Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Using your personal religion as a justification to have your separate legal entity break the law is against the law. I never argued that Christianity is against the law.

Are the Hobby Lobby stores going to disappear when the rapture happens?

I just don't see how potentially providing contraceptives to their employees will violate their religious beliefs. Oh well. Greens gonna Green

Nowhere did I say I was Christian. In my opinion it is the government that has broken the law by enacting legislation that infringes upon the reasonable, sane, and safe (implying that this belief doesnt infringe upon the rights of others) religious beliefs of a portion of its constituents.

This is a pointless argument anyway, because the Greens are not being told that they have to violate their Christian faith to comply with the law.

Exactly. The Greens in no way are being required to violate their own religious strictures. The separate legal entity which they own is being required to provide coverage which enables its employees to use or NOT use contraception as those EMPLOYEES' religious beliefs require or permit. If the government was requiring the Greens personally to use birth control, then that would clearly be a violation of their religious freedom. Instead they are complaining because they are not being allowed to impose their religious beliefs on their employees.

"Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's" makes quite clear that Jesus was saying to pay your taxes and obey the law in the temporal world. Yes, the Roman empire clearly did plenty of things with that tax revenue that the Jews and early Christians might not agree with. But what the government did with the tax money wasn't their responsibility.

 whembly wrote:
The argument really is this: Does a PRIVATE owner of a business have a right to run his business as he sees fit (with accordance to the law of course) and does he have a right to offer whatever compensation he can in a given market.

As soon as you add "with accordance to the law of course", you make your question meaningless. Coverage for contraception IS the law. The employer is no longer permitted to withhold coverage for it any more than they're allowed to lock employees in without access to fire exists (Triangle Shirtwaist factor), or they're allowed to make hourly employees work more than 40 hours without paying them overtime.

They seem to feel otherwise, and I understand their point. They are refusing on moral grounds based on their faith (and the code by which their company operates). To them assisting and/or encouraging behavior to which they are religiously opposed constitutes a violation of their faith, you will find that true of many faiths the world over, as every faith has an element of "guilt by association." You generally don't see jewish or muslim owned eateries providing non-kosher/halal meals for example, and I'd imagine if legislation was passed requiring such establishments to serve non-kosher/halal meals there would be a general uproar from many of you opposed to the greens, to which I will snidely say "But it doesn't violate their beliefs if their customers are eating pork."

As for their employees, if they want medical coverage including contraception they are free to seek employment elsewhere. The Greens are not imposing religious beliefs on anyone. Impose implies that the employees have no other option (they can terminate their employment at will) and there is no indication that the Greens are telling their employees that contraception is evil or forcing them to attend sunday service.

They seem to feel otherwise, and I understand their point. They are refusing on moral grounds based on their faith (and the code by which their company operates).

Where is that in the teachings of Christianity? Why don't they refuse to pay their taxes on the basis that those taxes go toward war? War is clearly a much greater violation of Christian principles.

You generally don't see jewish or muslim owned eateries providing non-kosher/halal meals for example, and I'd imagine if legislation was passed requiring such establishments to serve non-kosher/halal meals there would be a general uproar from many of you opposed to the greens, to which I will snidely say "But it doesn't violate their beliefs if their customers are eating pork."

What kind of food a given business offers to customers is in no way comparable to what kind of medical coverage a business provides to its employees. Come on, now. The power/dependence relationship and the degree of free choice available to the employee vs. the customer are not remotely similar.

Assume the employer provides free meals to its employees but only serves halal/kosher, suddenly the situation isn't quite so different.

As for where in Christianity, I'm not Christian and cannot answer that. In the case of Catholocism however the Pope is clear that abortion is sin, and his word is Gods word as per Catholic dogma.

Chaos: let's break this down:

What part of their faith do you think they are being told to violate?

(no big theological answer needed, just a simple "they are being told to do......" will do)

Because Abortion is the ending of a Human life it is held to be Murder by many people.

War is not against Christian principles in and of itself. There is a difference between killing people and Murder. Murder is expresslly forbidden, killing people is not.

