Feds can't force Domino's founder to offer contraceptives, judge says (Page 7)

Again, the CEO's beliefs are fine. It's a different thing to make it a company policy which can have unintended consequences for your company.

While, women can get birth control elsewhere - and this is a bit 'touchy feely' - how does a female employee who makes the decision to use birth control feel as though her employer isn't judging her for a personal choice that does not impact her work?

Why shouldn't she choose to work elsewhere where all other things being equal its likely that birth control will be covered.  Where that personal decision is not important or even considered by the employer.  A place where they may buy a health insurance package and follow it with no 'moral' interventions.  

Now your company is also seen as conservative Christian - maybe a good thing, maybe not.  Birth control is perfectly legal.  In a country of diversity of race, religion, etc and protected rights it's interesting. Shouldn't we feel free of the religious judgements of others at work? 

But really shouldn't the CEO be worried about company performance over the use of birth control. 

You always have a choice to work elsewhere if you don't like the HR policies of your company.

I feel bad for guys sometimes...they might do the same job as a woman and get paid the same salary...but the woman could get an extra 6 weeks paid time off for maternity leave...how is that fair to guys?  How do most guys NOT feel discriminated against when they get paid the same as someone that is able to get more paid time off than they do?

Even including women specific health care in an insurance plan is essentially discriminating towards men.  Will the premiums of men be lower since they don't need BC, can't have babies, and don't need mammograms?

As a guy, I would rather work than go through a pregnancy for 9 months and then 6 weeks of a new mother.

Just Say'n as a dad of 3 boys!  Not jealous of you ladies there!

(and I know men that have taken leave after their child is born)

Someone has said it before, but that's simply not how group insurance works.

I don't know. I'd have to think about this more.

The government does have a legitimate right to protect the life of a child.  Where the line is between, say, not immunizing and requiring life saving care, I'm not sure at the moment.

There is certainly room for persons of good will to come together to discern where the line is on all of these issues.  That's not the problem.

The problem lies in the apparent blindness to the concept of religious liberty itself; that somehow the free expression of religion is somehow forcing one's religion on others.

Ha!  I know most men feel that way.  But really...you are paid the same to potentially work a lot less...that ain't fair!  I use the same argument in the military...people are paid more because they are married.  So, I do the same job as a married person but they make more money than me.  Also not fair.

Agreed but when it's supposed to be about the company AND we're talking about 50% of the population here.  When you want the best of the best - giving them a 'judgement-free' workplace (regardless of your choice for birth control, families, children) is pretty important.  Employee turnover is an incredibly high cost to many organizations - and usually signals bigger organizational issues.  Again, with diversity in our countries only increasing, wearing your personal views in the company policies only invites issues, IMO.

As for women 'costing more' I would happily give my husband the ability to have a period and bear children but it's not the way it works.   Plus, men do bear the higher cost of other types of health care costs. Reproductive health benefits us all.   Heh. Equating mat leave with vacation is a pet peeve of mine ... here the man can take all or part of the 'parental leave' so it is actually quite equal.  Plus, we get WAY more time than 6 weeks.

Yep.  I still don't understand why they took the pledge of allegiance out of schools...I would have just been fine with them telling people they didn't HAVE to say it but anyone that wanted to CAN.  Because slowly but surely they are taking away the rights of the religious because the non religious types will say that any religion at all is in violation of their first amendment rights.  They are making it no longer a neutral rule...the non-religious side is winning.  And it's unfortunate.

Meh, I was more trying to make the point that if people are going to start calling this discrimination against women then they should really think about that...there are a lot of things we are "fine" with that when you REALLY think about it are rather discriminatory...like paid maternity leave.

I don't know the answer to that.

I know of employers who offer maternity leave to men.  I think but am not sure that it's even covered under FMLA.  

I don't believe that paid maternity leave, for men or women, is an automatic benefit.  While a woman's job is secured through FMLA, is there a requirement to pay?  I thought it was usually a combination of vacation time, sick time, and short term disability (all that vary by employer).  So, your employer may offer paid time off to women and not men after giving birth, but it's not mandated. 

Maybe someone who has had a child can straighten me out.   I suspect the benefits are different between a government job and a workplace like the one in question.   

Not necessarily forcing your religion on others but where does it stop?  I could go to what might sound like a ridiculous example: scientologists being against psychiatric treatment.  Regardless of what you think about it, for tax purposes, it's a religion.

Do we disallow insuring of every potentially objectionable thing?  Do we give some religions more leeway than others?

People misunderstand the word "choice".

I have no choice in my job.  I am committed (by law) until a certain date.  Prior to that date I cannot leave my job.  NO CHOICE.

I had a friend tell me he had no choice and couldn't quit his job because he had a family to support.  I told him that's not a choice...just because you don't like the consequences of your actions doesn't mean you still can't CHOOSE that option.  HE has a CHOICE... 

If you could walk into your bosses's office today and give notice and/or quit and he couldn't do anything about it...you have a choice.

But wait didn't you CHOOSE to do what you do in the first place?

The same as anyone else chooses to start a job.  The difference is in what happens AFTER.  Yes, I made the choice to take the job.  But once I signed my life away for pilot training completion (the moment of the choice) I literally COULD NOT QUIT...for ten years.  Contrast that with regular civilian jobs....you may choose to take a job.  Two weeks later you could change your mind and quit if you decide you hate the job.  I don't have that choice.  I literally cannot choose to quit my job...until 12 Aug 2014....

:D  That's what I said!  I just used a lot more unnecessary words. :D

What is this BC you can get from Target for $9/month without a prescription?