login
Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA (Page 5)
-
No new posts
|
 2014-04-01 9:13 AM in reply to: 0 |
Elite  6387    |  Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACAOriginally posted by braciole i know noone probably cares and that talking about wonky legal stuff isn't as much fun as the debate everyone's having here, but I think it'd be weird to have a 100+ post thread that doesn't mention by name or talk about the statute at issue in the case. Hobby Lobby isn't a First Amendment freedom of religion case. In 1990 the Supreme Court held that there are no religious exemptions to statutes of general application, even if those statutes impose a burden on religion. Under the First Amendment, Hobby Lobby would be SOL. There was a backlash against that decision, in response to which Congress (nearly unaminously) passed a statute called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which says that a court can create a religious exemption to a law of general applicability if the law imposes a burden on religion, unless the law is intended to serve a compelling government interest and seeks to achieve that goal using the least restrictive means available. The case is about that statute, which unquestionably applies to corporations. The parties in the case are fighting about whether the statute should apply to for profit corporations, or just non-profits. Congress could have exempted the ACA from the RFRA and avoided the issue altogether, but it chose not to. So here we are. Yes, but there are others. The Act is a large part of it... but also based on CU vs FCC, they say they have 1A rights since CU said the 1A makes no distinction on who or groups of who. People, and associations of peoples are covered.
But... how is the government unduly burdening them when they can choose to opt out? Seems to me the choice of opting out is a least restrictive means. Edited by powerman 2014-04-01 9:15 AM |
| 2014-04-01 9:45 AM in reply to: powerman |
Pro 9391  Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by braciole i know noone probably cares and that talking about wonky legal stuff isn't as much fun as the debate everyone's having here, but I think it'd be weird to have a 100+ post thread that doesn't mention by name or talk about the statute at issue in the case. Hobby Lobby isn't a First Amendment freedom of religion case. In 1990 the Supreme Court held that there are no religious exemptions to statutes of general application, even if those statutes impose a burden on religion. Under the First Amendment, Hobby Lobby would be SOL. There was a backlash against that decision, in response to which Congress (nearly unaminously) passed a statute called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which says that a court can create a religious exemption to a law of general applicability if the law imposes a burden on religion, unless the law is intended to serve a compelling government interest and seeks to achieve that goal using the least restrictive means available. The case is about that statute, which unquestionably applies to corporations. The parties in the case are fighting about whether the statute should apply to for profit corporations, or just non-profits. Congress could have exempted the ACA from the RFRA and avoided the issue altogether, but it chose not to. So here we are. Yes, but there are others. The Act is a large part of it... but also based on CU vs FCC, they say they have 1A rights since CU said the 1A makes no distinction on who or groups of who. People, and associations of peoples are covered.
But... how is the government unduly burdening them when they can choose to opt out? Seems to me the choice of opting out is a least restrictive means. I don't know how it's quantified from a legal standpoint, but I would guess a fine/tax of $26M would be considered unduly burdening them. |
| 2014-04-01 10:04 AM in reply to: powerman |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by dmiller5 Can I add that Hobby Lobby has provided healthcare plans in the past that do cover contraceptives. Only now are they making a stink about it because someone says that they have to. No, now they are making a stink about the 4 they have to add that they did not provide before... it is the 4 they are protesting.
Oh... Tony beat me to it. Ah, thanks for clearing that up, that makes a bit more sense...kind of |
| 2014-04-01 10:30 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by dmiller5 Can I add that Hobby Lobby has provided healthcare plans in the past that do cover contraceptives. Only now are they making a stink about it because someone says that they have to. No, now they are making a stink about the 4 they have to add that they did not provide before... it is the 4 they are protesting.
