Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 7:37

But, by God, we'll make money from companies that do.

"Being Christians, we don't pay for drugs that might cause abortions.... something that is contrary to our most important beliefs. It goes against the biblical principles on which we have run this company since day one," Hobby Lobby founder David Green wrote in an article for USA Today

Several of the mutual funds in Hobby Lobby's retirement plan have holdings in companies that manufacture the specific drugs and devices that the Green family, which owns Hobby Lobby, is fighting to keep out of Hobby Lobby's health care policies: the emergency contraceptive pills Plan B and Ella, and copper and hormonal intrauterine devices.

These companies include Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, which makes Plan B and ParaGard, a copper IUD, and Actavis, which makes a generic version of Plan B and distributes Ella. Other holdings in the mutual funds selected by Hobby Lobby include Pfizer, the maker of Cytotec and Prostin E2, which are used to induce abortions; Bayer, which manufactures the hormonal IUDs Skyla andMirena; AstraZeneca, which has an Indian subsidiary that manufactures Prostodin, Cerviprime, and Partocin, three drugs commonly used in abortions; and Forest Laboratories, which makes Cervidil, a drug used to induce abortions. Several funds in the Hobby Lobby retirement plan also invested in Aetna and Humana, two health insurance companies that cover surgical abortions, abortion drugs, and emergency contraception in many of the health care policies they sell.

It will be fun to watch them spin this.

Here is a link that might be useful: Link


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I have no sympathy for these people who want to control the lives of their employees but in their defense I highly doubt they knew what was in their pension plan other than in the broadest detail - if that.

That being said I hope this situation causes them some consternation and opens their eyes to the futility of their position in regard to health insurance. A benefits package should reflect the needs of those being benefited not the religious views of the employer.

No one is forced to use birth control against her principles simply because it is included in the benefits covered but it should be a standard benefit in all policies.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I would agree that no is being forced into using any parts of a benefits package, or insurance policy...

"A benefits package should reflect the needs of those being benefited not the religious views of the employer."


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Hobby Lobby is only good for shoplifting origami paper.
(But first check to make sure it's made in Japan, not China!)


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

It's really quite easy. If someone doesn't like the "benefits" they can always go work for someone else. The company can very easily announce they are discontinuing all insurance plans and the employees are on their own.

They have no problem with contraceptives, they don't want to pay for abortion inducing drugs. If a woman thinks she got pregnant, the "Plan B" drug costs $35. It's not exactly bank breaking. Have the guy pay for half.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

According to the article

Forbes pointed out that Hobby Lobby has a fiduciary duty under federal law to know what the company-sponsored 401(k) is investing in for the benefit of its employees.

They don't get a pass for ignorance about their investments, nor any of their other ignorant behavior.

They knew, they just hoped no one else would figure it out. It's always about the money

Here is a link that might be useful: Link, of course


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

90% of the stuff on their shelves comes from China, the bastion of women's rights and choices.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I'm slightly torn on this one but on balance I come down on the side of employers not being able to tailor benefits based on religious beliefs.

One one hand I think it is wrong that a corporation imposes it's religious belief on their employees whether it is benefits, dress code or which customers they serve or don't serve.

How would we react if this was a Muslim company that required their female employees cover their head or face? What if a company run by Jehovah Witness pulled blood transfusions from their insurance coverage?

On the other hand I can understand the employer feeling they have a right to tailor the benefits they pay for based on their corporate values.

regardless, I think, based on the Citizens United ruling, that this company will win their case at the Supreme Court.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I don't know, chase - this could go either way if the "slippery slope" aspect isn't weighed heavily by the Supremes. In addition to those examples you mentioned above - add not covering vaccines to the mix; Muslim cab drivers in Minneapolis (and they are legion) refusing to carry passengers carrying alcohol or persons with service animals; individual pharmacists refusing to fill prescriptions.

Religious conscience covers a lot of ground.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

We are becoming more and more fragmented, based on any number of ridiculous ideas.

I wonder, if in a hundred years or so, will we even be a United States? Or just a Balkanized confederation of states that happen to share borders.

I am losing hope for this great experiment in democracy. I think the Founding Fathers must be quite dismayed.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Asking them to clean up their pension plan would be like some of you calling your broker and telling them to dump coal, oil, fraudulent banks, etc.

But you won't The return is what you're after, not the ethics. At least Chase is being honest.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

And then there those of us who know exactly what is in our portfolios and have decided on the stocks and bonds based on many criteria, including the ethics of the company.

I also don't think all corporations have lousy ethics nor do I think that being an oil company is, in and of itself, a bad thing....coal I refuse to own as I do military stocks,

Companies like Hobby Lobby have big time accountants making their financial decisions including managing their pension plan. There is no way that the company executives, especially the CFO don't know EXACTLY what is in their portfolio.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I don't have a problem with them making money on their investments. My problem is them playing the christian card when it comes to providing certain benefits to their employees.