There is even one instance in the bible where God told Israel to commit outright Genocide. And not only all the people, not even the livestock were to be spared. Saul disobeyed, and because of that David was annointed to be King in his place. And the prophet Sammuel(IIRC) put the captured enemy king to the sword himself.

chaos0xomega wrote:
They seem to feel otherwise

Oh that feel that way do they? Well that settles it then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Because Abortion is the ending of a Human life

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't; depends on how you define 'human'. For some people a zygote doesn't quite make the cut yet for others even masturbating may be akin to abortion. If it were that simple, politicians wouldn't be able to use it as a wedge issue so easily.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Nowhere did I say I was Christian. In my opinion it is the government that has broken the law by enacting legislation that infringes upon the reasonable, sane, and safe (implying that this belief doesnt infringe upon the rights of others) religious beliefs of a portion of its constituents.

Well, I know five people who disagree with you on that.

So what exactly do you guys think that the Greens are arguing? What, in their minds, are they being told to do that is violating their religious beliefs?

There is a difference between the Government forcing you to get an abortion and the government forcing you to give your employees the option of getting one through the insura.....

You know what, nevermind. Gonna sit here, eat me some Chik-Fil-A, and laugh.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
eat me some Chik-Fil-A

You monster!

 Dreadwinter wrote:
There is a difference between the Government forcing you to get an abortion and the government forcing you to give your employees the option of getting one through the insura.....

You know what, nevermind. Gonna sit here, eat me some Chik-Fil-A, and laugh.

can I have some?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mannahnin wrote:

 whembly wrote:
The argument really is this: Does a PRIVATE owner of a business have a right to run his business as he sees fit (with accordance to the law of course) and does he have a right to offer whatever compensation he can in a given market.

As soon as you add "with accordance to the law of course", you make your question meaningless. Coverage for contraception IS the law. The employer is no longer permitted to withhold coverage for it any more than they're allowed to lock employees in without access to fire exists (Triangle Shirtwaist factor), or they're allowed to make hourly employees work more than 40 hours without paying them overtime.

You're right... it IS the law.

Does that mean the anyone (Hobby Lobby for one) shouldn't engage the legal/political process to reverse that?

Is that it?

Or... is the response is "Hey it's legal, so shut up!". ?

I mean, they're obviously worked up about it. Let 'em have their day in court.

Can we go to single payer already? It'll render these things moot....

 Ouze wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Nowhere did I say I was Christian. In my opinion it is the government that has broken the law by enacting legislation that infringes upon the reasonable, sane, and safe (implying that this belief doesnt infringe upon the rights of others) religious beliefs of a portion of its constituents.

Well, I know five people who disagree with you on that.

Just because they made a decision doesn't make it right.

The SCOTUS, and the government in general, is perfectly capable of being in the wrong. If the government was infaillable, we would have no higher courts and Laws would never be overturned.

Meh, I'm just waiting on anybody to actually know what it is the Greens are fighting against.

If this goes through, I expect a lot of companies will get religion really quickly.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Nowhere did I say I was Christian. In my opinion it is the government that has broken the law by enacting legislation that infringes upon the reasonable, sane, and safe (implying that this belief doesnt infringe upon the rights of others) religious beliefs of a portion of its constituents.

Well, I know five people who disagree with you on that.

Just because they made a decision doesn't make it right.

The SCOTUS, and the government in general, is perfectly capable of being in the wrong. If the government was infaillable, we would have no higher courts and Laws would never be overturned.

This isn't about right and wrong, it is about legal and illegal. The person said they thought it was illegal and the responder showed that people that have at least some familiarity with the Constitution and US law said that it actually is legal. Generally the law is never about right and wrong, honestly, as the law itself doesn't define morality or ethics.

 Vulcan wrote:
If this goes through, I expect a lot of companies will get religion really quickly.

Simple solution: "Christian opt out plan" same thing, same cost, just no.birth control. If you really wanna screw them you make it a comprehensive childcare and STD testing/treatment plan.

On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God's name on one's behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.
I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in "A," "B," "C" and "D." Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?
And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of "conservatism."

-Barry Goldwater

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
If this goes through, I expect a lot of companies will get religion really quickly.

Simple solution: "Christian opt out plan" same thing, same cost, just no.birth control. If you really wanna screw them you make it a comprehensive childcare and STD testing/treatment plan.

Do you think Hobby Lobby is fighting the government over birth control?

 d-usa wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
If this goes through, I expect a lot of companies will get religion really quickly.

