Flat Earth Birth Control

[Silverbeard]

Hell, mates, the best contraceptive is not to fuck everything that moves. One doesn't have to convert to Wahabbi Islam to know this. There's a certain irony in people wanting to knock each other up and then throwing a fit when someone else refuses to protect them from the consequences.

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

I'm not sure I understand enough about this issue to give an educated opinion, but I'd just like to say that so-called "pro-life" groups bug me. I mean, there's something wrong with being so against contraception methods that don't even come CLOSE to killing a fertilized egg let alone an unborn child (because morals), only to flip-flop and declare it's not your job to so much as pay for school lunches for hungry children, all under the banner of "pro-life".

If you want to argue that life starts at or before the fertilized egg, that's fine, but don't fucking turn around and act like it ends at birth because you don't want to pay taxes or w/e.

 

[lacktheknack]

Hell, mates, the best contraceptive is not to fuck everything that moves. One doesn't have to convert to Wahabbi Islam to know this. There's a certain irony in people wanting to knock each other up and then throwing a fit when someone else refuses to protect them from the consequences.

Oh yeah, abstinence based sex ed has such a great track record of preventing unwanted pregnancies...

That didn't really have anything to do with what he said.

 

[Bruce]

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.

No. Categorically wrong and already corrected earlier in the thread. The court ruled Hobby Lobby could not be compelled to pay for those particular pieces of the health plan. They then recommended that the regulators extend the same exemption (i.e. having to pay for that portion) that they extended to religious non profits. Essentially their employees get that coverage, it's just that Hobby Lobby doesn't pay for it. Generally the insurers are absorbing this hit from the exempted non profits themselves because they see long run it's cheaper than paying for pregnancies.

The real test will be Wheaton College who is challenging that being exempt from paying for that coverage is not enough to satisfy their religious rights under RFRA. They are arguing that allowing their employer insurance plan to offer those contraceptions for even free is forcing them to support this aberrant and immoral practice (from their perspective). That case will have the farther reaching implications on this issue.

Prior to the hobby lobby ruling the way health insurance worked was largely up to the worker in question - if you wanted to use it for a form of birth control that your boss didn't like, that was your decision.

Your health insurance was part of your cost-to-company, and largely your business.

Now your boss can go to your insurance company and say "Well, I don't approve of this, so I am not paying."

It is no longer your health insurance - it is no longer your health, it is your owner's health insurance.

It doesn't matter what your religious beliefs are - it matters what your boss's religious beliefs are.

As to claiming that for example, insurance companies can just absorb the cost - they're much more likely to just not cover it because why pay for something they don't have to?

Edit:

Oh, and the specific workaround you are pointing to was disallowed by an emergency order that evening.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/07/wheaton_college_injunction_the_supreme_court_just_sneakily_reversed_itself.single.html

 

[mega lenin]

Prior to the hobby lobby ruling the way health insurance worked was largely up to the worker in question - if you wanted to use it for a form of birth control that your boss didn't like, that was your decision.

Your health insurance was part of your cost-to-company, and largely your business.

Now your boss can go to your insurance company and say "Well, I don't approve of this, so I am not paying."

It is no longer your health insurance - it is no longer your health, it is your owner's health insurance.

It doesn't matter what your religious beliefs are - it matters what your boss's religious beliefs are.

As to claiming that for example, insurance companies can just absorb the cost - they're much more likely to just not cover it because why pay for something they don't have to?

Edit:

Oh, and the specific workaround you are pointing to was disallowed by an emergency order that evening.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/07/wheaton_college_injunction_the_supreme_court_just_sneakily_reversed_itself.single.html

A few things wrong with this reasoning. 1st in employee based health care your options are tied to whatever plans your employer decides to purchase from the insurance company. That has always been the case, because they are paying the lions' share for that benefit. That's why your premiums as an employee are generally lower than the personal private market. Essentially you and the employer are splitting the cost with the employer acting as gatekeeper because they own the place. Occasionally unions are involved in this process, but generally if a company's management doesn't want to purchase a plan with x, y, or z coverage their was no law to compel them to do so before Obamacare. So in short, your boss prior to Obamacare already could and did push his religious views on its employees via healthcare. You think hobby lobby had an employer health care plan that covered abortion priorly?

Absorbing the cost is what Obama convinced insurers to do on behalf of religious non-profits to prevent them from paying it. Insurers were fine with it, because in the grand scheme of things it isn't a lot of employees out of the entire economy. Secondly as I previously stated they have a profit motive to offer contraceptive coverage because it is vastly cheaper than paying for hospital cares for pregnancies. More money paid in and less payments paid out is how insurance companies make money.

Third an injunction does not equal the alternate provision being struck down. Wheaton College has a pending court case on this matter and asked for the injunction over concerns that complying through Obama's form would be approval of the statute and a violations of their rights under RFRA. Injunctions are temporary orders to stabilize situations that are matters before a court. Not a binding ruling meant for permanence. It doesn't say anything other than Wheaton College doesn't have to apply for the Obamacare exception until after the courts hear their case. The supreme court could side with them and strike down the provision but it's really unlikely. As I said earlier this will be the case to watch because it will have to deal with the heart of the matter that they tapdanced around in Hobby Lobby. I say this because it would seem sort of silly for the Supreme court to recommend that Hobby Lobby be granted an exemption provided in a statute, only to strike down that very statute in their very next case. It seems to me the SCOTUS is simply going out of the way to show Wheaton College fairness before they politely tell them they can't have what they want. I would be very surprised if the Court ruled for Wheaton and essentially nullified the exemption at this point.