Apparently money trumps "biblical principles". Hypocrites.

~Ann


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

It is always comical when those who mock Christianity mock Christians for not living up to Christianity.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Asking them to clean up their pension plan would be like some of you calling your broker and telling them to dump coal, oil, fraudulent banks, etc.

That is exactly what they should do. No exceptions, no excuses. They can't have it both ways.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 13:12

Asking them to clean up their pension plan would be like some of you calling your broker and telling them to dump coal, oil, fraudulent banks, etc.

That is exactly what they should do. No exceptions, no excuses. They can't have it both ways.

*

Uh, they can and they do.

What you think they should do is totally irrelevant.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Brush
Regarding your comments above at 11:59
Why are you so sure of your statement about people you dont know and their portfolios you have never seen, Brush?

It sure does sound like you are speaking from personal experience regarding how you manage your own portfolio, being unable to imagine anyone else not choosing return over ethics if you, yourself wont/ cant.

Wow.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Christopherh-you apparently haven't taken in yet the FACT that we are not talking plan B here. It is all contraceptives except barrier methods. All other contraceptives including birth control pills in all their permutations and IUD's have the potential to cause abortion if you believe that life begins at conception. So your statement that they don't have a problem with contraception is WRONG. It is exactly what they have a problem with. Where have you been?

The thin end of the wedge is allowing a company to deny workers their rights as citizens because of the religious views of the company owners. Can they decide that their god wants you to work 80 hour weeks? Can they decide that since they believe in fate they don't need to install legally required safety equipment? What OSHA standards? Our god will protect you...If a company doesn't want to abide by the laws of the land then let them move someplace else.

I agree that this news has exposed this company as a bunch of hypocrites.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Uh, they can and they do.

What you think they should do is totally irrelevant.

Well, then, we, the consumers need to make them very, very uncomfortable.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Ive never shopped there, Im not sure if Ive ever even heard of this chain.

But I believe this fresh information about this store is information those who support their stand should very carefully consider.
If I frequented this store and agreed with it's position, I might continue to support their position but you can bet on it that I would never shop there again.

Goodness knows though, this must have been TERRIFIC advertising if this chain is located more in the red states, up to this point they might have been enjoying the financial benefits of their public position.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by momj47 7A..was 6B (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 14:10

Uh, they can and they do.

What you think they should do is totally irrelevant.

Well, then, we, the consumers need to make them very, very uncomfortable.

*

Knock yourself out.

If it's anything like Chick Fil A people will be lining up to spend money for things they don't even need to support them.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Wow, you must really support Hobby Lobby.

My DD used to shop there, in El Paso, a blue city in a red state. She liked it, but it was the only craft store in town.

Now that they are back east, JoAnn Fabrics gets our business. Apparently there are a couple of HL's nearby, but like Chick-Fil-A, we don't go there.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I don't think any individuals opinion on a corporation and it"s operations is irrelevant. Isn't that what we are all about as free people, to voice our opinion?

Having opinions about the pro or con on any issue is what makes us a thriving , ever evolving society.

Now it may be that our opinions don't change things but they are hardly irrelevant any more than our opinion on our governments, taxes, health insurance...on and on... are irrelevant.

It is only through the sharing of opinions, views and ideas that things move forward.

As for Hobby Lobby abs Chik-fil-a...I will never purchase anything from them...and if lots of people do that it becomes very relevant to the bottom line.

PS Must say though that Chick-fil-a has fabulous bill boards!


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Do the companies in the mutual funds only manufacture the offending products? My guess would be that they are not aware of every single company in the mutual fund or at least were not but should now be aware and make the necessary changes.

One thing I do appreciate about Hobby Lobby is that they close their stores on Sundays to allow their employees to spend time with their families.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Our opinions in certain circumstances are irrelevant in practice, but not irrelevant if one is considering the opinions of another.

In this case, someone that doesn't support Hobby Lobby to begin with is going to make no to little difference in their bottom line.

I don't particularly support Hobby Lobby, I just think that businesses should not be required to provide health care.

I think employment and health care should be separated and the government should not tell businesses what kind of health care they have to provide and should not force them to pay for drugs that cause fertilized eggs not to implant, or anything else.

As I said, knock yourselves out.

For those that boycott a company they've never patronized it's of no significance.

I know to this day I avoid shopping centers with a Chick Fil A because the lines are so long. So, there are many, many people that support Chick FIl a and Hobby Lobby because of the religious beliefs of the company, but mostly because those companies hire competent, clean, polite and capable employees and provide goods and services at a good price, and generally run their businesses in a professional consumer oriented manner.

I do patronize Chick Fil A sometimes but not because or in spite of their politics.