Oh... Tony beat me to it. Ah, thanks for clearing that up, that makes a bit more sense...kind of I know there's a whole other debate about what constitutes birth control versus pregnancy termination which is somewhat relative to the conversation, but there is certainly a very large population of religious folks that feel very strongly that the morning after pills are more of a termination than a preventative. I'm a strong pro-life guy personally and I don't have a big issue with the plan B type contraceptives because of how they work. Yes, it's a little bit of a gray area, but it's a whole lot different than a termination in the sense of later down the road. |
| 2014-04-01 10:41 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by tuwood I don't see how when they already pay more than that for health care and agree they should Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by braciole i know noone probably cares and that talking about wonky legal stuff isn't as much fun as the debate everyone's having here, but I think it'd be weird to have a 100+ post thread that doesn't mention by name or talk about the statute at issue in the case. Hobby Lobby isn't a First Amendment freedom of religion case. In 1990 the Supreme Court held that there are no religious exemptions to statutes of general application, even if those statutes impose a burden on religion. Under the First Amendment, Hobby Lobby would be SOL. There was a backlash against that decision, in response to which Congress (nearly unaminously) passed a statute called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which says that a court can create a religious exemption to a law of general applicability if the law imposes a burden on religion, unless the law is intended to serve a compelling government interest and seeks to achieve that goal using the least restrictive means available. The case is about that statute, which unquestionably applies to corporations. The parties in the case are fighting about whether the statute should apply to for profit corporations, or just non-profits. Congress could have exempted the ACA from the RFRA and avoided the issue altogether, but it chose not to. So here we are. Yes, but there are others. The Act is a large part of it... but also based on CU vs FCC, they say they have 1A rights since CU said the 1A makes no distinction on who or groups of who. People, and associations of peoples are covered.
But... how is the government unduly burdening them when they can choose to opt out? Seems to me the choice of opting out is a least restrictive means. I don't know how it's quantified from a legal standpoint, but I would guess a fine/tax of $26M would be considered unduly burdening them. |
| 2014-04-01 10:55 AM in reply to: powerman |
New user 324 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by tuwood I don't see how when they already pay more than that for health care and agree they should Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by braciole i know noone probably cares and that talking about wonky legal stuff isn't as much fun as the debate everyone's having here, but I think it'd be weird to have a 100+ post thread that doesn't mention by name or talk about the statute at issue in the case. Hobby Lobby isn't a First Amendment freedom of religion case. In 1990 the Supreme Court held that there are no religious exemptions to statutes of general application, even if those statutes impose a burden on religion. Under the First Amendment, Hobby Lobby would be SOL. There was a backlash against that decision, in response to which Congress (nearly unaminously) passed a statute called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which says that a court can create a religious exemption to a law of general applicability if the law imposes a burden on religion, unless the law is intended to serve a compelling government interest and seeks to achieve that goal using the least restrictive means available. The case is about that statute, which unquestionably applies to corporations. The parties in the case are fighting about whether the statute should apply to for profit corporations, or just non-profits. Congress could have exempted the ACA from the RFRA and avoided the issue altogether, but it chose not to. So here we are. Yes, but there are others. The Act is a large part of it... but also based on CU vs FCC, they say they have 1A rights since CU said the 1A makes no distinction on who or groups of who. People, and associations of peoples are covered.
