General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMaybe they taught me wrong in school but....
what I learned in the seventies and eighties, that what was meant by freedom of religion was meant no one could force their religious beliefs upon another. In other words you could believe what you like, as an individual. That government and religion were to be separate.
How does the Hobby Lobby decision not force religious beliefs upon another with the power of law?
Freedom of religion also entails freedom from religion. How the fuck did this get so damned twisted.
Maybe it was my liberal public school education in Massachusetts where I received an inaccurate view of what freedom of religion means. Have I had the wrong interpretation all along?
JustAnotherGen
(31,980 posts)Color me disgusted today.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)THEIR beliefs sent me over the deep end as just a teenager back in the 60s. I would NEVER work for a Catholic organization; non-profit, or now "profit".
BootinUp
(47,207 posts)what it means is that the old battles must be re-fought forever.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)Not seeing how this "forces" any religious beliefs on anyone.
boston bean
(36,224 posts)Educate thyself.
Bettie
(16,138 posts)Which should cover prescribed medications.
My employer (general 'my'...I don't work for HL), being able to choose which prescribed medications my insurance can cover based on their religion amounts to their religious beliefs being forced on me...putting their holy book between me and my doctor and into private decisions about my health care.
And it opens the door for denial of all sorts of medical treatments and prescriptions based on 'religious belief'.
If you want corporations to dictate your health care based on the religious beliefs of their CEO, then go ahead. I'm not OK with it.
boston bean
(36,224 posts)It's not just the oral pill.
Bettie
(16,138 posts)I used the pill example because it was the easiest to illustrate my point.
But, I think that all but plan B require a prescription and/or procedure, so it still tracks that these people who are so concerned about 'government bureaucrats between a person and his or her doctor' are so very eager to be the jackwad between a woman and her doctor.
I know you get my point and I know I'm angry enough to lack clarity today.
boston bean
(36,224 posts)This covers all contraceptive methods and medical devices.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Tikki
(14,560 posts)Tikki
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)No, you won't. You'll expect your insurance to pay for it. And you'll really make a stink when it cost $30-40 a month on top of your already inflated premiums. All because your employer now has a right to determine what care of yours it will pay for.
Your post is needlessly obtuse. In the case of birth control, for most women it is the most important and/or only medication they will take for most of their lives. Because pregnancy is life-changing and dangerous--so reproductive planning is absolutely essential. And now it's not covered.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)childbirth, child care, or more children on their insurance. I am honestly shocked that the SCOTUS stooped this low, I would have thought they wouldn't have dared. Because it is so incredibly stupid.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)How about excluding pregnancy coverage for employers who weren't married in a Christian church too, since in the eyes of the HL owners' faith they aren't married before God?
Contraception is only one small piece of the pie. They'll be back for more.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Pay for it yourself, your choice to live with blood.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)Aren't people free to choose who they want to work for? That seems to help in some regard.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Not if their town has been taken over by a mall with nothing else for miles around.
REP
(21,691 posts)I can think of many reasons why someone may find themselves 'stuck' at a crappy job with horrid employers: poor economy and few jobs available that they qualify for; transportation issues (such as being limited to public transport in a city/town with a restricted coverage area); unable to get days off to look/apply/interview for another job during business hours; needing a particular hours schedule to accommodate school and/or childcare. I'm sure there are others - including being desperate to maintain health insurance - and I've been in most of those places, and the jobs I've held have been significantly better than working retail at a chain craft store.
The lower one is on the rungs of the employment ladder, the harder it is to change jobs smoothly and without financial pain. I would hazard a guess that many Hobby Lobby employees are working there not because that is their dream career, but because it was the first or best paycheck they could catch.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Then everyone will be happy, although 'good' religious women, those who have the same religion as their bosses, wouldn't use birth control.
That's crap.
Anansi1171
(793 posts)They want their evangelical outreach to be state sanctioned and mandatory in public life.
If they could beggar us until we accept their salvation, they would be well pleased.
The irony, to many, is just how anti-christ all of this actually is. We have Paul to thank for getting their ball rolling.
Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)TheKentuckian
(25,034 posts)one or select any at all. The state cannot dictate your beliefs or require association.
The current mess is caused by the insistence that employers be the gatekeeper to coverage.