Very few companies I boycott--United Colors of Benneton is a company I refused to buy anything from for my children or go into because of lewd advertisements years ago. Right now I wouldn't go in there anyway who cares.

I refuse to live my life trying to stay apprised of the politics of every company I do business with and making my shopping decisions based on the politics of every company.

This post was edited by demifloyd on Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 15:18


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I just think that businesses should not be required to provide health care.

I don't think ANY business should provide health insurance, we should have government sponsored single payer health insurance. Period

We don't patronized Chick Fil A, any more, and the grandchildren know why - because, as the five year old said the other day "they don't want Shelby's mothers to be married". Shelby lives across the street and her mothers are wonderful people. One mom is our lawyer, the other is our "wealth" manager.

Very few companies proclaim their politics, so for the most part, it's not an issue. But the ones that do usually do a terrible job of it, and then, we consumers can raise a ruckus, if we are so inclined. Why, look what happened to World Vision! You must be very pleased.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I don't think ANY business should provide health insurance, we should have government sponsored single payer health insurance. Period

I agree.

But we currently don't have government-sponsored, single-payer health insurance, and until we do, I want to see business offering plans that cover legal procedures and medications for male and female employees. No pick and choose, or having the employer imposing their moral choices on employees.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

No pick and choose, or having the employer imposing their moral choices on employees.

*

And no employees forcing their moral choices on employers' pocketbooks.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Remember when so many of you promised support of JCP...when Ellen was a spokesperson?

Well, either you failed to keep your promise or your support helped very little if any. JCP is failing.

Hobby Lobby won't miss your support and nobody else cares either.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

That's the answer!

Sit back and say or do nothing when you feel something is wrong.....doesn't matter anyhow. Let it all go by.....


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I read an article in my local paper this afternoon that says that oddly enough Hobby Lobby doesn't have a problem with birth control pills-only IUD's and morning after pills. I am thinking-well that's nice these dimwitted people don't even know how birth control pills work. They are supposed to make decisions for what sort of medications their employees can get through their insurance and they are clueless. Is this a good plan for health care in America? Your choices will be limited by the ignorant uneducated witless people you happen to work for? So instead of having to deal with the religious prejudice's of your employer you would also have to deal with their ignorance. When someone like me gives them a heads up they get to change their mind about birth control pills?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I'd be interested in what maternity benefits they give new Mom's in their employ..... Job guarantees, paid leave etc.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

American women do not receive the same maternity benefits that they enjoy here in Canada or many other countries. Another way the USA is behind other countries.

~Ann

Here is a link that might be useful: Maternity Leave around the World.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I don't think employers should give more than a few weeks maternity leave if they don't want to.

It's their business.

Women should decide if they want to stay home and cuddle a long period of time or work away from their child, if they don't have the option of doing both at the same time.

A burden shouldn't be placed on a employer to give more than a few weeks off for maternity leave, against their wishes.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I'm sure no one here is surprised that you feel that way Demi.

Like I said, the USA is way behind other countries. Even Russia has a longer maternity leave.

~Ann


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Patricia, with the use if the IUD, it encourages the body to expel an egg that has been fertilized, so it is considered an abortion devise. Im not sure how the morning after pill works - if its design is for the purpose of encouraging the body to expel a fertilized egg from conception which may have taken place hours before, then that too would be another device for abortion.

That would make the function of those two different birth control devices very different in nature than those which prevent conception in the first place, in the eyes if those who believe that a second after fertilization has taken place, the full value if every human being exists - within that egg which was not fertilized the second previously.

This fertilized egg is believed to be a full human being rather than the *possibility* of becoming a human being after further cell division and evolution of the fertilized egg has taken place. If I was one that believed abortion was the murder of a formed human being with the same value, then these two forms of birth control would be abortion devices imo, and if I felt it was my duty to not only not use these devices but to prevent the access to everyone else despite the ruling from the Supremes regarding the abortion issue, then this reaction by the company is something I would support.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Removed dbl posting

This post was edited by mylab123 on Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 20:29


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

My point was that they don't want to provide healthcare befits to prevent pregnancy but they also don't want to provide benefits to support a new Mom.

I suspect that those who sound so callous here have enjoyed many employee benefits...not maternity leave perhaps ...but health care insurance, pensions, life insurance and the like. Thank goodness their employers did as it has likely contributed in a substantial way to their life style today.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by chase z6 (My Page) on
Wed, Apr 2, 14 at 21:18

My point was that they don't want to provide healthcare befits to prevent pregnancy but they also don't want to provide benefits to support a new Mom.

I suspect that those who sound so callous here have enjoyed many employee benefits...not maternity leave perhaps ...but health care insurance, pensions, life insurance and the like. Thank goodness their employers did as it has likely contributed in a substantial way to their life style today.

*

This "callous" person only "enjoyed" health insurance while I worked, and while my spouse worked, and we both contributed to our health insurance premiums as well as our respective employers.