But... how is the government unduly burdening them when they can choose to opt out? Seems to me the choice of opting out is a least restrictive means. I don't know how it's quantified from a legal standpoint, but I would guess a fine/tax of $26M would be considered unduly burdening them. Hobby Lobby's options apparently are: (1) provide health insurance without the mandated coverages, and pay a $400+ million fine and probably go out of business; (2) violate their stated religious beliefs and provide the mandated coverages; or (3) act contrary to their stated religious beliefs (they've claimed they want to provide health coverage, that it's a good thing to do so, and that they are motivated by their religion to do so) and provide no health insurance, and pay a $25+ million fine. So when you're looking at option 3, it ignores part of the picture to say 'they would be fine with the penalty because they already pay that much for coverage anyway." To powerman's question above about the least restrictive method -- it would be less restrictive for the government to directly pay for the disputed coverages itself. |
| 2014-04-01 8:54 PM in reply to: braciole |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by braciole I don't see how when they already pay more than that for health care and agree they should Hobby Lobby's options apparently are: (1) provide health insurance without the mandated coverages, and pay a $400+ million fine and probably go out of business; (2) violate their stated religious beliefs and provide the mandated coverages; or (3) act contrary to their stated religious beliefs (they've claimed they want to provide health coverage, that it's a good thing to do so, and that they are motivated by their religion to do so) and provide no health insurance, and pay a $25+ million fine. So when you're looking at option 3, it ignores part of the picture to say 'they would be fine with the penalty because they already pay that much for coverage anyway." To powerman's question above about the least restrictive method -- it would be less restrictive for the government to directly pay for the disputed coverages itself. I'm really not trying to be obstinate... I usually don't have to try at that.
I don't see how paying the tax is "infringing on religious belief". You can make the argument that making them pay for certain contraceptives is, but I do not get the tax.... they are indeed putting into a pot to pay for health care. Their employees most certainly do have health care going to the exchange.... and Hobby Lobby is not directly buying contraceptives they do not agree with. So going that route, I do not see how it is an infringement. Even if they get the exemption... which they just might... they still pay for insurance and that money still goes into a pool and indirectly buys contraceptives... not for their employees... but health care is health care and under the new ridiculous program... it is all a shared expense. So... if that is the case, then I do not get how the tax is not a viable option. |
| 2014-04-01 9:03 PM in reply to: powerman |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA If you want my magic wand... health care needs to be divorced from employment completely and I as a consumer should be able to shop insurance like I do for my auto and home. That solves all these problems. So many ways to do it beside this ridiculous mess our government has foisted upon us. I am totally not into conspiracies... but I really can not come up with any other reason for Obamacare than to break the system so badly that we have to go single payer. That might solve some of the issues we have, but it certainly does not solve all of them... and most importantly it does not solve the "cost" problem. NOTHING the government provides is "cheaper". It may very well be necessary as many government functions are... but lower cost has NEVER happened with Government intervention.... and right now... "cost" has been the single biggest driver proclaimed from the mountain tops as to why we needed Obamacare in the first place. From day one it was not going to deliver what was promised. Now you have government mandating "social issues" through healthcare and it just does not work for everyone. |
| 2014-04-02 7:27 AM in reply to: powerman |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by powerman If you want my magic wand... health care needs to be divorced from employment completely and I as a consumer should be able to shop insurance like I do for my auto and home. That solves all these problems. So many ways to do it beside this ridiculous mess our government has foisted upon us. I am totally not into conspiracies... but I really can not come up with any other reason for Obamacare than to break the system so badly that we have to go single payer. That might solve some of the issues we have, but it certainly does not solve all of them... and most importantly it does not solve the "cost" problem. NOTHING the government provides is "cheaper". It may very well be necessary as many government functions are... but lower cost has NEVER happened with Government intervention.... and right now... "cost" has been the single biggest driver proclaimed from the mountain tops as to why we needed Obamacare in the first place. From day one it was not going to deliver what was promised. Now you have government mandating "social issues" through healthcare and it just does not work for everyone. Preach it Brother |
| 2014-04-02 9:09 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA I know Hobby Lobby probably does not have a lot of control over this but I do find it kinda funny. Hobby Lobby investing in the drugs they are trying to protest against. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-invests-in-em_... |
