been a perfect issue to summon the WGDF for.thaluikhain said:
The ruling basically finds that your employers', sorry that was the wrong word, owners' religious views get to dictate your medical decisions provided you work for a closely held corporation.
Further it is not simply a matter of religion trumping law, but also science. The company's objections were based on the idea that those medicines are aborticants, two of them actually aren't.
However the fact that it was the sincere religious belief of the owners that they were, well, fuck science.
If the regulation they based their decision on provides such a clear favouring of religion it should have failed the establishment clause.
While the judges excluded things like blood transfusions from their ruling, they didn't actually provide any reasoning to back that up. The result being that while their judgement doesn't currently cover that, it is really just one court case away.
This and their ruling on the previous Thursday both basically run on the fact that the justices are religiously opposed to abortion themselves.
The ruling on Thursday found that buffer zones around abortion clinics are unconstitutional. This is despite the fact that abortion doctors and clinic helpers have been murdered.
Meanwhile the buffer zone around the supreme court is 100% A Okay.
One can't really get around the elephant in the room here - it is a case which shows the distinct dangers involved in stocking the supreme court with Catholic conservatives.
Further it is not simply a matter of religion trumping law, but also science. The company's objections were based on the idea that those medicines are aborticants, two of them actually aren't.
However the fact that it was the sincere religious belief of the owners that they were, well, fuck science.
If the regulation they based their decision on provides such a clear favouring of religion it should have failed the establishment clause.
While the judges excluded things like blood transfusions from their ruling, they didn't actually provide any reasoning to back that up. The result being that while their judgement doesn't currently cover that, it is really just one court case away.
This and their ruling on the previous Thursday both basically run on the fact that the justices are religiously opposed to abortion themselves.
The ruling on Thursday found that buffer zones around abortion clinics are unconstitutional. This is despite the fact that abortion doctors and clinic helpers have been murdered.
Meanwhile the buffer zone around the supreme court is 100% A Okay.
One can't really get around the elephant in the room here - it is a case which shows the distinct dangers involved in stocking the supreme court with Catholic conservatives.
Look, I know it's fun to get snarky with outrage over the latest political issue, but even aside from the perspective being provided being drastically oversimplified and in many ways flat out wrong (Someone else already pointed out Hobby Lobby's insurance plan covers 16 different types of birth control, including "the pill" so it's not an "attack on women," especially given that Plan B is over-the-counter and $49.99 at Walgreen's)... I didn't bookmark this comic because I wanted political commentary... I wanted gaming humor. You are free, of course, to run your comic however you want, just be aware it makes me and probably some others less interested in reading it.
I believe that a employer only owes you a paycheck, nothing more. If I had my way, there would be no healthcare or any form of benefits at all, just money plain and simple. Use your money as you see fit, be it on healthcare, contraceptives or whatever you want. (Please don't say I'm anti-women either, as I don't believe men should get anything other than cash either).
After researching each of these forms of contraception, most of them dont seem like 'abortion' even to Christians.erttheking said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrauterine_device. If you look under mechanisms it says it works by preventing fertilization, which according to Christians is the deciding factor if it counts as abortion. So Copper Intrauterine device and IUD (which are both popular forms of contraception) are fine.
Plan B seems fine but at least there may be an argument. It seems to just prevent ovulation and prevent fertilization. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levonorgestrel. Some reports say that it might prevent a fertilized egg from attaching to the uteral wall, but these claims do not seem researched enough. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/health/research/morning-after-pills-dont-block-implantation-science-suggests.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.
Some things I am reading say that ella works similar to RU-486 which is an actual abortion drug and may disrupt the fertilized egg from implantation. But there are conflicting articles on this.
Anyways why are we letting a business decide what is best for an individual?
Plus for more data http://www.ucsfhealth.org/education/conception_how_it_works/ and http://www.unc.edu/news/archives/jun99/wilcox2.htm.
At least from this small sample google search it seems that more than half of fertilized eggs do not implant themselves anyways. Should fertilization really be what defines a fetus if over half will fail to implant? Just throwing more ideas out but is a drug that prevent implantation worse than nature preventing half of all implantations anyways?
Also Hobby Lobby and other companies want to exclude 'Doctor consultation about birth control and contrceptions' from being covered under their insurance. This would mean that doctors would not get paid and the men or woman would need to pay for the doctors time to even talk about contraception! This case is a very slippery slope to many many bad things for all workers.
Not according to actual science.wetfart said:
Hobby Lobby pretty much unilaterally declared that they believe morning after pills to be abortifacient, ignoring the reality that they do exactly nothing to a fertilized egg, that's why they only work on the morning after, between the intercourse and the conception.