I received NO pay for the time I took off for maternity leave.

NO life insurance, no pensions, no health insurance in retirement for either of us.

I think it's great if a company offers these and other benefits, I just don't think they should be made to offer anything other than paying employees for their services as agreed.

I certainly do not expect people should feel short changed if they don't receive these benefits.

This post was edited by demifloyd on Thu, Apr 3, 14 at 10:56


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Chase,

Preventing pregnancy is the responsibility of the employer?

What about STD's?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

separate your health insurance from your employment!!!!


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Brush, of course it is not an employers job to prevent pregnancy and I don;t believe I suggested it was.

Not their job to ensure male virility either but they do cover that little blue pill.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

As a customer of Hobby Lobby I recently talked to a young lady waiting for a price check who said that she only gets 32 hours a week so the question was moot. Does this sound familiar? A McHobby Lobby...


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

An unfortunate byproduct of greed, Tobr... no one wants to pay or provide anything but the very lowest of basics for employees these days.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Jodik,

That includes the mom and pop stores you support. They don't offer materity/paternity paid leave and most don't pay more than minimum wage. Perhaps it's time we punish those greedy b@stards, eh?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Mylab-you are right in that many IUDs prevent the implantation of the fertilized egg although some release hormones that prevent egg release as well. Oddly enough the morning after pill prevents the release of an egg and therefor fertilization and so does not lead to abortion. Regular birth control pills on the other hand are designed to have the uterus in a state not suitable for implantation on the off chance that an egg is released and a fertilization does take place because none of these hormone based medications are 100%. So far as I can see none of this is the business of the business that provides you your access to health insurance. I did a little poking around and found that indeed Hobby Lobby only objects to some forms of birth control but if their point is to prevent abortion they are sadly mistaken in their objections. As I said earlier, these people are nitwits. Do we let uninformed ignorant people decide for their employees what sort of health care they can access?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

And no employees forcing their moral choices on employers' pocketbooks.

And when has this happened?

In my experience (in California) the employer chooses among the plans offered by various insurers. If all methods of birth control are covered by a plan, that's the deal -- period. The employer doesn't dictate to the insurance company what will be covered, unless it's something like domestic partners are eligible to be included on employees' policies.

Does Hobby Lobby self insure? Is this where they can be picky?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Nancy-the issue started when ACA required insurance plans to cover birth control options. Suddenly companies who had been cheerfully providing insurance that covered birth control saw an opportunity to make a case for religious objections to abortion. Plenty of press and lots of opportunities for lawyers and more press and now everyone is rethinking birth control. Yeah. No stinking government is going to tell me what to do. Because birth control pills are like eye glasses-too many people are going to use this option, insurance companies often excluded it. Now the law ways they have to cover it.
We have tried to discuss business owners cherry picking insurance options in the past but no joy there. As you say it has always been a package deal.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Snopes

Here is a link that might be useful: The story


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Thanks, Brush. It's too bad one can't cut 'n paste from Snopes. I doubt many will read the link, as they might be compelled to say: "Oh, that's different. Never mind."


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I doubt many will read the link

What is in the link is what has been discussed in this thread and others dealing with Hobby Lobby. The company seeks to limit the female employees' (or spouses covered by the policy) access to legal methods of birth control.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I was wondering what I was supposed to be missing in that link that disproves anything said here.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Isn't it true in this lawsuit that:

"The lawsuit says the family also has "a sincere religious objection" to providing coverage for certain kinds of intrauterine devices..."

Wouldn't a family with sincere religious objections of this nature typically also be opposed to birth control? We know Rick Santorum is as he stated that sex is only for procreation. So if Rick and his wife are beyond child bearing years, they should never have sex again, as it cannot produce a child.

The president of local Southern Baptist Theological Seminary here, Albert Mohler, states the same thing. You must accept children willingly from God. Yet he only has two children. Not sure how that is possible.

But I digress, if Hobby Lobby's founders stay true to scripture, why do they accept birth control instead of insisting their employees accept children willingly from God?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on
Fri, Apr 4, 14 at 19:26

I doubt many will read the link

What is in the link is what has been discussed in this thread and others dealing with Hobby Lobby. The company seeks to limit the female employees' (or spouses covered by the policy) access to legal methods of birth control.

*

No it does not.

People are free to pay for their own birth control and Hobby Lobby does not seek to disqualify all birth control from their policies.

They are not seeking to limit access to birth control.

They just don't want to pay for certain types of birth control that is in conflict with their religious beliefs and the way they run their business.

There is no natural right to birth control--not paying for it is not seeking to limit access.

People are free to pay for their own.

Like they did for decades, and like people with high deductibles pay for all the time.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

"Wouldn't a family with sincere religious objections of this nature typically also be opposed to birth control?"