| 2014-04-02 5:05 PM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by chirunner134 I know Hobby Lobby probably does not have a lot of control over this but I do find it kinda funny. Hobby Lobby investing in the drugs they are trying to protest against. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/01/hobby-lobby-invests-in-em_... You could even go into partner companies that they buy products from who may be doing X or Y that they don't agree with. This is one of the reasons I don't get into the "boycot X" type movements whenever somebody does something I don't agree with. They're all so interconnected that half the time the alternative is owned by the same company. |
| 2014-04-03 7:23 AM in reply to: 0 |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA never mind Edited by Jackemy1 2014-04-03 7:32 AM |
| 2014-04-03 7:27 AM in reply to: powerman |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by powerman If you want my magic wand... health care needs to be divorced from employment completely and I as a consumer should be able to shop insurance like I do for my auto and home. That solves all these problems. So many ways to do it beside this ridiculous mess our government has foisted upon us. I am totally not into conspiracies... but I really can not come up with any other reason for Obamacare than to break the system so badly that we have to go single payer. That might solve some of the issues we have, but it certainly does not solve all of them... and most importantly it does not solve the "cost" problem. NOTHING the government provides is "cheaper". It may very well be necessary as many government functions are... but lower cost has NEVER happened with Government intervention.... and right now... "cost" has been the single biggest driver proclaimed from the mountain tops as to why we needed Obamacare in the first place. From day one it was not going to deliver what was promised. Now you have government mandating "social issues" through healthcare and it just does not work for everyone. Spot on. |
| 2014-04-03 9:06 AM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by Jackemy1 I've been on a roll it seems lately. I should run for an office. City Council seems interesting. Originally posted by powerman Spot on.If you want my magic wand... health care needs to be divorced from employment completely and I as a consumer should be able to shop insurance like I do for my auto and home. That solves all these problems. So many ways to do it beside this ridiculous mess our government has foisted upon us. I am totally not into conspiracies... but I really can not come up with any other reason for Obamacare than to break the system so badly that we have to go single payer. That might solve some of the issues we have, but it certainly does not solve all of them... and most importantly it does not solve the "cost" problem. NOTHING the government provides is "cheaper". It may very well be necessary as many government functions are... but lower cost has NEVER happened with Government intervention.... and right now... "cost" has been the single biggest driver proclaimed from the mountain tops as to why we needed Obamacare in the first place. From day one it was not going to deliver what was promised. Now you have government mandating "social issues" through healthcare and it just does not work for everyone. |
| 2014-04-03 9:08 AM in reply to: powerman |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA You should run. While I do not always agree with you. I think they come from an honest place. To me that is important. |
| 2014-04-03 9:14 AM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by chirunner134 You should run. While I do not always agree with you. I think they come from an honest place. To me that is important. My closet is full... it would not be pretty. |
| 2014-04-03 9:40 AM in reply to: powerman |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by Jackemy1 I've been on a roll it seems lately. I should run for an office. City Council seems interesting. Originally posted by powerman Spot on.If you want my magic wand... health care needs to be divorced from employment completely and I as a consumer should be able to shop insurance like I do for my auto and home. That solves all these problems. So many ways to do it beside this ridiculous mess our government has foisted upon us. I am totally not into conspiracies... but I really can not come up with any other reason for Obamacare than to break the system so badly that we have to go single payer. That might solve some of the issues we have, but it certainly does not solve all of them... and most importantly it does not solve the "cost" problem. NOTHING the government provides is "cheaper". It may very well be necessary as many government functions are... but lower cost has NEVER happened with Government intervention.... and right now... "cost" has been the single biggest driver proclaimed from the mountain tops as to why we needed Obamacare in the first place. From day one it was not going to deliver what was promised. Now you have government mandating "social issues" through healthcare and it just does not work for everyone. One of the best experiences of my professional life was running for elected office.....I highly encourage it if you have the time. You would be good councilor. And local office elections stay on topic - roads, public safety, budgets, and schools - so don't worry about the closet. It will stay locked. |