Hobby Lobby should pay a tax but plan selection (if we insist on such...stupidly) should be an individual matter.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)The Tealiban want a theocracy and they're going for it!
jeff47
(26,549 posts)See, some religions can't force their beliefs on you. Such as Scientologists, Muslims or Jehovah's Witnesses. They're the icky religions.
But Christian fundamentalists are the good religion. So we should be happy for them to force their beliefs on us.
Gormy Cuss
(30,884 posts)That's what the activist judges on SCOTUS got wrong.
No one is telling the owners of Hobby Lobby that they personally have to avail themselves of birth control. They can quiver all they want.
valerief
(53,235 posts)Louisiana1976
(3,962 posts)replaced by Obama by a justice who sides with the American people, not corporate interests.
valerief
(53,235 posts)Not that I'm saying that's what I'd like.
I just want a drunk Cheney to go fowl hunting with at least one of the foul five.
pipi_k
(21,020 posts)actually forcing their religious beliefs on people.
Instead, I see it as forcing the result of their religious beliefs on people.
Subtle difference...
boston bean
(36,224 posts)and it can't be covered in work place insurance, because again, their religious beliefs are NO contraception, is forced upon their employees.
Either making them do without, or making them pay more out of pocket.
They aren't just choosing no contraception for themselves.
joeybee12
(56,177 posts)Now we have 5 assholes on SCOTUS, two of whom were appointed by a President who wasn't even elected...
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)my takeaway was this: that's all it is. Lip service. What the religions teach on the subject is a little different from the public school version, "No one can force their religion ON YOU". They do NOT teach that it's not OK to force *their* religion on *others*; quite the opposite, because of course their version is the One True Way To Salvation and all must be saved. "Fishers of men" and all that. The oh-so-big-on-religious-freedom church affiliated with my school was of course also big on missionary work and spreading the Gospel of Believe Or Go To Hell For Eternity. Religious freedom was for them, not others.
And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.
malthaussen
(17,219 posts)"Freedom of religion," so the argument goes, is also freedom from having "secular" (or "humanist" views "shoved down the throat" of the True Believer. If that seems a weak argument to you, well, after all it's just a mask for the real "belief," which is that my hatred and desire for control is more important than your rights. Especially if you happen to be a female.
-- Mal
Bickle
(109 posts)Check the outstanding conflict off interest. The head of the cartel, successfully having convinced much of the world he's a liberal, instead of simply better at marketing won't budge on this none. When one believes that they face eternal tornment for disobedience, perhaps they shouldn't be making binding rulings on issues.
Oh and their more tangible and real gods, fat fisted GOP donors and other scam artists can't wait to exploit this one to the max.
maindawg
(1,151 posts)It was a deal with the devil that gave us the 80s. We were still deeply hurt as a nation in the 1970s. Wounded by the 50 thousand dead solders in Vietnam, the hundreds of thousands who suffered PTSD we all know one of those. We all were touched by the crimes perpetrated against us.They killed our president, then we had the embarrasment of Nixon. American was hurt but not angry in 1979. We elected a movie star ,an imaginary president if you will. We wanted to forget the mistakes of the past and Reagon offered a new start. Morning in America. It was all a bad dream. The Neo cons hadn't been on a crime tear for the past 18 years at all. The neo cons gave us a npresent. A Trojan horse if you will. A movie star who knew how to act coy and how to pose for the camera. A fatherly old guy who you could really trust. That the neo cons were the presenters did not seem important to anyone at the time other than my very young self who did not even vote.
The coup in 2000 was the second one because when Reagon made a deal with our enemy he committed treason. Just like Nixon. Before he even took office, he was a criminal.
We are reaping what we sowed, 34 years ago.
The neo cons have been exposed, and I think the populace is kinda pissed off by the way things are going. They are tired of the gun violence. They are worried about SS and they are all under employed. Even the republicans I know complain about working conditions.
I hope that we do not have to relive the battles already fought.
wandy
(3,539 posts)Except mine were in the fiftys and sixtys.
You may be wrong about one thing.
Its not the power of law.
Its not the power of religion.
Its the power of the god almighty dollar.
Got to wonder who the Hobby Lobby Lobby is.