See, that's one of the problems with stereotyping. What's "typical" for humans? Another problem with stereotyping (people) is that people who do that (wrongly, IMO) might tend to assume others do the same. "Might," since I wouldn't wish to stereotype all people who stereotype others. Might be a one-time thing, after all.

Now I'll answer the question: No, not necessarily. Different people believe different things! Amazingly, all Christians do not hold the same set of beliefs to the same degree. Even more amazing, there just may be people who do not consider themselves Christians, who nonetheless hold convictions about various aspects of birth control, both before and after conception. To make the issue even more complex, people change their minds from time to time. Some people.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Despite hand flapping and deflection, the fact is that Hobby Lobby does wish to restrict female employees' access to legal methods of birth control.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

What's "typical" for humans?

Not talking about all humans. Very religious people of all most religions: catholic, jewish, fundametalist christian, do not believe in birth control. I didn't say all Christians, I said very religious christians. Also very religious jews. Hardly stereotyping as this is fact.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Since the morning after pill does not cause abortion then the Hobby Lobby owners are ignorant and misled. Here is the problem . If this is upheld by the Supremes any weird insane nut job with a business can then deny any of you, men included and Demi by the way, insurance covered access to alien butt probes or what ever crazy thing they have decided is against their religious principles. You are going to have to pay for your own butt probes and if you suspect that you have colon cancer and cant afford the procedure then you could be in trouble. Do those of you, excepting Demi who thinks we should all be paying for our own medications anyway, think this is a good idea? Do you think that your rights should be limited by the religious beliefs of your owners because that is what they will become. Your rights as a working citizen could be curtailed by any business owner based on their flawed beliefs in crystal therapy or anything else you can think of. Religions come in some very strange flavors. If health insurance pools wasn't so closely married to business we wouldn't care but it is.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on
Sat, Apr 5, 14 at 0:20

Despite hand flapping and deflection, the fact is that Hobby Lobby does wish to restrict female employees' access to legal methods of birth control.

*

Despite hand flapping and deflection, no it does not.

Hobby Lobby just does not want to pay for it.

As I said, anyone is FREE TO BUY THEIR OWN BIRTH CONTROL.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Hobby Lobby is engaged in discrimination against its female employees by seeking to restrict their access to legal methods of birth control by seeking to eliminate certain medications from its insurance coverage.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Nancy, do you know if this company willingly pays for male's "the little blue pill" or male sterilization ? How about male testosterone therapy?

Im trying to figure out if there are any other objections at all the company has with specifically male only treatments within the narrow nature of their reproductive systems, in order to have a broader picture of the viewpoint and concerns of this company when it comes to the subject of a willingness to offer coverage concerning reproduction concerns with their employees.

Of course I would not expect nor want the company to have insurance to cover any use of devises, medication or treatments of an illegal nature by their employees.

That would be wrong.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on
Sat, Apr 5, 14 at 22:10

Hobby Lobby is engaged in discrimination against its female employees by seeking to restrict their access to legal methods of birth control by seeking to eliminate certain medications from its insurance coverage.

*

Facelifts are legal too.

Hobby Lobby isn't restricting anyone's rights.

The rights exist--just not the right for someone else to subsidize and offer the procedures.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Demi, I know that you have stated many times you don't thing insurance should cover birth control. Do you have some standard for what you don't think insurance should cover in the way of other medications or do you believe it shouldn't cover any medications?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by patriciae Z7PNW (My Page) on
Sat, Apr 5, 14 at 23:21

Demi, I know that you have stated many times you don't thing insurance should cover birth control.

*

I don't really care if a company wants to offer it, I just don't see why anyone is forced to offer it in plans, unless it is for a specific medical reason other than to prevent births or if births would jeopardize health of a woman.

I think people should have choices as to whether they want access to certain medications in their insurance or not.

I don't think one size fits all is going to work well at all.

Why pay for something you will never need?

Why not have pools with similar wants and needs and adjust costs, and keep employers out of the mix?

Employers should not be forced to provide insurance policies with the kitchen sink thrown in, like birth control pills or other devices.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Hobby Lobby isn't restricting anyone's rights.

Hobby Lobby is discriminating against female employees.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by nancy_in_venice_ca SS24 z10 CA (My Page) on
Sun, Apr 6, 14 at 0:45

Hobby Lobby isn't restricting anyone's rights.

Hobby Lobby is discriminating against female employees.

*

I don't see that they are.

Not giving someone everything they want or what others are offered in other insurance policies is not necessarily equal to discriminating against them.

Going by your standards, Hobby Lobby could claim the government is discriminating against them because of the religious beliefs of the corporation and how it runs it's business.

That conclusion is a handy summation without applying the facts to the Constitution.

The Supreme Court will do that.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Demi, how would you feel if it was a Jehovah Witness refusing to cover blood transfusions?

My objection to this is the fact it is based on a religious belief.

