- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Hobby Lobby decsion offers fodder for Democrat "War On Womenz" meme.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:10 pm to Navytiger74
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:10 pm to Navytiger74
quote:
Thanks. I have a $250 credit at Amazon. I'll check it out.
One of the best movies of all times. There are so many classic lines in that movie...
Cock-man oppressor...stop the penis party...America's Greatest president...the list goes on and on and on....well worth a watch to anyone who hates the PC world we live in.
0
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:12 pm to GumboPot
quote:
95% of the electorate do not understand the nuances of this decision so hell, why not? If you're a Dem, milk that cow until she's dry.
Yep, a fundamental premise of the liberal Dem strategy is to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:12 pm to GumboPot
If the boss is paying for coverage then it absolutely should be his decision as to what coverage the employee gets.
Nothing is barring the woman from paying for her own coverage on the exchanges that includes contraception
Nothing is barring the woman from paying for her own coverage on the exchanges that includes contraception
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:16 pm to davesdawgs
quote:
Yep, a fundamental premise of the liberal Dem strategy is to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
If you think that one party does this over the other, then you're foolish. That's what happens when you need 51% of the electorate to win - you MUST pander and you MUST appeal to the lowest common denominator. Republicans and Democrats both do it.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:20 pm to GumboPot
Ginsberg's dissent is profoundly poor and void of reason.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:23 pm to asurob1
RA'd, script kiddies hacking tigerdroppings forum accounts. People with nothing better to do 
hope the real asurob1 gets his account back.
hope the real asurob1 gets his account back.This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 2:24 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:24 pm to Scoop
quote:
Posted by Scoop
The test case for this should have been a Muslim owned company. Libs would have been all like:
Damn, would of been golden!
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:27 pm to GumboPot
Seems like this would have given the White House a perfect opportunity to send a message that if you didn't like your Employer's care, you could always look to the Obamacare exchanges.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:28 pm to Tiguar
Uh no one hacked my account. I call things as I see them. As always.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:29 pm to asurob1
quote:
Uh no one hacked my account. I call things as I see them. As always.
Consider this a warning. You are off the ranch.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:29 pm to GumboPot
quote:
setting a dangerous precedent that permits corporations to choose which laws to obey.
You mean, like Obama himself?
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:30 pm to Rickety Cricket
quote:
You mean, like Obama himself?
*boom*
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:35 pm to Rickety Cricket
quote:
setting a dangerous precedent that permits corporations to choose which laws to obey.
Such a stupid line. Statutory laws, like the ACA, cannot supercede Constitutional rights.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:38 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Ginsberg's dissent is profoundly poor and void of reason.
What was the crux, if you don't mind summarizing?
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:39 pm to Scoop
quote:
The test case for this should have been a Muslim owned company.
Libs would have been all like:
I really don't get where this idea that liberals are somehow in love with Muslims comes from.
When it comes to religion, I'm an equal opportunity offender, I guess.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:41 pm to Scoop
quote:
The test case for this should have been a Muslim owned company.
Libs would have been all like:
Honestly, so would many conservatives.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:41 pm to 90proofprofessional
quote:
What was the crux, if you don't mind summarizing?
quote:
"The exemption sought by Hobby Lobby and Conestoga would…deny legions of women who do not hold their employers' beliefs access to contraceptive coverage"
quote:
"Religious organizations exist to foster the interests of persons subscribing to the same religious faith. Not so of for-profit corporations. Workers who sustain the operations of those corporations commonly are not drawn from one religious community."
quote:
"Any decision to use contraceptives made by a woman covered under Hobby Lobby's or Conestoga's plan will not be propelled by the Government, it will be the woman's autonomous choice, informed by the physician she consults."
quote:
"It bears note in this regard that the cost of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month's full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage."
quote:
"Would the exemption…extend to employers with religiously grounded objections to blood transfusions (Jehovah's Witnesses); antidepressants (Scientologists); medications derived from pigs, including anesthesia, intravenous fluids, and pills coated with gelatin (certain Muslims, Jews, and Hindus); and vaccinations[?]…Not much help there for the lower courts bound by today's decision."
quote:
"Approving some religious claims while deeming others unworthy of accommodation could be 'perceived as favoring one religion over another,' the very 'risk the [Constitution's] Establishment Clause was designed to preclude."
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:46 pm to Antonio Moss
I honestly don't see where that's "void of reason." She makes some good arguments.
Her point is that a) the religious beliefs of some people, under this ruling, will impact the healthcare choices of others, and b) who gets to determine whose religious exemptions are valid?
Couldn't a Muslim owned business now say "well, I don't want to pay for artificial insulin because sometimes that's harvested from the pancreas of a pig, and that's not Halal?"
The question isn't whether or not her arguments hold water - they do - but whether or not these companies have the right to make these sorts of decisions. That is the debate. I guess you could say that she failed to address that.
Her point is that a) the religious beliefs of some people, under this ruling, will impact the healthcare choices of others, and b) who gets to determine whose religious exemptions are valid?
Couldn't a Muslim owned business now say "well, I don't want to pay for artificial insulin because sometimes that's harvested from the pancreas of a pig, and that's not Halal?"
The question isn't whether or not her arguments hold water - they do - but whether or not these companies have the right to make these sorts of decisions. That is the debate. I guess you could say that she failed to address that.
This post was edited on 6/30/14 at 2:47 pm
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:46 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
"It bears note in this regard that the cost of an IUD is nearly equivalent to a month's full-time pay for workers earning the minimum wage."
Umm.... then don't use an IUD. There. That problem is solved.
Posted on 6/30/14 at 2:52 pm to GumboPot
Here's more deception coming out of the WH on the Hobby Lobby decision:
WTF?
How can you make a personal health decision when your boss is between you and your doctor? SCOTUS removed the boss from contraceptive decisions today and Hobby Lobby was/is please to get out of the way. This WH spin is so deceptive.
LINK
quote:
The Supreme Court’s ruling against the birth control mandate “jeopardizes the health of women,” the White House said Monday.
White House press secretary Josh Earnest said women should be able to "make personal health decisions for themselves,” and called contraception "vital" to the health and well-being of women.
"Today's decision jeopardizes the health of women that are employed by these companies," Earnest said.
WTF?
How can you make a personal health decision when your boss is between you and your doctor? SCOTUS removed the boss from contraceptive decisions today and Hobby Lobby was/is please to get out of the way. This WH spin is so deceptive.
LINK
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News