 

[Ratty]

Hobby Lobby covers the following forms of contraception:
Male condoms
Female condoms
Diaphragms with spermicide
Sponges with spermicide
Cervical caps with spermicide
Spermicide alone
Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (?Combined Pill)
Birth-control pills with progestin alone (?The Mini Pill)
Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
Contraceptive patches
Contraceptive rings
Progestin injections
Implantable rods
Vasectomies
Female sterilization surgeries
Female sterilization implants

The forms of contraception that were opposed were:
Plan B (morning after pill)
Ella (another emergency contraceptive)
Copper Intrauterine Device
IUD with progestin

The reason they were opposed was because these forms of birth control can cause or are akin to abortion.

"Eden Foods" is already in the process of getting it's case to deny ANY birth control coverage ("abortive" or not) approved because of this decision. And it's just the first in a legion of companies that will follow suite.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/01/companies-birth-control-hobby-lobby_n_5546155.html

How long until one of these companies uses "sincerely held religious beliefs" as an excuse to not hire LGBT people or people who don't follow their particular religion/denomination? Why should company owners be compelled to respect the rights of people they believe are "damned sinners" after all?

 

[Schadrach]

Prior to the hobby lobby ruling the way health insurance worked was largely up to the worker in question - if you wanted to use it for a form of birth control that your boss didn't like, that was your decision.

Your health insurance was part of your cost-to-company, and largely your business.

Now your boss can go to your insurance company and say "Well, I don't approve of this, so I am not paying."

It is no longer your health insurance - it is no longer your health, it is your owner's health insurance.

It doesn't matter what your religious beliefs are - it matters what your boss's religious beliefs are.

As to claiming that for example, insurance companies can just absorb the cost - they're much more likely to just not cover it because why pay for something they don't have to?

By "prior to the Hobby Lobby ruling" you mean the stretch of time after the Affordable Care Act was passed but before the Hobby Lobby ruling. Because before the ACA was passed, employers weren't required to have health insurance that covered birth control (or anything else in specific), or health insurance at all. They could freely negotiate to with the insurance company over what they wanted to pay for coverage (or not) of. Unless of course you have a personal health insurance plan rather than a company plan in which case it has always been, and still is, no one's business but your own.

 

[Mikeyfell]

Hobby Lobby covers the following forms of contraception:
Male condoms
Female condoms
Diaphragms with spermicide
Sponges with spermicide
Cervical caps with spermicide
Spermicide alone
Birth-control pills with estrogen and progestin (?Combined Pill)
Birth-control pills with progestin alone (?The Mini Pill)
Birth control pills (extended/continuous use)
Contraceptive patches
Contraceptive rings
Progestin injections
Implantable rods
Vasectomies
Female sterilization surgeries
Female sterilization implants

The forms of contraception that were opposed were:
Plan B (morning after pill)
Ella (another emergency contraceptive)
Copper Intrauterine Device
IUD with progestin

The reason they were opposed was because these forms of birth control can cause or are akin to abortion.

That doesn't make the comic any less relevant.
It's still a big middle finger to the separation of church and state

 

[C14N]

I just want to point out that Hobby Lobby are not anti-contraception and still provide 16 forms of contraception including condoms and the pill. I just feel the need to say that because I hadn't heard that in all the outrage until Politifact did a piece on it. So anyone who wants to practice safe sex, prevent STDs or use the pill for its other health benefits is still free to do so. This isn't anti-woman, this isn't a company telling its employees not to have sex before marriage and it isn't a corporation looking to nickel-and-dime their employees as much as possible to save some pennies (Hobby Lobby actually have an excellent record regarding employee pay). The actual effects of this ruling will be pretty negligible, especially since the missing contraceptives will still be provided by the insurance companies who want to save money on paying for pregnancy.

Now I know what you're thinking: "it's not about the direct effects, it's about the precedent it sets, what if McDonalds suddenly decide they want to be Muslim and make all female employees wear burkhas or what if GM make up their own religion that says paying minimum wage is wrong? Where does it all end!?"

But that's also not going to happen. This ruling was incredibly specific, and it was decided to be allowed because Hobby Lobby are a privately-held company run on actual Christian-based policy and whose owners all demonstrably hold these beliefs. The number of companies run on religious policy with over 50 employees is tiny, they're virtually non-existent and employers trying to prevent things like blood transfusions is unheard of. It's very unlikely anyone could use this as a precedent for anything and even if it somehow does, it certainly won't be common by any means.

Just to be clear, I still don't really think this should have happened, but it really doesn't matter like the leftist media are hyping it up. This is pretty much a complete non-issue that hurts nobody.

 

[Bruce]

OH NOOOOO THEY SCREWED OVER WOMEN WHO ARE ALLEGEDLY EMPOWERED BUT NEED THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE PEOPLE TO PAY FOR THEIR BIRTH CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is no slippery slope at play. Yes, it will raise more court issues in the future but each will be judged on the constitutionality of the issue at hand.
Get over it.

Conservatives ladies and gentlemen - because your boss should really get a say in your sex life.

 

[And Man]

Am I the only one that, before all this Hobby Lobby stuff, didn't know that insurance companies covered birth control at all? So does this mean I can use my health insurance to buy condoms?

 

[gadjo]

This shit is crazy. I'm sorry, but corporations are not people. Also, what the hell about the religious freedom of the people employed by those businesses? Will we need to research the religious beliefs of every goddamn place we apply to since a conflict in beliefs would be such a clusterfuck? would it be within a corporation's religious rights to refuse or terminate employment due to a conflict in religious beliefs? It seems like the supreme court opened one hell of a can of worms on our asses this time.