That is a very dangerous precedent to set as it relates to defining employee benefits.

I also think it depends on who pays for the insurance, if the employee is contributing then why would they not have a say in what the insurance covers too?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by chase z6 (My Page) on
Sun, Apr 6, 14 at 9:14

Demi, how would you feel if it was a Jehovah Witness refusing to cover blood transfusions?

My objection to this is the fact it is based on a religious belief.

That is a very dangerous precedent to set as it relates to defining employee benefits.

I also think it depends on who pays for the insurance, if the employee is contributing then why would they not have a say in what the insurance covers too?

*

I would feel the same.

The rule of law is important.

People should procure their own health care and not depend on their employers if they don't like what the employer offers.

The Constitution is what should trump--not individual exemptions to every little situation.

That is why health care should have nothing to do with our employers, unless they want to pay an employee a stipend, but not be involved in what is covered in the policy itself.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

You are losing me a bit .......

I thought you were saying that you don't believe an employer should have to provide insurance coverage for things they don't believe in, regardless of what that is, and employees should self insure if they don't like the plan...I get that. I don't agree with it but I get it.

then you say.......

"The Constitution is what should trump--not individual exemptions to every little situation."

I don't understand the last part of that sentence given there has been no SCOTUS decision given in this matter.

The Constitution will trump but the decision may very well may be individual exemptions to every little situation.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Speaking of boycotting--the boycotting of Chick Fil A has not hurt the company--Chick Fil A has now unseatied Kentucky Fried Chicken in No. 1, with considerably fewer stores than KFC:

"The days when fried chicken was synonymous with a certain white-haired southern gentleman are over, at least in the U.S. A new champion has claimed the chicken crown: Chick-fil-A. The Atlanta-based chain has surpassed KFC in total U.S. sales, taking in $5 billion last year to KFC’s $4.22 billion, according to Technomic.

The change atop the leaderboard appears undisputed: Yum! Brands (YUM), which owns KFC and has for years prided itself as “the leader in the U.S. chicken [quick-service restaurant] segment,” removed that very phrase from the company’s most recent annual report. But anyone in the northern half of the U.S. is likely scratching her head and wondering why she hasn’t seen Chick-fil-A outlets opening in the neighborhood. Check out the map below of Chick-fil-A locations, with a heavy concentration in the South.

Source: www.chick-fil-a.com

Last year Chick-fil-A only had about 1,775 U.S. stores to KFC’s 4,491. Yet in dollar terms the Colonel is coming up short even with that much larger footprint: Chick-fil-A’s 2013 sales exceeded its larger rival’s by nearly $800 million in the U.S. in 2013. And that’s with zero dollars coming in to Chick-fil-A on Sundays, when every restaurant is closed.
Story: To Start Fresh in China, KFC Goes for a Menu Makeover

What Chick-fil-A lacks in store count, it makes up for in traffic. Each restaurant made about $3.2 million in 2013, more than three times as much as the average KFC at $938,000. Average sales at KFC restaurants have remained largely unchanged over the past decade, while they have climbed steadily at Chick-fil-A. Same-store sales climbed by more than 3.6 percent at Chick-fil-A last year; KFC’s fell by 2 percent.

KFC hit its U.S. peak by store count around 2004, when it had more than 5,500 restaurants�"over four times the number of Chick-fil-A locations�"and claimed 46 percent of the fast-food chicken market. But over the past decade the gap between the two narrowed as KFC closed stores and Chick-fil-A added more. Now, KFC’s storefront advantage is just 2.5 times more than its rival, and Chick-fil-A plans to chip away with more than 100 new locations opening this year. (A representative for KFC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

Darren Tristano, an executive vice president at consultancy Technomic, called Chick-fil-A one of the most successful fast-food chains. He cited the sizable breakfast business, an average check slightly higher than competitors’, and a menu that differentiates it from the big burger chains."--Bloomberg Businessweek 3 18 14.

There is also an article about Hobby Lobby and the history of the company's business practices at this source.

Nothing too new.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

"I also think it depends on who pays for the insurance, if the employee is contributing then why would they not have a say in what the insurance covers too?"

The employee is buying a product, no? If one doesn't like the product, why would ze purchase it? I'm going to buy peanut butter cookies. If a company doesn't include real butter in the ingredients, I'm not going to buy them. I don't have the right to tell the company how to make them.

If the insurance offered by the employer doesn't offer what the employee desires, don't work there. Don't buy the "product,", e.g., don't take the job.

This wouldn't be a problem if insurance was not tied to the job.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Speaking of boycotting--the boycotting of Chick Fil A has not hurt the company--

So what, those of us who don't patronize it don't care at all. Same for Papa John's, The Salvation Army (I've stopped my meagre donation), and Cracker Barrel (they have a long and proud homophobic tradition) and probably many other companies.