Simple solution: "Christian opt out plan" same thing, same cost, just no.birth control. If you really wanna screw them you make it a comprehensive childcare and STD testing/treatment plan.

Do you think Hobby Lobby is fighting the government over birth control?

Honestly? I think they're doing this to elicit some kind of response similar to Chi-fil-a in the hopes to generate more revenue.

But, I'm kinda Jaded now... shall I dispense with that in 33 minutes?

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
If this goes through, I expect a lot of companies will get religion really quickly.

Simple solution: "Christian opt out plan" same thing, same cost, just no.birth control. If you really wanna screw them you make it a comprehensive childcare and STD testing/treatment plan.

Do you think Hobby Lobby is fighting the government over birth control?

Honestly? I think they're doing this to elicit some kind of response similar to Chi-fil-a in the hopes to generate more revenue.

But, I'm kinda Jaded now... shall I dispense with that in 33 minutes?

So you have no clue what Hobby Lobby is actually arguing against? Because nobody has actually answered the question of what they think it is that Hobby Lobby think is violating their beliefs.

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:
If this goes through, I expect a lot of companies will get religion really quickly.

Simple solution: "Christian opt out plan" same thing, same cost, just no.birth control. If you really wanna screw them you make it a comprehensive childcare and STD testing/treatment plan.

Do you think Hobby Lobby is fighting the government over birth control?

Honestly? I think they're doing this to elicit some kind of response similar to Chi-fil-a in the hopes to generate more revenue.

But, I'm kinda Jaded now... shall I dispense with that in 33 minutes?

So you have no clue what Hobby Lobby is actually arguing against? Because nobody has actually answered the question of what they think it is that Hobby Lobby think is violating their beliefs.

I do have a clue... I'm offering to sell some too!

Then how about you answer the quesion?

Because at this point there is zero point talking to you about this. Getting pretty tired of this...

 d-usa wrote:
Then how about you answer the quesion?

Because at this point there is zero point talking to you about this. Getting pretty tired of this...

I get a sense that you're chomping at the bit for something... o.O

Why does it matter though? It's commonly held that certain sects of Christianity who don't believe in supporting abortative medications/procedure.

In Hobby Lobby's case, it's basically civil disobedience:

Kyle Duncan, an attorney for the pro-life legal group Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said in a statement that hobby Lobby doesn’t plan to offer its employees insurance that would cover the drug while its lawsuit is pending.

“The company will continue to provide health insurance to all qualified employees,” Duncan said. “To remain true to their faith, it is not their intention, as a company, to pay for abortion-inducing drugs.”

 Mannahnin wrote:
Exactly. The Greens in no way are being required to violate their own religious strictures. The separate legal entity which they own is being required to provide coverage which enables its employees to use or NOT use contraception as those EMPLOYEES' religious beliefs require or permit. If the government was requiring the Greens personally to use birth control, then that would clearly be a violation of their religious freedom. Instead they are complaining because they are not being allowed to impose their religious beliefs on their employees.

"Render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's" makes quite clear that Jesus was saying to pay your taxes and obey the law in the temporal world. Yes, the Roman empire clearly did plenty of things with that tax revenue that the Jews and early Christians might not agree with. But what the government did with the tax money wasn't their responsibility.

Gonna go with this one. Me thinks the Greens like playing the victim a little bit.

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Then how about you answer the quesion?

Because at this point there is zero point talking to you about this. Getting pretty tired of this...

I get a sense that you're chomping at the bit for something... o.O

Why does it matter though? It's commonly held that certain sects of Christianity who don't believe in supporting abortative medications/procedure.

In Hobby Lobby's case, it's basically civil disobedience:

Kyle Duncan, an attorney for the pro-life legal group Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said in a statement that hobby Lobby doesn’t plan to offer its employees insurance that would cover the drug while its lawsuit is pending.

“The company will continue to provide health insurance to all qualified employees,” Duncan said. “To remain true to their faith, it is not their intention, as a company, to pay for abortion-inducing drugs.”

Because we have people going on about how Hobby Lobby shouldn't have to pay for birth control because that is their faith. And Hobby Lobby is paying for birth control and has no problem with doing so. Which just means that people are mouthing off and ranting about stuff that has nothing to do with the case.

Hobby Lobby is also not being told to cover abortions, they never have been. They are also not told to pay for abortion-inducing drugs, they never have been.