| 2014-04-03 10:01 AM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by powerman One of the best experiences of my professional life was running for elected office.....I highly encourage it if you have the time. You would be good councilor. And local office elections stay on topic - roads, public safety, budgets, and schools - so don't worry about the closet. It will stay locked. Originally posted by Jackemy1 I've been on a roll it seems lately. I should run for an office. City Council seems interesting. Originally posted by powerman Spot on.If you want my magic wand... health care needs to be divorced from employment completely and I as a consumer should be able to shop insurance like I do for my auto and home. That solves all these problems. So many ways to do it beside this ridiculous mess our government has foisted upon us. I am totally not into conspiracies... but I really can not come up with any other reason for Obamacare than to break the system so badly that we have to go single payer. That might solve some of the issues we have, but it certainly does not solve all of them... and most importantly it does not solve the "cost" problem. NOTHING the government provides is "cheaper". It may very well be necessary as many government functions are... but lower cost has NEVER happened with Government intervention.... and right now... "cost" has been the single biggest driver proclaimed from the mountain tops as to why we needed Obamacare in the first place. From day one it was not going to deliver what was promised. Now you have government mandating "social issues" through healthcare and it just does not work for everyone. Unfortunately my threshold is very low. I could probably get away with neighborhood board, but beyond that my closet would get me. lol |
| 2014-04-03 1:32 PM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by powerman One of the best experiences of my professional life was running for elected office.....I highly encourage it if you have the time. You would be good councilor. And local office elections stay on topic - roads, public safety, budgets, and schools - so don't worry about the closet. It will stay locked. Originally posted by Jackemy1 I've been on a roll it seems lately. I should run for an office. City Council seems interesting. Originally posted by powerman Spot on.If you want my magic wand... health care needs to be divorced from employment completely and I as a consumer should be able to shop insurance like I do for my auto and home. That solves all these problems. So many ways to do it beside this ridiculous mess our government has foisted upon us. I am totally not into conspiracies... but I really can not come up with any other reason for Obamacare than to break the system so badly that we have to go single payer. That might solve some of the issues we have, but it certainly does not solve all of them... and most importantly it does not solve the "cost" problem. NOTHING the government provides is "cheaper". It may very well be necessary as many government functions are... but lower cost has NEVER happened with Government intervention.... and right now... "cost" has been the single biggest driver proclaimed from the mountain tops as to why we needed Obamacare in the first place. From day one it was not going to deliver what was promised. Now you have government mandating "social issues" through healthcare and it just does not work for everyone. I've gone to a couple council meetings, and there are some big fights currently over stuff I care about. But seriously... I don't have the pedigree. My Councilman, is a PhD engineer. The other guy I like is a Air Force Academy grad and current airline pilot. Everyone else own huge businesses... I'm just a blue collar schmuck. |
| 2014-04-03 1:39 PM in reply to: powerman |
Elite 3656 West Allis, Wisconsin | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by powerman \Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by powerman One of the best experiences of my professional life was running for elected office.....I highly encourage it if you have the time. You would be good councilor. And local office elections stay on topic - roads, public safety, budgets, and schools - so don't worry about the closet. It will stay locked. Originally posted by Jackemy1 I've been on a roll it seems lately. I should run for an office. City Council seems interesting. Originally posted by powerman Spot on.If you want my magic wand... health care needs to be divorced from employment completely and I as a consumer should be able to shop insurance like I do for my auto and home. That solves all these problems. So many ways to do it beside this ridiculous mess our government has foisted upon us. I am totally not into conspiracies... but I really can not come up with any other reason for Obamacare than to break the system so badly that we have to go single payer. That might solve some of the issues we have, but it certainly does not solve all of them... and most importantly it does not solve the "cost" problem. NOTHING the government provides is "cheaper". It may very well be necessary as many government functions are... but lower cost has NEVER happened with Government intervention.... and right now... "cost" has been the single biggest driver proclaimed from the mountain tops as to why we needed Obamacare in the first place. From day one it was not going to deliver what was promised. Now you have government mandating "social issues" through healthcare and it just does not work for everyone. I've gone to a couple council meetings, and there are some big fights currently over stuff I care about. But seriously... I don't have the pedigree. My Councilman, is a PhD engineer. The other guy I like is a Air Force Academy grad and current airline pilot. Everyone else own huge businesses... I'm just a blue collar schmuck. the blue collar schmucks (aka, the actual working people of the country) are what we need more of in office. they probably have more common sense.