I don't care how they fare, I just don't spend MY money with them. They don't care.

I imagine we have all changed, 180 degrees, some of our beliefs during our lives, as we should. Stiff-necked, unthinking prejudice, especially when people try to justify it with religion, is sickening.

The owners, managers, founders, etc, can believe anything they want, but when they have a public rant, or in the case of Hobby Lobby, impose their beliefs on thousands of employees, well, they don't get my money.

If/when they see the error of their ways, I'll reconsider.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

The employees share some of the expense in their health insurance, be it through their own contribution or in terms of benefits versus higher wage.

So the female employees are chipping in for prostrate surgeries and cancer, the incidence of renal cancer is far higher in males than females, men have twice the risk for Parkinson's' disease, almost twice the rate for coronary heart disease, and so on.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

"The Constitution is what should trump--not individual exemptions to every little situation."

I don't understand the last part of that sentence given there has been no SCOTUS decision given in this matter.

The Constitution will trump but the decision may very well may be individual exemptions to every little situation.

*

I am aware that has been no ruling.

That is what I meant by the Constitution should triumph--the facts applied to the Constitution should yield the right answer for this particular situation. That is why we have Supreme Court Justices, and because they are good legal arguments on either side for the very specific and narrow issue, we won't know until they decide. Even then there will be those that disagree.

However, I think that it is just wrong to require employers to provide health care. Health care and employment should be separate.

Health care should not be dependent on one's employment.

This post was edited by demifloyd on Sun, Apr 6, 14 at 15:29


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Absolutely agree with you...but can you imagine how bad the healthcare situation in the States would be without employer based insurance?

Universal , single payer, health care will come in some form or other some day....i even truly believe that there is enough common ground amongst the "people" that they could do pull it off......the politicians.....not so much.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

It would be nice if health insurance was divorced form employment but it isn't. Insurance companies sell policies based on insurance pools. If insurance is so chopped up that I have to be in a pool that reflects not only my health issues but my probable or possible health issues then the costs of putting these pools together and finessing the packages would be hopelessly complicated and ridiculously expensive. Demi, your scenario is impossible. Try thinking through an insurance pool that would cover you but not your daughter because the two of you don't have even faintly the same insurance needs even though you are both female.
As for a company paying a stipend-well many tax payers have decided they don't want to pay a stipend that would cover abortion just in case someone buying health insurance decides to have one for some reason or other and the tax payer doesn't believe in abortions so will not pay anything towards a policy that might cover that option. What would be different about some business with issues?

As for how insurance companies cover things I don't believe you understand how insurance works at all. My insurance would potentially cover thousands of different kinds of medications, most of which I will never need. It would not change my costs at all if every single medication that is specific to men or babies or young asthmatic children or people with genetic diseases I cant get or in my case birth control of any kind. It doesn't work that way.

No one want to comment on a company making choices for you based on erroneous information?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Vermont will be worth watching; first state to pass a single-payer universal health care law to be fully operational by 2017. Everybody in, nobody out is the slogan.

Here is a link that might be useful: A short but interesting read


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I read it, Duluth. Many thanks.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Health care should not be dependent on one's employment

Agree but that doesn't address the op and why it seems to be ok for Hobby Lobby to invest in these companies but not offer their products/services in healthcare packages to their employees.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

I just wanted to add a partial correction. It was stated above that we cannot cut-n-paste anything from Snopes. Strictly speaking that is true, but one can COPY-N-PASTE--which is what the poster probably meant since I can't imagine anyone would want to tamper with and change articles that Snopes posts on its own site!

Here is a copy-n-paste from Snopes:
"As of December 2013 Hobby Lobby's case has worked its way through the federal court system, and the U.S. Supreme has agreed to hear it along with a similar case involving the pro-life Mennonite owners of the Pennsylvania-based Conestoga Wood Specialties.

April 2014 news accounts accused Hobby Lobby of hypocrisy for holding investments in 401(k) mutual funds that included companies involved in the production of contraceptives.

Not that I have see why anyone referred to that Snopes' article in the first place since our posts already had covered that information--so the Snopes' article added nothing to the discussion.

But you can copy-n-paste if you want to.


A point about employer-provided insurance: we seem to have forgotten that that system was started as a way of employeers supplementing wages. They figured it would cost them more to raise wages, but they didn't want to lose valuable employees, so they offered "benefits" (at the urging of the unions, of course) as part of the "wage" package. So when some companies now cut back on health insurance benefits, they are in effect giving the worker a cut in pay since it was originally understood that ones' pay was the combination of "wages and benefits."

Kate


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Kate, your last paragraph today (@18:43) was a topic of discussion today amongst our group of friends who gathered altogether again this afternoon after a long winter's hibernation for this year's first barbeque to celebrate the beautiful days ahead.
It is an important point to remember. This company isnt likely paying it's average store employee much over the minimum wage. That makes it an unrealistic, miserly argument that the female employee can just pay for a very important necessity herself instead of it being part of the health care package.
That is much in the vein of telling people who haven't enough bread to eat to get themselves some cake instead.

But I agree on one point. Its past time that our nations health care system is so deeply tied to employment through companies or employers.
One major way of cutting health care costs would be to cut out the middle man and go to a single payer system which almost every single person who supported health care reform in the first place wanted, including our President.
It is such a terrible shame that we will have to achieve that goal by approaching it "sideways" in bits and pieces of change until the majority of baby boomers opposed to a single payer system have died off enough that their numbers no longer make a real different in the voting booth.
Then, finally, our children and grandchildren can take the politics out of health care by perhaps devising for their country a single payer system of such excellence that even those countries who have been happily living under their own single payer system for decades will sit up and take notice of how the American citizens came together and accomplished a wonderful thing for themselves.
I would think that companies will be more than happy to see a single payer system created for this country? However, then they will also have to focus harder on paying a living wage, too.
I hope for a great deal of reform of all kinds are ahead for all citizens in this country over the coming decades.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by mylab123 z5NW (My Page) on
Sun, Apr 6, 14 at 22:52

Kate, your last paragraph today (@18:43) was a topic of discussion today amongst our group of friends who gathered altogether again this afternoon after a long winter's hibernation for this year's first barbeque to celebrate the beautiful days ahead.
It is an important point to remember. This company isnt likely paying it's average store employee much over the minimum wage. That makes it an unrealistic, miserly argument that the female employee can just pay for a very important necessity herself instead of it being part of the health care package.
That is much in the vein of telling people who haven't enough bread to eat to get themselves some cake instead.

\*\

You do know what they say about assumptions, don't you?

Try bothering to look up facts instead of making false assumptions about what Hobby Lobby pays it's employees and going off on your Marie Antoinette act as though it were accurate.

It is not.

"In 2009, Green decided to pay full-time hourly employees more than the federal minimum wage; the starting rate is now about $14 an hour. Hobby Lobby has 16,000 full-time employees who are eligible for health insurance, almost 70 percent of whom are women."--Bloomberg Businessweek, 4 3 14.

Seasonal and part time workers aren't eligible for insurance, as is the case with many corporations and companies.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Are you not feeling well today, Demi?


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Posted by mylab123 z5NW (My Page) on
Mon, Apr 7, 14 at 2:59

Are you not feeling well today, Demi?

*

How I feel has nothing to do with inaccurate statements.

I am feeling great, mylab.

You made assumptions and denigrating statements without knowing facts, because Hobby Lobby indeed does pay considerably more than minimum wage.

Trashing people or corporations in this case, on false information is irresponsible in my opinion.

I posted information contrary to your guesses about Hobby Lobby.

IN fact, I feel even better having done so than I did to begin with.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Hobby Lobby's press release refers only to full-time employees earning $14 per hour. We have no information on the percentage of full-time v. part-time employees. Part-time employees were raised to $9/hour in 2012 and $9.25/hour in 2013. However this site, glassdoor.com., shows wages lower than that.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Duh I noted that in my post Nancy.

That has nothing to do with the full time employees, as they ARE paid considerably more than minimum wage.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Duh I noted that

Still no answer as to how many are part-time versus full-time, nor why the self-reported pay rates are lower than the announced part-time minimums.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

Still no takers on Hobby Lobby making their decisions on what sort of birth control you can get through the insurance plan based on WRONG information. If this is the standard then any nutty idea would rule. All you would have to do is believe it sincerely as a part of your religious expression.


 o
RE: Hobby Lobby - great American Hypocrites

At $9.25 an hour, those employees can't very well.have been expected to be able to support themselves AND be able to afford to maintain the very necessary expense of birth control they would need in order to maintain the needed pull on their own bootstraps by not bringing children into the world when not even making a wage which can be considered reasonable as a living wage.

Perhaps when the employees ask hobby lobby to reconsider by providing such necessities of life as the contraceptives best suited to the individual (bread) Hobby Lobby can refuse on their own privately held lofty principal (cake) while providing male employees the coverage for the little blue pill in order for them to be able to impregnate the poorly paid female employees in the first place (champagne)?
Or, perhaps refuse any coverage because they are part time workers at only up to and including 39 hours a week? (filet mignon and grilled lobster tail all around, for lucky, fully insured store owners! )

But lots dont care about the unknown, faceless part timer- until little blue pill impregnates the part timer, (who's bootstraps broke clean in two) and offspring must have public assistance to get by - boy, a whole lot of caring goes on then. Pages and pages of outraged caring takes place.
Including lots of vocal caring those also outraged Hobby Lobby owners.
Because its their tax dollar too going to all irresponsible part timer offspringers, of course.

Odd, how all of that works.


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here