Welcome to America- Land of the "Give me everything for free because I said so." Whether it's Viagra, condoms, dental care, birth control, getaways or whatever tickles your fancy, I better get it for free from my boss because I'll be damned if I'm paying for it with my own money.Westaway said:
just wiki'd this
"Practices that have been forbidden by Wahhabi preachers include performing or listening to music, dancing, fortune telling, amulets, television programs (unless religious), smoking, playing backgammon, chess, or cards, drawing human or animal figures, acting in a play or writing fiction (both are considered forms of lying), dissecting cadavers (even in criminal investigations and for the purposes of medical research). Common Muslim practices Wahhabis believe are contrary to Islam include listening to music in praise of Muhammad, praying to God while visiting tombs (including the tomb of Muhammad), celebrating mawlid (birthday of the Prophet) building of minarets or use of ornamentation on or in mosques. The driving of motor vehicles by women is allowed in most countries but Wahhabi-dominated Saudi Arabia."
jesus christ thats... something
"Practices that have been forbidden by Wahhabi preachers include performing or listening to music, dancing, fortune telling, amulets, television programs (unless religious), smoking, playing backgammon, chess, or cards, drawing human or animal figures, acting in a play or writing fiction (both are considered forms of lying), dissecting cadavers (even in criminal investigations and for the purposes of medical research). Common Muslim practices Wahhabis believe are contrary to Islam include listening to music in praise of Muhammad, praying to God while visiting tombs (including the tomb of Muhammad), celebrating mawlid (birthday of the Prophet) building of minarets or use of ornamentation on or in mosques. The driving of motor vehicles by women is allowed in most countries but Wahhabi-dominated Saudi Arabia."
jesus christ thats... something
I'm going to say something very controversial. It's sad that the Supreme Court would rule in favor of this, but I'm not surprised corporations would fight for this stance. It's what corporations do: if there are corners to be cut, they'll cut them all and cut some more just to be on the safe side.
But, it comes down to, what I believe, personal responsibility. Yes, there are many, many exceptions to the rule, but for the most part, the parties in question should practice safe sex in order to avoid these types of situations. Yes, lots of individuals find it difficult to afford birth control methods, but maybe it brings up another question whether relationships should be based solely or heavily on sex. True love should go beyond sex and just spending time with one another should just be pleasant all by itself.
And yes, there is the religion thing. I want to give the benefit of the doubt and say that religious groups have the right to exercise a certain freedom as entailed in the constitution, but there will always those who will game the system and abuse it. It's very sad, but we have to hope courts know the difference between freedom of religion and using religion to exploit it.
But, it comes down to, what I believe, personal responsibility. Yes, there are many, many exceptions to the rule, but for the most part, the parties in question should practice safe sex in order to avoid these types of situations. Yes, lots of individuals find it difficult to afford birth control methods, but maybe it brings up another question whether relationships should be based solely or heavily on sex. True love should go beyond sex and just spending time with one another should just be pleasant all by itself.
And yes, there is the religion thing. I want to give the benefit of the doubt and say that religious groups have the right to exercise a certain freedom as entailed in the constitution, but there will always those who will game the system and abuse it. It's very sad, but we have to hope courts know the difference between freedom of religion and using religion to exploit it.
Which in no way changes the larger controversy because the door has been opened on those other coverages.wetfart said:
However, as Hobby Lobby is invested in companies that make such "abortion" causing drugs, it's hard to say they have any good faith argument for their principles.
They're invested in and profiting on abortion.
Because JAYSUS.
This isn't about the legality of abortion, but whether or not someone should be required to follow a law that's against their religious beliefs or subsudise something against their religious beliefs.erttheking said:
And until now, the answer has been overwhelmingly "yes." Mormons can't just have multiple child brides because of their religious beliefs. Quakers can't refuse to pay taxes because of their anti-war stance and unwillingness to participate in, fund, or support a war, and it's probably best to classify Muslim rights related to belief as a can of worms unto itself.
Granted, if this weren't about abortion specifically and Christians specifically, it wouldn't have gone anywhere, but that's the problem.
RJ 17 said:
Yeah, but who needs WGDF when this sort of thing is around?thaluikhain said:
Yep. And this isn't about religious freedom. It's about saving money. Period.
It's called health insurance, ever heard of it?Westaway said:
You don't like Hobby Lobby's owners religious beliefs DON'T WORK FOR THEM!erttheking said:
And even more important don't shop there! if they get a loss of income they will change quick enough.
I'm going to assume you know how sex works, which makes me question why the need for plan B or other such drugs would lead to necessarily "heavy" dependence on sex. You don't need to have a lot of sex to need plan B, after all. People get pregnant their first time having sex, and all it takes it one broken, misapplied, or lost (it does happen) condom for the need to arise.Burnouts3s3 said:
And if you want to talk responsibility, is it responsible for them to still provide coverage for viagra?
It isn't. But neither is getting the sniffles. So what?Westaway said:
They're all issues pertaining to health.
Why do they cover pain killers? You can get them in stores.