|
| 2014-04-03 1:51 PM in reply to: djdavey |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by djdavey Originally posted by powerman \Originally posted by Jackemy1 Originally posted by powerman One of the best experiences of my professional life was running for elected office.....I highly encourage it if you have the time. You would be good councilor. And local office elections stay on topic - roads, public safety, budgets, and schools - so don't worry about the closet. It will stay locked. Originally posted by Jackemy1 I've been on a roll it seems lately. I should run for an office. City Council seems interesting. Originally posted by powerman Spot on.If you want my magic wand... health care needs to be divorced from employment completely and I as a consumer should be able to shop insurance like I do for my auto and home. That solves all these problems. So many ways to do it beside this ridiculous mess our government has foisted upon us. I am totally not into conspiracies... but I really can not come up with any other reason for Obamacare than to break the system so badly that we have to go single payer. That might solve some of the issues we have, but it certainly does not solve all of them... and most importantly it does not solve the "cost" problem. NOTHING the government provides is "cheaper". It may very well be necessary as many government functions are... but lower cost has NEVER happened with Government intervention.... and right now... "cost" has been the single biggest driver proclaimed from the mountain tops as to why we needed Obamacare in the first place. From day one it was not going to deliver what was promised. Now you have government mandating "social issues" through healthcare and it just does not work for everyone. I've gone to a couple council meetings, and there are some big fights currently over stuff I care about. But seriously... I don't have the pedigree. My Councilman, is a PhD engineer. The other guy I like is a Air Force Academy grad and current airline pilot. Everyone else own huge businesses... I'm just a blue collar schmuck. the blue collar schmucks (aka, the actual working people of the country) are what we need more of in office. they probably have more common sense.
Most people say that until one of them sticks their head out of the clouds. <cough>Sarah Palin</cough> BTW, I agree with you but the political machine is vicious to anyone who doesn't fit the mold of a "proper" politician. |
| 2014-04-03 1:56 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Exactly. |
| 2014-04-03 2:55 PM in reply to: powerman |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Speaking of everyone's favorite punching bag: Just saw this and thought it was funny Putin & Sarah Palin Phone Call
|
| 2014-04-03 4:38 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Veteran 200 Houston, TX | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA When is the administration going to congratulate Hobby Lobby, and Chick-Fil-A for that mater, for paying their employees well over the minimum wage? Guess that goes out the window if they lose their lawsuit |
| 2014-04-04 9:39 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Science Nerd 28760 Redwood City, California | Subject: RE: Hobby Lobby claiming religious freedom and the ACA Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by powerman Originally posted by dmiller5 Can I add that Hobby Lobby has provided healthcare plans in the past that do cover contraceptives. Only now are they making a stink about it because someone says that they have to. No, now they are making a stink about the 4 they have to add that they did not provide before... it is the 4 they are protesting.
Oh... Tony beat me to it. Ah, thanks for clearing that up, that makes a bit more sense...kind of I know there's a whole other debate about what constitutes birth control versus pregnancy termination which is somewhat relative to the conversation, but there is certainly a very large population of religious folks that feel very strongly that the morning after pills are more of a termination than a preventative. I'm a strong pro-life guy personally and I don't have a big issue with the plan B type contraceptives because of how they work. Yes, it's a little bit of a gray area, but it's a whole lot different than a termination in the sense of later down the road. They can believe whatever they want, but that's not what they studies show. In a study of Plan B, women who had already ovulated and took Plan B got pregnant at the same rate as women who did not take Plan B. If it did cause abortions, that would be different. |
|
|
|
|
| ACA Calculator Pages: 1 2 | ||
| |||
| |||
| ACA fun begins on Oct 1 (mines beginning already) Pages: 1 2 3 4 | ||
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK